Impact of the front-of-pack 5-colour nutrition label (5-CNL) on the nutritional quality of purchases: an experimental study

The impact of nutri-score on consumers' preferences for geographical indications. Evidence from a non-hypothetical experiment

The EU Farm to Fork strategy (F2F) promotes the compulsory adoption of a nutritional front of pack label to improve the diets of the citizens, supporting healthier food choices. In the public debate, Nutri-Score (NS) is the most favored candidate. Although being widely supported, oppositions on the political and producer levels are raised against the NS, due to the economic impact it could have on specific food sector, and specifically on Geographical Indications (GIs). Recent literature has stressed the need to explore it in more detail. The current study contributes to fill this gap by analyzing consumers' monetary preferences for GI products labelled with different NS levels. An incentivized non-hypothetical experiment was conducted on 188 Italian consumers. Different products representing different levels of NS were used. Specifically, a conventional pasta and the Pasta di Gragnano PGI (NS = A), a conventional flatbread (piadina) and the Piadina Romagnola PGI (NSC), and a conventional hard cheese and the Parmigiano Reggiano PDO (NS = D) were considered in the survey. Results reveal that the NS elicits favorable responses and unfavorable reactions in consumers' preferences, aligning with expectations for A and D scores, respectively. The perceived healthiness of the product significantly affects consumers' WTP, increasing it. Results stress the need to have effective communication strategies within the EU to reach the F2F goals. NS diminishes the premium in prices associated with GIs independently from its level, when considering those consumers who value more the GIs. However, the most well-known GIs does not suffer from this negative effect of the NS, as the positive value associated to the GI offset the negative effect of the NS.

Investigation of the 1-week effect of traffic light nutrition labeling on diet selection among Japanese university students: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The method of displaying nutrition information labels on the front of food packaging (FOP: Front of Pack) has been implemented worldwide to prevent lifestyle-related diseases. This study aimed to investigate whether the use of the UK's Traffic Light Food (TLF) label, known as the FOP label, influences the dietary choices of Japanese youth and promotes healthy dietary choices.

METHODS

Diet selection was performed for one week each during the baseline and intervention periods. During the intervention period, TLF labels were displayed on meal images of the intervention group. Participants chose what they would like to have for dinner of the day from 15 images. Each meal was scored based on the color of the nutrition label, and a comparison between groups was made to determine whether TLF labeling influenced meal selection for dinner. The psychological stress caused by the presence or absence of nutrition labels and nutritional components when choosing meals was also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 69 participants were randomly assigned to two groups. Dietary choice scores indicated that the TLF-labeled group made significantly healthier dietary choices than the unlabeled group. Additionally, the TLF-labeled group showed a significant increase in the percentage of people conscious of nutritional components when choosing meals. Furthermore, a significant increase in the number of people conscious of protein, a nutritional ingredient not indicated on the TLF label, was observed. During the test period, no difference in psychological stress caused by the presence and absence of the TLF labels was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of TLF labels also encouraged healthy dietary choices among Japanese university students. The use of FOP nutrition labels should be considered in Japan to prevent lifestyle-related diseases through healthy dietary choices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry Number: UMIN000047268. Registered March 23, 2022.

Do Consumers Value Welfare and Environmental Attributes in Egg Production Similarly in Fresh Eggs and Prepared Meals?

Food items are increasingly chosen based on sustainability attributes as the public is becoming increasingly aware of the environmental and animal welfare impacts of production systems, in addition to the traditional consideration for nutrition. Although surveys have been used to investigate the demand for these attributes in unprocessed products, little information exists on how these attributes impact consumer preferences in the case of processed products or prepared meals. This study uses a stated preference survey to examine Quebec (Canada) consumers' preferences for eggs from four production systems with different impacts on animal welfare and on the environment. We compare the respondents' choices of fresh eggs and two prepared meals that contain eggs. Furthermore, we examine the shift in choices following information treatments on animal welfare, nutrition, or environmental impact attributes. Results indicate that respondents choose eggs from more sustainable production systems more frequently when included in prepared meals than in their unprocessed form. The provision of information led participants to update prior beliefs and revise their initial choices, especially for animal welfare attributes.

Is it really a piece of cake to label Geographical Indications with the Nutri-Score? Consumers’ behaviour and policy implications

To improve the dietary habits of the population, the EU, within the Farm to Fork strategy (F2F), is strongly supporting the Nutri-Score (NS) Front Of Pack (FOP) label. Under the NS system, Geographical Indications (GIs) are generally scored as “unhealthy” food, given the predominance of products of animal origin among GIs which are, notoriously, high-fat products. This study aims to determine the impact of the NS label on consumers’ preferences for two Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) cheeses, in comparison with generic ones. A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) was conducted on 600 Italian consumers through the estimation of a Random Parameter Logit model. Results highlighted that Italian consumers are generally not familiar with the NS and perceive it as a positive characteristic of the product, even if it is signalling an unhealthy choice (D score). However, consumers aware of the Nutri-Score meaning are willing to pay less to buy a product considered “unhealthy” according to this system. Furthermore, we found that consumers who already knew the NS system have homogeneous behaviours in rejecting the product, independently of the association with a PDO certification. This result has important implications on the agri-food sector. If the Nutri-Score becomes mandatory in the EU, consumers might refuse many GIs due to their negative Nutri-Score values. However, the quality of these products is recognized and protected worldwide. In this vein, the GI policy could be questioned by the F2F strategy: both of them aims to reduce information asymmetry producing, at the same time, contrasting results. Within the Geographical Indication policy, the PDO and PGI goods are protected for their quality attributes, which are strictly linked to their geographical origin of the products and traditional know-how. However, the EU adoption of the Nutri-Score could damage these products, reducing their perceived quality/value.

Effects of Digitalized Front-of-Package Food Labels on Healthy Food-Related Behavior: A Systematic Review

Front-of-package (FOP) food labels may impact healthy food-related behavior. However, such labels may be presented using new technology and they may impact behavior differently than physical labels. This systematic review investigated the effects of physical and digitalized labels on healthy food-related behavior. This review used four search engines to collect articles that investigated the effects of food labels on the purchase, consumption, hypothetical choice, and self-reports of healthy foods. General findings, types of labels, or whether the articles used physical versus digitalized static, interactive, or technology-enabled labels were synthesized. The dependent variables were categorized according to whether they were under full, partial, or no control of the independent variables. The risk of bias was measured by the RoB 2 tool and adapted Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist. The search strategy identified 285 records and 30 articles were included. While digitalized static and physical labels did not differ in their effects on healthy food-related behavior, technology-enabled labels were more predictive of healthy food-related behavior than interactive labels.

Impact of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label on purchasing intentions of individuals with chronic diseases: results of a randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

To our knowledge, the effect of front-of-pack nutrition labels such as the Nutri-Score on food purchases has never been assessed among individuals suffering from nutrition-related chronic diseases specifically, while dietary modifications are generally part of their care. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the nutritional quality of purchasing intentions among adults suffering from a cardiometabolic disease, compared with no label and the Reference Intakes (RIs), a label already implemented by some food manufacturers in France.

SETTING

Secondary prevention-mainland France.

PARTICIPANTS

2431 eligible participants were randomly assigned and 1180 participants (65.5% women, mean age 65.0±7.1 years) completed the shopping task and were included in the analyses.

INTERVENTION

A three-arm randomised controlled trial using an experimental online supermarket was conducted in 2017. Participants with cardiometabolic diseases were invited to simulate food purchases with the Nutri-Score, the RIs or no label.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the nutritional quality of the shopping cart, estimated using the French-modified Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS), and secondary outcomes included the nutrient content of purchases.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) FSAm-NPS score was significantly lower in the Nutri-Score arm (1.29 (3.61) points), reflecting a higher overall nutritional quality of purchasing intentions, compared with the RIs (1.86 (3.23) points) and no label (1.92 (2.90) points) arms (p=0.01). Moreover, the Nutri-Score led to significantly lower content in calories and saturated fatty acids compared with the two other arms. These differences resulted from participants avoiding some packaged products (sweets, dairy and starches) and purchasing larger amounts of fresh fruit and meat.

CONCLUSIONS

The Nutri-Score exhibited a significant higher nutritional quality of purchasing intentions, encouraging healthier food choices among individuals suffering from cardiometabolic chronic diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02769455.

Uncovering the Effect of European Policy-Making Initiatives in Addressing Nutrition-Related Issues: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis on Front-of-Pack Labels

The last decades have been marked by the introduction of front-of-pack labels (FoPL) as an institutional corrective action against obesity and nutrition-related illnesses. However, FoPL-related policy-making initiatives issued by the European Union evolved over time and led to a diversity of labels with different effects on consumers’ decisions. As a result, the extant literature adapted to the regulative scenario over the years and investigated the effects of the labels, creating consensus on some topics while being fragmented on others. Similarly, policy-makers adapted some regulations to the evidence supported by the research. With the aim to systematize the overall structure and evolution of the literature on FoPL, investigate the presence of a consensus on specific topics through a co-citation analysis, and examine the evolution of the consensus and co-citation networks over the years and potential research gaps, we report the results of bibliometric and co-citation analyses and a systematic literature review involving 170 papers and a selection of 49 articles published in the last months, for a total of 219 articles, analysed according to three timespans (Period 1 (1989–2011); Period 2 (2012–2016) and Period 3 (2017–2022)). Our findings highlight the interplay of policy development and FoPL research, the presence of few self-reinforcing and well-established co-citation networks based on validated evidence in the literature and the presence of alternative emerging theories that offer different and valid perspectives overlooked by mainstream co-citation research networks.

Nutri-Score: Awareness, Perception and Self-Reported Impact on Food Choices among French Adolescents

To date, no studies have evaluated the appropriation of the front-of-pack Nutri-Score labeling among adolescents, although they are both consumers and buyers of food products. Therefore, the objectives of the present study were (1) to assess Nutri-Score awareness, perception and self-reported impact on food choices in French adolescents and (2) to identify the determinants associated with higher Nutri-Score awareness and self-reported impact on food choices. A web-based survey was conducted in November 2021 among 1201 adolescents. Multivariate logistic models were used to evaluate the relationships between individual factors and Nutri-Score awareness and self-reported impact on food choices. Almost all the adolescents reported to know the Nutri-Score (97.0%) and more than 9 out of 10 considered this logo easy to understand and easy to identify on food packages. Finally, 54% self-reported that the label had already impacted their food choices. Girls (2.28 (1.09−4.77), p = 0.028) and the 15−17-year-olds (3.12 (1.32−7.35), p = 0.0094) were more likely to be aware of the label compared with their respective counterparts (i.e., boys and the 11−14-year-olds). Regarding the impact of food choices, the use of the Nutri-Score by the parents was the most determinant criterion (7.74 (5.74−10.42), p < 0.0001). Thus, promotion campaigns should target both adolescents and parents.

Healthy or Not Healthy? A Mixed-Methods Approach to Evaluate Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels as a Tool to Guide Consumers

This study explored how South African food labels could be improved, to enhance customer evaluation of the overall healthiness of packaged food. Focus was given to the comparison of front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labels as a quick assessment tool. The exploratory sequential mixed-methods design used qualitative interviews (n = 49) to gain insight into labeling challenges and select FOP nutrition labels for consumer testing. Consumers (n = 1261) randomly assessed two out of six possible FOP nutrition labels relative to a ‘no-label’ control in one of 12 online surveys, applied to a fictitious cereal product. A mixed-model analysis of variance was used to compare the differences in health ratings for the different FOP nutrition labels. The interviews revealed three themes for label improvement, that are presented over three time horizons. In terms of helping consumers identify less healthy products, the effect sizes were most prominent for health warnings (p < 0.01) and low health star ratings (p < 0.01). The findings of this research not only clarify whether FOP nutrition labeling formats used in other regions such as Europe, South America and Australia could be useful in the South African context, but they can assist policymakers and decision-makers in selecting an effective FOP label.

Are Front-of-Pack Labels a Health Policy Tool?

To stem the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and obesity, front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) have been developed since 1989. Whereas several countries have already adopted one voluntarily, the European Community wants to harmonize an FOPL system that will be mandatory for all member states. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe what could be achieved or not by FOPLs, and to discuss if there is enough evidence to establish whether such labels are effective in modifying purchasing behavior, in directing individual dietary patterns towards a healthy and sustainable diet, and in reformulating food products by the food industry. Non-directive FOPLs, which are still under study, appear to be informative and well-accepted by consumers even if they require a cognitive effort. Conversely, directive FOPLs are supported by several studies, but they are mostly conducted in simulated scenarios and/or performed as retrospective studies. Nevertheless, directive FOPLs are rated as an intuitive tool, and they have demonstrated a high capacity to help consumers rank food products as more or less healthy. In conclusion, directive and non-directive FOPLs convey different messages. No FOPL individually can be considered exhaustive in relation to all the objectives outlined in this narrative review, and therefore, the development of a model synthesizing both messages is advisable. Many questions remain open, such as the possibility of reformulating pre-packaged products, how to deal with traditional products, and the impact on the incidence of NCDs and obesity. In the light of the complexity of factors that condition consumption choices and health, none of the current FOPLs can be considered a health policy tool on its own. The possibility of development remains open, but as the state of the art, these tools do not seem to be able to achieve all the European Community goals together. We can speculate that they could meet these goals only if they are integrated into a multi-tiered, structured health policy intervention.

The use of food swaps to encourage healthier online food choices: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Online grocery stores offer opportunities to encourage healthier food choices at the moment that consumers place a product of their choice in their basket. This study assessed the effect of a swap offer, Nutri-Score labeling, and a descriptive norm message on the nutrient profiling (NP) score of food choices in an online food basket. Additionally explored was whether these interventions made it more motivating and easier for consumers to select healthier foods and whether potential effects were moderated by consumer health interest.

METHODS

Hypotheses were tested with a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in a simulated online supermarket. Dutch participants (n = 550) chose their preferred product out of six product options for four different categories (breakfast cereals, crackers, pizza, and muesli bars). Participants were randomly allocated to one of eight groups based on the interventions in a 2 (Nutri-Score: present, not present) X 2 (swap offer: present, not present) X 2 (norm message: present, not present) between subject design. The primary outcome was the difference in combined NP score of product choices, for which a lower score represented a healthier product.

RESULTS

Swap offer (B = - 9.58, 95% CI: [- 12.026; - 7.132], Ƞ² = 0.098) and Nutri-Score labeling (B = - 3.28, 95% CI: [- 5.724; -.829], Ƞ² = 0.013) significantly improved the combined NP score compared to the control condition (NP score M = 18.03, SD = 14.02), whereas a norm message did not have a significant effect (B = - 1.378, 95% CI [- 3.825; 1.070], Ƞ² = 0.002). No evidence was found that interventions made it more motivating or easier for consumers to select healthier food, but situational motivation significantly influenced the healthiness score of food choices for both swap offer (b = - 3.40, p < .001) and Nutri-Score (b = - 3.25, p < .001). Consumer health interest only significantly moderated the influence of Nutri-Score on ease of identifying the healthy food option (b = .23, p = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Swap offer and Nutri-Score labeling were effective in enhancing healthy purchase behavior in the online store environment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered in the ISRCTN database on 02-09-2021 ( ISRCTN80519674 ).

The impact of shelf tags with Nutri-Score on consumer purchases: a difference-in-difference analysis of a natural experiment in supermarkets of a major retailer in Belgium

Background

Delhaize, a major Belgian retailer, started implementing electronic shelf labels (ESL) with Nutri-Score since May 2019. Nutri-Score rates the healthfulness of packaged foods with five colours/letters from red/E (least healthy) to green/A (most healthy). This study evaluated the impact of ESL on consumer purchases, overall, and by food category.

Methods

For 43 intervention stores (implementing ESL in the period 27 May 2019–19 June 2019), a control store, from the same province and retailer-assigned cluster was matched. There were 14 unique control stores. By store, weekly non-food and food sales for 2018 and 2019 were received by Nutri-Score (A/B/C/D/E) and food category according to a retailer-assigned classification system. The primary outcomes were the proportion of food sales for Nutri-Score A,B,C,D,E. Difference-in-differences regression analysis was conducted to estimate the effect of the ESL intervention on proportion of overall food and food category sales for Nutri-Score A,B,C,D,E, using linear mixed models to account for clustering at store-level. We controlled for store characteristics (region, cluster, non-food sales) and week of the year. Analyses were weighted to re-balance discrepancy between the number of intervention and control stores. To account for multiple testing, a Bonferroni adjustment was applied.

Results

Comparing pre- and post-intervention periods, difference-in-differences for the proportion of Nutri-Score B and C product sales were more favourable in intervention than control stores (0.11 ± 0.04%, p = 0.007 and − 0.06 ± 0.03%, p = 0.026 respectively), while difference-in-differences for the proportion of Nutri-Score D product sales were less favourable in intervention than control stores (0.12 ± 0.04%, p = 0.002). For 17/58 food categories (representing 29% of total food sales) a positive impact [increase in healthier (Nutri-Score A, B) and/or decrease in less healthy (Nutri-Score D, E) food sales], and for 16/58 categories (representing 24% of total food sales) a negative impact was found. Positive impacts were found for vegetable, fruit and dairy products and confectionery. Negative impacts were found for bread and bakery products.

Conclusion

The impact of ESL on consumer purchases was mixed. Favourable difference-in-differences were found for Nutri-Score B and C products and unfavourable difference-in-differences for Nutri-Score D products. Shelf labeling on its own is unlikely to significantly influence consumer behaviours.

Evaluation of the Ability of Nutri-Score to Discriminate the Nutritional Quality of Prepacked Foods Using a Sale-Weighting Approach

The implementation of mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling is currently being discussed in the European Union (EU). The Nutri-Score (NS) was developed in France to empower consumers to make informed and healthier food choices. Based on strong evidence of its efficacy in supporting healthy choices, it has already been implemented for voluntary use in some EU member states, making it relevant to developing a harmonised EU scheme. This study aimed to evaluate the NS’s discriminating ability on products available in the food supply and compare it with Slovenian national nutritional recommendations based on an adapted WHO Europe (WHOE) profile. The innovative approach of the study is that we used sale-weighting to address the public health importance of available foods, with consideration of market share. We profiled 15,822 products available in the Slovenian food supply in 2017. The NS had a high ability to discriminate food products based on nutritional composition. Products that are generally encouraged in dietary recommendations (fruits, vegetables, cereals) had, in most cases, better NS grades than less favourable products (confectionery, snack foods, added fats), which is also in line with the national nutrition policy programme. The discriminating ability of the model was also shown within food (sub)categories (e.g., plain and flavoured yoghurt). Sale-weighting showed that offerings do not always reflect sales. Major differences between offerings and sales were observed for beverages, dairy, fruits/vegetables, and edible oils/emulsions. Additionally, sale-weighted distribution tended towards less favourable nutritional composition, particularly in categories with overall smaller offerings of products with favourable composition. The NS showed moderate agreement with the WHOE profile (κ = 0.57); differences were particularly observed in flavoured yoghurts, juices, cooking oils, and cheeses. Modelling the operation of the NS with representative real-life food samples provided insight valuable for developing and implementing harmonised mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling in Europe.

The impact of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label on purchasing intentions of unprocessed and processed foods: post-hoc analyses from three randomized controlled trials

Background

The Nutri-Score summary graded front-of-pack nutrition label has been identified as an efficient tool to increase the nutritional quality of pre-packed food purchases. However, no study has been conducted to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the shopping cart composition, considering the type of foods. The present paper aims to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the type of food purchases, in terms of the relative contribution of unpacked and pre-packed foods, or the processing degree of foods.

Methods

Between September 2016 and April 2017, three consecutive randomized controlled trials were conducted in three specific populations – students (N = 1866), low-income individuals (N = 336) and subjects suffering from cardiometabolic diseases (N = 1180) – to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on purchasing intentions compared to the Reference Intakes and no label. Using these combined data, the proportion of unpacked products in the shopping carts, as well as the distribution of products across food categories taking into account the degree of processing (NOVA classification) were assessed by trials arm.

Results

The shopping carts of participants simulating purchases with the Nutri-Score affixed on pre-packed foods contained higher proportion of unpacked products – especially raw fruits and meats, i.e. with no FoPL –, compared to participants purchasing with no label (difference of 5.93 percentage points [3.88–7.99], p-value< 0.0001) or with the Reference Intakes (difference of 5.27[3.25–7.29], p-value< 0.0001). This higher proportion was partly explained by fewer purchases of pre-packed processed and ultra-processed products overall in the Nutri-Score group.

Conclusions

These findings provide new insights on the positive effect of the Nutri-Score, which appears to decrease purchases in processed products resulting in higher proportions of unprocessed and unpacked foods, in line with public health recommendations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-021-01108-9.

Effect of front-of-package nutrition labeling on food purchases: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This study systematically reviewed evidence from interventions on the effect of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labeling on food purchases.

STUDY DESIGN

The study design used in this study is a systematic review.

METHODS

Keyword search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (10 randomized controlled trials, four pre-post studies, and one case-control study) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Five studies were conducted in a controlled setting through the establishment of an online virtual supermarket or physical laboratory food store solely for the intervention. In contrast, the remaining ten studies were conducted in a naturalistic setting where people commonly purchase foods (e.g., supermarket, grocery store, school/hospital cafeteria, or vending machine). FOP labels assessed included traffic lights, health star rating, daily intake guides, health warnings, and high sugar symbol labels. Compared with the control, FOP labels were effective for helping participants make healthier food purchase decisions in five of the 12 studies that assessed traffic lights labels, in one of the two studies that assessed health warning labels, and in one study that assessed high sugar symbol labels. Three assessed health star ratings and one assessed daily intake guide labels, but none revealed an effect on food purchases compared with the control.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings on the effectiveness of FOP nutrition labels in 'nudging' consumers toward healthier food purchases remain mixed and inconclusive. Future studies should examine other types of FOP labels beside the traffic lights labels and explore the different effects by consumer affordability, population subgroup, and shopping environment.

Appropriation of the Front-of-Pack Nutrition Label Nutri-Score across the French Population: Evolution of Awareness, Support, and Purchasing Behaviors between 2018 and 2019

Since the implementation of the Nutri-Score on a voluntary basis in 2017 in France, very few studies have evaluated how the label was recognized and used by consumers. The goal of this study was to assess the evolution of awareness, support, and perceived impact on purchasing behaviors of the Nutri-Score in France. Between April 2018 and May 2019, a total of 4006 participants were recruited across three successive waves and answered questions regarding awareness of the Nutri-Score, support of the measure, and change of behavior following the implementation of the Nutri-Score via an online survey. Descriptive analyses to assess the evolution over time were performed, as well as logistic regression models to evaluate associations between the different outcomes and individual characteristics. From April 2018 to May 2019, the awareness of the Nutri-Score increased considerably, reaching 81.5% in May 2019. Since April 2018, a steady proportion of participants—9 out of 10—showed strong support toward the measure and a similar proportion, 87.2%, declared being in favor of making the Nutri-Score mandatory. The impact on purchasing behaviors appeared promising given the limited implementation of the label, with 42.9% of the participants reporting they modified their purchasing behaviors thanks to the measure. Multivariate analyses showed that the impact on purchasing behaviors of the Nutri-Score was greater over time, on younger populations and on frequent labeling readers. Our results suggested that the labeling system was well received and used by all socioeconomic groups, including subgroups who are more likely to have a lower-quality diet.

Association between nutritional profiles of foods underlying Nutri-Score front-of-pack labels and mortality: EPIC cohort study in 10 European countries

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the Food Standards Agency nutrient profiling system (FSAm-NPS), which grades the nutritional quality of food products and is used to derive the Nutri-Score front-of-packet label to guide consumers towards healthier food choices, is associated with mortality.

DESIGN

Population based cohort study.

SETTING

European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort from 23 centres in 10 European countries.

PARTICIPANTS

521 324 adults; at recruitment, country specific and validated dietary questionnaires were used to assess their usual dietary intakes. A FSAm-NPS score was calculated for each food item per 100 g content of energy, sugars, saturated fatty acids, sodium, fibre, and protein, and of fruit, vegetables, legumes, and nuts. The FSAm-NPS dietary index was calculated for each participant as an energy weighted mean of the FSAm-NPS score of all foods consumed. The higher the score the lower the overall nutritional quality of the diet.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Associations between the FSAm-NPS dietary index score and mortality, assessed using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models.

RESULTS

After exclusions, 501 594 adults (median follow-up 17.2 years, 8 162 730 person years) were included in the analyses. Those with a higher FSAm-NPS dietary index score (highest versus lowest fifth) showed an increased risk of all cause mortality (n=53 112 events from non-external causes; hazard ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.10, P<0.001 for trend) and mortality from cancer (1.08, 1.03 to 1.13, P<0.001 for trend) and diseases of the circulatory (1.04, 0.98 to 1.11, P=0.06 for trend), respiratory (1.39, 1.22 to 1.59, P<0.001), and digestive (1.22, 1.02 to 1.45, P=0.03 for trend) systems. The age standardised absolute rates for all cause mortality per 10 000 persons over 10 years were 760 (men=1237; women=563) for those in the highest fifth of the FSAm-NPS dietary index score and 661 (men=1008; women=518) for those in the lowest fifth.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multinational European cohort, consuming foods with a higher FSAm-NPS score (lower nutritional quality) was associated with a higher mortality for all causes and for cancer and diseases of the circulatory, respiratory, and digestive systems, supporting the relevance of FSAm-NPS to characterise healthier food choices in the context of public health policies (eg, the Nutri-Score) for European populations. This is important considering ongoing discussions about the potential implementation of a unique nutrition labelling system at the European Union level.

Effectiveness of Different Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels among Italian Consumers: Results from an Online Randomized Controlled Trial

In Italy, discussions are currently ongoing to implement a front-of-pack nutrition label (FoPL) while a growing number of European countries are adopting the Nutri-Score. The effectiveness of the Nutri-Score among Italian consumers requires further investigation. This study compared five FoPLs among Italian participants (Health Star Rating system, multiple traffic lights, Nutri-Score, reference intakes, warning symbol) in terms of food choices and understanding of the labels by consumers. In 2019, 1032 Italian consumers completed an online survey in which they were asked to select one product they would likely purchase from a set of three foods with different nutrient profiles and then classify the products within the set according to their nutritional quality, first with no label and then with one of the five FoPLs on the pack. While no significant difference across labels was observed for food choices, the Nutri-Score demonstrated the highest overall performance in helping consumers to correctly rank the products according to their nutritional quality compared to the reference intakes (OR = 2.18 (1.50–3.17), p-value < 0.0001). Our results provide new insights on the effectiveness of the Nutri-Score, which would be a relevant tool to inform Italian consumers on the nutritional quality of food products.

Association between the nutrient profile system underpinning the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label and mortality in the SUN project: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Front-of-pack nutrition labelling is a key public health policy that can be adopted as part of a comprehensive set of measures to promote healthy diets. The Nutri-Score, a five-colour summary label based on a modified version of the British Food Standards Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS), is being considered for implementation in several European countries including Spain. This study aimed to prospectively assess the association between the FSAm-NPS and mortality rate in a Spanish cohort of university graduates.

METHODS

Analyses included 20 503 participants (mean [SD] age: 38 [12] years) from the SUN cohort. Dietary intake was assessed at baseline and after 10-years of follow-up with a validated semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire. The FSAm-NPS was calculated for each food/beverage based on their amount of energy, saturated fat, sugar, sodium, fibre, protein, fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, rapeseed, walnut and olive oils per 100 g of product. The FSAm-NPS Dietary Index (DI) was computed as an energy-weighted mean of the FSAm-NPS scores of all foods and beverages consumed by each participant. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause and cause-specific mortality according to baseline and updated FSAm-NPS DI scores.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 407 participants died. A higher baseline FSAm-NPS DI score, reflecting consumption of foods with lower nutritional quality and hence less favourable Nutri-Score rating, was directly associated with all-cause mortality (HR _Q4 versus _Q1 = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.47; p-trend<0.001) and cancer mortality (HR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.54 to 3.85; p-trend<0.001). No association was found for cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The consumption of food products with a higher FSAm-NPS score (lower nutritional quality) was associated with a higher rate of all-cause and cancer mortality in a large prospective cohort of Spanish, middle-aged university graduates. These findings further support the implementation of Nutri-Score in Euro-Mediterranean countries.

Food-Based Dietary Guidelines - development of a conceptual framework for future Food-Based Dietary Guidelines in Europe: report of a Federation of European Nutrition Societies Task-Force Workshop in Copenhagen, 12-13 March 2018

Identifying a need for developing a conceptual framework for the future development of Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDG) in Europe, The Federation of European Nutrition Sciences established a Task Force for this purpose. A workshop was held with the specific objective to discuss the various dimensions considered as particularly relevant. Existing frameworks for FBDG were discussed, and presentations from various countries illustrated not only several commonalities but also a high degree of heterogeneity in the guidelines from different countries. Environmental aspects were considered in several countries, and dimensions like food safety, dietary habits and preparation were included in others. The workshop provided an overview of the use of FBDG - both in developing front-of-pack nutrition labels and for reformulation and innovation. The European FBDG dimensions were described with examples from the close connection between FBDG and European Union (EU) policies and activities and from the compilation of a database of national FBDG. Also, the challenges with communication of FBDG were discussed. Considering the current scientific basis and the experiences from several countries, the Task Force discussed the various dimensions of developing FBDG and concluded that environmental aspects should be included in the future conceptual framework for FBDG. A change in terminology to sustainable FDBG (SFBDG) could reflect this. The Task Force concluded that further work needs to be done exploring current practice, existing methodologies and the future prospects for incorporating other relevant dimensions into a future Federation of European Nutrition Societies conceptual framework for SFBDG in Europe and working groups were formed to address that.

Performance of the Front-of-Pack Nutrition Label Nutri-Score to Discriminate the Nutritional Quality of Foods Products: A Comparative Study across 8 European Countries

Abstract: In Europe, discussions are currently ongoing to harmonize front-of-pack nutritional labelling, while some countries have adopted or are considering implementing the Nutri-Score. However, its adaptability to multiple nutritional contexts in Europe requires further investigation. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the Nutri-Score in various European countries, regarding its ability to discriminate the nutritional quality of foods and its consistency with national dietary recommendations. The European Food Information Resource (EUROFIR) nutritional composition databases from eight European countries (Finland, France, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, and Switzerland) were used. The distribution of foods across the Nutri-Score classes within food groups was assessed, as well as the discriminating performance of the label, and the adequacy of nutritional recommendations. The Nutri-Score demonstrated high discriminating ability for all food groups, with similar trends in the eight countries, and consistency with nutritional recommendations. For instance, fruit and vegetable products were mainly classified in the two healthiest Nutri-Score categories, while sugar and animal fat products were mainly classified in the two less healthy categories of the Nutri-Score. Our results support the fact that the Nutri-Score would be a relevant tool to discriminate the nutritional quality of products within and across relevant food groups in different European countries, with consistency with nutritional recommendations.

That's My Cue to Eat: A Systematic Review of the Persuasiveness of Front-of-Pack Cues on Food Packages for Children vs. Adults

Packaging is increasingly recognized as an essential component of any marketing strategy. Visual and informational front-of-pack cues constitute salient elements of the environment that may influence what and how much someone eats. Considering their overwhelming presence on packaging of non-core foods, front-of-pack cues may contribute to the growing rates of overweight and obesity in children and adults. We conducted a systematic review to summarize the evidence concerning the impact of front-of-pack cues on choices and eating behaviors. Four electronic databases were searched for experimental studies (2009-present). This resulted in the inclusion of 57 studies (in 43 articles). We identified studies on children (3-12 years) and adults (≥ 18 years), but no studies on adolescents (12-18 years). The results suggest that children and adults are susceptible to packaging cues, with most evidence supporting the impact of visual cues. More specifically, children more often choose products with a licensed endorser and eat more from packages portraying the product with an exaggerated portion size. Adults' eating behaviors are influenced by a range of other visual cues, mainly, package size and shape, and less so by informational cues such as labels.

Consumers' food choices, understanding and perceptions in response to different front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems in Belgium: results from an online experimental study

Background

Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) are increasingly implemented by governments internationally to support consumers to make healthier food choices. Although the Nutri-Score FOPL has officially been implemented in Belgium since April 2019, no study has been conducted before its implementation to compare the effectiveness of different FOPLs.

Methods

The aim of this study was to compare food choices, objective understanding and perceptions of Belgian consumers in response to five different FOPLs, currently implemented in different countries internationally, namely the Health Star Ratings (HSR), the Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), and Warning symbols. During the summer 2019, 1007 Belgian consumers were recruited and randomized to one of the five different FOPLs. Through an online questionnaire they were asked to choose one of three different foods within each of three categories (pizzas, cakes, breakfast cereals), as well as rank those same three foods according to nutritional quality, in the condition without as well as with FOPL. In addition, various questions were asked on their perceptions in relation to the FOPL they were exposed to.

Results

Perceptions of consumers were favorable for all FOPLs with no significant differences between the different FOPLs. There were no significant differences in food choices among the different FOPLs, but Nutri-Score performed best for ranking food products according to nutritional quality.

Conclusions

While there were no significant differences among different FOPLs for food choices and perceptions, the Nutri-Score was the most effective FOPL in informing Belgian consumers of the nutritional quality of food products.

Nutritional Content, Labelling and Marketing of Breakfast Cereals on the Belgian Market and Their Reformulation in Anticipation of the Implementation of the Nutri-Score Front-Of-Pack Labelling System

Objective: Breakfast cereals are frequently consumed in Belgium, especially among children. We investigated the nutritional content, labelling and marketing of breakfast cereals and the changes in nutrient content and reformulation in anticipation of the implementation of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack label. Design: Pictures were taken of cereal packages. The WHO-Europe nutrient profiling tool was used to classify cereals into ‘permitted’/‘not-permitted’ to be marketed to children, while the nutritional quality was assessed using Nutri-Score. The proportion of cereals with nutrition and health claims and/or promotional characters on the front-of-pack was compared between permitted and not-permitted cereals and between different Nutriscore categories using Chi-squared tests. The average nutrient contents per 100g were compared between 2017 and 2018 using paired t-tests. Setting: Belgium. Participants: All breakfast cereals in the major supermarkets (n = 7) in 2017 and 2018. Results: Overall, 330 cereals were included. About 77.2% of cereals were not permitted to be marketed to children but, of those, 22.0% displayed promotional characters. More claims (68.9% of all claims) were found on ‘not-permitted’ compared with ‘permitted’ cereals, particularly nutrition claims. Most claims were displayed on cereals with the allocated Nutri-Score A (42.0%) and C (37.0%). A significant reformulation of cereals was found between 2017 and 2018, with reductions in total sugar (−5%) (p < 0.001) and sodium (−20%) (p = 0.002) and increases in fibre (+3%) (p = 0.012) and proteins (+2%) (p = 0.002). Conclusion: Breakfast cereals on the Belgian market are predominantly unhealthy and frequently carry claims and promotional characters. Minimal reformulation occurred over one year. Policy recommendations include restrictions on claims and marketing for not-permitted cereals.

Compared to other front-of-pack nutrition labels, the Nutri-Score emerged as the most efficient to inform Swiss consumers on the nutritional quality of food products

Background

Switzerland, like other high-income countries, is facing a major public health challenge with the increasing burden of non-communicable diseases. Discussions are currently on-going in Switzerland regarding the implementation of a Front-of-Pack nutrition label (FoPL) as a public health measure to guide consumers towards healthier food choices, and the Nutri-Score represents an alternative supported by multiple actors. To date, no studies have investigated the performance of the Nutri-Score among Swiss consumers. This study aimed to compare the response of Swiss consumers to five FoPLs (Health Star Rating system, Multiple Traffic Lights, Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes and Warning symbol) in terms of perception and understanding of these labels and effects on food choices.

Methods

In 2019, 1,088 Swiss consumers were recruited and asked to select one product from among a set of three foods with different nutritional profiles and then classify the products within the sets according to their nutritional quality. Tasks were performed in situations without a label and then with one of the five FoPLs–depending on the group in which they were randomized–on the pack. Finally, participants were questioned on their perceptions regarding the label to which they were exposed.

Results

All FoPLs were favorably perceived, with marginal differences between FoPLs. The Nutri-Score demonstrated the highest percentage of improvement in food choices and the highest overall performance in helping consumers rank the products according to their nutritional quality.

Conclusion

Overall, the Nutri-Score was the most efficient FoPL in informing Swiss consumers of the nutritional quality of food products, and as such could be a useful tool to improve food choices and reduce the burden of chronic diseases in Switzerland.

[Nutri-Score and ultra-processing: two different, complementary, non-contradictory dimensions]

Introduction

The front-of-pack nutritional labeling system Nutri-Score is sometimes under attack because it classifies as A and B certain ultra-processed foods. In fact, this is not surprising given that nutritional quality (assessed by Nutri-Score) and ultra-processing (assessed by the NOVA classification) do not cover the same "health dimensions" in foods but rather different dimensions likely to affect health through specific mechanisms. Although they cover different and complementary dimensions, there is nevertheless an overall association between the degree of processing and nutritional quality of foods. But within the group of ultra-processed foods there are differences in the number, type and doses of additives, as well as differences in nutritional quality. Therefore Nutri-Score allows, within the category of ultra-processed foods (as for all categories of the NOVA classification), to differentiate the nutritional quality of foods, which is essential in terms of health impact. Indeed, regardless of the level of food processing, it has been shown that consuming foods that are better ranked on the Nutri-Score scale is associated with a health benefit and a lower risk of chronic diseases. This is important because, even if it is recommended to reduce the consumption of ultra-processed foods, for those who do not want to or cannot avoid consuming them, for those for whom cooking is difficult (for reasons of time, ease, taste, etc.), the choice of foods better ranked on the Nutri-Score scale has a positive impact on health. Nutri-Score and ultra-transformation must be considered two different and complementary dimensions.

Consumer beliefs about healthy foods and diets

Background

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has begun a public process to redefine how companies are allowed to use the term “healthy” on food packages. Although the definition is formulated based on the latest consensus in nutrition and epidemiological research, it is also important to understand how consumers define and understand the term if it is to be behaviorally relevant. This research is an exploratory study designed to provide a descriptive account of consumers’ perceptions of and beliefs about the meaning of “healthy” food.

Methods

A nationwide U.S. sample of 1,290 food consumers was surveyed in December 2018. Respondents answered 15 questions designed to gauge perceptions of healthy food and to elicit preference for policies surrounding healthy food definitions. Responses are weighted to demographically match the population. Categorical variables have a sampling error of ±2.7%. Exploratory factor analysis is used to determine latent dimensions of health perceptions related to food type.

Results

Consumers were about evenly split on whether a food can be deemed healthy based solely on the foods’ nutritional content (52.1% believing as such) or whether there were other factors that affect whether a food is healthy (47.9% believing as such). Consumers were also about evenly split on whether an individual food can be considered healthy (believed by 47.9%) or whether this healthiness is instead a characteristic of one’s overall diet (believed by 52.1%). Ratings of individual food products revealed that “healthy” perceptions are comprised of at least three underlying latent dimensions related to animal origin, preservation, and freshness/processing. Focusing on individual macronutrients, perceived healthiness was generally decreasing in a food’s fat, sodium, and carbohydrate content and increasing in protein content. About 40% of consumers thought a healthy label implied they should increase consumption of the type of food bearing the label and about 15% thought the label meant they could eat all they wanted.

Conclusions

Results suggest consumer’s perceptions of “healthy,” which is primarily based on fat content, partially aligns with the FDA definition but also suggest consumers perceive the word as a broader and more nuanced concept that defies easy, uniform definition. Results highlight areas where nutrition education may be needed and suggest disclosures may need to accompany health claims so that consumers know what, precisely, is being communicated.

Impact of a front-of-pack nutritional traffic-light label on the nutritional quality and the hedonic value of mid-afternoon snacks chosen by mother-child dyads

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a nutritional traffic-light label, the Nutri-Score, on snack choices in mother-child dyads and to assess a potential hedonic cost associated with a change in favour of healthier choices. French mothers and children (n = 95; children's age: 7-11 years) who participated were asked to choose, for themselves and for the other dyad member, a snack composed of one beverage and two food items selected among several products with different nutritional quality. In the first step, the products were presented without any information. In the second step, the products were labelled with the Nutri-Score. Mothers and children were asked to rate their liking for all proposed products before being informed of their nutritional quality. The nutritional quality, the hedonic score, and the estimated budget of the selected snacks were compared before and after labelling. As hypothesized, the Nutri-Score label led to a significant increase in the nutritional quality of the chosen snacks. The budget for the chosen snacks was unchanged or decreased after the nutritional labelling was applied. Children and mothers had significantly lower liking for the snacks after nutritional labelling than before nutritional labelling, suggesting a hedonic cost associated with a change in favour of healthier snack choices. This raises the question of the sustainability of the behavioural change induced by the Nutri-Score label.

Consumers' Responses to Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling: Results from a Sample from The Netherlands

Front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) are efficient tools for helping consumers identify healthier food products. Although discussions on nutritional labelling are currently ongoing in Europe, few studies have compared the effectiveness of FoPLs in European countries, including the Netherlands. This study aimed to compare five FoPLs among Dutch participants (the Health Star Rating (HSR) system, Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes (RIs), and Warning symbols) in terms of perception and understanding of the labels and food choices. In 2019, 1032 Dutch consumers were recruited and asked to select one product from among a set of three foods with different nutritional profiles, and then rank the products within the sets according to their nutritional quality. These tasks were performed with no label and then with one of the five FoPLs on the package, depending on the randomization arm. Finally, participants were questioned on their perceptions regarding the label to which they were exposed. Regarding perceptions, all FoPLs were favorably perceived but with only marginal differences between FoPLs. While no significant difference across labels was observed for food choices, the Nutri-Score demonstrated the highest overall performance in helping consumers rank the products according to their nutritional quality.

Modelling the impact of different front-of-package nutrition labels on mortality from non-communicable chronic disease

Background

Front-of-Package nutrition labels (FoPLs) are intended to help reduce the incidence of nutrition-related non-communicable diseases through an improvement in diet quality. FoPLs have been shown to improve the nutritional quality of purchases and have been associated with improved diet quality, which is in turn associated with reduced risk of non-communicable diseases. However, the potential impact of FoPLs on reducing mortality from chronic diseases has never been estimated.

Methods

Data from a laboratory experimental economics test were used to investigate the effects of five different FoPLs (Nutri-Score, Health Star Rating system, Multiple Traffic lights, Reference intakes and SENS (Système d’Etiquetage Nutritionnel Simplifié)) on the nutritional quality of household purchases. The relative differences in nutrient content and composition of food purchases were then applied to dietary intakes using data from an observational study, thus yielding estimates for ‘reference’ and ‘labelled’ diets. A macro-simulation study using the PRIME model was then conducted to estimate the impact of the modification in dietary intake as a result of FoPL use on mortality from diet-related non-communicable diseases.

Results

The use of FoPLs led to a substantial reduction in mortality from chronic diseases. Approximately 3.4% of all deaths from diet-related non-communicable diseases was estimated to be avoidable when the Nutri-Score FoPL was used. The remaining FoPLs likewise resulted in mortality reduction, although to a lesser extent: Health Star Rating system (2.8%), Reference Intakes (1.9%), Multiple Traffic Lights (1.6%), and SENS (1.1%).

Conclusions

FoPLs have the potential to help decrease mortality from diet-related non-communicable diseases, and the Nutri-Score appears to be the most efficient among the five formats tested.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12966-019-0817-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Effect of Randomly Providing Nutri-Score Information on Actual Purchases in Colombia

Recently, front-of-package (FOP) food labeling systems have captured the attention of researchers and policy makers. Several Latin American governments are currently considering employing different FOP labeling systems. However, there is much need for more research-based evidence in these countries. In this paper, we study whether food-purchasing decisions and the nutritional qualities of those purchases are influenced by randomly informing some customers and not others about an FOP label known as Nutri-Score. We also separate the information effect from the effect of being aware of the system. We combined a randomized field intervention in a university cafeteria in Bogotá, Colombia with data from an after-purchase survey and receipts. We found that randomly providing information on Nutri-Score increased total expenditure by $0.18. Additional spending on healthier items was 21% or $0.26 higher, with no change for less healthy items. Expenditure estimates were higher among customers who were aware of the system’s existence. Customers in the study were also 10% more likely to buy a healthier item than control customers were, and the concentration of protein in their purchases was greater. Information on the Nutri-Score system increased the store’s sales. This potential financial incentive may facilitate the implementation of Nutri-Score.

Impact of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels on Portion Size Selection: An Experimental Study in a French Cohort

In the European Union (EU) three coloured graded Front-of-Pack labels (FoPLs), two endorsed by governments (Nutri-Score and Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL)) and one designed by industry (Evolved Nutrition Label (ENL)) are currently being discussed. This study aimed to investigate the impact of these FoPLs on portion size selection, specifically for less healthy products. In 2018, participants from the French NutriNet-Santé cohort study (N = 25,772) were exposed through a web-based self-administered questionnaire to products from three food categories (sweet biscuits, cheeses, and sweet spreads), with or without FoPLs, and were invited to select the portion they would consume (in size and number). Kruskall-Wallis tests, and mixed ordinal logistic regression models, were used to investigate the effects of FoPLs on portion size selection. Compared to no label, Nutri-Score consistently lowered portion sizes (OR = 0.76 (0.74⁻0.76)), followed by MTL (OR = 0.83 (0.82⁻0.84)). For ENL, the effects differed depending on the food group: It lowered portion size selection for cheeses (OR = 0.84 (0.83⁻0.87)), and increased it for spreads (OR = 1.19 (1.15⁻1.22)). Nutri-Score followed by MTL appear efficient tools to encourage consumers to decrease their portion size for less healthy products, while ENL appears to have inconsistent effects depending on the food category.

Nutritional quality of food as represented by the FSAm-NPS nutrient profiling system underlying the Nutri-Score label and cancer risk in Europe: Results from the EPIC prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Helping consumers make healthier food choices is a key issue for the prevention of cancer and other diseases. In many countries, political authorities are considering the implementation of a simplified labelling system to reflect the nutritional quality of food products. The Nutri-Score, a five-colour nutrition label, is derived from the Nutrient Profiling System of the British Food Standards Agency (modified version) (FSAm-NPS). How the consumption of foods with high/low FSAm-NPS relates to cancer risk has been studied in national/regional cohorts but has not been characterized in diverse European populations.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This prospective analysis included 471,495 adults from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC, 1992-2014, median follow-up: 15.3 y), among whom there were 49,794 incident cancer cases (main locations: breast, n = 12,063; prostate, n = 6,745; colon-rectum, n = 5,806). Usual food intakes were assessed with standardized country-specific diet assessment methods. The FSAm-NPS was calculated for each food/beverage using their 100-g content in energy, sugar, saturated fatty acid, sodium, fibres, proteins, and fruits/vegetables/legumes/nuts. The FSAm-NPS scores of all food items usually consumed by a participant were averaged to obtain the individual FSAm-NPS Dietary Index (DI) scores. Multi-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were computed. A higher FSAm-NPS DI score, reflecting a lower nutritional quality of the food consumed, was associated with a higher risk of total cancer (HRQ5 versus Q1 = 1.07; 95% CI 1.03-1.10, P-trend < 0.001). Absolute cancer rates in those with high and low (quintiles 5 and 1) FSAm-NPS DI scores were 81.4 and 69.5 cases/10,000 person-years, respectively. Higher FSAm-NPS DI scores were specifically associated with higher risks of cancers of the colon-rectum, upper aerodigestive tract and stomach, lung for men, and liver and postmenopausal breast for women (all P < 0.05). The main study limitation is that it was based on an observational cohort using self-reported dietary data obtained through a single baseline food frequency questionnaire; thus, exposure misclassification and residual confounding cannot be ruled out.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multinational European cohort, the consumption of food products with a higher FSAm-NPS score (lower nutritional quality) was associated with a higher risk of cancer. This supports the relevance of the FSAm-NPS as underlying nutrient profiling system for front-of-pack nutrition labels, as well as for other public health nutritional measures.

A citizen perspective on nutritional warnings as front-of-pack labels: insights for the design of accompanying policy measures

Objective

Nutritional warnings have recently been suggested as a simplified front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme to facilitate citizens’ ability to identify unhealthful products and discourage their consumption. However, citizens’ perspective on this policy is still under-researched. The objective of the present work was to study how citizens perceive nutritional warnings and to evaluate public support of this policy, with the goal of deriving recommendations for the design of policy measures accompanying the introduction of nutritional warnings.

Design

An online survey with 1416 Uruguayan citizens, aged 18–75 years, 61 % female, was conducted. Participants had to answer a series of questions (open-ended and multiple-choice) related to their perception of warnings as a front-of-package nutrition labelling scheme.

Results

Participants showed a positive attitude towards nutritional warnings, which were regarded as easy to understand and to identify on food packages. The majority of respondents emphasized that they would take nutritional warnings into account when making their food choices, stating that they would allow them to make informed choices and, consequently, to increase the quality of their diet and their health status. Health motivation appeared as a crucial driver for taking nutritional warnings into consideration.

Conclusions

A high level of public support for nutritional warnings was observed. Responses can be used to derive a range of recommendations for a policy mix that should synergistically support the introduction of nutritional warnings and encourage citizens to take them into account when making their food purchases.

Objective understanding of Nutri-Score Front-Of-Package nutrition label according to individual characteristics of subjects: Comparisons with other format labels

Background

To improve nutritional status and prevent chronic nutrition-related diseases, international organizations have recommended the use of multiple strategies, including front-of-package nutrition labelling (FOPL). In France, the Nutri-Score has been selected by health authorities in March 2017. However, to be effective in purchasing situations, the label needs to be well understood, which may be influenced by label format and sociodemographic characteristics. This study aimed at investigating the objective understanding of the Nutri-Score compared to other label formats, and more particularly among specific at-risk populations.

Methods

The objective understanding of four FOPLs—namely Nutri-Score, Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), the simplified nutrition labelling system (SENS), and modified Reference Intakes (mRIs)—was investigated in a sample from the NutriNet-Santé French cohort (n = 3,751). Logistic regression mixed models were computed to assess the association of the four FOPLs, compared to a “no label” situation, on the consumers’ ability to rank products according to their overall nutritional quality. Objective understanding was also investigated according to sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics.

Results

Compared to a “no label” situation, all FOPLs were significantly associated to an increase in consumers’ ability to classify the products correctly, with wide disparities in results according to formats. The best performance was observed for the Nutri-Score (OR = 20.33(17.68–23.37)), followed by SENS (OR = 9.57(8.50–10.77)), MTL (OR = 3.55(3.20–3.93)) and mRIs (OR = 1.53(1.39–1.69)). This ranking was similar among all sub-populations and the ORs associated to the Nutri-Score were over 10, whichever the sub-group considered. Women, younger people, non-smokers, individuals with higher educational level and those with children had a higher capacity to identify healthier products (all P≤0.05).

Conclusion

Nutri-Score, with a summarized graded and color-coded format, using semantic colours, is associated to a higher objective understanding than monochrome and nutrient-specific labels. Furthermore, though objective understanding may differ according to individual characteristics of subjects, the magnitude of effect of the Nutri-Score largely outweighed this effect, even in the at-risk populations.

The Impact of the Australasian 'Health Star Rating', Front-of-Pack Nutritional Label, on Consumer Choice: A Longitudinal Study

Front-of-pack (FoP) nutrition labels are a widely deployed tool in public good marketing. This article reports on a field experimental test of the impact of one of these systems, the Australasian Health Star Rating system (HSR), on consumer choice in the breakfast cereals category in New Zealand. This study forms part of a time-series replication stream of research on this topic. The research applied a 2 × 2 factorial design with multiple replications to retail food consumers exiting from supermarkets in New Zealand. The first part of the time series, undertaken shortly after the HSR’s initiation in 2014, indicated that the HSR was ineffective. Between 2014 and 2016, commercial brands in the category within New Zealand massively promoted the HSR as a basis for consumer choice. The research presented in this article forms part of the second part of the series, undertaken in 2016, using an identical experimental methodology to the 2014 study. The results indicate that the HSR may be beginning to influence consumer choice as it was predicted to, but the impact of the system is still small, and statistically sub-significant, relative to other consumer decision inputs presented on the package.

The impact of interpretive and reductive front-of-pack labels on food choice and willingness to pay

BACKGROUND

This study examined how front-of-pack labels and product healthfulness affect choice and willingness to pay across a range of foods. It was hypothesized that: (i) product choice and (ii) willingness to pay would be more aligned with product healthfulness when healthfulness was expressed through the Health Star Rating, followed by the Multiple Traffic Light, then the Daily Intake Guide, and (iii) the Nutrition Facts Panel would be viewed infrequently.

METHODS

Adults and children aged 10+ years (n = 2069) completed an online discrete choice task involving mock food packages. A 4 food type (cookies, corn flakes, pizza, yoghurt) × 2 front-of-pack label presence (present, absent) × 3 front-of-pack label type (Daily Intake Guide, Multiple Traffic Light, Health Star Rating) × 3 price (cheap, moderate, expensive) × 3 healthfulness (less healthy, moderately healthy, healthier) design was used. A 30 s time limit was imposed for each choice.

RESULTS

Of the three front-of-pack labels tested, the Health Star Rating produced the largest differences in choices, with 40% (95% CIs: 38%-42%) of respondents selecting the healthier variant, 33% selecting the moderately healthy variant (95% CIs: 31%-35%), and 23% (95% CIs: 21%-24%) selecting the less healthy variant of the four products included in the study. The Multiple Traffic Light led to significant differences in choices between healthier (35%, 95% CIs: 33%-37%) and less healthy products (29%, 95% CIs: 27%-31%), but not moderately healthy products (32%, 95% CIs: 30%-34%). No significant differences in choices were observed by product healthfulness when the Daily Intake Guide was present. Only the Health Star Rating resulted in a significantly greater willingness to pay for healthier versus less healthy products. The Nutrition Facts Panel was viewed for only 7% of all mock packages.

CONCLUSIONS

Front-of-pack labels that are more interpretive, such as the Health Star Rating, can be more effective at directing consumers towards healthier choices than reductive front-of-pack labels such as the Daily Intake Guide. The study results provide policy makers with clear guidance on the types of front-of-pack labels that are most likely to achieve positive health outcomes at a population level.

Perception of different formats of front-of-pack nutrition labels according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors in a French population: cross-sectional study among the NutriNet-Santé cohort participants

OBJECTIVE

Four formats for a front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label are currently considered in France: the Nutriscore (or 5-Colour Nutrition Label, developed by a public research team), the SENS (supported by retailers), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL, currently used in UK) and a modified version of the Reference Intakes (mRIs, supported by industry). Our objective was to investigate the perception of these FOP labels, according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Web-based French cohort.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

FOP labels perception.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort received a specific questionnaire on the perceptions of the four label formats identified. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary data (three 24-hours dietary records) were collected through self-administered questionnaires. Mutually exclusive clusters of FOP labels perception were identified through a multiple correspondence analysis followed by a hierarchical clustering procedure. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors associated with the clusters were explored using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. All analyses were weighted according to 2009 French census data.

RESULTS

Among the 21,702 participants in the study, the Nutriscore received the most important number of favourable responses on positive perception dimensions by participants, followed by MTL and SENS. The five identified clusters were characterised by marked preferences for Nutriscore (cluster 1, 43.2% of participants, crude n=9,399), MTL (cluster 2, 27.3%, crude n=6,163), SENS (cluster 3, 17.05%, crude n=3,546), mRIs (cluster 4, 7.31%, crude n=1,632) and none of the presented formats (cluster 5, 5.10%, crude n=965). The cluster 1 (Nutriscore) was associated with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations, while cluster 2 (MTL) was associated with younger age and higher level of education.

CONCLUSION

The Nutriscore appears to have a wide reach in the population and to appeal to subjects with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations.

Research and lobbying conflicting on the issue of a front-of-pack nutrition labelling in France

Front-of-pack nutrition labelling has been highlighted as a promising strategy to help consumers making healthier food choices at the point of purchase. In France, a simplified front-of-pack nutrition labelling system was proposed in 2014, the 5-Colour Nutrition Label (5-CNL). It is supported by studies evaluating the various dimensions of the validation of both its underlying classification algorithm and its format. Opposed by agro-industry and retailers, multiples lobbying strategies have been deployed to stop or at least delay the implementation of the 5-CNL. Various alternative nutrition labels were proposed, and a full-scale trial was successfully argued for. This paper retraces the various steps of the opposition between public health and agro-industry lobbies on the topic of front-of-pack nutrition labelling in France.