I’m a big fan of Nutella, but I’ve always thought that for a sweet hazelnut-cocoa spread its commercials contain liberal doses of baloney. Each ad I’ve seen promotes the product as a healthy, nutritious, natural spread and shows it being slathered onto whole-grain bread and waffles. And of course, kids love the taste, as it’s chocolate. Of course, a glance at the nutrition label indicates that the reason kids love it is that the first two ingredients are sugar and oil, and lots of it. But even for a health-conscious adult reading a label, “30 grams of sugar per serving” often seems abstract and difficult to measure.
About a year ago, German consumer interest group Verbraucherzentrale Hamburg began publishing images showing a graphic representation of a product’s composition. Their image for Nutella, shown here as an example, illustrates that the “healthy” chocolate spread is indeed mostly sugar and palm oil. Graphic nutritional information does what even a list of nutrition facts doesn’t: it provides a much better representation of ingredient amounts, not just their place in the nutritional hierarchy. The German images also teed off on the purportedly healthy Slim Fast and Capri Sun: the former is almost half sugar, while the latter is mostly sugar and water, despite being marketed as “made from sun-ripened fruits.”
Sugar has spawned its own public health crisis and in many ways is the new saturated fat in the public health crosshairs. While added sugar consumption in the US is steadily decreasing, Americans still consume about 94 g per day as of 2015. Consumer advocacy groups believe that nutrition labels are part of the problem. In particular, current labels list a product’s sugar content, but not added sugars or a percent daily value, like they do for fat, cholesterol, carbs and protein. In May 2016, the FDA announced some tweaks to US nutrition labels, requiring food manufacturers to include the total amount and percent daily value of added sugars.
The new labels (as shown here) will also make the serving size and calories more prominent, reword the servings per container verbiage, and eliminate the calories from fat requirement. Manufacturers grossing over $10 million in annual sales have until July of next year to comply with the new labels; those making less will have until 2019 to change their labels.
Of course, consumers often eat what they’re “not supposed to” even when they know exactly what’s in a product or what it could potentially do to them. Even worse, the new labels could have unintended consequences. A 2015 article in the journal Appetite found that the new labels actually caused consumers to overpurchase and potentially overconsume food because the majority of laypeople are still confused as to the definition of serving size. In this case, making the serving size more prominent produced an effect opposite its intention.
I still find the new labels—especially the graphic ones—pretty interesting, and I’ll surely think twice about considering Nutella anything more than junk food in the future.
|
Comments rated to be Good Answers:
Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers: