Exploring claims and marketing techniques in Brazilian food labels

2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (7) ◽  
pp. 1550-1564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafaela Corrêa Pereira ◽  
Michel Cardoso de Angelis-Pereira ◽  
João de Deus Souza Carneiro
Keyword(s):  
Product Category ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Alcoholic Beverages ◽  
Processed Foods ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Food Market ◽  
Packaged Food ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the packaged food market in Brazil by examining the use of nutrition and health claims and marketing techniques, as well as the different levels of industrial food processing in relation to product category, nutrition information and price. Design/methodology/approach A survey was conducted on the labels of pre-packed foods and non-alcoholic beverages marketed in a home-shopping website in Brazil. Findings The authors showed that the use of nutrition and health claims on packaged foods in Brazil is widespread and varied across different food categories. Marketing techniques were also prevalent, and techniques emphasising general health, well-being or naturalness were the most frequent type used. Overall, products carrying nutrition and health claims and/or using marketing techniques had lower content of fat and higher content of fibre. However, the high prevalence of these strategies in ultra-processed foods is alarming. The presence of health claims and use of marketing techniques was not found to be an effective modifier of the three price measures. However, processed and ultra-processed foods were more expensive than unprocessed foods when considering price per energy and price per 100 g or mL. Originality/value These results indicate that there are clear opportunities to improve the packaged food environment in supermarkets. It is important to highlight the need to develop public policies to address these issues, including restriction of the promotion and advertising of unhealthy foods and beverages and use of warning labels.

scholarly journals Nutrition and health claims on healthy and less-healthy packaged food products in New Zealand

2016 ◽  
Vol 116 (6) ◽  
pp. 1087-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haya H. Al-Ani ◽  
Anandita Devi ◽  
Helen Eyles ◽  
Boyd Swinburn ◽  
Stefanie Vandevijvere
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Food Choices ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Nutrition Claims ◽  
Nutrient Profiling ◽  
Packaged Foods ◽  
Packaged Food ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

AbstractNutrition and health claims are displayed to influence consumers’ food choices. This study assessed the extent and nature of nutrition and health claims on the front-of-pack of ‘healthy’ and ‘less-healthy’ packaged foods in New Zealand. Foods from eight categories, for which consumption may affect the risk of obesity and diet-related chronic diseases, were selected from the 2014 Nutritrack database. The internationally standardised International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-Communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) taxonomy was used to classify claims on packages. The Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC) was used to classify products as ‘healthy’ or ‘less healthy’. In total, 7526 products were included, with 47 % (n 3557) classified as ‘healthy’. More than one-third of products displayed at least one nutrition claim and 15 % featured at least one health claim on the front-of-pack. Claims were found on one-third of ‘less-healthy’ products; 26 % of those products displayed nutrition claims and 7 % featured health claims. About 45 % of ‘healthy’ products displayed nutrition claims and 23 % featured health claims. Out of 7058 individual claims, the majority (69 %) were found on ‘healthy’ products. Cereals displayed the greatest proportion of nutrition and health claims (1503 claims on 564 products), of which one-third were displayed on ‘less-healthy’ cereals. Such claims could be misleading consumers’ perceptions of nutritional quality of foods. It needs to be explored how current regulations on nutrition and health claims in New Zealand could be further strengthened (e.g. using the NPSC for nutrition claims, including general health claims as per the INFORMAS taxonomy) to ensure consumers are protected and not misled.

scholarly journals Estimated effects of the implementation of the Mexican Warning Labels regulation on the use of health and nutrition claims on packaged foods

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Cruz-Casarrubias ◽  
Lizbeth Tolentino-Mayo ◽  
Stefanie Vandevijvere ◽  
Simón Barquera
Keyword(s):  
Food System ◽  
Potential Effect ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Retail Stores ◽  
Processed Foods ◽  
Warning Labels ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Nutrition Claims ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

Abstract Background The use of health and nutrition claims on front-of-pack labels has a potential effect on consumers' food choices; therefore, many countries established regulations to avoid misperceptions. This study describes the use of nutrition and health claims on the front-of-pack of food products in retail stores in Mexico and analyze the potential effects of the new front-of-pack labelling regulation on the use of these claims. Methods This is a cross-sectional study in which nutrition and health claims, nutrition information panels, and the list of ingredients of all foods and beverages available in the main retail stores in Mexico City were collected. The products were grouped by level of processing according to the NOVA food system classification. Claims were classified into different types using the internationally harmonized INFORMAS taxonomy. The potential effect of the implementation of the warning label regulations on the use of nutrition and health claims was estimated by food group and by thresholds of energy and critical nutrients according to the new regulation. Results Of 17,264 products, 33.8% displayed nutrition claims and 3.4% health claims. In total 80.8% of all products on the Mexican market were classified as "less healthy"; 48.2% of products had excess calories, 44.6% had excess sodium, and 40.7% excess free sugars according to the new regulation. The new regulation would prevent 39.4% of products with claims from displaying health and nutrition claims (p<0.001); the largest reduction is observed for ultra-processed foods (51.1%, p<0.001). The regulation thresholds that contribute the most of the reduction in the use of claims were calories (OR 0.62, p<0.001) and non-sugar sweeteners (OR 0.54, p<0.001). Conclusions The new Mexican front-of-pack labelling regulation will prevent most of less healthy processed and ultra-processed foods from displaying HNC and will potentially increase the effectiveness of the warning labels for consumers.

scholarly journals The use of Nutrition and Health Claims on Yoghurts on the Irish Market

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. O'Mahony ◽  
R.J. Creane ◽  
E. Philpott ◽  
C. B. O'Donavan ◽  
O.C. Lyons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Product Category ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Food Label ◽  
Health Claim ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Nutrition Label ◽  
Food Category ◽  
Commission Regulation ◽  
Probiotic Strains ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

AbstractThe use of nutrition and health claims on food is legislated for in Commission Regulation 1924/2006 and SI No. 11 of 2014. This legislation ensures that any claim made on a food label is clear, accurate and substantiated, enabling consumers to make informed choices. A study undertaken by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) in 2009 found that yoghurts were the food category with the highest use of nutrition and health claims on the Irish market.In 2018, the FSAI undertook a nutrition label verification study to verify the accuracy of declared nutrition information on yoghurts. The aims of this study were to measure the use of nutrition and health claims on a sample of yoghurts available on the Irish market in 2018 and assess their compliance with Regulation 1924/2006 Nutrition and Health Claims made on Food.Yoghurts identified in a 2016 market scan (n578) were weighted based on categorisation of manufacturer type (branded, own brand), product category (natural, flavoured and luxury) and declared nutrition content. Samples (n200) were randomly selected from these weighted groups for the 2018 nutrition label verification study. A subsample (n100) was randomly sampled and checked for presence of nutrition and health claims. Presence of nutrition and health claims was recorded in Microsoft Excel and checked for compliance with Regulation 1924/2006.Of the yoghurts reviewed, 67% (n67) made at least one nutrition claim and 34% (n34) made at least one health claim. Of these, 29% (n29) made a nutrition and a health claim. Branded yoghurts were more likely to make nutrition and health claims than own brand yoghurts (78% (n49) vs. 48% (n18)). Of yoghurts with a health claim, 88% (n30) were branded and 12% (n4) were own brand. Of yoghurts with a nutrition claim, 1.5% (n1) made a nutrition claim which was potentially non-compliant with Regulation 1924/2006. Of yoghurts with a health claim, 74% (n23) made a health claim which was potentially non-compliant with Regulation 1924/2006. The majority of potentially non-compliant health claims were in relation to probiotic strains and ‘live cultures’.In conclusion, yoghurts continue to be a food category which often uses nutrition and health claims. Nutrition and health claims are more frequently used by branded than own brand products. Potentially non-compliant health claims are an issue amongst this food category which will be further investigated and followed up.

scholarly journals Nutrition and Health Claims Spectra of Pre-Packaged Foods on Serbian Supermarket Shelves: A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 2832
Author(s):  
Dragana Davidović ◽  
Katarina Paunović ◽  
Danica Zarić ◽  
Ana Jovanović ◽  
Nadja Vasiljević ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Products ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Product Categories ◽  
Packaged Food ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

Nutrition and health claims (NHCs) are a powerful tool that influence consumers’ final decision on the choice of food products. The purposes of this repeated cross-sectional study were to (i) assess the prevalence of pre-packaged food products containing nutrition and health claims among different food categories, (ii) to determine the type of NHCs labelled on the examined food products, and (iii) to evaluate the trend in the use of NHCs in comparison to the 2012 survey. The survey was conducted immediately before the full enforcement of the new national legislation on NHCs in 2020. It comprised 3141 pre-packaged food products from 10 product categories. In total, 21.2% of food products contained any claim (19.4% contained any nutrition claim; 8.2% contained any health claim). In comparison to the 2012 survey, we observed a rising trend in the presence of NHCs; the use of nutrition claims on food products increased three times and the use of health claims increased 1.3 times in the 2020 survey. Bearing in mind that NHCs are a powerful tool guiding consumers’ food purchase decisions, NHCs should be supported by precise legislation and strict surveillance by the public health authorities.

scholarly journals Banning front-of-package food labels: First Amendment constraints on public health policy

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1123-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy D Lytton
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Nutrition Policy ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Processed Foods ◽  
Food Labels ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Food Packages ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

AbstractIn recent months, the FDA has begun a crackdown on misleading nutrition and health claims on the front of food packages by issuing warning letters to manufacturers and promising to develop stricter regulatory standards. Leading nutrition policy experts Marion Nestle and David Ludwig have called for an even tougher approach: a ban on all nutrition and health claims on the front of food packages. Nestle and Ludwig argue that most of these claims are scientifically unsound and misleading to consumers and that eliminating them would ‘aid educational efforts to encourage the public to eat whole or minimally processed foods and to read the ingredients list on processed foods’. Nestle and Ludwig are right to raise concerns about consumer protection and public health when it comes to front-of-package food labels, but an outright ban on front-of-package nutrition and health claims would violate the First Amendment. As nutrition policy experts develop efforts to regulate front-of-package nutrition and health claims, they should be mindful of First Amendment constraints on government regulation of commercial speech.

French consumers’ perceptions of nutrition and health claims: A psychosocial-anthropological approach

Appetite ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 105 ◽  
pp. 618-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Estelle Masson ◽  
Gervaise Debucquet ◽  
Claude Fischler ◽  
Mohamed Merdji
Keyword(s):  
Health Claims ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Anthropological Approach ◽  
Nutrition And Health Claims

Nutritional Marketing of Plant-Based Meat-Analogue Products: an exploratory study of front-of-pack and website claims in the USA

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Jennifer Lacy-Nichols ◽  
Libby Hattersley ◽  
Gyorgy Scrinis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Processed Foods ◽  
Nutrition And Health ◽  
Nutrition Claims ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Alternative Protein ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Usa

Abstract Objective: To explore how some of the largest food companies involved in producing alternative proteins use health and nutrition claims to market their products. Design: We identified the largest food manufacturers, meat processors, and alternative protein companies selling plant-based alternative protein products in the United States. Using publicly available data, we analysed the voluntary health and nutrition claims made on front-of-pack labels and company webpages. We also analysed company websites for further nutrition and health-related statements about their products or alternative proteins more generally. Claim classification was guided by the INFORMAS (International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-Communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring, and Action Support) taxonomy for health-related food labelling. Setting: United States. Results: 1394 health and nutrition-related front-of-pack label (FOPL) claims were identified on 216 products, including 685 nutrition claims and 709 ´other health-related´ claims. No FOPL health claims were identified. Most nutrient claims were for nutrients associated with meat, with 94% of products carrying a protein claim and 30% carrying a cholesterol claim. 74% of products carried a GMO-free claim and 63% carried a plant-based claim. On their websites, some companies expanded on these claims or discussed the health benefits of specific ingredients. Conclusions: Companies involved in this category appear to be using nutritional marketing primarily to position their products in relation to meat. There is a focus on nutrient and ingredient claims, with discussion of processing largely avoided. The findings highlight the challenges companies face in positioning AP products as healthy against the backdrop of debates about ultra-processed foods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document