Nutrition Support in the Supermarket

Linda Kronheim, PA NEN

How do you determine if a food that you want to purchase is healthy? Do you flip over the package to look at the nutrition facts label? Or read the ingredient list? Or simply glance at the claim on the front of the package before making your decision?

A recent article in ADA Times reviewed the current dilemma regarding the use of nutrition symbols on food package labels. The nutrition facts panel was created in 1993 to help consumers understand the nutritional components of the foods they purchase. Research indicates that most consumers at least occasionally use this panel, but are still confused by what the facts really mean. (1) In response to this confusion coupled with the growing consumer interest in health, many food manufacturers have begun to place nutrition information on the front of their products to simplify their potential customer’s decision. These front-of-the-package labels use either a “fact-based” system or a “better-for-you” system.

The “fact-based” system is based on FDA/USDA labeling criteria. For example, a cereal box may display a logo on the top right corner that summarizes calories or fat per serving. This system, in effect, repeats key information from the nutrition facts panel on the back of the box and allows customers to choose based on their personal understanding of nutritional needs. In contrast, the “better-for-you” system would state that “Product A” is a better choice than “Product B” (based on criteria that the company has chosen). When using this system, companies can make comparisons only with other products in their own manufacturing lines. This method of comparison implies that a product may be healthy compared to other products made by the same company, but it still may not be a good nutritional choice in reality.

In addition to the (federally mandated) nutrition facts label and the front-of-the-package logo claims (determined by food manufacturing companies), what else can a confused consumer use to help make a decision? The FDA also regulates a series of health claims that can be placed on a product if the claim can be proven based on certain criteria. For example, a manufacturer can describe how a food affects body structure (“calcium helps maintain bone strength”) or how eating a certain food can reduce disease risk (“low-fat diets rich in fiber-containing grains, fruits, and vegetables may reduce the risk of some types of cancer”). These claims are highly specific, can only be made based on empirical evidence, and are optional for food companies to add to a label. It may be easier for companies to place their own nutrition label on a product than to go through the process of getting an FDA-approved health claim.

So what works? Is one labeling system better than another? Should we scrap the whole idea and just focus on the nutrition facts panel? Isn’t this just another marketing ploy, anyway? Food companies and supermarkets report that products with these logos sell better than products without the logos. This logo system can quickly become complex and confusing for the customer, especially since no standards exist for how products can be labeled. Some companies use their own labeling criteria while others use a system complementary to the USDA’s MyPyramid guidance.(3) The FDA recently held a public hearing to examine how nutrition symbols are being used both in the United States and internationally (see http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/07n0277/mostrecent.htm for transcripts of the hearing). Other countries, particularly in Europe, are also struggling to simplify and harmonize these symbol systems. What is a nutrition educator to do? The article in ADA Times concludes by encouraging educators to keep up with the meaning of these symbols so they can help consumers put nutrition information into an appropriate perspective. Teaching clients how to interpret the nutrition facts label will continue to be critical; USDA provides a variety of tools to help consumers use this label when making food purchase decisions.

 

1. http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg/ada/hs.xsl/home_133_ENU_HTML.htm

2. D. Kunkel, C. McKinley (2007), “Developing ratings for food products: Lessons learned from media rating systems,” J Nutr Educ Behav 39 (S24-S31).

3. http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=83446-conagra-labeling-mypyramid