Improving the composition and marketing of commercial baby foods: a Nutrient Profile Model

AbstractObjectiveThe present study assessed the nutrition information displayed on ready-to-eat packaged foods and the nutritional quality of those food products in Thailand.DesignIn March 2015, the nutrition information panels and nutrition and health claims on ready-to-eat packaged foods were collected from the biggest store of each of the twelve major retailers, using protocols developed by the International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS). The Thai Nutrient Profile Model was used to classify food products according to their nutritional quality as ‘healthier’ or ‘less healthy’.ResultsIn total, information from 7205 food products was collected across five broad food categories. Out of those products, 5707 (79·2 %), 2536 (35·2 %) and 1487 (20·6 %) carried a nutrition facts panel, a Guideline Daily Amount (GDA) label and health-related claims, respectively. Only 4691 (65·1 %) and 2484 (34·5 %) of the products that displayed the nutrition facts or a GDA label, respectively, followed the guidelines of the Thai Food and Drug Administration. In total, 4689 products (65·1 %) could be classified according to the Thai Nutrient Profile Model, of which 432 products (9·2 %) were classified as healthier. Moreover, among the 1487 products carrying health-related claims, 1219 (82·0 %) were classified as less healthy. Allowing less healthy food products to carry claims could mislead consumers and result in overconsumption of ready-to-eat food products.ConclusionsThe findings suggest effective policies should be implemented to increase the relative availability of healthier ready-to-eat packaged foods, as well as to improve the provision of nutrition information on labels in Thailand.

Download Full-text

Validating a nutrient profile model

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980007000377 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. 371-378 ◽

Cited By ~ 101

Author(s):

Carukshi Arambepola ◽

Peter Scarborough ◽

Mike Rayner

Keyword(s):

Construct Validity ◽

Energy Intake ◽

Discriminant Validity ◽

Good Health ◽

Healthy Foods ◽

Nutrition Survey ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Profile Model ◽

Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽

The Way

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the validity of nutrient profiling Model WXYfm – developed for the purpose of regulating the promotion of ‘less healthy’ foods to children. The model ranks foods according to their healthiness and categorises foods into ‘healthier’ and ‘less healthy’ foods.DesignConvergent and discriminant validity was tested by comparing the way Model WXYfm categorises foods with the way the UK’s national food guide – the Balance of Good Health (BGH) – categorises foods. Construct validity was assessed by testing a hypothesis relating the constructs of ‘healthiness’ of foods (as measured by Model WXYfm) and the ‘healthiness’ of diets (measured using the Diet Quality Index) and assessing whether this hypothesis was confirmed or refuted by using data on the dietary patterns of subjects (n= 1117) of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey of adults carried out in Great Britain in 2000–01.ResultsModel WXYfm showed good convergent and discriminant validity: the level of agreement between the way the model categorises foods and the way the BGH categorises foods was good (κ= 0.69). Model WXYfm also showed good construct validity: the energy intake from ‘less healthy’ foods amongst subjects with the least healthy diets was nearly twice the energy intake from ‘less healthy’ foods amongst the subjects with the healthiest diets.ConclusionsModel WXYfm demonstrated good validity in categorising foods in a way that is related to the healthiness of diets both recommended and achieved. The methods for assessing the validity of a nutrient profile model used in this paper have not, to our knowledge, been used before.

Download Full-text

Regulating health and nutrition claims in the UK using a nutrient profile model: an explorative modelled health impact assessment

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity ◽

10.1186/s12966-019-0778-5 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Asha Kaur ◽

Peter Scarborough ◽

Mike Rayner

Keyword(s):

Impact Assessment ◽

Health Impact Assessment ◽

Health Impact ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Profile Model ◽

Nutrition Claims ◽

Health And Nutrition ◽

The Uk

Download Full-text

The WHO South-East Asia Region Nutrient Profile Model Is Quite Appropriate for India: An Exploration of 31,516 Food Products

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu13082799 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (8) ◽

pp. 2799

Author(s):

Chandra Pandav ◽

Lindsey Smith Taillie ◽

Donna R. Miles ◽

Bridget A. Hollingsworth ◽

Barry M. Popkin

Keyword(s):

East Asia ◽

Saturated Fat ◽

Food Products ◽

Noncommunicable Diseases ◽

South East Asia ◽

Warning Label ◽

Warning Labels ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Profile Model ◽

East Asia Region

The rapid rise in prevalence of overweight/obesity, as well as high prevalence of type 2 diabetes and other nutrition-related noncommunicable diseases, has led the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to propose a front-of-package labeling (FOPL) regulation. An effective FOPL system applies a nutrient profile model that identifies foods high in sugar, sodium, and saturated fat that would receive a warning label for consumers to effectively discern between more and less healthy foods. Previous Nutrition Alchemy data collected by the food industry (n = 1306 products) estimated that approximately 96% of foods in India would have at least one warning label based on the FSSAI proposed FOPL. This near universal coverage of warning labels may be inaccurate and misleading. To address this, the current study compared two nutrient profile models, the WHO South-East Asia Region Organization (SEARO) and the Chilean Warning Octagon (CWO) Phase 3, applied to food products available in the Indian market from 2015–2020, collected through Mintel Global New Products Database (n = 10,501 products). Results suggest that 68% of foods and beverages would have at least one ‘ high-in’ level warning label. This study highlights the need to include a more comprehensive sample of food products for assessing the value of warning labels.

Download Full-text

Application of the WHO nutrient profile model on food product data recorded for the Austrian project “Food in the Spotlight”

Proceedings of The Nutrition Society ◽

10.1017/s0029665120005121 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽

Author(s):

Bettina Meidlinger ◽

Christian Luipersbeck ◽

Melanie U. Bruckmüller ◽

Birgit Dieminger-Schnürch ◽

Bernadette Bürger-Schwaninger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Food Product ◽

Food Products ◽

Soft Drinks ◽

Noncommunicable Diseases ◽

National Context ◽

Negative Consequences ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Profile Model ◽

Marketing To Children ◽

The Impact

AbstractIntroduction:Children are exposed to marketing of foods with a high content of energy, fat, sugar and salt on a daily basis, which can have negative consequences via increasing children's preferences for those foods. An unhealthy diet can promote obesity and other noncommunicable diseases. The objective of this scientific work was to assess the applicability of the nutrient profile model (NPM) for food products available in the Austrian market. The model was developed by the WHO Regional Office for Europe to reduce the impact of marketing to children.Material and Methods:The NPM was applied to food product information, which was recorded for the project “Food in the Spotlight” (www.lebensmittellupe.at). Food products were assigned to food categories made by the WHO and the NPM was applied to identify products, which should not be allowed to be marketed to children. As the WHO NPM is flexible and can be adapted to the national context possible adaptations of the model to the Austrian market were developed.Results:Among those product groups which were included in Food in the Spotlight 0% of cocoa (n = 89), milk drinks with additional ingredients (e.g. strawberry milk, n = 111), soup pearl croutons (n = 13), ketchups (n = 79) and pestos (n = 119), 0.4% of soft drinks (Cola, lemonade etc., n = 454), 8% of pizza and pizza-like products (n = 274), 13% of yoghurt products with additional ingredients (n = 611), 18% of sugos (n = 193), 28% of fruit and vegetable purees (n = 36) and 33% of breakfast cereals (n = 678) were found to be eligible for marketing to children. Those 0.4% of soft drinks which would be allowed are two waters flavoured with aroma. Pure products such as whole milk and yoghurts with 3.5% fat would not be allowed because they exceed the thresholds for total fat. For those products with a packaging appealing to children and adolescents almost none passed the NPM.Conclusion:Our results showed, that before the NPM can be implemented in Austria, it is important to adapt the model to national dietary guidelines. Additionally, food categories could be modified to be more suitable for the Austrian market, as some products which are common in Austria could not be easily assigned to the WHO food categories. To adapt the WHO NPM to the national context cooperation between health experts and food manufacturers is necessary.

Download Full-text

Comparing how Canadian packaged food products align with the 2007 and 2019 versions of Canada’s Food Guide

Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism ◽

10.1139/apnm-2020-0620 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Christine Mulligan ◽

Beatriz Franco-Arellano ◽

Mavra Ahmed ◽

Laura Vergeer ◽

Kacie M Dickinson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Food Label ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Profile Model ◽

Information Program ◽

Food And Beverage ◽

Label Information ◽

Packaged Foods ◽

Packaged Food ◽

Health Canada ◽

Future Work

In 2019, Canada’s Food Guide (CFG) was updated from the 2007 version. This study developed a food-based nutrient profile model (NPM) to evaluate the alignment of packaged food and beverage products with CFG 2019 and compared it with CFG 2007. Packaged products from the University of Toronto’s Food Label Information Program 2017 database were evaluated in terms of their alignment with CFG 2007 (using the Health Canada Surveillance Tool (HCST)) and CFG 2019 (using our newly developed CFG 2019 NPM). Agreement in alignment (e.g., products “in line” according to CFG 2019 NPM and in Tiers 1 or 2 according to the HCST) was calculated and differences in alignment and reasons for differences were quantified and described. Overall agreement in product alignment between CFG 2007 and 2019 was 81.9%, with fewer products aligned with CFG 2019: 16.4% vs. 31.8%, (X2 =189.12, p< 0.001). Differences in alignment varied across food categories (0.0-73.8%), explained by differences in CFG 2019, reflected in the CFG 2019 NPM (e.g., emphasis on avoiding processed foods, encouraging whole grains and low-fat dairy). This study presents a first step in assessing packaged foods’ alignment with CFG 2019; future work is needed to evaluate broader dietary adherence to the updated recommendations. Novelty Bullets: -A food-based nutrient profile model was developed based on the 2019 Canada’s Food Guide (CFG) and tested on packaged foods by comparing it to the nutrient-based Health Canada Surveillance Tool (HCST), based on CFG 2007. -Most (82%) packaged products were “not in line” with either CFG version.

Download Full-text