Tag Archives: nutritional information

Nutrition labels: What wine can learn from two packages of frozen onion rings

nutrition labelsIf wine doesn’t have nutrition labels, how will younger consumers know it’s not going to kill them?

Every time the Wine Curmudgeon writes about wine nutrition and ingredient labels, people cancel their email subscriptions to the blog. So get ready to press the cancel button, because you’re really not going to like this post: How nutrition and ingredient labels save us from making stupid food decisions, and what wine can learn from a package of onion rings.

Consider two packages of frozen onion rings – one traditional and one made with onions, cauliflower, and beans. Which do you think is the healthiest choice?

And you’d be wrong.

In fact, the faux rings, Farmrise veggie rings, have 220 calories per serving, with 15 percent of the USDA daily allowance of fat and 8 percent of the allowance of sodium. The onion rings, the Kroger house brand, have 180 calories, 10 percent of fat, and 7 percent of sodium. Plus, the real onion rings are about half the price. Click on each link and you’ll see the nutrition label for each product.

The difference in nutrition? The faux rings need the extra fat and salt because cauliflower has no flavor; the fat and salt goose up the Farmrise so it won’t taste like industrially steamed cauliflower. And the difference in price? That’s the healthy option premium, in which we’re supposed to pay more for stuff that’s better for us, even when it isn’t. Check out a can of so-called “healthy” soup, and the only difference between it and Campbell’s may be the price – each has massive amounts of sodium.

What does this have to do with wine? Wine refuses to join the 21st century by making this nutrition information easily available; it has been fighting labels with down to the last bullet determination for more than a decade. But that also means that the same younger consumers who would spot the onion ring contradiction in a second will continue to think wine has something to hide. This is opposed to their parents and grandparents, wine drinkers all, who trust in cauliflower and Big Food.

Because, to the younger consumer’s post-modern way of thinking, wine would have these labels unless there was something fishy going on (or eggy or sugary or industrial adhesive-y or any of the other 60-some ingredients legally allowed in wine that aren’t grapes).

And, as we are reminded here and elsewhere, and reminded over and over, younger consumers aren’t drinking wine the way their parents and grandparents did. Maybe this could be one of the reasons?

More about wine nutrition labels:
The final “nutrition and ingredient labels for wine are a good thing” post
Are we making progress in adding ingredient labels to wine?
Nutritional labels for booze

Nutritional labels for booze

nutritional labelsOnce again, wine falls behind when it comes to nutritional labels

The nutritional label pictured here is for Bulleit Rye, and should be on bottles this summer (click to make it bigger). Is it perfect? No, since it doesn’t list all the ingredients.

But is it still better than almost anything the wine business has done or wants to do? Of course. Because the wine business still doesn’t think consumers want to know this stuff, still thinks it’s not possible to do on a wine bottle, and still thinks consumers act like it’s 1955.

But Diageo, the company that owns Bulleit, knows better. Understand three reasons why this label matters:

• A shot of Bulleit (which is a very nice rye and fairly priced) has 110 calories – about the same as a light beer. Anyone who doesn’t think that matters to consumers hasn’t spent any time in a grocery store watching people read canned soup labels.

• Notice the lines about where the rye was distilled and bottled. This addresses the controversy (and lawsuits) surrounding craft spirits and how they are made. Diageo is practicing transparency, something the wine business is terrified of doing. Call it MegaPurple paranoia.

• “Made using a 95% rye mash,” though confusing if you don’t know spirits, means the Bulleit has almost twice as much rye as required by law. Legally, it can contain as little as 51 percent rye; the rest would be barley, corn, or other grains. The wine equivalent would be listing how much pinot noir is actually in a bottle of pinot noir. Too many producers meet the 75 percent legal requirement, and flesh the wine out with syrah, grenache, petite sirah, or our old friend MegaPurple without telling us what’s in the other 25 percent.

Finally, my contact at Diageo went out of her way to help me with this post, even locating the Bulleit label in proof. I usually don’t get that kind of cooperation from Big Wine when I write about this subject. I don’t wonder why.

More about nutrition and ingredient labels:
Wine and GMO labeling
Update: Nutrition labels and what the wine business doesn’t understand
Nutrition labels coming to wine — finally

Winebits 162: Pacific Rim, sommeliers, nutrition facts

? Grahm sells Pacific Rim: Randall Grahm has sold one of the last parts of his $10 wine empire, the Pacific Rim white wine brand, to the family that owns Banfi Vintners, a leading U.S. wine importer, and Italy’s Castello Banfi winery. No sale price was disclosed. Grahm, the impresario of California’s Bonny Doon, broke up his $10 wine operation in 2006, selling the Big House and Cardinal Zin labels and splitting Pacific Rim off from Bonny Doon. Pacific Rim, based in Washington state, is best known for riesling, but also does gewurtztraminer and chenin blanc.

? Not enough qualified sommeliers? That’s the opinion of top sommelier Jordan Mackay, who says demand for the wine experts in restaurants has outgrown supply. “Inexperienced sommeliers are winding up in jobs that they’re simply not ready for,” he wrote on Zester Daily Web site. This has hurt restaurant wine sales and reputations, he says, and isn’t so good for the rest of us: “And, diners, for a while, be warned that you may face young somms intent on selling you the wine they like (instead of the one you’re asking for).”

? Diageo wants serving facts on labels: Diageo, one of the world’s largest drinks company, wants the federal government to allow producers to put nutritional information, like serving size, alcohol per serving, carbohydrates and calories, on wine and spirits. The government’s alcohol Tax and Trade Bureau has been considering the Serving Fact Information proposal since 2003 — so long ago that I wrote a newspaper story about it. It has been held up by resistance from the industry, as well as a low priority in Washington. Diageo, seeing a marketing advantage, wants the TTB to let producers voluntarily include the information.