The St. Mary banner. (Franklin, Parish of St. Mary, La.) 1889-1931, 1911-02-18

Distortion No. 1 stated that we have
been accustomed to advertise Grape
Nuts and Postum as "cure-alls for ev-
erything."
1t has never been the policy Of this
Company to advertise Grape-Nuts or
Postum to cure anything.
we say that in cases where coffet
disagrees and Is causing sickness Its
dismissal will remove the cause Of the
trouble, and we suggest the use OF Pos
tum for the reason that it furnishes a
hot palata BILE morning beverage, and
contains natural elements from the
grain which can be used by nature to
assist in rebuilding nerve centers that
coffee may have broken down.
Likewise Grape-Nuts food does not
cure anything. but it does assist nature
Tremendously in rebuilding. provided
the undigestible food that has been
used is discontinued and Grape-Nuts
taken in its place.
Charge No. 2 states that the passage
OF the National Food & Drugs Act COM
PEELED US to drop from the package
i some assertions regarding the nutri-
tive value OF Grape-Nuts.
We have never been "compelled' to
make any change.
Since the beginning 1t has been a
universal rule to print clearly on every
package exactly wnat I he contents are
Before the passage Of the Pure Food
Law the packages stated that Grape
Nuts food was made Of wheat and bar
ley w. -, no+ .s,.ar, n. sm.,, .mourt
of salt and yeast as Of value enough to
speak of, but after the new Law came
in We became as technical as the Off
Gals at Washington on, and -, added the
have no recollection of being asked to.
We believed that our statement that
Grape-Nuts will supply elements to
nourish the brain and nerve centers is
true and bring authorities to support
the fact
Some state chemists believed this a
gross eXaggeration and inasmuch as
the Food Dept at Washington could
easily harass grocers. pending tria!
on the disputed question, we concluded
that much the better way would be to
eliminate from our packages such
claims, however certain We may be that
the claims are true.
Another statement objected to read
as follows:
The system will absorb a greater
amount Of nourishment from one pound
Of Grape-Nuts than from ten pounds OF
meat. wheat. oats, or bread.
Some Department chemists deceive
themselves as well as the public.
'Calorie" is the word which defines
unit of heat determined by the amount.
necessary to raise one kilogram OF wa
ter one degree centlgrade. On this
basis a table Of calories is prepared
showing the percentage OF different
kinds of food. Butter shows $50;
Grape-Nuts 3.96: milk. O.70. Remember
the statement on the package spoke of
the nourishment the system would abb
sorb, but did not speak Of the calories
Of heat contained in it, for the heat is
not nourishment. and the nourishment
cannot be judged by the number OF heat
units, Notwithstanding the fact that
certain chemists would have the public
believe SO.
AS an illustration: Attempt to feed a
man sixty days on butter alone. with
It's $50 calories. The man would die
before the experiment had run sixty
days.
Then take Grape-Nuts with 800 and
milk with 0.70. the two combined equal
4.66-about one-half the number of
Galleries contained in butter. The man
fed for sixty days on this food would
be well nourished. and could live not
only sixty days. but six months on that |
food alone, and We do not hesitate to |
say from our long knowledge of the |
sustaining power Of the food that a |
of practically the same weight as when |
he started.-@if he be man Of normal |
weight.
We will suppose that from his work
he lost q pound a day and made up a |
pound each day from food. If that
premise proved to be true the man in |
sixty days time would make sixty |
pounds of tissue to replace what had
been lost. and this would be done on
number Of calories Of butter upon
which no one can sustain life.