Comments on: Nutritional Labels Coming for Booze? http://daysthatendiny.com/2008/01/29/nutritional-labels-coming-for-booze/ Alcohol's Official Weblog Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:44:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Mike http://daysthatendiny.com/2008/01/29/nutritional-labels-coming-for-booze/#comment-3301 Mike Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:23:57 +0000 http://daysthatendiny.com/2008/01/29/nutritional-labels-coming-for-booze/#comment-3301 Jacob, I do see what you're getting at, and I don't like the possibility of smaller producers having larger costs and more hurdles to overcome. I certainly don't want my favorite microbrews to disappear from the market, but I would like to know what the heck's in those beers! If I recall correctly, manufacturers of food products have to shell out for the cost of labels, and I wouldn't be surprised if the TTB implemented it in the same way. However, I believe the public health issues outweigh the interests of small companies, and Diageo's motives thus seem unimportant, as the behemoth isn't actively pushing for something outright harmful. I also don't doubt the ability of large companies to do good even when I do doubt that large companies would generally want to do good since that's never a company's end goal. (Google's do no evil? Whatever. In the end, it's the shareholders' interests.) Anyway, there probably wouldn't be much of a difference between requiring producers to label their products and allowing producers to label their products. Competition would likely force all producers to label regardless of whether or not the law required them to do so, and mandatory labeling would at least standardize the entire process. As a result, I'd be willing to support simple reversal of current regulations as well, as the end outcome would still be desirable. But, it would likely be much more sloppily implemented. Jacob, I do see what you’re getting at, and I don’t like the possibility of smaller producers having larger costs and more hurdles to overcome. I certainly don’t want my favorite microbrews to disappear from the market, but I would like to know what the heck’s in those beers! If I recall correctly, manufacturers of food products have to shell out for the cost of labels, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the TTB implemented it in the same way. However, I believe the public health issues outweigh the interests of small companies, and Diageo’s motives thus seem unimportant, as the behemoth isn’t actively pushing for something outright harmful. I also don’t doubt the ability of large companies to do good even when I do doubt that large companies would generally want to do good since that’s never a company’s end goal. (Google’s do no evil? Whatever. In the end, it’s the shareholders’ interests.) Anyway, there probably wouldn’t be much of a difference between requiring producers to label their products and allowing producers to label their products. Competition would likely force all producers to label regardless of whether or not the law required them to do so, and mandatory labeling would at least standardize the entire process. As a result, I’d be willing to support simple reversal of current regulations as well, as the end outcome would still be desirable. But, it would likely be much more sloppily implemented.

]]> By: Jacob G http://daysthatendiny.com/2008/01/29/nutritional-labels-coming-for-booze/#comment-3300 Jacob G Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:02:02 +0000 http://daysthatendiny.com/2008/01/29/nutritional-labels-coming-for-booze/#comment-3300 Hold on there, buddy. I'm all for removing the current restrictions that forbid companies from putting this information on their labels. If consumers demand it, then by all means, they should be allowed to have it. However, I'm a little wary of the proposal to require companies to include all this information. If you look at who's backing this, you'll see that Diageo is pushing it pretty hard. Is that because the company cares so deeply about public health? Maybe. But I imagine it's a lot easier for a massive corporation with standardized products to abide by these regulations than it's going to be for smaller, craft operations. Before backing a law mandating nutritional information I'd like to hear from some microbrewers about how much it would cost to, say, get their once a year barley wine tested in the lab. I wrote about this a while back here: http://www.jacobgrier.com/blog/archives/758.html Hold on there, buddy. I’m all for removing the current restrictions that forbid companies from putting this information on their labels. If consumers demand it, then by all means, they should be allowed to have it. However, I’m a little wary of the proposal to require companies to include all this information.

If you look at who’s backing this, you’ll see that Diageo is pushing it pretty hard. Is that because the company cares so deeply about public health? Maybe. But I imagine it’s a lot easier for a massive corporation with standardized products to abide by these regulations than it’s going to be for smaller, craft operations. Before backing a law mandating nutritional information I’d like to hear from some microbrewers about how much it would cost to, say, get their once a year barley wine tested in the lab.

I wrote about this a while back here:
http://www.jacobgrier.com/blog/archives/758.html

]]>