“Maybe a little bit of guilt isn’t so bad for the overall health of an individual”: a mixed-methods exploration of young adults’ experiences with calorie labelling

Abstract

Background Menu labelling, and more specifically calorie labelling, has been posited as an intervention to improve nutrition literacy and the healthfulness of consumers’ food purchases. However, there is some concern calorie labelling may unintentionally trigger or exacerbate disordered eating among vulnerable persons. The purpose of this research was to explore young adults’ experiences with labelling, with a focus on its implications for their relationships with food. Methods Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants from a campus-based menu labelling study. Interview data were inductively coded using thematic analysis and supported by survey data assessing disordered eating, body esteem, and related constructs. Results The sample consisted of 13 participants (10 women, 3 men), most of whom perceived themselves as “about the right weight” (62%). Four key themes included: (1) participants’ support of and skepticism about labelling interventions, (2) the identification of knowledge and autonomy as mechanisms of labelling interventions, (3) the role of the individual’s and others’ relationships with food in experiences with labelling, and (4) disordered eating and dieting as lenses that shape experiences with interventions. Participants’ perceptions of and experiences with calorie labels were shaped by gender, body esteem, and disordered eating risk. Conclusions The results provide insight into the complexity of young adults’ interactions with labelling interventions and context for future research exploring the unintended consequences of public health nutrition interventions.

Assessing public perception and awareness of UK mandatory calorie labeling in the out‐of‐home sector: Using Twitter and Google trends data

“…In relation to this, a second theme identified was that the policy will be “ineffective/doesn't go far enough/will be ignored.” Multiple tweets expressed negative sentiments reflecting the potential harm toward individuals with eating disorders combined with the view that the policy will be ineffective at achieving aims to reduce obesity levels. This is in line with qualitative evidence in which individuals reported support for calorie labeling policies, but scepticism regarding their effectiveness 23 . These themes indicate a narrative on social media that the policy will cause considerable adverse effects in individuals with eating disorders, with minimal evidence of benefit to the wider population.…”

“…22 Positive public perceptions, awareness and engagement with health policies, particularly ones such as calorie labeling that rely on consumers noticing and use of provided information, may prove vital for a wider impact on public health and obesity levels. 23 Research from Saudi Arabia found that 85% of people surveyed thought food labeling in restaurants was useful, however, only 43% stated that they always or usually use food labeling when making their purchases. 24 It was identified that the main barrier for not using food labeling was time constraints (25%) followed by difficulty to use (24%).…”

‘An extra fight I didn't ask for’: A qualitative survey exploring the impact of calories on menus for people with experience of eating disorders

“…Haynos and Roberto (2017) conducted an online survey with adult undergraduate student women about the impact menu labelling had on hypothetical meal choices. In line with others (Raffoul et al, 2022) they tentatively concluded that calories on menus may exacerbate and trigger ‘eating disorder tendencies’ (Haynos & Roberto, 2017, p. 281). Additionally, Raffoul et al's (2022) mixed methods study was not conducted with participants with EDs exclusively, but some participants reported ED histories.…”

Individuals with restrictive eating disorders' experience of the introduction of calories on menus in England: An interpretative phenomenological analysis study

“…In practice this means that all cafés, restaurants, and takeaways with over 250 employees are required to provide calorie labelling ‘clearly and prominently’ at the point of choice, alongside a statement that ‘adults need around 2000 kcal a day.’ Restaurants are allowed provide ‘calorie‐free’ menus at the request of the consumer, although provision of these is not compulsory. This legislation has come under criticism from several different perspectives, including the limited high‐quality research on its short‐ (Crockett et al., 2018) and long‐term effectiveness (Petimar et al., 2019); whether calories are the most important nutritional information to focus on (Yeo, 2022); the omission of social determinants of health (Raffoul et al., 2022); and the potential harms of this legislation, including for individuals with EDs.…”