If you don't already follow Marion Nestle's blog @ foodpolitics.com, I'd highly recommend checking it more frequently. Her perspective on socio-political issues is a nice counter-point sometimes. In perusing her blog, I came across an action notice by the FDA.
The FDA will be studying the effects that nutrient claims have on consumer attitudes and responses. I find that this goes quite nicely with my most recent post on Isolated Nutrients and how the food industry likes to manipulate nutrient content to glorify the healthful components of their products. The FDA notes that it's stance "... does not encourage the addition of nutrients to certain food products (including sugars or snack foods such as [cookies] candies, and carbonated beverages). "
The FDA will be giving 15 minutes web-based interviews to 7500 individuals that reflect the U.S. Census data regarding gender, SES, age, education, ethnicity, etc. They will be using mock snacks, candy and carbonated beverages with specific nutrient claims, randomly allowing some participants to see the Nutrition Facts and others not to. They will then have to answer a series of questions about whether they find this product healthy, whether they would buy it, etc.
I'll be interested to see where this goes and how it will change future recommendations - Dr. Nestle points out that there's plenty of research done showing that label claims alter consumer choice, but having this research come out of a major governing body has the potential for more impact.
The fact that it is web-based will probably bring a lot of criticisms - it's one thing to sit alone and view labels individually - it's another to have 30 minutes to buy the groceries with an infant, a toddler and a 7 yr old asking if they can buy every sugared product on the shelves. However, in the effort of identifying just the effects of label claims, the study design seems adequate.
I highly doubt anything that comes out of this will lead to regulation. Just as there's plenty of data showing that advertising to kids has downstream negative health outcomes, it is still left up to industry to self-regulate. Turn on the tv for 15 minutes on ABC family and let me know how you think that self-regulation is going.
If you're interested in reading the full report, check it: http://tinyurl.com/l5c5yue
The FDA will be studying the effects that nutrient claims have on consumer attitudes and responses. I find that this goes quite nicely with my most recent post on Isolated Nutrients and how the food industry likes to manipulate nutrient content to glorify the healthful components of their products. The FDA notes that it's stance "... does not encourage the addition of nutrients to certain food products (including sugars or snack foods such as [cookies] candies, and carbonated beverages). "
The FDA will be giving 15 minutes web-based interviews to 7500 individuals that reflect the U.S. Census data regarding gender, SES, age, education, ethnicity, etc. They will be using mock snacks, candy and carbonated beverages with specific nutrient claims, randomly allowing some participants to see the Nutrition Facts and others not to. They will then have to answer a series of questions about whether they find this product healthy, whether they would buy it, etc.
I'll be interested to see where this goes and how it will change future recommendations - Dr. Nestle points out that there's plenty of research done showing that label claims alter consumer choice, but having this research come out of a major governing body has the potential for more impact.
The fact that it is web-based will probably bring a lot of criticisms - it's one thing to sit alone and view labels individually - it's another to have 30 minutes to buy the groceries with an infant, a toddler and a 7 yr old asking if they can buy every sugared product on the shelves. However, in the effort of identifying just the effects of label claims, the study design seems adequate.
I highly doubt anything that comes out of this will lead to regulation. Just as there's plenty of data showing that advertising to kids has downstream negative health outcomes, it is still left up to industry to self-regulate. Turn on the tv for 15 minutes on ABC family and let me know how you think that self-regulation is going.
If you're interested in reading the full report, check it: http://tinyurl.com/l5c5yue
Comments
Post a Comment