That is why I stand with Vermont's sugar makers to ask the FDA to amend its guidance so that consumers are not led to believe that anything is added to their 100 percent pure Vermont maple or honey products.
By enforcing these labels, the profits for these Vermont companies will drop significantly, because artificial/added sugar is a lot worse than natural sugars.
"Vermonters have stood behind maple for generations and sugar makers need their support again," said Brown. "Please tell the FDA what every Vermonter already knows — pure maple syrup has no added sugar."
If the majority of people from Vermont already know about this, then why were these food labels suggested?
It will allow additional language to state the sugar is found naturally in honey and maple products.
Don't most maple syrups already contain this description on the packaging?
"The updated nutrition facts label will really help consumers be aware of added sugars in the diet that are coming from all sources,"
Will this label be on every food product that contains even the slightest bit of sugar?
"added sugar," meaning an additional amount of sugar in your diet.
This will steer consumers away from this product because they will believe that more sugar is being added to the syrup, instead of your diet.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
This was created after The Jungle by Upton Sinclair was published, to protect consumers.
Maple syrup producers take pride in their pure, natural product
If it is a natural product, why does it have "added" sugar?
"Overwhelmingly, these subsidies flow to farms that are financially on an extremely sound footing, Smith said, "and the payments benefit, by and large, households whose incomes are well above the national average and whose level of wealth on a net worth basis is typically in the multiple millions of dollars. These are not households usually viewed as in need of welfare payments."
What is a possible way to get the subsidies to the farms who are in need of the government's subsidies? If its not getting the population that is in need why does this subsidy exist still?
Up to 2 million SNAP recipients could lose or have their benefits slashed under the proposed rule changes
This means that a large amount of people who are relying on the help of SNAP, wouldn't be able to receive the benefits that this program provides for them. That's so sad.