Food Fridays: Misleading People with Percentages

I enjoy Cape Cod Potato Chips, so one day I decided to try the reduced fat variety. I was pleasantly surprised that they tasted much like the regular. They have a nice crunch and are worthy to be eaten along with (or even inside) a sandwich. I try to avoid chips, but I figure these are a good option when I indulge.

My enjoyment is only curbed by the misleading name.

The company calls its reduced fat variety by a special name. It’s not just reduced fat, it’s 40% reduced fat.

But I was skeptical of how they could remove that much fat. It made me investigate more.

Here are the nutrition facts from the Cape Cod Potato Chips website.

The reduced fat have 6 grams of fat versus 8 in the regular. By my account, that is a reduction of 2 grams from 8, which is only a mere 25% reduction. What gives?

Here is their logic on the 40% reduced fat. The package indicates that 6 grams of fat is 40% less than 10 grams, which is what the national leading brand has. Oh, so that’s the game: increase the percentage base to make the reduction sound better.

Also notice how the calories are only reduced by 13%, making the products similar from a weight loss perspective. But again, 40% reduced is better than 13%!

I was wondering about labeling facts, so I dug up the definition of reduced fat via the FDA:

reduced: when describing fat, sodium or calorie content, the food must have at least 25 percent less of these nutrients than the “regular” version.

Technically, Cape Cod Reduced Fat chips meet the definition, as they are 25% reduced from the “regular.” Why are they allowed to call it 40%?

Whatever the case may be, I chalk this example as the nutrition labeling equivalent of inflated price savings. I think the solution is to ignore percentages entirely, just as I try to ignore savings.