Food packaging labels have no apparent consumer health impact, study finds

A new study from Georgetown University, US, indicates no evidence linking the adoption of front-of-package (FOP) labeling to positive changes in food intake, diet quality, and obesity rates.

Instead, it recommends portion control and management to reduce obesity levels over nutritional label scoring.

The study comes after the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health in 2022 recommended that the FDA develop a standardized FOP labeling system for pre-packaged food products. 

The research explores the efficacy of global FOP labeling initiatives in combination with a survey conducted in 2023 by Georgetown University. 

It aims to help US policymakers, the food and packaging industry, and public health advocates make informed policy decisions on food packaging labeling. 

The researchers conclude that the consumers who read labels the most are those who need them the least, while obesity rates in the US remain high. 

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2023, all US states and territories had an obesity rate higher than 20%, equaling to one in five adults.   

The research explores the efficacy of global front-of-package labeling systems.Price before health

The researchers analyzed nationally published reports from Chile, the US, the UK, and the EU, as well as a 2023 survey conducted by Georgetown University’s Portion Balance Coalition and the Natural Marketing Institute (NMI). 

The NMI research defines five consumer categories with different attitudes toward nutritional labeling. The consumers with the highest body max index were least interested in packaging labels (Magic Bullets and Eat, Drink, and Be Merry’s).

The research found that only 31% of Magic Bullets and 23% of Eat, Drink & Be Merry’s read nutritional label information, compared to 71% of the healthiest consumers (the Well Beings) with the lowest BMI. 

The study also linked higher obesity rates in the US to lower income and educational levels. It determined that while consumer purchasing choices are influenced by taste, cost, convenience, and health of products, decisions are based almost entirely on price for lower-income consumers. 

It details that healthier foods are often more expensive, so consumers with a limited budget may not read the labels.

Dairy bias 

The research also finds other factors influencing natural labels, such as consumer comprehension, interest, and industry adoption. 

Based on the Chilean nutritional labeling system, consumers can have “muted” reactions to the labels, which they do not notice over time.  

Nutritional labels can unfairly categorize dairy products, according to the research.Moreover, nutritional packaging labels can unfairly penalize some sectors, like dairy or confectionery, according to the research. The NMI survey found that the healthiest consumers purchased candy at a higher rate than the least healthy shoppers because candy is an occasional treat consumed in small quantities. 

Last year, the Italian government accused the EU Nutri-Score system of bias against Italian food products, claiming it undermined the country’s national identity. 

Portion control over packaging

The research strongly urges policymakers to advocate for portion control over labeling management based on the McKinsey Global Institute’s 2014 report, which ranked nutritional labels lower than product reformation, weight loss programs, and surgery. 

Despite multiple nutritional score systems across the globe, obesity rates remain high, say the researchers. 

The study concludes that regardless of effectiveness, labels do provide transparency regarding ingredients and nutritional information, which consumers always appreciate.