Background In 2016, Chile implemented a unique law mandating front-of-package warning labels, restricting marketing, and banning school sales for products high in calories, sodium, sugar, or saturated fat. We aimed to examine changes in the calorie, sugar, sodium, and saturated fat content of food and beverage purchases after the first phase of implementation of this law.Methods This before and after study used longitudinal data on food and beverage purchases from 2381 Chilean households from Jan 1, 2015, to Dec 31, 2017. Nutrition facts panel data from food and beverage packages were linked to household purchases at the product level using barcode, brand name, and product description. Nutritionists reviewed each product for nutritional accuracy and categorised it as high-in if it contained added sugar, sodium, or saturated fat and exceeded phase 1 nutrient or calorie thresholds, and thus was subject to the labelling, marketing, and school regulations. Using fixed-effects models, we examined the mean nutrient content (overall calories, sugar, saturated fat, and sodium) of purchases in the post-policy period compared to a counterfactual scenario based on prepolicy trends. FindingsCompared with the counterfactual scenario, overall calories purchased declined by 16•4 kcal/capita/day (95% CI -27•3 to -5•6; p=0•0031) or 3•5%. Overall sugar declined by 11•5 kcal/capita/day (-14•6 to -8•4; p<0•0001) or 10•2%, and saturated fat declined by 2•2 kcal/capita/day (-3•8 to -0•5; p=0•0097) or 3•9%. The sodium content of overall purchases declined by 27•7 mg/capita/day (-46•3 to -9•1; p=0•0035) or 4•7%. Declines from high-in purchases drove these results with some offset by increases in not-high-in purchases. Among high-in purchases, relative to the counterfactual scenario, there were notable declines of 23•8% in calories purchased (-49•4 kcal/capita/day, 95% CI -55•1 to -43•7; p<0•0001), 36•7% in sodium purchased (-96•6 mg/capita/day,-105•3 to -87•8; p<0•0001), and 26•7% in sugar purchased (-20•7 kcal/capita/day, -23•4 to -18•1; p<0•0001).Interpretation The Chilean phase 1 law of food labelling and advertising policies were associated with reduced high-in purchases, leading to declines in purchased nutrients of concern. Greater changes might reasonably be anticipated after the implementation of phases 2 and 3.

Policies to require warnings on the front of food and drinks high in nutrients of concern (e.g., added sugar, sodium, or saturated fat) are becoming increasingly common as an obesity prevention strategy. Colombia, a country with growing prevalence of obesity, is considering implementing a similar policy. The objective of this study was to assess perceptions and reactions to different warning designs. We conducted a randomized experiment in an online panel of adults age > 18y (n = 1997). Participants were randomized to view one of four labels: a control label (barcode), an octagon warning, a circle warning, and a triangle warning. Participants viewed their randomly assigned label on a series of products and answered questions (continuous outcomes ranged from 1–4). Compared to the control, all warnings led to higher perceived message effectiveness (increase in mean from 1.79 in the control to 2.59–2.65 in the warning conditions, p < 0.001), a higher percentage of participants who correctly identified products high in nutrients of concern (from 48% in the control condition to 84–89% in the warning conditions, p < 0.001), and reduced intentions to purchases these products (decrease in mean from 2.59 to 1.99–2.01 in the warning conditions, p < 0.001). Relative to the control, warnings performed similarly across education levels, suggesting this policy would be equitable in Colombia. Looking at differences by warning type, the pattern of results suggested that the octagon warnings performed best. After viewing all label types, 49% of participants selected the octagon warning as the one that most discouraged them from consuming products high in nutrients of concern, while 21% and 27% selected the circle and triangle warning. Colombian policymakers should consider the octagon warning as part of a front-of-package labeling policy to help consumers identify and reduce consumption of foods and drinks high in nutrients of concern.

No abstract

Objective This study assessed nutrient warnings’ impact on product selection and identification of food products high in nutrients of concern in Colombia. Methods In an online experiment (October 2020), 8,061 Colombians were randomized to a nutrient warning, guideline daily amounts (GDA), Nutri-Score, or no-label condition. They viewed two fruit drinks labeled according to their condition, one high in sugar and one not, and completed selection tasks. Next, they assessed four products high in sugar, sodium, and/or saturated fat (“high in” product). Finally, they selected which label would most discourage them from consuming a “high in” product. Results The nutrient warning performed better on most outcomes. Twenty percent of participants exposed to the nutrient warning would purchase the high-sugar fruit drink compared to GDA (24%, p<0.01), Nutri-Score (33%, p<0.001), and no label (29%, p<0.001). GDA performed slightly better than the nutrient warning in identifying the high-sugar fruit drink (91% vs 88%, p<0.001). The nutrient warning best helped participants correctly identify other “high in” products (75% vs. 23% no-label, 26% Nutri-Score, and 43% GDA, all p<0.001) and had the highest perceived message effectiveness (3.86 on 5-point scale vs. 2.97 GDA and 2.70 Nutri-Score, both p<0.001) and lowest likelihood of purchasing “high in” products (2.58 on 5-point scale vs. 3.23 GDA, 3.49 Nutri-Score, and 3.51 no label, all p<0.001). The nutrient warning most discouraged participants from wanting to consume “high in” products. Conclusions Nutrient warnings are a promising policy to help consumers identify and discourage consumption of products high in nutrients of concern. Trial registration Trial Registration: NCT04567004.

Policies to require front-of-package labels (FOPLs) on packaged foods may help Indian consumers to better identify foods high in nutrients of concern, including sugar, saturated fat, and sodium, and discourage their consumption, which are outcomes that are critical for preventing rises in diet-related non-communicable disease. The objective was to test whether FOPLs helped Indian consumers identify “high-in” packaged foods and reduce intentions to purchase them. We conducted an in-person randomized experiment (n = 2869 adults between ages 18 and 60 years old) in six states of India in 2022. Participants were randomized to one of five FOPLs: a control label (barcode), warning label (octagon with “High in [nutrient]”), Health Star Rating (HSR), Guideline Daily Amount (GDA), or traffic light label. Participants then viewed a series of packaged foods high in sugar, saturated fat, or sodium with the assigned FOPL, and rated product perceptions and label reactions. Fewer than half of participants in the control group (39.1%) correctly identified all products high in nutrient(s) of concern. All FOPLs led to an increase in this outcome, with the biggest differences observed for the warning label (60.8%, p < 0.001), followed by the traffic light label (54.8%, p < 0.001), GDA (55.0%, p < 0.001), and HSR (45.0%, p < 0.01). While no FOPLs led to a reduction in intentions to purchase the packaged foods, the overall pattern of results suggested that warning labels are the most effective FOPL to help Indian consumers identify unhealthy foods.