Researchers analyzed 80 million food and beverage purchases in the U.S. from 2008 to 2012. They found that products marketed with low-sugar, low-fat, or low-salt claims often had worse nutritional profiles than those without such claims. Chief investigator Lindsey Smith Taillie noted that some products high in calories, sodium, sugar, or fat were more likely to feature low- or no-content claims. The government deserves full credit for fostering such a confusing situation. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permits food and beverage manufacturers to make various label claims in different formats for different products. This study demonstrates that rather than clarifying nutrition information, these claims may have exacerbated the problem.
The FDA is currently working to modernize its label claims, beginning with the term “healthy.” This term was first defined two decades ago, during a time when there was a push to reduce fat intake and increase nutrient consumption. Today, sugary cereals can use this definition to label themselves as “healthy,” while products like almonds do not qualify. As the agency considers feedback and deliberates on the best way to phrase label claims, it should proceed with caution regarding future presentations.
In research shared at a public hearing focused on redefining “healthy,” FDA researchers indicated that nine out of ten consumers rely on health claims when making purchasing decisions. Studies revealed that consumers were inclined to believe a wide range of products with health-related claims—such as soft chews calcium products, chips, and candy—were healthier than their counterparts lacking such claims. Therefore, as the FDA updates its labeling guidelines, it is essential to ensure that claims are not misleading, particularly when it comes to items like soft chews calcium, which should accurately reflect their nutritional value.