An independent audit of the Australian food industry’s voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme for energy-dense nutrition-poor foods

Carter, O B J; Mills, Brennen; Lloyd, E. A.; Phan, Tina

doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.179

Cited by 22 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study, we have included key nutrients, as shown on the traditional NIP, and derived a %DI from the reference value of a recommended average adult intake . This is consistent with the information provided by the originally proposed label system . However, in the current Australian marketplace, the form of FOP labelling adopted by the Australian Food and Grocery Council only shows %DI for energy on most beverage packaging, rather than showing other relevant nutrients .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…However, in the current Australian marketplace, the form of FOP labelling adopted by the Australian Food and Grocery Council only shows %DI for energy on most beverage packaging, rather than showing other relevant nutrients . The ranking of beverages in Table was performed only by %DI for energy as this is how they are labelled in the marketplace . The results of the present study show that using %DI for a range of nutrients (carbohydrates, sugars, salt) as well as energy would be beneficial for labelling beverages and helping consumers identify those that are more healthy based on nutrients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of Front‐of‐Pack labelling systems on packaged non‐alcoholic beverages for Australian consumer guidance

Yang

Liu

Ford

et al. 2016

Nutrition & Dietetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Numerous Front-of-Pack nutrition labelling systems have been proposed in recent years to assist consumers in making healthier food choices, including reducing sugar intake. Packaged beverages represent one product category that has undergone significant diversification and has emerging new subcategories. The present study examined the implications of applying three different currently used or proposed Front-of Pack nutrition labels to a range of pre-packaged beverage products to descriptively assess their potential utility. Methods: The Traffic Light System, % Daily Intake label and the Health Star Rating system were applied in accordance with established criteria and standards on 31 non-alcoholic pre-packaged beverages representing eight subcategories. Results: There were often considerable differences between labelling system ratings for the same products. The Traffic Light System had similar labelling when comparing soft drinks and fruit juice and sodium content was marked as low for all tested products. Percentage Daily Intake reflected similar results for regular soft drinks and fruit juices; however, in terms of energy, liquid breakfast ranked highest followed by energy drinks, fruit juice and soft drinks. The Health Star Rating showed the fruit juice category to be healthier than other beverages, including water. Diet products scored 0.5-1 stars more than regular products. Conclusions: The Health Star Rating system was concluded to be more suitable to label beverages based on better utility, applicability and ease of identifying healthier beverage choices; however, this system would benefit from further refinement. Labelling simplicity, health representativeness, marketplace utility and consumer comprehensiveness are important considerations for future labelling development.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Analysis of Front‐of‐Pack labelling systems on packaged non‐alcoholic beverages for Australian consumer guidance

Yang

Liu

Ford

et al. 2016

Nutrition & Dietetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, foods using the HSR system would carry at least a half-star and thus a product with no stars clearly indicates its manufacturer's non-participation. Previous Australian and international research has shown that a voluntary approach to FOPL resulted in inconsistent implementation (31,32) . For this reason, a mandatory standard FOPL would almost certainly better enable consumers to evaluate the nutritional quality of foods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A nutrient profiling assessment of packaged foods using two star-based front-of-pack labels

Carrad

Louie

Yeatman

et al. 2015

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare two front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems for the assessment of packaged foods and drinks with Australian Dietary Guidelines. Design: A 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. Setting: The study was conducted in Australia, using a comprehensive food database. Subjects: Packaged food and drink products (n 20 225) available in Australia. Results: Using 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. Conclusions: Both 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.

show abstract

“…Voluntary measures have been criticised as being small, indistinct and seriously flawed, as well as too confusing for the average consumer to understand [15]. Additionally, due to the voluntary nature of the scheme, they are often absent from energy dense (high-fat/high-sugar) foods [16]. On the other hand, the use of mandatory, distinct front-of-pack labelling has been shown to help consumers make better food choices [16,17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, due to the voluntary nature of the scheme, they are often absent from energy dense (high-fat/high-sugar) foods [16]. On the other hand, the use of mandatory, distinct front-of-pack labelling has been shown to help consumers make better food choices [16,17]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Preferences for the Use of Taxation and Labelling Policy Measures to Combat Obesity in Young Children in Australia

Comans

Moretto

Byrnes

2017

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Childhood obesity is a serious concern for developed and developing countries. This study aimed to assess the level of support in Australia for regulation and to assess whether systematic differences occur between individuals who support increased regulation and individuals who oppose it. Methods: An online survey (n = 563) was used to assess parental/caregiver preferences for taxation policy options and nutrition labelling designed to address the incidence of childhood obesity. Participants were parents or caregivers of young children (3 to 7 years) who were actively enrolled in an existing birth cohort study in South-East Queensland, Australia. Results: The majority of the parents (over 80%) strongly agreed or agreed with labelling food and drink with traffic light or teaspoon labelling. Support for taxation was more variable with around one third strongly supporting and a further 40% of participants equivocal about using taxation; however, a quarter strongly rejected this policy. Cluster analysis did not detect any socio-demographic differences between those who strongly supported taxation and those who did not. Conclusions: Better food labelling would be welcomed by parents to enhance food choices for their children. Taxation for health reasons would not be opposed by most parents. Implications for Public Health: Governments should consider taxation of unhealthy drinks and improved labelling to encourage healthy food purchasing.

show abstract

An independent audit of the Australian food industry’s voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme for energy-dense nutrition-poor foods

Cited by 22 publications

References 6 publications

Analysis of Front‐of‐Pack labelling systems on packaged non‐alcoholic beverages for Australian consumer guidance

Analysis of Front‐of‐Pack labelling systems on packaged non‐alcoholic beverages for Australian consumer guidance

A nutrient profiling assessment of packaged foods using two star-based front-of-pack labels

Public Preferences for the Use of Taxation and Labelling Policy Measures to Combat Obesity in Young Children in Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About