Most Popular

It's common knowledge that appliances continue to draw a small amount of power when they're switched off but still plugged in.

One solution is to unplug electronics and chargers when you aren't using them. Or you can plug cords into a power strip and switch it off whenever you want to cut off all power to appliances.

But many consumers wonder if it's worth the hassle to unplug electronics they aren't using. The answer, of course, depends on your objectives.

While it's true that an "informed and aggressive approach can reduce standby use by about 30 percent," according to scientists at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, "There are more productive ways to save energy with an investment of an hour."

The upshot? If it's easy for you to unplug chargers and other electronics when you aren't using them, then go for it. And no-one says you have to unplug everything. You might want to choose the biggest energy hogs or items that are easily unplugged. 

But don't fret if you find the job too tedious or hard to remember. The following actions are all easy and, in some cases, save you more money with much less effort than stamping out energy vampires.

Pick and choose what works best for you from this list, or try everything for an estimated annual savings of $275.  

 

• Activating the power-save function on your computer is a super-easy way to shave up to $90 a year off your utility bills. Exactly how much you save depends on whether you use a laptop or a CPU and a monitor and how long you currently leave your computer on for.
  
  Low power mode also helps equipment run cooler so it lasts longer. Get into the habit of turning off your monitor when you walk away for 20 minutes and your computer when you leave your desk for more than two hours, and you'll rack up even more savings.

 

• Reduce the brightness setting of your television. Select the "home" mode because the "retail" or "vivid" mode (the default setting for most TVs) uses up to 25 percent more power, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council.
  
  While you're at it, activate the energy- and power-saving modes on your TV and other appliances and save around $43.04 a year.

 

• Video game consoles, such as the Sony PlayStation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360, use nearly the same amount of power when they are turned on and left idle as they do when you are actively playing a game or watching a movie.
  
  Save more than $100 a year by remembering to turn off your gaming system whenever you're not using it.

 

• Switching off unneeded lights will save you $21.04 a year. Does it make sense to turn off the light when you leave a room for a few minutes? Yes for incandescent bulbs. Fifteen minutes is a good rule of thumb for compact fluorescent light bulbs.
  
  Speaking of CFLs, Consumer Reports' tests found that each CFL will save you around $5 a year in electricity costs over a regular bulb.

 

• Wash your clothes in cold water. You'll reduce your bill by around $18.58 a year and it's better for your clothes.
  
  Even just switching your temperature setting from hot to warm water can cut a load's energy use by half, according to the Department of Energy.

Environmental journalist Lori Bongiorno shares green-living tips and product reviews with Yahoo! Green's users. Send Lori a question or suggestion for potential use in a future column. Her book, Green Greener Greenest: A Practical Guide to Making Eco-smart Choices a Part of Your Life is available on Yahoo! Shopping and Amazon.com.

Check out Yahoo! Green on Twitter and Facebook.

A new federal agency charged with reporting on climate change is being formed.  The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will set up the Climate Service using members of the National Weather Service and other NOAA offices.

Climate operations have been spread out among NOAA offices, but with more and more requests pouring in for information concerning climate change, officials decided to combine those efforts into one main office.  The Climate Service will be headquartered in Washington, D.C., with six regional directors elsewhere in the country.

The agency will still have to be approved by congressional committee, but if it clears all necessary hurdles, it should be up and running by the end of the year.

via Huffington Post

Dearest readers,

Sometimes when I’m down in the stacks researching answers to your latest dilemmas, I enjoy taking a stroll down Ask Umbra archives lane.

Here are some sparkly tidbits I culled from my past advice on lessening your impact on that sweet little romantic holiday, Valentine’s Day. Have any of your own sustainable loving tips or stories? Let me know in the comments section below or shoot me an email.

Break up with your blow-up doll
And that jelly vibrator, while you’re at it. Lots of popular sex toys are made of PVC—a fancy name for vinyl (no vinyl, that’s final)—or with plastic-softening, hormone-disrupting phthalates. Heat and agitation from use can cause toxins to leach from the toys—not hot. Get the full Ask Umbra answer.

Pull the e-card
About a billion Valentine’s Day cards are sent globally each year. Don’t let your Valentine greeting be just another number: Save some paper (and a few bucks) by sending your snookums a well-selected e-card instead. Get the full Ask Umbra answer.

Channel Martha Stewart
Eschew conventional consumption, and get a little crafty for your Valentine. Put together some memorable photos, write a poem, or bake a tasty vegan chocolate cake. Get the full Ask Umbra answer.

Sweeten the deal
If traditional is your middle name, then your parents were a little odd, no? Anyway, perhaps you’re inclined to give a more classic V Day gift like chocolate. Because of issues like child labor, low wages, pesticide use, and deforestation, pay careful attention when picking sweets for your sweetie. Look for chocolate that’s both fair-trade and organic. Get the full Ask Umbra answer.

Turn on the green light in the bedroom
Set the mood in your boudoir with sustainable hemp sheets, dimmed lighting, organic massage oils, and vegan condoms. Then pop in a steamy movie—An Inconvenient Truth, perhaps?—and let the magic begin. Get the full Ask Umbra answer.

Lovingly,
Umbra

Related Links:

• Ask Umbra on engagement rings, straws, and napkins
• Ask Umbra’s video advice on making your own club soda
• Ask Umbra on sustainable manufacturing jobs, sexless fish, and matches

The Denny's Grand Slam breakfast Super Bowl commercials could have doubled as environmental ads, if only the message was about free range pastures, rather than overworked laying hens.

And while it may not have lived up to the standards of that Doritos kid slapping his mom's date, one of the funnier Super Bowl commercials was for the Audi A3 TDI, which gets 34 mpg of diesel fuel, and was chosen as Green Car of the Year by Green Car Journal.

Even clean diesel, though, is not as clean-burning as gasoline. The Audi A3 produces 15% more carbon in a year than either the Nissan Altima or Toyota Camry hybrid, which also get 34 mpg. It emits 9% more than the Toyota Yaris, which burns gasoline in a conventional engine and gets 32 mpg.

But the Audi A3 TDI still achieves impressive mileage, and we haven't seen a better commercial for any of those other comparable models:

More from The Daily Green

• The 10 Funniest Green Viral Videos
• 4 Funny Moments from NBC's Green Week
• 6 Eco Myths Debunked
• 11 Powerful Environmental Advertisements
• The 10 Funniest 'Green' TV Moments

Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc

It's that time of year again!  The Greener Gadgets Design Competition has started and 18 cool, eco-friendly gadget ideas are waiting for your votes.

This year is the third year for the competition and the Greener Gadgets Conference, which is being held on February 25 in New York City, and I must say, this is the best crop of designs yet. 

Some of the highlights include a kinetic-energy-harvesting rocking horse that fuels flashlights or nightlights called Rocco, a USB-outfitted, wall-mounted charger that is powered by indoor light called the Illumi Charger and a system of turbine-run highway lighting that would be powered by the air turbulence from passing cars.

Your votes will narrow down the pool to a handful of finalists that will be judged at the conference.  You have until February 12 to cast your vote for the best and most revolutionary idea.  Click here to vote and learn more about the conference.

While the BLM is facing a virtual clog of large, desert-based solar project proposals, smaller, distributed solar projects are popping up at an impressive rate.  In just the past few weeks, 1,300 MW worth of these projects have been announced or approved, which could equal about the same energy output of a big nuclear power plant.

The larger, more ambitious solar power plans have many environmental and land-use hurdles to clear, while these smaller plans, set to occupy commercial and residential rooftops, areas near electrical substations and urban areas, don't have the same obstacles in their way.  Also, the smaller projects are cheaper, meaning more utilities can afford to implement them as they're scrambling to meet renewable energy mandates.

Arno Harris, the CEO of Recurrent Energy, a company that has signed a contract with Southern California Edison for 50 MW of small-scale solar, summed it up like this:

“Distributed solar is faster on permitting, on environmental issues and interconnection to the grid.  It offers a safety valve for utilities who don’t want to put all their eggs in one basket.”

The projects, anywhere from 50 to 500 MW each, are mainly concentrated in California, though New York Power Authority is planning 100 MW installation around the state as well.

via Green Inc.

The media coverage of the health dangers of BPA has really reached a fever-pitch these days and, thanks to that coverage, many companies are removing it from their products.  While that is wonderful, there are still many BPA-containing plastics out there and 2.7 million tons of it being made every year.  How do we make sure all that plastic is disposed of safely?

Scientists have come up with a way that they believe decomposes polycarbonate plastic without releasing BPA.  The scientists, Mukesh Doble and Trishul Artham, pretreated polycarbonate with ultraviolet light and heat and then exposed it to three types of fungi known for their pollutant remidiation abilities.

After 12 months, the pretreated plastic had substantially decomposed without releasing any BPA, while the control plastic that was not pretreated before being exposed to the fungi showed almost no decomposition.

via Science Daily

 

 

The Federal Trade Commission is cracking down on a marketing claim that may have ensnared many environmentally conscious buyers: "bamboo."

While clothing and other textiles may have started off, at some point, as the rapidly regenerative bamboo, the FTC says companies can't label rayon as bamboo, even if it's made from bamboo. Why?

Because, according to the FTC:

Rayon is a man-made fiber created from the cellulose found in plants and trees and processed with harsh chemicals that release hazardous air pollution. Any plant or tree – including bamboo – could be used as the cellulose source, but the fiber that is created is rayon.

The FTC this week sent warning letters to 78 retailers about misguided use of "bamboo" marketing. Among the warned retailers: Amazon.com, Barney’s New York, Bed Bath & Beyond, BJ’s Wholesale Club, Bloomingdale’s, Costco Wholesale, Garnet Hill, Gold Toe, Hanes, Isotoner, JC Penney, Jockey, Kmart, Kohl’s, Land’s End, Macy’s, Maidenform, Nordstrom, Overstock.com, QVC, REI, Saks Fifth Avenue, Sears, Shop NBC, Spiegel, Sports Authority, Target, The Gap, The Great Indoors, Tommy Bahama, Toys R’ Us, Wal-Mart, and Zappos.com. Last year, the FTC sued several retailers for advertising rayon as bamboo.

"We need to make sure companies use proper labeling and advertising in their efforts to appeal to environmentally conscious consumers," David C. Vladeck, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a prepared statement. "Rayon is rayon, even if bamboo has been used somewhere along the line in the manufacturing process."

If retailers and manufacturers fail to comply, the penalty can be severe: $16,000 per violation.

The FTC's consumer tips include this information about "bamboo" rayon:

• Rayon made from bamboo uses "toxic chemicals in a process that releases pollutants into the air."
• "Extracting bamboo fibers is expensive and time-consuming, and textiles made just from bamboo fiber don’t feel silky smooth."
• "There’s also no evidence that rayon made from bamboo retains the antimicrobial properties of the bamboo plant."
• "No traits of the original plant are left in the finished product."

More from The Daily Green

• 10 Superfoods to Boost Your Sex Drive
• 10 Weird Uses for Vodka
• 13 Organic Fair Trade Chocolates
• Vegan Heels and More: The Complete Green Outfit
• 10 Stylish Ways to Wear the Same Little Black Dress

Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc

While the most fuel-efficient Toyotas at were not among the recall models associated with the growing sudden acceleration problem, the Prius is now suspect because of the feature that makes hybrids hybrid: regenerative braking.

The regenerative braking problems that has prompted the Japanese government to order Toyota to investigate its popular hybrid, the Prius, may not be unique to that country.

There have been more than 100 complaints from U.S. car buyers about 2010 Prius brakes made to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, at least two of which resulted in injuries:

WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE THE BRAKE PEDAL IT EXTENDED TO THE FLOOR; HOWEVER, WITHIN A FEW SECONDS THE BRAKE WOULD RESPOND. SHE EXPERIENCED THE BRAKE FAILURE THREE TIMES; DURING THE SECOND FAILURE THE BRAKES DIDN'T RESPOND AND SHE COLLIDED INTO A VEHICLE AND INJURED HER NECK. SHE HAS NOT TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER SINCE THE FAILURE OCCURRED ONLY WHEN SHE HIT A BUMP IN THE ROAD. SHE WILL TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO BE DIAGNOSED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 3,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 10,000.

I WAS UNABLE TO SLOW DOWN GOING INTO AN INTERSECTION AT A REASONABLE RATE OF SPEED. WHILE I WAS NOT ACCELERATING, WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES THE CAR DID NOT SLOW DOWN AS I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED. THIS SAME BEHAVIOR HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS SINCE I'VE OWNED THE PRIUS 2010 MODEL. IT SEEMS TO SKIP FORWARD OR ACCELERATE WHILE BRAKING ON A DOWNHILL OR UNEVEN SURFACE. BY THE TIME I WAS ABLE TO STOP I THE AIRBAGS HAD GONE OFF AND I HAD HURT MY NECK AND BACK. IT IS A NEW VEHICLE THAT NOW HAS ALMOST $14,000 DAMAGE AND WON'T BE FIXED FOR A MONTH. IF ANYTHING, I'M AN OVERLY CAUTIOUS DRIVER AND WONDERING WHAT I COULD HAVE DONE TO AVOID THE ACCIDENT.

Is this problem limited to the Prius, or is it a problem associated with regenerative braking more generally? At least one complaint has also been filed about the 2010 Toyota Camry hybrid.

Here's the complaint:

CAMRY HYBRID 2010. BOUGHT NEW AND COMPLAINED TO TOYOTA OF SURGING FORWARD INCONSISTENCY DURING MY DAILY TWO HOUR COMMUTE. I ASKED IF THEY PLANNED TO FIX IT DURING MY LAST SERVICE VISIT AND THE ANSWER WAS "NOPE." WHEN ASKED THAT THEY DO FIX IT, THE ANSWER WAS, "NOPE!". YOU WILL BE NOTIFIED IN APRIL WHEN THE PEDALS ARE GOING TO BE FIXED. I HAVE HAD NIGHTMARES OF SPEEDING OUT OF CONTROL AND AM AFRAID TO DRIVE THIS CAR. DO I HAVE ANY RECOURSE. THIS IS NOT THE CAR I THOUGHT I PURCHASED MONTHS AGO.

And at least one complaint has been filed about brakes on the 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid, but none about the Ford Escape hybrid.

Here's the Fusion complaint:

I BOUGHT A 2010 FORD FUSION HYBRID ON MAY 23, 2009 FROM CROWN FORD OF FAYETTEVILLE, NC. ON MAY 27, WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD, THE BREAKS SUDDENLY HIT THE FLOOR AND THERE WAS MINIMAL RESISTANCE. I EVENTUALLY BROUGHT THE CAR TO A HALT IN A PARKING LOT. IT WAS TOWED TO CROWN FORD AND THEY SAID IT WAS ONLY AIR IN THE BREAKS AND THE CAR WAS NOW SAFE FOR MY FAMILY. 4 DAYS LATER ON MAY 31ST WHILE I WAS IDLING AT A STOP LIGHT WITH MY DAUGHTER IN THE BACK SEAT, THE BREAKS WENT TO THE FLOOR/FAILED AGAIN AND I HAD TO UTILIZED THE EMERGENCY BREAK TO MANEUVER IT TO A SAFE PLACE. CROWN FORD SAID IT WAS THE WIRING THIS TIME. I DO NOT THINK FORD KNOWS WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THIS VEHICLE SINCE IT HAS THIS NEW REGENERATIVE BREAKING SYSTEM. WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT AS SOON AS MY FUSION HYBRID WAS "FIXED" AGAIN, I DROVE IT STRAIGHT TO ANOTHER DEALERSHIP AND TRADED IT IN FOR A DIFFERENT VEHICLE. I WOULD NEVER PUT MY KIDS BACK IN THAT CAR AND AM WORRIED ABOUT OTHER FAMILIES WHO CHOOSE TO BUY THIS TYPE OF VEHICLE.

Of the other hybrids on The Daily Green's list of most fuel-efficient cars and SUVs, there have been no registered complaints for the Honda hybrids, the Accord, or the Insight; the Mercury hybrids, the Milan, and Mariner; the Lexus HS 250h hybrid, or the Nissan Altima hybrid.

Will this problem engulf the hybrid market? It's too early to tell, but stay tuned.

More from The Daily Green

• How to Pay $1 a Gallon for Gas (or Less)
• 10 Ways to Save 20% on Gas Every Day
• The Most Fuel-Efficient 2010 Cars and SUVs
• 7 Affordable Fuel-Efficient Cars
• 15 E-Bikes: Ride in Sustainable Style an an Electric Bike

Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc

It's a fact of the grocery store that the most healthy food often has the least marketing muscle behind it. The best sources of fiber and vitamins are fresh vegetables and fruit, and yet it's the processed, packaged junk food fortified with vitamin and fiber powder that screams for attention. The Center for Science in the Public Interest recently published a comprehensive report on the subject, a persuasive indictment delicately called "Food Labeling Chaos."

"Consumers need honest labeling so they can spend their food dollars wisely and avoid diet-related disease," said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller, co-author of the report. "Companies should market their foods without resorting to the deceit and dishonesty that's so common today. And, if they don't, the FDA should make them."

You can often decipher the truth amid the lies and misdirection by carefully reading food labels.

We take a look at nine things the CSPI identified as the most common ways food labels mislead so you can prepare before your next trip to the grocery store.

Made with whole grains

You're standing in the grocery aisle, faced with a choice. On the one hand, there are the Thomas' English Muffins of your youth: White and filled with nooks and crannies practically screaming to be filled with pools of melted butter. On the other: Thomas' Hearty Grains English Muffins, which are "made with the goodness of whole grains." You reach, somewhat grudgingly, for the healthy option, since experts tell you that 50% of your grains should be whole grains.

What you don't realize is that unbleached wheat flour is the main ingredient; whole wheat flour is the third on the list, "indicating that the product contains relatively little," according to the CSPI.

Once again, one truth - the presence of whole grains - masks another, that whole grains make up an insignificant portion of the food.

Some products that trumpet their whole-grain credentials (like Keebler's Zesta saltine crackers) use caramel to mimic the brown color that results from the use of whole grains. In fact, the CSPI notes that these crackers have almost as much salt as whole grains. Other purportedly healthy crackers have more sugar than whole wheat.

So much for healthy whole grains (or truth in advertising).

Ingredients

What could be more straight-forward than ingredient lists? So you might think, but there's a lot of room for deception and misdirection in the average ingredient list, which lists ingredients in order from most to least.

Exhibit A from the CSPI: the Tasty Living Mocha Cherry Double Chocolate Layer Cake. The first ingredient is enriched wheat flour. 

This cake must be sort-of nutritious, since it's mostly made out of nutritious wheat flour, right? Sorry, but the biggest ingredient in this cake is sugar, as the CSPI points out. How is it possible?

Just add up all the sugars that go by different names: sugar, corn syrup, high-fructose corn syrup, and white grape juice concentrate. Boom! This cake is nearly one-third sugar.

The CSPI argues that U.S. nutrition labels and ingredient lists should be more consumer friendly. By grouping major ingredients and separating minor ingredients, we'd all be better able to make smarter purchases.

Which can of diced tomatoes is 60% tomato and 40% water, and which is 70% tomato? How much fruit is actually in that fruity-looking "health" bar? Right now, there's no way to know ... without a chemistry kit.

Serving size

A 20-oz. soda fits easily in your hand, fits easily in your car's cup holder, and might even come free with a sandwich at the local deli. But even if a reasonable person might perceive that bottle as a single-serving delivery system, there are 2.5 official servings in there, meaning 100 calories per "serving" ... but 240 calories per bottle.

While major soda bottlers have begun spelling out this single-serving conundrum to the junk food-consuming public, most serving-size calculations are based on standards developed decades ago!

Just try to remember the size of the sodas and popcorn customarily dolled out in 1977 at the drive-in, compared to today at the megaplex, and you get a sense for how much our sense of portion proportion has gone out of whack (er, changed) in the last generation.

And yet, the serving-size data on our foods reflect a slimmer more restrained era, when an 8-oz. soda was a weekly treat, not a single glug between fistfuls of Cool Ranch Doritos (serving size: 11 chips).

How many people do you know restrain themselves to 11 chips? Or to a 1/2 cup of ice cream? Or a single cup of cooked pasta?

Omega 3

Omega-3 fatty acids are an essential component of a healthy diet, but that doesn't mean every product emblazoned with the word is a healthy source of it.

The FDA allows certain foods that are rich in two of the omega-3 fatty acids to advertise that they can reduce the risk of coronary heart disease, but only if they're also low in saturated fats or other risk factors.

Which is why many eggs and some walnuts use this bit of marketing misdirection: The packaging has the phrase "omega 3," but nothing specifically about heart health, according to the CSPI.

The FDA specifically prohibited eggs from carrying the "qualified health claim" linking omega-3 fatty acids to heart health because eggs are high in cholesterol; it ruled out walnuts because the omega-3 fatty acid found in the nuts isn't one of the two that has been linked to heart health.

These products, and others, dance around the truth and the law by simply stating that they contain omega 3s, which bathes the food in a healthy light they don't necessarily deserve.

Made with real fruit

Hey wow! That candy has real fruit in it. It must be good for my kid.

The marketing around "real fruit" is so egregious that, for many shoppers, it doesn't pass the sniff test. But we all get weak-kneed when faced with something potentially yummy, so let's take a look at some of those misleading marketing techniques.

Case-in-point: Gerber Fruit Juice Treats for Preschoolers. Its package blooming with pictures of ripe oranges, raspberries, cherries, peaches, grapes, and pineapple, its only fruit-like ingredient is fruit juice concentrate, which the Dietary Guidelines for Americans considers just another form of sugar.

Not surprisingly, the primary ingredients are also sugar and ... well, sugar (corn syrup). It's candy.

Similarly, Betty Crocker Strawberry Splash Fruit Gushers says it's made with real fruit, but the only thing approximating fruit is pear concentrate (sugar) with Red No. 40 for "strawberry" color. Overall, the gushers are half sugar (a.k.a., candy).

Bottom line: If you want real fruit, buy real fruit. If you want candy, buy candy.

(And watch out for the same tricky marketing used on supposedly vegetable-rich products like Knorr Pasta Sides Chicken Broccoli Fettuccine. As the CSPI points out, there's more salt than broccoli in this pasta dish. Of course, it isn't called Chicken Salt Fettuccine ... because presumably no one would buy it.)

Zero trans fat

Like some kind of Frankenstein's monster, we stagger down the grocery aisles, arms outstretched, growling, "Trans fats bad!" And yes, they are bad.

After numerous studies showed that these fats boost "bad" LDL-cholesterol levels and lower "good" HDL-cholesterol counts (they've been called "the most potent type of fatty acid in terms of increasing the risk of coronary heart disease"), the U.S. required companies to disclose trans fat content in their foods.

But it's marketers who made our modern Frankenstein mutter: While some companies reformulated their products to reduce the use of risky fats, many just replaced trans fats with saturated fats.

These reformulated foods are basically just as bad, but they scream one truth: "0 trans fats!" to obscure another: "Still bad for your heart!"

Free range eggs

Ah, the idyllic red barn. The rays of sunshine streaming over the hillside. You feel good buying those "free range" eggs knowing that the chickens tasked with producing those little protein-filled shells lived happy cage-free lives. The sunny label says so.

But the few extra cents you plunk down for the "free range" eggs might be paying a savvy marketer, rather than an ethical farmer, because the government doesn't regulate the use of the phrase "free range" or "cage free" on eggs.

Legally speaking, it's meaningless, according to Consumer Reports' Eco Label Decoder.

The Department of Agriculture does have rules for use of the term on poultry. It means chickens must be granted the luxury of exactly five minutes of "access" to the outdoors everyday, a token prize for a short dirty life that can also include an unceremonious severing of the beak, wing-to-wing crowding in a shed that's more hangar than coop, and more chicken poop than you ever want to contemplate while planning a meal.

Those eggs you buy may have been raised ethically, with room enough for hens to roam the yard and peck contentedly at the dirt. But there's no guarantee in the "free range" label.

Fiber

Fiber is fiber is fiber. Right? Who would have any reason to think otherwise?

You might if you knew the fibers advertised in many foods are mainly "purified powders" called inulin, polydextrose, and maltodextrin, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

These "isolated" unnatural fibers are unlikely to lower blood cholesterol or blood sugar, as other fibers can, and two of the three won't even "help with regularity," says the CSPI.

"Currently, fiber is being added to foods such as ice creams, yogurts, juices, and drinks so that manufacturers can brag about their fiber content," the group contends. "But these products do not contain the traditional sources of fiber associated with a variety of health benefits."

There may be nothing harmful about maltodextrin, (made from corn, wheat, rice, or potato starch), polydextrose (made from glucose and sorbitol), or inulin (a carbohydrate derived mostly from chicory roots and other plant roots). But these ingredients act more as low-calorie filling agents (and high-value marketing agents) than proven health agents.

For the real thing in fiber, look for foods like whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and beans.

Tastes like medicine!

Food isn't medicine ... or is it? Certain micronutrients, after all, can prevent diabetes, cure cancer, make you smarter, improve your sex life, polish your furniture, and more...

In truth, the FDA allows food manufacturers to make certain pre-approved "qualified health claims" about the health benefits of nutrients in food, but only if those foods meet a range of healthy criteria, like low fat, cholesterol, and sodium content. But, according to the CSPI, marketers have stretched this inch into a long mile.

For instance, food makers can't say that their product "helps reduce the risk of heart disease" without FDA approval, so they say that it "helps maintain a healthy heart." That's why several public health groups, including the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society, have voiced concern about this trend.

In the most famous recent example, the FDA stopped General Mills from labeling Cheerios with cholesterol reducing claims it wouldn't allow on some prescription drugs. Another, which the California attorney general helped stamp out, was the Kellogg's claim that its children cereals "support your child's immunity" because, even though some are 40% sugar, they are fortified with vitamins.

"While a severe deficiency in those vitamins could interfere with the proper functioning of the body’s immune system (and any other system), there is no evidence that Cocoa Krispies actually improves a children’s immune status or wards off disease," CSPI argues. But Kellogg's is far from alone.

Even as Kellogg's stopped that line of marketing, Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice, Juicy Juice Berry Beverage, Nestlé's Carnation Instant Breakfast, and Kraft's Crystal Light all make similar claims.

Other foods make claims about boosting your kid's intelligence (Juicy Juice), protecting healthy joints (orange juice), and improving heart health (Quaker Cinnamon and Spice Instant Oatmeal, which is almost one-third sugar).

Bottom line: Food is food, not medicine.

 

More from The Daily Green

• Absurdly Wasteful Packaging for Food
• The Dirty Secrets of Six Scandalous Foods
• Six Surprising Facts About Organic Food
• The Dirty Dozen: 12 Foods to Buy Organic
• Simple Superfoods (and How to Cook Them)

Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc

Check out Yahoo! Green on Twitter and Facebook.