Front-of-pack labels: “Directive” versus “informative” approaches

Donini, Lorenzo M.; Berry, Elliot M.; Folkvord, Frans; Jansen, Léon; Leroy, Frédéric; Şimşek, Ömer; Fava, Fabio; Gobbetti, Marco; Lenzi, Andrea

doi:10.1016/j.nut.2022.111861

Cited by 31 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…multiple traffic light (MTL) system in the UK), to interpretive directive advice to support consumer choices (e.g. Nutri-Score in Europe) ( 8 ) . Current FOPL focus on the energy and nutrient content of products.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutrients or processing? An analysis of food and drink items from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey based on nutrient content, the NOVA classification and front of package traffic light labelling

Dicken,

Batterham,

Brown

2024

Br J Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UK front of package labelling (FOPL) informs consumers on the nutrient content of food. However, FOPL does not consider food processing, and with the UK government being urged to act on ultra-processed food (UPF), whether UPF should be added to FOPL is unclear. This study compared food and drink in the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) Intake24 database based on FOPL, nutrient content and NOVA classification, to understand whether UPFs are covered by dietary recommendations for foods high in fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS). NDNS items were coded into minimally processed food (MPF), processed culinary ingredients (PCI), processed food (PF) and UPF according to the NOVA classification, and FOPL traffic lights. UPFs contained greater energy, fat, saturated fat (SF), total sugar (TS), and salt than MPF. UPFs had a greater odds of containing red FOPL and an unhealthier overall FOPL score (odds ratio (OR):4.59 [95%CI:3.79,5.57]; OR:7.0 [95%CI:6.1,8.2] respectively) and lower odds of containing green FOPL (OR:0.05 [95%CI:0.03,0.10]), compared with MPFs. For items with no red FOPL, UPFs still contained greater energy, fat, SF, TS and salt than MPFs. However, several UPFs have healthier FOPL scores. UPFs had an unhealthier nutritional profile and FOPL score than MPFs. For items with no red FOPL, UPFs still had an unhealthier profile than MPFs, with a higher energy density. Importantly, not all UPFs were unhealthy according to FOPL. These results indicate partial overlap between FOPLs, nutrient content and NOVA classification of UK food and drink products, with implications for UK food and drink labelling.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutrients or processing? An analysis of food and drink items from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey based on nutrient content, the NOVA classification and front of package traffic light labelling

Dicken,

Batterham,

Brown

2024

Br J Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5) Legislate (and incentivize) the Food Industry to produce healthy (minimally processed foods), with less added sugars, trans fats, salt, and additives. Informative Labeling ( 27 , 28 ). Ensure honest and transparent marketing with.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving adherence to the Mediterranean Diet through a bio-psycho social and sociotype approach

Donini,

Berry

2023

Front. Nutr.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Conversely, 9 of the 23 studies presenting results which are not favourable (39.1%) included a conflict of interest by the authors or that the study had received funding from the food industry. Among these nine studies, six [11][12][13][14][15][16] are narrative reviews or papers not presenting any original research. These especially aim to sow doubts about the validity of the algorithm underlying the computation of Nutri-Score and/or on those demonstrating its efficiency in terms of objective understanding, food choice and impact on the nutritional quality of food purchases.…”

Section: Bmj Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study is 21 times more likely to find unfavourable results about the nutrition label Nutri-Score if the authors declare a conflict of interest or the study is funded by the food industry

Besançon¹,

Beran

Batal

2023

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Front-of-pack labels: “Directive” versus “informative” approaches

Cited by 31 publications

References 82 publications

Nutrients or processing? An analysis of food and drink items from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey based on nutrient content, the NOVA classification and front of package traffic light labelling

Nutrients or processing? An analysis of food and drink items from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey based on nutrient content, the NOVA classification and front of package traffic light labelling

Improving adherence to the Mediterranean Diet through a bio-psycho social and sociotype approach

A study is 21 times more likely to find unfavourable results about the nutrition label Nutri-Score if the authors declare a conflict of interest or the study is funded by the food industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About