Front-of-pack Nutrition Labels Research Articles

Front-of-pack warning labels are preferred by parents with low education level in four Latin American countries

Background: Overweight and obesity rates in Latin America are much higher than the global prevalence. Front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label systems are gaining momentum in Latin America and being implemented as a strategy to tackle obesity among children and adults. This study investigates the usage and preference of three FOP nutrition labels among Argentinian, Chilean, Costa Rican, and Mexican adult parents.
 Methods: From March to May 2016, a questionnaire was administered to 966 parents of elementary school aged children in Argentina (89), Chile (304), Costa Rica (258) and Mexico (315). Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), traffic light (TL), and warning label FOP systems were compared and analyzed. Statistical analysis was conducted using frequencies and proportions. Median differences tests, ANOVAs and logistic regression models were performed. A thematic analysis of qualitative data was conducted using a deductive process.
 Results: Parents with low education levels and poor health conditions (i.e., overweight) preferred the FOP warning labels over the GDA and TL systems. The GDA FOP nutrition labels were preferred by parents with higher education levels. Overall, the TL system was preferred with no significant differences across countries.
 Conclusion: FOP warning labels are preferred by parents with vulnerable conditions (i.e., low education levels and overweight) across four Latin American countries. An easily understandable, readable and acceptable label may facilitate usage by vulnerable groups to make healthy food purchases. These results have important policy implications by providing evidence to government policymakers to enact legislation to implement or enhance existing FOP nutrition label policies as a viable strategy to reduce obesity risk.

Alignment of Supermarket Own Brand Foods' Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling with Measures of Nutritional Quality: An Australian Perspective.

Two voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labels (FOPNL) are present in Australia: the government-led Health Star Ratings (HSR) and food industry-led Daily Intake Guide (DIG). Australia’s two largest supermarkets are key supporters of HSR, pledging uptake on all supermarket own brand foods (SOBF). This study aimed to examine prevalence of FOPNL on SOBF, and alignment with patterns of nutritional quality. Photographic audits of all SOBF present in three large supermarkets were conducted in Perth, Western Australia, in 2017. Foods were classified as nutritious or nutrient-poor based on the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGTHE), NOVA level of food processing, and HSR score. Most (81.5%) SOBF featured FOPNL, with only 55.1% displaying HSR. HSR was present on 69.2% of Coles, 54.0% of Woolworths, and none of IGA SOBF. Half (51.3%) of SOBF were classified as nutritious using the AGTHE, but using NOVA, 56.9% were ultra-processed foods. Nutrient-poor and ultra-processed SOBF were more likely than nutritious foods to include HSR, yet many of these foods achieved HSR scores of 2.5 stars or above, implying they were a healthy choice. Supermarkets have a powerful position in the Australian food system, and they could do more to support healthy food selection through responsible FOPNL.

Traffic Light System Can Increase Healthfulness Perception: Implications for Policy Making

ObjectiveTo evaluate how information about low nutrient content included in the traffic light labeling system influences consumers' perception of the healthfulness of products with high content of 1 key nutrient, and to compare the traffic light system with warnings in terms of the perception of healthfulness. DesignImages of front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labels (the traffic light labeling system with different numbers of nutrients with low content, and warnings) were evaluated in study 1, whereas product labels featuring the different FOP nutrition labels were evaluated in study 2. SettingOnline studies conducted in Montevideo, Uruguay. ParticipantsA total of 1,228 Uruguayan Facebook users. Main Outcome MeasuresPerception of healthfulness. AnalysisThe researchers used ANOVA to evaluate the influence of FOP nutrition labels on perceived healthfulness. ResultsThe inclusion of information about low nutrient content in the traffic light system statistically significantly increased the perception of the healthfulness of products with high nutrient content. Nutritional warnings showed healthfulness ratings similar to those of the simplified version of the traffic light system. Conclusions and ImplicationsInformation about low nutrient content in the traffic light system might be used to infer health, and thus could raise the perception of healthfulness and decrease the traffic light system's efficacy in discouraging the consumption of unhealthful products. A simplified version of the traffic light highlighting only high-nutrient content or nutritional warnings seems to overcome this problem.

How do front of pack nutrition labels affect healthfulness perception of foods targeted at children? Insights from Brazilian children and parents

The inclusion of front of pack (FOP) nutrition labels is one of the strategies that has been proposed to encourage people to make healthful food choices, helping to cope with the increasing burden of overweight and obesity among adults and children. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different FOP labels on Brazilian children and parents’ healthfulness perception. Children aged 6–12years (n=318) and parents (n=278) with different socio-economic status rated their perceived healthfulness of eight food products targeted at children using a 7-point scale (1=not healthful and 7=very healthful). Participants were randomly allocated into one of the three groups of FOP nutrition labels: Daily Guideline Amounts (GDA), Traffic Light System (TLS) and warning system. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance. For parents, products with the warning system were rated significantly less healthful than those containing the GDA, whereas the TLS did not significantly differ from the other two systems. Age and socio-economic status influenced the effect of FOP labels on children’s perceived healthfulness. Only 9–12years old children from middle/high socio-economic status were influenced by FOP labels: the warning system and TLS reduced healthfulness perception of frosted corn flakes compared to the GDA system. These results suggest that directive and semi-directive FOP have the potential to modify healthfulness perception of products targeted at children and stress the need to study the modulating effect of individual variables such as age and socio-economic status on the perception of FOP labels.

To See or Not to See: Do Front of Pack Nutrition Labels Affect Attention to Overall Nutrition Information?

BackgroundFront of pack (FOP) nutrition labels are concise labels located on the front of food packages that provide truncated nutrition information. These labels are rapidly gaining prominence worldwide, presumably because they attract attention and their simplified formats enable rapid comparisons of nutritional value.MethodsEye tracking was conducted as US consumers interacted with actual packages with and without FOP labels to (1) assess if the presence of an FOP label increases attention to nutrition information when viewers are not specifically tasked with nutrition-related goals; and (2) study the effect of FOP presence on consumer use of more comprehensive, traditional nutrition information presented in the Nutritional Facts Panel (NFP), a mandatory label for most packaged foods in the US.ResultsOur results indicate that colored FOP labels enhanced the probability that any nutrition information was attended, and resulted in faster detection and longer viewing of nutrition information. However, for cereal packages, these benefits were at the expense of attention to the more comprehensive NFP. Our results are consistent with a potential short cut effect of FOP labels, such that if an FOP was present, participants spent less time attending the more comprehensive NFP. For crackers, FOP labels increased time spent attending to nutrition information, but we found no evidence that their presence reduced the time spent on the nutrition information in the NFP.ConclusionsThe finding that FOP labels increased attention to overall nutrition information by people who did not have an explicit nutritional goal suggests that these labels may have an advantage in conveying nutrition information to a wide segment of the population. However, for some food types this benefit may come with a short-cut effect; that is, decreased attention to more comprehensive nutrition information. These results have implications for policy and warrant further research into the mechanisms by which FOP labels impact use of nutrition information by consumers for different foods.