Information displayed on Brazilian food bar labels points to the need to reformulate the current food labelling legislation

2021 ◽  
pp. 131318
Author(s):  
Jéssica Bevenuto Mattar ◽  
Aline Carare Candido ◽  
Darlene Larissa de Souza Vilela ◽  
Vanessa Ladeira de Paula ◽  
Luiza Carla Vidigal Castro
Keyword(s):  
Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Gibney ◽  
Aifric O’Sullivan ◽  
Albert Flynn ◽  
Janette Walton ◽  
Hannelore Daniel ◽  
...  

The present study set out to explore the option of developing food portion size for nutritional labelling purposes using two European Union (EU) dietary surveys. The surveys were selected as they differed in (a) methodologies (food diary versus food frequency questionnaire), (b) populations (Irish National Adult Nutrition Survey (NANS) versus a seven-country survey based on the pan EU study Food4Me), (c) food quantification (multiple options versus solely photographic album) and (d) duration (4 consecutive days versus recent month). Using data from these studies, portion size was determined for 15 test foods, where portion size was defined as the median intake of a target food when consumed. The median values of the portion sizes derived from both the NANS and Food4Me surveys were correlated (r = 0.823; p < 0.00) and the mean of the two survey data sets were compared to US values from the Recognized as Customarily Consumed (RACC) database. There was very strong agreement across all food categories between the averaged EU and the US portion size (r = 0.947; p < 0.00). It is concluded that notwithstanding the variety of approaches used for dietary survey data in the EU, the present data supports using a standardized approach to food portion size quantification for food labelling in the EU.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Mansilla ◽  
Violeta Stancu ◽  
Lisa Stickel ◽  
Simona Grasso

Author(s):  
A. Hrković-Porobija ◽  
A. Hodžić ◽  
N. Hadžimusić ◽  
E. Pašić-Juhas ◽  
A. Rustempašić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 2265-2272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan L Williams ◽  
Kerry W Mummery

AbstractObjectiveThe Heart Foundation Tick aims to help consumers make healthier food choices and overcome confusion in understanding food labels. Little is known about what factors differentiate frequent from infrequent users and the effectiveness of this scheme in helping Australians make healthier food choices.DesignA cross-sectional survey was used to explore use of the Tick and associations with a range of individual characteristics.SettingA national panel of Australians, living in each state and territory, completed an online survey (n1446).SubjectsAdult men (41 %) and women participated in the study.ResultsMost trusted the Heart Foundation (79 %), and used the Tick at least occasionally (19 % regularly, 21 % often, 35 % occasionally, 24 % never). A majority was classified as overweight/obese (60 %), 3·5 % were diagnosed with CHD, 5·2 % with diabetes and 23 % with hypertension. Many did not meet recommendations for the consumption of red meat (30 %), processed meat (23 %), vegetables (78 %), fruit (43 %) and fast foods (47 %). Female frequent users tended to have hypertension, be married/de facto, older than 45 years, rural dwellers, and limit their intake of fast foods. Male frequent users tended to have hypertension, meet recommendations for fruit, vegetables and processed meats, but not have a tertiary education.ConclusionsThe Heart Foundation Tick is a highly trusted, highly recognizable food labelling scheme and helpful to consumers who are motivated to make healthier food choices. More inter-sector collaboration is required to incorporate these schemes into public health campaigns to help consumers make healthier food choices.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document