related to last week's topic

HAHA - I found this on slashfood.com:

No fruit in that snack? I could have told you that.
Posted Feb 25th 2008 2:00PM by Shayna Glick
Filed under: Snacks, British Isles, Business, Fruit, Food Quest

I was just reading about a survey done by a U.K. group called the Food Commission. The group looked at several products that were fruit flavored (they actually concentrated on strawberry flavored foods) to see what the actual fruit content was. Well, it wasn't so great. Only about 40% of the products had any fruit in them at all, and those that did only had minimal amounts.

The Food Commission is upset. They say that the products which have no fruit but are flavored and have that fruit pictured all over the packaging are misleading consumers, at the very least. But in this day and age, with all the studies that have been done and all the information available, can anyone really claim to not know what they're eating? Maybe companies can be misleading on packaging, but they can't outright lie on the label information (though they do find tricky ways around some information).

I just assume that big corporations are lying to me. I assume that anything in a box or other packaging has very little nutrition, especially real fruit. If a food says it's fruit flavored and has that picture on the front, you still need to read the ingredient label to know what you're really eating. I feel like people should take charge of their own consumption. Read the label. Then if you still eat it, at least you know what you're getting.