A comparison of the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada

Abstract

Background: Canada's food supply is abundant in less healthy products, increasing Canadians' risk of obesity and non-communicable diseases. Food companies strongly influence the food supply; however, no studies have examined differences in the healthfulness of products offered by various companies in Canada. This study aimed to compare the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada. Methods: Twenty-two top packaged food and beverage manufacturing companies were selected, representing > 50% of the Canadian market share in 2018. Nutritional information for products (n = 8277) was sourced from the University of Toronto Food Label Information Program 2017 database. Descriptive analyses examined the nutritional quality of products based on: 1) the Health Star Rating (HSR) system; 2) calories, sodium, saturated fat and total sugars per 100 g (or mL) and per reference amounts (RAs) defined by Health Canada; and 3) "high in" thresholds for sodium, saturated fat and total sugars proposed by Health Canada for pending front-of-package labelling regulations. Kruskal-Wallis tests compared HSRs of products between companies. Results: Mean HSRs of companies' total product offerings ranged from 1.9 to 3.6 (out of 5.0). Differences in HSRs of products between companies were significant overall and for 19 of 22 food categories (P < 0.05), particularly for fats/oils and beverages. Calories, sodium, saturated fat and total sugars contents varied widely between companies for several food categories, and depending on whether they were examined per 100 g (or mL) or RA. Additionally, 66.4% of all products exceeded ≥1 of Health Canada's "high in" thresholds for sodium (31.7%), saturated fat (28.3%) and/or sugars (28.4%). The proportion of products offered by a company that exceeded at least one of these thresholds ranged from 38.5 to 97.5%. Conclusions: The nutritional quality of products offered by leading packaged food and beverage manufacturers in Canada differs significantly overall and by food category, with many products considered less healthy according to multiple nutrient profiling methods. Variation within food categories illustrates the need and potential for companies to improve the healthfulness of their products. Identifying companies that offer less healthy products compared with others in Canada may help prompt reformulation.

The Development and Application of a Tool for Quantifying the Strength of Voluntary Actions and Commitments of Major Canadian Food Companies to Improve the Nutritional Quality of Their Products

“…Previous research demonstrated that many of the Canadian products offered by the packaged food and beverage companies in this sample are of relatively poor nutritional quality, with mean HSRs of <3.5/5 (i.e., generally considered less healthy) and two-thirds of their products exceeding 15% of the Daily Value and considered high in sodium, saturated fat, and/or sugars ( 6 ). There was also significant variation in the nutritional quality of comparable products offered by different companies ( 6 ). Similar results were observed in a 2016 cross-sectional analysis of calories and nutrients of concern in the menu items of major Canadian chain restaurants ( 64 ).…”

“…In Canada, most major packaged food and beverage companies reported recent or ongoing actions to improve the nutritional composition of their products, with sodium being the most commonly targeted nutrient and a median score for the product (re)formulation policy domain of 27/100 ( 22 ). The nutritional quality of products offered by top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand has also been assessed as part of BIA-Obesity phase 2 ( 6 , 14 , 27 ). However, the 2 phases have not yet been examined in combination to compare changes in the nutritional composition of companies’ products to their reported voluntary actions and commitments concerning product (re)formulation, in relation to WHO- and government-recommended targets.…”

“…Accordingly, a more detailed focus on company commitments regarding product (re)formulation is warranted. This is particularly important given that most products offered by the leading packaged food and beverage companies in Canada and elsewhere are energy dense and high in sodium, saturated fat, and/or sugars ( 6 , 14 , 17 , 18 , 27 , 30 ). Moreover, repeated cross-sectional analyses have shown little or no overall improvement in the nutritional quality of the Canadian packaged food supply over time, suggesting that voluntary product (re)formulation actions and commitments have had limited impact to date ( 4 , 31 – 33 ).…”

Development of the Food Label Information Program: A Comprehensive Canadian Branded Food Composition Database

“…Data in Paraguay (n = 4,091) and Peruvian data (n = 1,533) were collected during the Summer 2017 and December 2019. The Canadian FLIP or the FLIP-LAC have been used for research, food supply monitoring, policy evaluation and modeling (28,(44)(45)(46)(47)(48).…”

The relationship between voluntary product (re) formulation commitments and changes in the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada from 2013 to 2017

“…Research has also shown that many of the products offered by major food companies are of relatively poor nutritional quality [ 24 , 25 , 27 – 30 ]. In Canada, two-thirds of products offered by the leading packaged food and beverage companies were energy-dense and high in sodium, saturated fat and/or sugars in 2017 [ 3 ]. These findings are not surprising, given the evidence to suggest the limited impact of government-led voluntary product (re) formulation policies on the healthfulness of the packaged food supply [ 31 , 32 ].…”