Could Red Light, Green Light be the Next Nutrition Game?

By , SparkPeople Blogger
We know there are food labeling loopholes as well as many different front-of-package identification systems. A few weeks ago we learned the 'Smart Choices' program had been halted. However, other identification programs and labels continue to crowd the fronts of many products on store shelves. Some packages contain the American Heart Association's heart shaped check-mark logo, while others sport a Healthy Ideas box or a Nutrition IQ logo.

Margaret Hamburg, head of the FDA, shared concerns recently related to the confusing nature of having so many different labeling and marketing programs on the front of packages. While the back of package nutrition information is already uniform and consistent because of the nutrition facts label, the same is not true for the front of the package, at least not yet.

The front-of-package labeling has been open to marketing buzzwords and manufacturing company guideline programs which have become confusing to consumers without providing significant helpful information for healthier meal and snack choices. At a previous FDA press conference, there were frequent mentions to the Great Britain front-of-package system which Australia also has a version of as well. This stop light type system highlights levels of key "offenders" such as fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt. It provides a green light for go for those that are deemed healthier and a red light for stop for those that are not. Of course, the yellow light is reserved for those that fall somewhere in between. This system has been met with mixed reviews in Great Britain and can offer equal amounts of confusion for consumers. For instance, apple juice and soda both receive a 'yellow light' for sugar but I think we would all agree that their nutritional risks and benefits are very different to the individuals that select and consume them. Likewise, they would each have a different place and roll in a healthy and nutrient rich diet. One complaint by nutrition professor Marion Nestle with the current 'Smart Choices' system surrounds its indication that processed foods appear as healthy as unprocessed foods. It seems that based on my example above, it will be difficult for any quick view, front-of-label system to totally eliminate this appearance on an item by item basis. It will be interesting to see what comes from the new discussions for these labeling guidelines.

The original intent of food companies was to keep the government out of the front-of-package guideline decision making by developing and agreeing on their own system. Now that the industry has not been successful at providing a helpful nutrition rating system, it will be interesting to see where regulation comes out and how marketing trends will change as a result. Regardless of what ends up on the front of the package, flipping it over and reviewing the complete nutrition facts label on the back is still your best option for making a healthy and nutrient rich choice for the money you spend to feed yourself and your family.

Tell us what you think. Do we really need a front-of-package nutrition rating system? If you think we do, what type of system do you think would be most helpful for you and your family?

See more: nutrition