Front-of-package nutrition labelling policy: global progress and future directions

Nutrient‐Based Warning Labels May Help in the Pursuit of Healthy Diets

“…Differences in their design, nutrition criteria, nutrients displayed, products targets, and their mandatory or voluntary implementation can stimulate different responses by consumers and industry. A large variety of FOP labels are currently in use, and in their recent review, Kanter and colleagues document key characteristics of existing FOP systems (2). In this commentary, we argue that the newest paradigm of FOP labels, represented by the Chilean warning label (WL), has the greatest potential to promote healthy diets and is better aligned with FBDG and their central messages of eating a diversity of core, plant-based foods (whole grains, legumes, nuts, fruits, vegetables) and avoiding noncore foods (3) compared with the Keyhole symbol (KH), the multiple traffic-light label (TLL), the Health Star Ratings system (HSR), and the 5-Color Nutrition label (5-CNL) (2).…”

Response to ‘Front-of-package nutrition labels need to be assessed on their nutrition science rigour’ by Lawrence and Woods

“…Various FOP nutrition labelling systems, while at times crude and based on a limited number of nutrients, have the ability to help consumers identify 'more healthful' and 'less healthful' food items in an increasingly complex food system (2,12,13) . We feel that a thorough examination of consumer understanding, interpretation and use of each of the various FOP nutrition labelling systems and impacts on the food industry are equally as important for understanding FOP nutrition labelling as a public health nutrition tool as Lawrence and Woods' suggestions of improved nutrient profiling science (1) , to advance this policy space.…”

Anticipatory effects of the implementation of the Chilean Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on food and beverage product reformulation

“…Regulated products are also subject to restrictions regarding both their marketing to children (<14 y) and their sale and promotion in schools. When passed in 2012, this law was unique in its scope, but since has increasingly garnered attention, and motivated similar regulations, worldwide, the status of which is presented in a timeline in a recent commentary . Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Uruguay are also all considering similar FOP warning labels to that of Chile…”

“…When passed in 2012, this law was unique in its scope, but since has increasingly garnered attention, and motivated similar regulations, worldwide, the status of which is presented in a timeline in a recent commentary. 6 Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Uruguay are also all considering similar FOP warning labels to that of Chile. 7,8 Food and beverage product reformulation is one means to make unhealthy products healthier, thus contributing to wider prevention efforts to help prevent nutrition-related noncommunicable diseases.…”

“…30 One positive example in terms of anticipatory reformulation prior to an obligatory sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax has been reported. 31 While many types of FOP nutrition labeling schemes exist to date, 6 few studies, in countries other than Chile, have investigated the potential impact of FOP nutrition labeling initiatives on the reformulation of food and beverage products by industry through observational rather than predicted (modeling) studies; and all are based on positive labeling systems. 12,23,32 Regarding the voluntary Health Star Rating (HSR) system FOP nutrition label in New Zealand, Ni Mhurchu et al found that between 2014 and 2016, some products that carried the HSR underwent healthier reformulation compared with similar products without an HSR.…”