Country-of-origin labeling laws went into effect in the United States Tuesday, though it may be some weeks before new labels appear at grocery stores. American stores will now have to identify the country of origin for meats, produce and some types of nuts, according to the Agriculture Department. Retailers have six months to comply with the law.

A number of groups have rallied for country-of-origin labeling, including farmers, ranchers and consumer groups, who say shoppers should know where their food comes from. The recent Chinese melamine scandal has had an increasing number of Americans worried about knowing what country's products they're buying. This type of labeling is already ubiquitous in Europe, where foods are often labeled down to the specific region of origin.

The "traffic-light" nutrition labels unveiled by the British Food Standards agency may not be popular with the food manufacturers and supermarkets, who are uncomfortable with the black and white (or red, yellow/orange and green) separation of "good" and "bad" foods, but consumers love them. The labeling system uses the three traffic light colors to distinguish between high, medium and low levels of fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt in food. The labels are very simple in design and it is easy to tell at a glance what the nutritional profile of a food is.

Out of all the supporters the system, parents are some of the biggest fans. Almost 80% of all parents would prefer if food manufacturers used the "traffic light" labels. They take very little time to read and, unlike the more detailed labels that use the Guideline Daily Amount (GDA) system, no "real world" translation of the information presented is necessary. On top of that, even small children can get the hang of the color-coded system very quickly, which helps to teach them about nutrition, as well as to make taking them along to the store much easier.

Energy Fiend has a great caffeine content database that can give you the exact amount of caffeine in just about any drink you could want to know about. It is a great resource because, although drinks containing caffeine make it clear in the ingredients list, they don't list the actual amount of caffeine that they contain. Coca-Cola, perhaps taking a cue from E.F. is hoping to make getting this information easier for consumers by adding labels to all of their products indicating their exact caffeine content.

Such labels are already found on Enviga (8.33 mg/oz.) and Full Throttle (8.81 mg/oz.) and Coca-Cola Classic (2.83mg/oz.) cans will have it by May, with the rest of the beverage lineup - including Diet Coke (3.75mg/oz.) to follow over the rest of the year, though the labels will not be put onto the bottles and cans of Coca-Cola products sold outside of the US.

For comparison, drip coffee (black) has 18.13mg caffeine/oz., Red Bull has 9.64mg/oz. and regular black tea has 5.88mg/oz.

The real motivation behind it is that foods sourced from elsewhere have less traceability than UK-based products, as manufacturing and processing standards may be lower elsewhere. A move like this would potentially increase the trust that consumers have in UK-made products, where the processing standards are known, and as a result, support UK-based farmers.

There are federal regulations in place that dictate how terms like "fat free," "low fat," "reduced fat" and "light," among others, can be used with regard to food. Fat free foods, for example, must contain less than .5 grams of fat per serving. It may seem like there is enough definition in this area of food labeling already, but a new label is catching on rapidly: the "lean" label.

For a long time, the "lean" label has been applied only to USDA certified meats that have less than 8 grams of total fat per serving, and no more than 3.5 mg of saturated fats. A recent ruling change means that the term can now be applied to packaged foods, putting it in direct competition with "fat free" and other existing labels for the consumer's attention at the grocery store.

Do consumers really need another way to describe the fat content of, say, frozen pizza? It would probably be too much to as that they just start printing the fat content right on the front of the box.

The New Year is always full of possibilities. There are meals to be eaten, recipes to try and, of course, a slew of new food trends that will shape the way we eat and what food issues will be at the forefront of the news. Of all the trends that seemed to be pushing towards the forefront in recent months, these are some of those that look like they're about to have a breakout year.

Single Origin Chocolates - Dark chocolate was the hot item last year, but more companies, including Hershey's, are introducing and promoting single origin chocolates with cocoa beans from one country - or even one plantation - for their unique flavor profiles.

Healthy Soft Drinks - Jones Soda has eliminated high fructose corn syrup from their recipes. Enviga has been fairly successful so far, thanks to the large amount of publicity that it has received, and Diet Coke Plus will be coming to stores in a few months. Look for other soda companies to follow suit.

Healthy Food Labels - Hannaford supermarket introduced a labeling scheme of their own to direct shoppers to healthier foods and the traffic light system was a success in the UK. Don't be surprised to see more obvious messages about what is and is not good for you.

Want to look back on some of the top news, trends and other food related goings-on of the last year? After a jam-packed year of posting, there are some topics that keep coming up again and again. From A to Z, here are our top picks from 2006:

Ad mascots made a comeback and even got spinoff merchandise of their own.

Bacon was just about everywhere

Premium and gourmet coffee is everywhere, and there is an increased appreciation for it.

Dark chocolate is more popular than ever

Energy drinks are a big hit with teens. Caffeinated vodkas are taking the trend even further.

Fois gras is banned in Chicago, although you wouldn't know it to eat there.

Gelato is nearing the top spot on the list of cold, sweet treats that people love to indulge in.

High fructose corn syrup is being looked on with a more critical eye by consumers and removed from some drinks.

You have probably seen cartons of eggs in the store from "free range" or "cage free" hens, but what about all those other eggs on the shelves? At stores like Wild Oats and Whole Foods, only cage-less eggs are sold, but by some estimates, the eggs from caged hens in an ordinary grocery store could be more than 80% of those on the shelves. Eggs from caged hens are not labeled in any particular way, leaving consumers with the impression that the eggs have a blank slate. In other words, if it doesn't clearly state the eggs' origin, consumers aren't going to spend too much time thinking about it even if they don't support caging chickens.

At least, this is the theory put forward by Washington DC council member Jim Graham, who is proposing a law that would require supermarkets to display signs stating that "Eggs may be from caged hens" on displays of eggs not labeled otherwise. He says that this would increase consumer awareness for the issue, which is receiving more and more attention from animal rights groups, as well as individuals who are "interested in protecting animals"

In contrast to American consumers, who regularly request that the nutritional information be presented in the absolute simplest form possible, European consumers are now saying that they would prefer to have the calories in foods on their nutritional labels. The reason for this is not that they have some deeper understanding of nutrition than Americans, but that energy-based labeling is the most widely understood system and that many consumers would like to see an EU-wide system that does not vary from place to place. The US system seems to be their model, with the most recent drive being for foods to have "front-of-pack and back-of-pack nutrition labeling, based on a uniform list of nutrients, nutrition information per serving and the introduction of Guideline Daily Amounts (GDAs)." Once a standard is in place, then simplifications can be made or additional labeling systems added, but you can't simplify what isn't there, so shoppers will have to wait for a basic system first.

The Department of Agriculture has proposed some changes to the standards currently in place for grass fed beef. At the moment, there really are no specific guidelines, and farmers who produce at least 99% grass fed beef want labels that indicate that their beef is exactly what it sounds like: from cows that live in pastures and eat only grass. The proposal has no provisions that state that the cows must be kept in pastures and it defines "grass" to include "leftovers from harvested crops," including corn and silage, which feedlot finished cows are already fed. It means that some conventional beef, feedlot beef, could be labeled "grass fed."

Understandably, the farmers who have pasture-raised cattle don't like the proposal because it devalues the "grass fed" label, barely separating it from conventional beef as far as consumers are concerned. They propose a more specific definition of "grass" and a minimum amount of time that the cows must spend grazing in pasture each day. The Agriculture Department says those rules are too strict and that their standards put less strain on ranchers, particularly in years of bad weather or drought when pastures may suffer.

Under the Agriculture Department's standards, more beef labeled "grass fed" will reach the market. But will consumers want it, or be willing to pay a premium for it, if it has no distinction from conventional?

The traffic light labeling system, which clearly indicates whether foods have high, low or medium levels of fats, sugar and salt, has enjoyed good success with consumers in England and is even being adopted in other parts of the world. Some supermarkets have expressed displeasure over the system, but now five major food manufacturers are launching their own campaign to try to bring it down.

Critics of the GDA plan say that percentages are too confusing for the average consumer and that they need the black and white (or red and green) of the traffic system to help them make food choices. A trial run should help determine wither the GDA will catch on.