How Much Do Front-Of-Pack Labels Correlate with Food Environmental Impacts?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Muzzioli L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10005439 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
How Much Do Front-Of-Pack Labels Correlate with Food Environmental Impacts?
Muzzioli Luca L Donini Lorenzo Maria LM Mazziotta Matteo M Iosa Marco M Frigerio Francesco F Poggiogalle Eleonora E Lenzi Andrea A Pinto Alessandro A
Nutrients 20230226 5
Nutrient profiling and front-of-pack labeling (FOPL) have been developed to categorize food products as more or less healthy based on their nutrient content and to easily communicate this information to consumers. The goal is to change individual food choices toward a healthier diet. Since global climate change has recently become an urgent matter, this paper also aims to investigate the correlations between different food health scales, including some FOPLs currently adopted by one or more coun ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare, in adolescents, two models of front-of-pack Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA) labels in terms of (i) friendliness and acceptance and (ii) the ability to choose a diet that closely follows the nutritional recommendations.DesignA randomized cross-over study was designed to compare two simplified front-of-pack GDA nutrition labels.SettingA Spanish secondary school.SubjectsEighty-one healthy adolescents aged between 14 and 16 years were recruited. Participants were randomly exposed to two experimental non-real food-choice conditions using multiple-traffic-light or monochrome nutritional labels. Participants had to choose options from a closed menu for 5 d on the basis of the experimental front-of-pack labelling. For each meal, three food options with different nutritional compositions were given to the participants. The contents of total energy and fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt of the chosen options were calculated.ResultsThere were no significant differences in baseline sociodemographic and anthropometric characteristics between participants regardless of the experimental condition in which they started. There were no carry-over effects between the experimental sequences. It was observed that when participants used the multiple-traffic-light GDA system they chose significantly less total energy (mean -123·1 (sd 211·0) kJ (-29·4 (sd 50·4) kcal), P < 0·001), sugar (-4·5 (sd 4·6) g, P < 0·001), fat (-2·1 (sd 4·5) g, P = 0·006), saturated fat (-1·0 (sd 1·9) g, P = 0·002) and salt (-0·4 (sd 0·5) g, P < 0·001) than when they used the monochrome GDA system.ConclusionsCompared with the monochrome GDA front-of-pack nutritional label, the multiple-traffic-light system helped adolescents to differentiate between healthier and less healthy food, theoretically making it possible for them to choose a diet closer to dietary recommendations.
| S-EPMC10282295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To stem the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and obesity, front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) have been developed since 1989. Whereas several countries have already adopted one voluntarily, the European Community wants to harmonize an FOPL system that will be mandatory for all member states. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe what could be achieved or not by FOPLs, and to discuss if there is enough evidence to establish whether such labels are effective in modifying purchasing behavior, in directing individual dietary patterns towards a healthy and sustainable diet, and in reformulating food products by the food industry. Non-directive FOPLs, which are still under study, appear to be informative and well-accepted by consumers even if they require a cognitive effort. Conversely, directive FOPLs are supported by several studies, but they are mostly conducted in simulated scenarios and/or performed as retrospective studies. Nevertheless, directive FOPLs are rated as an intuitive tool, and they have demonstrated a high capacity to help consumers rank food products as more or less healthy. In conclusion, directive and non-directive FOPLs convey different messages. No FOPL individually can be considered exhaustive in relation to all the objectives outlined in this narrative review, and therefore, the development of a model synthesizing both messages is advisable. Many questions remain open, such as the possibility of reformulating pre-packaged products, how to deal with traditional products, and the impact on the incidence of NCDs and obesity. In the light of the complexity of factors that condition consumption choices and health, none of the current FOPLs can be considered a health policy tool on its own. The possibility of development remains open, but as the state of the art, these tools do not seem to be able to achieve all the European Community goals together. We can speculate that they could meet these goals only if they are integrated into a multi-tiered, structured health policy intervention.
| S-EPMC8879020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFront-of-pack (FOP) nutrition warning labels to identify potentially harmful foods/beverages have recently been considered in Singapore. The objective of this study was to pilot test two promising FOP warning labels intended to reduce purchases of products high in sugar to determine whether a full scale trial testing one or both these labels using actual purchases is warranted.MethodsFive hundred twelve participants ≥21 years old and residing in Singapore completed all study elements online via the NUSMart Online Grocery Store study website. The study was designed as a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) where consumers were randomized and asked to hypothetically shop in one of three versions of an online grocery store; 1) no FOP label (control), 2) a graphical high-in-sugar label shaped like a stop sign, or 3) a text-based warning label. The proportion of labelled products purchased (primary outcome) and all secondary measures of diet quality were calculated using participants' orders. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression was used to compare purchasing behavior across the three study arms.ResultsThe proportion of high-in-sugar products selected (i.e., those targeted for labelling) was largest in the no label control arm at 20%. The proportion was a non-statistically significant 2 percentage points lower (P = 0.146) for the high-in-sugar stop-sign label arm and 4 percentage points lower (P < 0.05) in the warning label with deterrent text arm. We could not reject the hypothesis of equal effectiveness of the two warning labels (P = 0.231).ConclusionsResults suggest that the two health warning labels have potential to reduce demand for high-in-sugar products in Singapore. Future studies should test the influence of these labels using actual purchases in efforts to identify whether either labelling strategy should be considered for adoption in the local setting.Trial registrationThe American Economic Association's registry for randomized controlled trials; AEARCTR-0003800 . Registered 18 January 2019.
| S-EPMC6367807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The implementation of a standardized front-of-pack-labelling (FoPL) scheme would likely be a useful tool for many consumers trying to improve the healthfulness of their diets. Our objective was to examine what the traffic light labelling scheme would look like if implemented in the US. Data were extracted from Label Insight's Open Access branded food database in 2017. Nutrient levels and the proportion of products classified as "Red" (High), "Amber" (Medium) or "Green" (Low) in total fat, saturated fat, total sugar and sodium for food and beverage items were examined. The proportion of products in each category that had each possible combination of traffic light colors, and met the aggregate score for "healthy" was examined. Out of 175,198 products, >50% of all US packaged foods received a "Red" rating for total sugar and sodium. "Confectionery" had the highest mean total sugar (51.9 g/100 g) and "Meat and meat alternatives" the highest mean sodium (781 mg/100 g). The most common traffic light label combination was "Red" for total fat, saturated fat and sodium and "Green" for sugar. Only 30.1% of products were considered "healthy". A wide variety (n = 80) of traffic light color combinations were observed. A color coded traffic light scheme appears to be an option for implementation across the US packaged food supply to support consumers in making healthier food choices.
| S-EPMC5452210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-pack labeling is a cost-effective strategy to decrease population consumption of sodium, sugar, saturated fat, total fat, and trans-fatty acids, considered critical nutrients for chronic disease. Our main objective was to explore the subjective understanding of labels that are currently used internationally among low- and middle-income Mexican consumers. We performed two phases of 10 focus groups with adolescents (13-15 y), young adults (21-23 y), mothers of children 3-12 y, fathers of children 3-12 y and older adults (55-70 y). Seven FOPL were evaluated: Guideline Daily Amounts, Multiple Traffic Light, Chilean Warning labels, Warning labels in Red, 5-Color Nutrition Label, Health Star Rating, and Healthy Choice label. Data was analyzed with a triangulation of researchers using a content analysis, based on three codes: 1) awareness and use of the Guideline Daily Amounts, 2) acceptability, and 3) subjective understanding of labels. Most participants were aware of the Guideline Daily Amounts, however they rarely used it because interpreting the information displayed on the label was too complicated. Health Star Rating, Warning labels, Multiple Traffic Light and the Healthy Choice logo labels were the most understandable, however the acceptability of the The Healthy Choice logo decreased as it did not provide information on specific ingredients. The Warning labels was the only label able to warn about critical nutrients that could represent a health risk. The Warning labels in red was more accepted compared to Warning labels in black. Results show that directive and semi-directive labels, such as Warning labels, Health Star Rating or Multiple Traffic Light, may be better at helping population of low- and middle income make healthier food choices, than non-directive FOPL such as the Guideline Daily Amounts implemented in México. The study results highlight the potential of Warning labels to support decreases in the consumption of critical ingredients in low- and middle-income Mexican consumers.
| S-EPMC6860442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nutrition labels on packaged food items provide at-a-glance information about the nutritional composition of the food, serving as a quick guide for consumers to assess the quality of food products. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the nutritional information on the front and back of pack labels of selected packaged foods in the Indian market. A total of 432 food products in six categories (idli mix, breakfast cereals, porridge mix, soup mix, beverage mix and extruded snacks) were investigated by a survey. Nutritional profiling of the foods was done based on the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) claims regulations. The healthiness of the packaged foods was assessed utilising nutritional traffic light system. The products were classified into 'healthy', 'moderately healthy' and 'less healthy' based on the fat, saturated fat, and sugar content. Most of the food products evaluated belong to healthy' and 'moderately healthy' categories except for products in extruded snacks. Reformulation of 'extruded snacks' are necessary to decrease the total and saturated fat content. The nutrient content claims were classified using the International Network for Food and Obesity / NCDs Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) taxonomy. Protein, dietary fibre, fat, sugar, vitamins and minerals were the most referred nutrients in the nutrient content claims. Breakfast cereal carried highest number of nutritional claims while porridge mix had the lowest number of claims. The overall compliance of the nutrient content claims for the studied food products is 80.5%. This study gives an overall view about the nutritional quality of the studied convenience food products and snacks in Indian market.
| S-EPMC11623555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2011, a National Academy of Medicine report recommended that packaged food in the U.S. display a uniform front-of-package nutrition label, using a system such as a 0-3 star ranking. Few studies have directly compared this to other labels to determine which best informs consumers and encourages healthier purchases. In 2013, we randomized adult participants (N=1247) in an Internet-based survey to one of six conditions: no label control; single traffic light; multiple traffic light; Facts Up Front; NuVal; or 0-3 star ranking. We compared groups on purchase intentions and accuracy of participants' interpretation of food labels. There were no differences in the nutritional quality of hypothetical shopping baskets across conditions (p=0.845). All labels improved consumers' abilities to judge the nutritional quality of foods relative to no label, but the best designs varied by outcomes. NuVal and multiple traffic light labels led to the greatest accuracy identifying the healthier of two products (p<0.001), while the multiple traffic light also led to the most accurate estimates of saturated fat, sugar, and sodium (p<0.001). The single traffic light outperformed other labels when participants compared nutrient levels between similar products (p<0.03). Single/multiple traffic light and Facts Up Front labels led to the most accurate calories per serving estimations (p<0.001). Although front-of-package labels helped participants more accurately assess products' nutrition information relative to no label, no conditions shifted adults' purchase intentions. Results did not point to a clearly superior label design, but they suggest that a 3-star label might not be best for educating consumers.
| S-EPMC5764801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify patterns of perception of front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labels and determine dietary, lifestyle and health profiles related to such patterns.DesignCross-sectional.Participants/setting28,952 French adults participating in the web-based Nutrinet-Santé cohort.Outcome measuresPerception was measured using indicators of understanding and acceptability for three simple FOP labels ("green tick", the logo of the French Nutrition and Health Program and "simple traffic lights" (STL)), and two detailed FOP formats ("multiple traffic lights" (MTL) and "color range" logo (CR)), placed on ready-to-eat soup packages. Dietary intake data were collected using three web-based 24 h records.Statistical analysesAssociations of perception patterns with individual characteristics, including diet, lifestyle and health status, were examined using analysis of covariance and logistic regression, adjusted for socio-demographic and economic factors.ResultsNo clear trend emerged concerning differences in dietary intake between perception groups. Low physical activity and obesity were more frequent in the 'favorable to STL' group (respectively, 20.7% and 10.7%). The 'favorable to MTL' group included the highest percentage of individuals who declared type 2 diabetes (2.2%). Persons with hypertension were proportionally more numerous in the 'favorable to MTL' and the 'favorable to CR logo' groups (respectively, 9.5% and 9.3%).ConclusionsAfter adjustment for socio-demographic and economic factors, no FOP label stood out as being more suitable than another for reaching populations with poor diet. However, both STL and MTL may be most appropriate for increasing awareness of healthy eating among groups at higher risk of nutrition-related chronic diseases.
| S-EPMC3951292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost food in the United Kingdom is purchased in supermarkets, and many of these purchases are routinely tracked through supermarket loyalty card data. Using such data may be an effective way to develop remote public health interventions and to measure objectively their effectiveness at changing food purchasing behavior.ObjectiveThe Front-of-pack food Labels: Impact on Consumer Choice (FLICC) study is a pilot randomized controlled trial of a digital behavior change intervention. This pilot trial aimed to collect data on recruitment and retention rates and to provide estimates of effect sizes for the primary outcome (healthiness of ready meals and pizzas purchased) to inform a larger trial.MethodsThe intervention consisted of a website where participants could access tailored feedback on previous purchases of ready meals and pizzas, set goals for behavior change, and model and practice the recommended healthy shopping behavior using traffic light labels. The control consisted of Web-based information on traffic light labeling. Participants were recruited via email from a list of loyalty card holders held by the participating supermarket. All food and drink purchases for the participants for the 6 months before recruitment, during the 6-week intervention period, and during a 12-week washout period were transferred to the research team by the participating supermarket. Healthiness of ready meals and pizzas was measured using a predeveloped scale based solely on the traffic light colors on the foods. Questionnaires were completed at recruitment, end of the intervention, and end of washout to estimate the effect of the intervention on variables that mediate behavior change (eg, belief and intention formation).ResultsWe recruited 496 participants from an initial email to 50,000 people. Only 3 people withdrew from the study, and purchase data were received for all other participants. A total of 208 participants completed all 3 questionnaires. There was no difference in the healthiness of purchased ready meals and pizzas between the intervention and control arms either during the intervention period (P=.32) or at washout (P=.59).ConclusionsAlthough the FLICC study did not find evidence of an impact of the intervention on food purchasing behavior, the unique methods used in this pilot trial are informative for future studies that plan to use supermarket loyalty card data in collaboration with supermarket partners. The experience of the trial showcases the possibilities and challenges associated with the use of loyalty card data in public health research.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN19316955; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19316955 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76IVZ9WjK).International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1186/s40814-015-0015-1.
| S-EPMC6482590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare two front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems for the assessment of packaged foods and drinks with Australian Dietary Guidelines.DesignA cross-sectional nutrient profiling assessment. Food and drink products (n 20 225) were categorised into scoring levels using criteria for the Institute of Medicine (IOM) three-star system and the five-star Australian Health Star Rating (HSR). The effectiveness of these systems to categorise foods in accordance with Australian Dietary Guidelines was explored.SettingThe study was conducted in Australia, using a comprehensive food database.SubjectsPackaged food and drink products (n 20 225) available in Australia.ResultsUsing the IOM three-star system, the majority (55 %) of products scored the minimum 0 points and 25·5 % scored the maximum 3 points. Using HSR criteria, the greatest proportion of products (15·2 %) scored three-and-a-half stars from a possible five and 12·5 % received the lowest rating of a half-star. Very few products (4·1 %) scored five stars. Products considered core foods and drinks in Australian Dietary Guidelines received higher scores than discretionary foods in all food categories for both labelling systems (all P<0·05; Mann-Whitney U test), with the exception of fish products using IOM three-star criteria (P=0·603). The largest discrepancies in median score between the two systems were for the food categories edible oils, convenience foods and dairy.ConclusionsBoth the IOM three-star and Australian HSR front-of-pack labelling systems rated packaged foods and drinks broadly in line with Australian Dietary Guidelines by assigning core foods higher ratings and discretionary foods lower ratings.
| S-EPMC10271162 | biostudies-literature