When 100% Whole Grain Means Nothing
30 August 2, 2010
Snack Girl's search for healthy crackers never ends. I am always looking for that holy grail of a packaged snack that is also good for you.
Recently, I received a box of Wheat Thins in the mail (hey, companies send me crackers). And, I purchased some at the grocery store.
Also, my pal Hemi over at Fooducate posted this article: Will Kraft Deliver on its Whole Wheat Promise? and guess what? He talked about Wheat Thins!
Kraft put out a press release saying "it will contribute more than 9 billion servings of whole grain to American diets each year". Wow! That is fantastic! More whole grain means more fiber and hopefully better choices for consumers. Is Kraft reading Snack Girl and/or listening to the needs of consumers?
I found the 100% Whole Grain Wheat Thins at my grocery store. I was excited that more nutrition had been packed into what is an "okay" cracker choice (better than Ritz Crackers worse than Doctor Kracker).
Until I read the label!
Bummer. The 100% Whole Grain is on the right because it should be the RIGHT choice. But, if you can read it you can see that there is no increase in fiber per serving. The two are EXACTLY the same.
Shouldn't an increase of 10 grams of whole grain per serving do SOMETHING to the fiber content?
Also, why is there high fructose corn syrup and more sodium in the 100% Whole Grain versus the Original?
They taste exactly the same so I guess they are exactly the same except one has darker blue lettering on the box. Oh well :(
I called Kraft (there is a phone number on the box) to ask them to explain why there is no nutritional difference between these products. They said it would take 7 to 10 business days to research my question.
Kraft, I am waiting for your call.....sitting by the phone....really!!!
Why aren't the 100% whole grain Wheat Thins any different?