New research reveals why front-of-pack labels alone aren’t enough to guide healthier choices, as consumers’ beliefs about naturalness and processing continue to shape what ends up in their shopping carts.
Research: State-of-the-art in front-of-pack food labeling systems that take into account consumer trends and perceptions regarding natural health, food processing and sustainability. Image credit: Stock-Asso/Shutterstock.com
Front-of-pack (FOP) labels are intended to help consumers quickly identify healthy food options. But a recent review shows that its effectiveness largely depends on how shoppers interpret terms like “healthy,” “natural,” “processed,” and “sustainable.” ACS Nutrition.
Define a healthy diet beyond nutrients and food groups
A healthy diet includes a balanced intake of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains while limiting intake of sugar, sodium, trans fat, and saturated fat. A typical example is the Mediterranean diet, which also includes foods such as ham and pastries that are high in salt and fat.
Therefore, healthy food is a more complex concept than purely nutritional, and no single food can be classified as completely “good” or “bad” on its own.;health effects depend more on overall dietary pattern than on health status. individual food. The Mediterranean diet is considered healthy primarily because of its active and socially responsive lifestyle and nutritional diversity.
Perceptions of the healthiness of foods can vary by food category (fruit vs. sweets), “nutrients of concern” (e.g., sodium, sugar, saturated fat), nutritional labeling, organic origin, physical or sensory characteristics, and degree of processing.
Food philosophies and health issues also influence what is considered healthy. Dairy products are unhealthy for people with lactose intolerance, and gluten is unhealthy for people with celiac disease. Although dark chocolate is moderately high in calories, it is rich in bioactive compounds, making it a healthy choice in moderation.
Processed foods and natural foods
This complexity extends to how consumers interpret food processing.
It is important to note that processing food does not automatically make it unhealthy, and there is no direct, linear relationship between the level of processing and health. Some processed foods are high in sodium, sugar, and saturated fat. However, other food processes are needed to fortify foods with essential micronutrients, increase the nutritional value of antinutrient-rich foods, and increase vitamin retention.
The authors note that natural products are not always optimal for health, and it has been observed that some non-natural foods (e.g. processed cassava) are less toxic than their natural counterparts (natural cassava may contain compounds that convert to cyanide). Consumers tend to confuse natural with healthy due to low processing, but this reflects a large gap between consumer perception and scientific evidence rather than an evidence-based belief.
FOP label system
Multiple food labeling strategies have been developed in each country, usually related to local needs and health policies. FOP labels are intended to “inform consumers at a glance of a product’s relative health status (interpretive system), nutrients of concern (non-interpretive system), or both.” It is intended as a complementary tool, not a replacement for broader dietary guidelines.
Types of FOP label systems
The authors review several FOP food classification systems. Some, like NutriScore for interpretation, are color-coded. There are also visual representations of nutrients of concern, such as Healthy Star Ratings and FOP symbols. Other non-interpretable nutrition facts provide numerical information about nutrients of concern, such as NutrInform and FOP warning labels.
Hybrid systems, such as the Traffic Label System, provide color-coded warnings along with numerical information. Additionally, there are sustainability labels, such as Enviroscore, which assess environmental impact, and naturalness labels, such as the Food Naturalness Index. However, each system uses different criteria, thresholds, and methodologies, and none is free from scientific criticism and limitations. It reflects the ongoing scientific debate about how best to classify and communicate the health of foods.
FOP labels, which use numbers and percentages to describe nutrient content, are even more difficult to understand. In contrast, colors, symbols, and simple terms such as “low,” “medium,” and “high” are easier to understand and perhaps actionable.
Advantages of FOP labels
FOP labels make nutritional information easier to see and understand. It could help consumers, especially those who are less educated, make more informed choices and make faster decisions. It could encourage manufacturers to produce healthier food formulations. We believe that Codex Alimentarius should provide complementary and easy-to-understand nutritional information alongside nutrition labels.
FOP labeling limitations
The actual impact of labeling on long-term consumer behavior, dietary choices, and obesity prevalence remains unclear. Consumer choices are determined not only by labels but also by price, which is often the more important factor. Through branding and marketing. Depends on personal preference. Due to socio-cultural expectations. and by knowledge of nutrition.
Food scientists and people in the nutrition field often complain that such labeling systems oversimplify the nutritional content of foods. Additionally, some consumers express skepticism or limited trust in labeling systems developed by industry or government agencies.
Future direction
FOP labels are essential for transparency, but to be more effective they must align with consumer perceptions. A more accurate and standardized food classification system is needed to reflect the various aspects of food, such as nutrition, sustainability, and processing-related information. Especially as environmental and sustainability considerations become central to the food system.
The solution is to reduce the complexity of the communication forms used, not the information behind them.
Stronger regulatory guidelines are needed to ensure consistent use of such systems. Label design should focus on simple formats that are easy to understand, rather than purely numerical information. Consumer education continues to be important to bridge the gap between food science and food choices, helping individuals appreciate labels rather than basing their decisions on terms like “natural” or “healthy.”
Click here to download your PDF copy.
Reference magazines:
-
Amorim, A., Deliza, R., Hubinger, MD, et al. (2026). A state-of-the-art food packaging labeling system that takes into account consumer trends and perceptions regarding natural health, food processing and sustainability. ACS Nutrition. Toi: 10.1021/acsnutrsci.5c00018. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnutrsci.5c00018
