Consumers confused by 'healthy' labelling

The ongoing debate over healthy food labelling has been once again put under the spotlight as a US study finds terms such as no-fat, no-sugar, low-fat and reduced-salt and food packaging rarely reflect the actual nutritional quality of the food.

The results of the study, led by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, have been published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

“In many cases, foods containing low-sugar, low-fat or low-salt claims had a worse nutritional profile than those without claims,” explained lead investigator Lindsey Smith Taillie, a research assistant professor in the department of nutrition at UNC’s Gillings School of Global Public Health. “In fact, in some cases, products that tend to be high in calories, sodium, sugar or fat may be more likely to have low- or no-content claims.”

For example, a three-biscuit serving of reduced-fat Oreos contains 4.5 g of fat, compared to 7 g in a serving of full-fat Oreos — but both still contain 14 g of sugar per serving. Low-fat chocolate milk has a lower fat content but it is higher in sugar relative to plain milk and higher in sugar and fat relative to other beverages.

Consumers trying to make healthy choices may assume that a food or drink with a ‘reduced’ claim is a healthier product. But that product only has to be reduced in reference to the original food of the same product for that specific nutrient — a reduced-fat biscuit, for example. That biscuit could also contain higher sugar or sodium, so if consumers are only relying on the reduced claim, they could potentially end up with a less healthy biscuit.

After examining more than 80 million food and beverage purchases from more than 40,000 households from 2008 to 2012, Taillie and her colleagues at the UNC-Duke USDA Center for Behavioral Economics and Healthy Food Choice Research found that 13% of food and 35% of beverage purchases had a low-content claim (including no, free, low or reduced) and that low-fat was the most common claim, followed by low-calorie, low-sugar and low-sodium.

Investigators also found a connection between socio-economic status and food purchases, with high-and middle-income level households more likely to purchase food and beverages with low-content claims.

A key question for future research, said Taillie, will address how these claims affect consumer choice and how claims interact with other common strategies, such as sales or price promotions, to influence purchasing behaviour and, ultimately, dietary quality.