Warnings as a directive front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme: comparison with the Guideline Daily Amount and traffic-light systems

Arrúa, Alejandra; Machín, Leandro; Curutchet, María Rosa; Martínez, Joseline; Antúnez, Lucía; Alcaire, Florencia; Giménez, Ana; Ares, Gastón

doi:10.1017/s1368980017000866

Cited by 140 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 51 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken together, our findings from a large sample of Brazilian packaged foods and beverages, sold in supermarkets in the country that control 70% of the retail market share contribute to the literature by showing the pervasive presence of nutrition and health claims in unhealthy products, even more so among those highly consumed by children and adolescents [2,25,40]. Although FoP labeling in the format of warning signs seems to be effective in nudging consumers to choose healthier products [8,11,14,43], when these signs are accompanied by nutrition claims for the same nutrient for which a warning sign is present in the package, this can undermine the efficacy of FoP labeling [17]. Health and nutrition claims have been associated with purchase behavior [44].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…These proposed regulations have the potential to substantially alter the Brazilian food supply as well as consumers' understanding, perceptions, purchase intentions, and intake of UPF. A recent randomized controlled trial in Brazil found that the exposure to FoP warning labels that only identify unhealthy foods helped consumers understand the unhealthiness of UPF and reduced their intentions to purchase this food [8], consistent with a growing body of literature that shows that warning labels improve consumers' ability to assess the healthfulness of products [10,11] and help them make healthier choices [12][13][14][15]. Conversely, nutrition and health claims have been shown to make consumers think a product is healthier than it actually is, working as a marketing strategy rather than an information tool (i.e., the "health halo" effect) [16,17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 58%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conflicting Messages on Food and Beverage Packages: Front-of-Package Nutritional Labeling, Health and Nutrition Claims in Brazil

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the prevalence of front-of-package (FoP) claims in the Brazilian packaged food supply and examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients. Using data from a random 30% subsample of 11,434 foods and beverages collected in the five largest food retailers in Brazil in 2017 (n = 3491), we classified claims into nutrition, health, and environment. We examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients using 95% confidence intervals. Claims were found in 41.2% of the products. Nutrition claims were the most prevalent (28.5%), followed by health (22.1%), and environment-related claims (5.2%). More than 85% of the breakfast cereals, granola bars, and nectars contained claims, which were found in 51% of the dairy beverages. Foods with nutrition claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients (65.3%; 95% CI 62.3, 68.2% vs. 54.1% 95% CI 52.1, 56.0). Products with health (52.9%; 95% CI 49.3, 56.4% vs. 58.5%; 95% CI 56.6, 60.3) and environment-related claims (33.5%; 95% CI 27.0, 40.8% vs. 58.6%; 95% CI 56.9, 60.2%) were less likely to be high in critical nutrients. FoP claims are prevalent in Brazil, and nutrition claims are more likely to have a poorer nutritional profile. Policymakers should consider restricting the presence of claims on unhealthy products.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Conflicting Messages on Food and Beverage Packages: Front-of-Package Nutritional Labeling, Health and Nutrition Claims in Brazil

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have highlighted consumers' difficulty in understanding the percentages displayed on the GDA label [8,19,46]. When the labelling displays descriptors or color-coding, it gives the consumer the means to interpret numeric information and reduce processing time required to interpret labels [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An increasingly large number of studies evaluating FOP nutrition labels' impact on awareness [13,14], acceptability [15], understanding [14,16,17], use [13], or effects in healthfulness perceptions [18,19], have been conducted among Latin American populations. However, limited literature exists evaluating FOP label effects on consumer purchasing intentions (e.g.…”

Section: Abstract: Nutritional Labeling Latin-america Shopping Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of front-of-pack nutrition labels on consumer purchasing intentions: a randomized experiment in low- and middle-income Mexican adults

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labeling is a cost-effective strategy to help consumers make informed and healthier food choices. We aimed to investigate the effect of the FOP labels used in the Latin American region on consumers' shopping intentions when prompted to make their choices with specific nutrients-to-limit in mind among low-and middle-income Mexican adults (> 18 y). Methods: In this experimental study of an online simulated shopping situation participants (n = 2194) were randomly assigned to one of three labeling conditions: Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), or red Warning Labels (WL). Participants were required to view a video explaining how to correctly interpret the assigned label. Primary outcomes were the overall nutritional quality (estimated using the Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion [NPSC] and NPSC baseline score) and mean energy and nutrient content of purchases. Secondary outcomes included shopping time variables. We also evaluated the impact of the labels across food categories (ready-made foods, dairy beverages, non-dairy beverages, salty snacks, and breakfast cereals) and sociodemographic subgroups.Results: The MTL and the WL led to a better overall nutritional quality of the shopping cart compared to the GDA (p < 0.05). According to the NPSC score, the WL led to a better nutritional quality across breakfast cereals and salty snacks compared to the GDA (p < 0.05); a similar effect was observed for the MTL among non-dairy beverages (p < 0.05). The MTL and the WL required shorter shopping times compared to GDA (p < 0.05). Across all labeling conditions, the nutritional quality of the shopping cart tended to be lower among those with low income, education and nutrition knowledge levels.Conclusion: WL and MTL may foster healthier food choices in a faster way among low-and middle-income groups in Mexico. To produce an equitable impact among consumers of all socioeconomic strata, efforts beyond simply the inclusion of a communication campaign on how to use and interpret FOP labels will be required.(Continued on next page)

show abstract

“…For example, in the Mexican National Health and Nutrition Survey Survey of 2016, only 41% declared they use the labelling . Also, there is evidence that other types of labels could be more effective …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The INFORMAS healthy food environment policy index (Food‐EPI) in Mexico: An assessment of implementation gaps and priority recommendations

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Mexico is one of the countries with the highest prevalence of obesity and recently declared a national epidemic of diabetes. Healthy food environments have the potential to improve the diet of the population and decrease the burden of disease. The aim of the study was to assess the efforts of the Mexican Government towards creating healthier food environments using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food‐EPI). The tool was developed by the International Network for Food and Obesity/Non‐communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS). Then, it was adapted to the Latin‐American context and assessed the components of policy and infrastructure support. Actors from academia, civil society, government, and food industry assessed the level of implementation of food policies compared with international best practices. Actors were classified as (1) independents from academia and civil society (n = 36), (2) government (n = 28), and (3) industry (n = 6). The indicators with the highest percentage of implementation were those related to monitoring and intelligence. Those related to food retail were rated lowest. When stratified by type of actor, the government officials rated several indicators at a higher percentage of implementation compared with independent actors. None of the indicators were rated at high implementation. Government officials and independent actors agreed upon nine priority actions to improve the food environment in Mexico. These actions have the potential to improve government commitment and advocacy efforts to create healthier food environments.

show abstract

Warnings as a directive front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme: comparison with the Guideline Daily Amount and traffic-light systems

Abstract: Results from the present work suggest that warnings have potential as directive FOP nutrition labels to improve consumer ability to identify unhealthful products and highlight advantages compared with the traffic-light system.

Cited by 140 publications

References 51 publications

Conflicting Messages on Food and Beverage Packages: Front-of-Package Nutritional Labeling, Health and Nutrition Claims in Brazil

Conflicting Messages on Food and Beverage Packages: Front-of-Package Nutritional Labeling, Health and Nutrition Claims in Brazil

Impact of front-of-pack nutrition labels on consumer purchasing intentions: a randomized experiment in low- and middle-income Mexican adults

The INFORMAS healthy food environment policy index (Food‐EPI) in Mexico: An assessment of implementation gaps and priority recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About