Objectives. To determine which front-of-package label (out of 5 formats) is most effective at guiding consumers toward healthier food choices. Methods. Respondents from Argentina, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Mexico, Singapore, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States took part in the Front-of-Pack International Comparative Experiment between April and July 2018. Respondents were shown foods of varying nutritional quality (with no label on package) and selected which they would be most likely to purchase. The same choice sets were then shown again with 1 of 5 randomly allocated labels on package (Health Star Rating (HSR), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes, or Warning Label). We calculated an improvement score (from 11 100 valid responses) to identify the extent to which the labels produced healthier choices. Results. The most effective labels were the Nutri-Score and the MTL (mean improvement score = 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.07, 0.11), then the Warning Label (0.06; 95% CI = 0.04, 0.08), the HSR (0.05; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.07), and lastly the Reference Intakes (0.04; 95% CI = 0.02, 0.04). Conclusions. Well-designed, salient, and intuitive front-of-package labels can be effective on a global scale. Their impact is not bound to the country from which they originate.
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.
International audience ; 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.
International audience ; 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.
International audience ; 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.
International audience ; 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.
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.
In: Deschasaux , M , Huybrechts , I , Julia , C , Hercberg , S , Egnell , M , Srour , B , Kesse-Guyot , E , Latino-Martel , P , Biessy , C , Casagrande , C , Murphy , N , Jenab , M , Ward , H A , Weiderpass , E , Overvad , K , Tjønneland , A , Rostgaard-Hansen , A L , Boutron-Ruault , M C , Mancini , F R , Mahamat-Saleh , Y , Kühn , T , Katzke , V , Bergmann , M M , Schulze , M B , Trichopoulou , A , Karakatsani , A , Peppa , E , Masala , G , Agnoli , C , De Magistris , M S , Tumino , R , Sacerdote , C , Boer , J M , Verschuren , W M , van der Schouw , Y T , Skeie , G , Braaten , T , Redondo , M L , Agudo , A , Petrova , D , Colorado-Yohar , S M , Barricarte , A , Amiano , P , Sonestedt , E , Ericson , U , Otten , J , Sundström , B , Wareham , N J , Forouhi , N G , Vineis , P , Tsilidis , K K , Knuppel , A , Papier , K , Ferrari , P , Riboli , E , Gunter , M J & Touvier , M 2020 , ' Association between nutritional profiles of foods underlying Nutri-Score front-of-pack labels and mortality : EPIC cohort study in 10 European countries ' , B M J , vol. 370 , m3173 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3173
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.
In: Deschasaux , M , Huybrechts , I , Julia , C , Hercberg , S , Egnell , M , Srour , B , Kesse-Guyot , E , Latino-Martel , P , Biessy , C , Casagrande , C , Murphy , N , Jenab , M , Ward , H A , Weiderpass , E , Overvad , K , Tjønneland , A , Rostgaard-Hansen , A L , Boutron-Ruault , M-C , Mancini , F R , Mahamat-Saleh , Y , Kühn , T , Katzke , V , Bergmann , M M , Schulze , M B , Trichopoulou , A , Karakatsani , A , Peppa , E , Masala , G , Agnoli , C , De Magistris , M S , Tumino , R , Sacerdote , C , Boer , J M , Verschuren , W M , van der Schouw , Y T , Skeie , G , Braaten , T , Redondo , M L , Agudo , A , Petrova , D , Colorado-Yohar , S M , Barricarte , A , Amiano , P , Sonestedt , E , Ericson , U , Otten , J , Sundström , B , Wareham , N J , Forouhi , N G , Vineis , P , Tsilidis , K K , Knuppel , A , Papier , K , Ferrari , P , Riboli , E , Gunter , M J & Touvier , M 2020 , ' Association between nutritional profiles of foods underlying Nutri-Score front-of-pack labels and mortality : EPIC cohort study in 10 European countries ' , B M J , vol. 370 , m3173 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3173
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.
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.
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.