Traffic light labelling

Posted by Andrew Wadge on January 4th 2007 in Supporting consumer choice

You may have seen reports in the media this morning about 'front-of-pack labelling' for fat, sugar and salt in food. The Agency welcomes this move by the food manufacturers and retailers as we know from our research that consumers want clear front-of-pack information on fat, sugar and salt in order to make healthier choices about food purchases.

There are currently two systems being used: one based on percentages of Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA) of fat, sugar and salt (for example a portion contains 35% of your GDA of salt) and a traffic light system which gives numerical information with red, amber and green for high, medium and low amounts each of fat, sugar and salt.

Our research with over 2500 consumers showed that they favoured the traffic light system because it provides such a quick 'at a glance' guide for busy shoppers.  The proponents of the GDA system argue that the traffic light system is simplistic.

The real advantage to consumers of front-of-pack labelling is for foods such as ready meals and sandwiches, which can contain many ingredients and surprisingly different levels of fat, sugar and salt.  Early indications are that consumers are using this new labelling to switch to healthier options, which is good news for all of us.

As always, we will be evaluating the effect of the different labelling schemes on shopping behaviour.  We are working with stakeholders to set up an independent expert panel to manage this evaluation and expect to get the results next year.  We hope everyone will accept these results and adopt whatever approach works best for consumers.

add new comment

Time to force proper standards (not simplistic ones) on the FSA

Posted by Steve Green (not verified) on 31/01/2008 - 00:14

I have a few suggestions...

1). Ban foods manufacturers from putting the word 'Healthy' on their packaging. While having less fat in it, a 'Healthy' version of a ready meal usually has more sugar, sometimes more than twice the sugar of the 'Regular' ready meal counterpart.

For someone with diabetes (like me), the higher fat lower sugar ready meal is actually preferrable and healthier. I have not seen a clear definition of the word 'Healthy' and I believe that it should be our own judgement as to whether a meal is 'Healthy' or not.

To decide if something is healthy, we need proper information, not a simplistic and arbitrary system.

2). Force the FSA to stop pressurising the food industry with an ill thought out and simplistic food labelling system. The traffic light food labelling system runs contrary to the goverments line of education, education, education, and making sure the public is informed.

3). Test food labelling on more than 2600-2800 people. Approving a food labelling system based on a percentage of population's opinion smaller than the percentage of the population who marched and protested against the Iraq war is lunacy.

Before approving a food labelling system which is still inferior to the current food standards for farm animals, far greater and extensive testing must be done.

4). Instead of a coloured circle, have a pie chart showing percentage of daily allowance. I believe that this would be much easier to understand for both Traffic Light lovers and GDA lovers.

5). Rather than the colours be green amber and red, there should be a gradient of colours, starting from green for 0% gradienting up to yellow for 50% and red for 100% etc. or whatever fits (or is easiest to understand), this would more accurately reflect low/medium/high amounts.

6). The pie charts (apt name) should then be in the colour that corresponds with the percentage. These colours should be hue tested so that people with colour vision issues can understand them at a glance. The pie charts should have the GDA percentages written over the top to satisfy GDA lovers like me.

I believe this solution satisfies both the FSA easy to understand at a glance low, medium, high traffic light idea for those who prefer it, and the proper labelling of GDA for those who really want to be properly informed.

This solution also adds a couple of dimensions to the instant recognition, that of a pie chart, and graded colour to give a more accurate representation of the amount in grammes.

Thoughts? Ideas? Feedback?

Time to force the traffic light system on the food industry

Posted by Andrew Wadge on 14/01/2008 - 15:55

You're absolutely right and thanks for your comments. Yes, traffic light labelling is about giving shoppers clear and honest information, and it can be a tool to help producers reformulate their products if it means they'll have more green and amber lights on them. I assume that's what you mean by 'improving'

You only have to look at the growing number of traffic light adopters to know that the system makes sense. I can assure you we're doing what we can at this end to persuade companies to make the switch, and that includes working with other government departments in the UK, and in Europe.

As for standing up to the lobbyists, well, every little helps (isn't that one supermarket chains'slogan?). Please apply some consumer pressure (it's a very powerful tool) and let them know that you'd prefer to see a single front-of-pack labelling format and that one based on traffic light colours is the scheme that does it for you.

Time to force the traffic light system on the food industry?

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 11/01/2008 - 01:05

It is blatantly clear that the traffic light system is being avoided by many food producers because many of their products -- high in the flavourings and additives -- will have red indicators.

Surely this is the whole point of the system, to give consumers choice and to put pressure on the producers to improve their products.

Now is the time to force them to use this system. They are clearly taking the British people for a ride, and riding roughshod over the Government sponsored scheme.

Come HMG, stand up to their lobbyists and change the system.

Traffic light labelline on takeaways

Posted by Jennifer Brown (not verified) on 29/11/2007 - 18:36

Although there has been a recent struggle in consensus in which labelling should be used for consumers, to understand the foods they are eating and how to make healthier choices. Recent surveys carried out by ourselves have suggested that the standard red ambre green traffic light labelling is the most effective. The one thing that is posing high demand at this present time is this kind of labelling to be shown in some form on takeaway food menus. www.takeawayz.com is currently one of the first food ordering online companies piloting this idea and have use guidelines to give people insight in to the foods they are eating and how to make healthier choices.

This will be a phenomenon and not only providing convenience but also assisting people who want more insight in to this in a clear way.

please visit www.takeawayz.com for information this edition will be added shortly.

Traffic-lighted percentages?

Posted by Alex W (not verified) on 09/03/2007 - 10:11

Am I the only one to think that the 'answer' to the quandries posed by the two rival systems is blatantly obvious and extremely simple?

Would it not be possible to place BOTH percentage values and colour-coding on the same label? I have seen this on a few items, although at the moment the only name I can remember is Kettle Chips (very tasty crisps).

This combines the at-a-glance benefits of the traffic-light system with (in my opinion) the more informative percentage system.

I say more informative as, I don't know about you, but I tend to eat more than one item of food in a day. Therefore, with the traffic-light system, how many yellow's make a red? Does a red mean I'll be sent to hell for eating this or merely that I shouldn't eat more than 10!?

Additionally, as the GDA system is not regulated by the FSA I have seen and heard of it being flaunted by the producers, e.g. the small-print on the pack states the percentages relate to half the pack where as most of the time they relate to the whole thing, or products aimed at children have percentages based on the GDA's of adult men! Although, the traffic-light system seems to be more coplicated than it pretends to be by only being based on 100g of the pack/product rather than the entire thing.
Please, for the sake of us that actually look at these things, can you iron out these problems and difference!?

Traffic Light System

Posted by CDS (not verified) on 02/03/2007 - 18:09

All the comments about educating children is exactly right. Add to that educating adults and you've got it spot on! Teach our children when they are young about the importance of nutrition and eating fresh fruits and vegetables and avoiding ready-made meals and we will have a better world with less cancer and illnesses. The only people who will really even look at the colour-coded packaging will be people who are interested in knowing. The rest will ignore it anyhow. The FSA research is far too limited to have any concrete results. Rather than spend money of advertising and promoting this system, and demanding manufacturers to spend money on packaging, why not simply produce a beautiful educational booklet for FREE to every home in Britain with all the nutritional information, prepared by educational 'professionals' - and encourage everyone to eat fresh fruit and vegetables showing the real and accurate statistics vitamin and mineral content. An added section on the benefits of exercise and a Big emphasis on A BALANCED LIFESTYLE. Key: Knowledge is Power.

Colour coding

Posted by Mark Pearson (not verified) on 27/02/2007 - 20:12

I'll save comment about the merits of the scheme for others.

However, as already noted, this colour coding is not typically accessible to the 7-10% of colour-blinds. If the aim was to make front of pack labelling assessment quick and simple to use, then why can't the symbology include shapes as well: triangle, square, circle? This would be a reasonable adjustment in the 'spirit' of the Disability Discrimination Act.

Can I also mention that black text on a red background is a bad combination for a colour blind. As can be seen on your 'eatwell' website.

thankyou

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 23/02/2007 - 15:02

i just want to say that this website has been really helpful to my a level studies so thankyou for all the information you have provided me with.

Healthy Food

Posted by David (not verified) on 22/02/2007 - 23:06

I note from your latest posting that you have still to realise the difference between healthy eating and foods that have a low energy density and low sugar and fat.
The GDA system is based on consuming sufficient calories as part of a balanced diet to sustain a normal active lifestyle. To continually try to reduce calorie consumption to match a more sedentary lifestyle is not the way to improve public health as basic unfitness is not just a question of weight.
Also the information given by the traffic light is totally inadequate to help people construct a healthy diet. For example the GDA for fat is 70g but the amber range for fat is 3.1g to 19.9g. So when you see an amber light you only know that you can eat somewhere between 350g and 2250g of the food in a day to reach your GDA. Using a GDA system, where the portion size is identified, it is a simple multiple to get the exact figure you would have to consume to achieve a healthy balance.
Unfortunately what the FSA have done with their traffic light system is to simplify a complex issue to the point where the information they are giving has become meaningless and is in danger of becoming counter-productive by encouraging orthorexia which is now being recognised as a serious eating disorder.

Thanks for your comments ...

Posted by Andrew Wadge on 21/02/2007 - 11:32

Many thanks for your continuing comments on front-of-pack labelling. I'm delighted that it’s stimulated such a lot of interest.

A point which has been made more than once in the comments posted concerns the basis of the traffic light colour banding. Just to clarify – the bandings are based on how much of a nutrient there is in 100g or a portion of the product. There is no industry standard for portion sizes, but we encourage manufacturers to use realistic portion sizes.

We developed our recommendations on front-of-pack labelling after extensive testing with 2600 consumers, as well as consultation with industry and stakeholders. We asked shoppers about what kind of nutritional labelling they liked – and assessed which formats helped them choose healthier foods. The results of the research, which have been published in full, were clear – traffic light colour coding was key to helping consumers choose healthier foods at a glance.

We agree that front-of-pack labelling needs to be seen as part of a package of measures to support consumers in making healthy and informed choices. This needs to include education as well as measures to raise consumer awareness. The aim of the advertising is to raise consumer awareness, and the TV advertising featuring Dawn French is part of an integrated campaign which includes posters outside supermarkets, on buses and press advertising to explain the message. The media used for the campaign were carefully selected to ensure that key target markets obtain the full message. The Agency has also published web-based material on the traffic light approach at www.eatwell.gov.uk and a new labelling leaflet which covers front-of-pack labelling.

We recognise that some consumers are colour blind, and sought to take account of their views in the research we commissioned to support development of our recommendations. As a result of this research, in addition to traffic light colour coding, the Agency's recommended signposting format also incorporates the descriptions ‘HIGH', 'MED' and 'LOW' alongside each nutrient.

Food labelling

Posted by Meriel Williamson (not verified) on 17/02/2007 - 01:37

I find that the red,amber and green system proposed by the FSA is far inferior to the GDA. The traffic light system seems to be based on a 100g of the foodstuff eg cheese, that is very misleading as you would not eat that much as a portion, the GDA is more informative to consumers. I am not surprised that you say your market research confirms your system as the better one. Having worked in market research for many years, I think your sample is very small and depending on how you ask the questions you can usually get the answers you want!

I have seen one of the traffic light ads on TV, with the Dawn French voiceover, it is pathetic and tells the consumer nothing. The real answer is education, well I would say that as a retired biology lecturer. I was taught at school about food in both biology and home economics and in the latter subject how to prepare and cook healthy meals. It appears that those schools that still teach H.E. now call it food technology and the students design packaging for fish fingers! Until recently school meals have been dire as well, so how do you expect healthy choices to be made when children are fed turkey twizzlers and chips with everything? It would also appear that you have forgotten that quite a few people are colourblind. How much of my taxpayer's money had been wasted on this nonsense?

I much prefer the traffic lights

Posted by Caroline (not verified) on 09/02/2007 - 16:18

I much prefer the traffic light system rather than the percentages. However with Tesco's pushing the percentages approach I worry that the quick and easy traffic light approach will be abandonded.

Traffic Light System

Posted by Vicky (not verified) on 09/02/2007 - 00:11

At last, someone else who commented that we should educate children about food. I'm no expert chef (far from it) but my 6 year old has understood (for the last few years) that we need to eat a balanced diet made up of protein, fat, vitamins and minerals. She knows that artificial sugar is not particularly healthy, but ok in moderation. We shop together and she often chooses the ingredients - fresh fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, cheese and natural yoghurt. Of course, we eat junk food too, but as the exception, rather than the rule.

The easiest way to know what is going into your stomache is by buying raw ingredients and cooking it yourself, rather than filling your shopping trolley with prepackaged food. I work long hours and it's a pain sometimes to cook from scratch, but with an overall healthy approach to diet, I feel no guilt at the occasional take-away or packaged food. My daughter makes choices based on her 'education'. We are learning to cook together and last year we tried growing lots of vegetables and herbs, which she thoroughly enjoyed looking after and then eating. Of course, being just 6 years old, she likes to make cakes and biscuits occasionally too (we very rarely buy them ready made).

I realise that there are many people who can't find the time to do that, so I think the traffic light system is useful if people understand that they do need some of the 'red' foods to achieve a balanced diet. Perhaps it could be further improved, for the colour blind population, by the addition of numbers on the colours. I've recently bought a few things with the other system and found it useful, as the ingredients are usually written so small that I struggle to read them.

traffic light labelling

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 07/02/2007 - 06:13

Traffic light labelling does not work for red/green colour blind individuals such as myself. There are a lot of us around....

Traffic light colour code

Posted by B Bradford (not verified) on 05/02/2007 - 15:09

As a person who has a red-green deficiency I wonder whether any consideration has been given to the actual hues chosen to represent the three "at a Glance" choices. The colours do not stand out well to me and so possibly are no better for up to 10% of the male, and a smaller part of the female, population. The green needs to be nearer to blue and the red needs to be nearer to orange.( I perceive the road traffic lights as very blue and very orangy/ red. The amber appears close to yellow.

This is indeed a good point

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 31/01/2007 - 15:33

This is indeed a good point - though the GDA system is similarly opaque - a good example being a pack of wafer thin ham, where a 'portion' is set at one slice, rather than the 4-5 slices you need to make a half substantial sandwich.

A system based on portion sizes is open to mis-use, as they can essentially be tailored to make the product appear more healthy than it really is.

Understanding of percentages

Posted by Clive (not verified) on 31/01/2007 - 11:27

I think there is a much more fundamental flaw in the GDA system. How many times do I hear on my radio that too many kids are coming out of school with an inadequate understanding of basic maths? While people who take the time to respond to blogs are probably well-educated, I wonder how many of our fellow-citizens look at the GDA percentages and don't really understand what 25% means or that 35% is about a third of your whole daily requirement. I am not suggesting that overweight people are all stupid (I am overweight and I'm not stupid) but if we are to believe the dire warnings about the innumeracy of some school-leavers, surely the traffic light system has to be better if for no other reason than the fact that it is accessible to all people regardless of educational attainment (unless they're coloyur-blind!)

Great concept

Posted by Melody (not verified) on 30/01/2007 - 22:56

This is such a great concept.
I can hardly wait to get back to the UK to check them out.

I wish the Australian gov would introduce something so easy to read on packet foods here.

Front-of-pack labelling comments

Posted by Andrew Wadge on 30/01/2007 - 11:33

Many thanks to all those of you who’ve commented on front of pack labelling. Keep them coming.

Rosemary Hignett, the Agency's Head of Nutrition, has asked me respond to a couple of the points which come up in a number of the posted comments.

The colour banding under the FSA traffic light approach is based on how much of a nutrient there is in 100g or a portion of the product. There is no industry standard for portion sizes, but we encourage manufacturers to use realistic portion sizes.

The ‘red’ label under the traffic light approach means that the food is high in that particular nutrient. It doesn't mean 'stop' or 'bad'. Many of the foods with traffic light labels will have a mixture of reds, ambers and greens so consumers can tailor their diet as they choose. We encourage consumers to go for more greens and ambers with fewer reds, if they want to make healthier choices.

We are pleased to see that the traffic light approach is already encouraging manufacturers to reformulate their products, to reduce the amounts of salt, fat and sugars in their foods, and so reduce the number of reds on the label. That’s got to be a good thing in helping people to make healthier choices.

And finally on GDAs – some shoppers do find the extra information which GDAs provide useful. But our research shows that the traffic light colour code is key to quick 'at a glance' choices in the supermarket So all those using GDA schemes need to do is add traffic light colours and the consumer gets the best of both worlds.

traffic light labels

Posted by Tanya (not verified) on 25/01/2007 - 10:38

You don't need to add up percentages. Simply look at the percentage for energy (kcals). Then glance at the other percentage figures. If they are higher than the percentage figure for energy, it means that they are too high relative to the portion-size quoted.

For example, if the percentage for energy is, say, 20% but the salt percentage is 40%, then you know that there is too much salt in that product relative to the portion you are eating. I picked up a steam-meal in Tesco the other day and immediately put it back when I saw the energy was around 25% but the salt was about 60%.

My biggest hang-up with the FSA system is that it doesn't include energy (k/cals or calories) values. Whilst nobody should get too hung up on counting calories, an awareness of them is important if you really wish to lose weight. I know many labels proclaiming to follow the FSA label do also add energy values, but it isn't actually part of the FSA system.

The GDA system can be applied to all products and natural basic foods. The FSA system is really geared just to manufactured products - for example, if it were applied to oils there would be no differentiation between different varieties - they would all be red giving the impression they were all "bad". Unfortunately, red is likely to become "bad" rather than "high". (With the GDA system, whilst the percentage for fat would always be higher than the percentage for energy, the percentage for saturated fat would be different for different types of oils).

Labels

Posted by JIM (not verified) on 22/01/2007 - 13:07

As a major label manufacturer providing labels to a number of small business within the food industry combining both raw material & finished product, how is a small producer going to adequately label their products using this system (i.e. a small sandwich manufacturer has 42 products using 5 different types of bread, due to the ingredients the 4 requested values will be different. this would equate to approx 210 different traffic light formula's. would it not be better to have a generic traffic light label that people could declare adequate % values). it seems to me that this system is being setup to once again to force the small producers out of business. i await some sensible information.

label wars

Posted by Chris Collins (not verified) on 19/01/2007 - 17:21

Ms Badaracco should realise that retailers are competing for consumers and want to help them. FSA is responding to "activists" and wants to please them. There is no reason why the two should match as the consumers' agenda is frequently different to that of "activists" claiming to know best.

On a slightly different note I am concerned that nutrition labelling "legislation" is becoming challengeable on at least two fronts.

1.There is confusion between "population targets" for nutrient intake and individual requirements - very few people are "average"

2.The FSA is pushing for simplicity because they have survey results indicating that a large %age of the population struggle with technicalities. Unfotunately simplicity by definition leads to generalistaions that are apparantly easy to comprehend but inevitably prone to be misleading. (e.g. the use of "salt" where the nutrition concern is about sodium). The existing legislation requires accurate labelling that is not misleading but can be difficult to understand for some and does not cover all individual needs. The developing pseudo-legislation (guidelines) is creeping away from accuracy and diving deeper into the pool of misunderstanding.

Public education would be a better way of resolving the difficulty.

I think that food labels will never be the right medium for information on a complex and issue where individuals need advice and info. The best we can hope for is some simple easy info - like the requirements for the existing legislation.

Nutrition labelling isn't the only example where activist pressure has resulted in labelling requirements against the wishes of the groups affected - but there is a limit to how long one's finger typing can keep going!

Traffic light label ads

Posted by Andrew Wadge on 17/01/2007 - 12:23

Great to get all so many interesting comments on traffic light labels. For info, we've now got a detailed list of the scheme's
supporters on our food.gov website, as well as
general information for consumers about traffic light labels on our eatwell website. And watch out for the TV and poster ads, which we're launching today. But most importantly, keep the comments coming.

Food labelling

Posted by Mandy Tilston-Viney (not verified) on 16/01/2007 - 16:16

I am currently working on a project on Anglesey for ARC Cymru, looking at the barriers to good health faced by people with a learning disability, focussing on healthy eating. Overall, people with learning disabilities have considerably poorer health than the rest of the general population, obesity levels are higher and life expectancy is shorter. Getting easy to understand information is difficult, and we are producing some resources to tackle this. As part of the project we are looking at food labels. I have found that people with learning disabilities have considerable problems understanding the GDA system, whereas the traffic light system offers a straightforward, much more accessible approach. It is helping people who may have considerable difficulty with calculations to instantly understand what is in their food and to make informed choices about what they eat.

Traffic light system

Posted by Nicolas V. (not verified) on 16/01/2007 - 09:38

Wouldn't it be more interesting to educate kids on food than educate them on how use a labelling system? If the kids had the knowledge of what a balanced diet is, obesity and junk food problems would be sharply reduced. The traffic light system is a corrective action, but education is a preventive action.

Traffic Light Labelling

Posted by Gary (not verified) on 15/01/2007 - 16:01

1. How can any system based on 100g quantities be right, it really doesn't help. Any nutritionally based system can only work if it takes into consideration some measure of intake. Though not ideal portion size is the best measure we have.
2. How can anything be considered high or low without considering the needs and habitual intake of the person concerned. What is moderate for me may be high for my toddler son and low for my active teenage daughter.
One size never fits all.

Traffic light labelling

Posted by Mrs Jones (not verified) on 15/01/2007 - 09:56

I much prefer the GDA labelling scheme over the trafic light scheme. To change a product from Red to Amber can require big changes in the amount of salt, fat or sugar. Big changes can be unpalatable but gradual changes allows the palate to adjust. The GDA encourges gradual change and I know what each portion is contributing to my diet. Portions are rarley 100g and I don't have to calculate what I am consuming with a GDA label.

Consumer labelling

Posted by Allan (not verified) on 12/01/2007 - 18:33

Don't give in or compromise. I've heard it said that the 5% of people who actually comment about any issue are those motivated pro or anti the position - so it's not those who comment here who will be influenced, it's the other 95% who need to decide on which is best.

As another below has commented, how can you keep track of percentages when items are purchased for consumption in one go or over a series of days? Traffic lights may be extreme but if they make you think before you purchase or open the packaging that's no bad thing. Consumer choice will lead to market pressures having the desired effect and this is a valuable tool in the public health debate.

A weakness common to both systems is that any package with multiple portions does not as yet clearly identify individual consumption e.g. per unit contents or per 100 gm is ok but a bottle of cooking sauce may contain a variable number of portions. I don't think I've expressed this well but what I mean is there is a lack of a single uniform system for partial consumption.

However, Traffic Lights - if nothing else - allow quick relative comparison between alternatives especially if you forget your glasses when shopping as I often do.

Don't give in or compromise; this will take 5+ years to get established but it's the better and simpler system. Allan

label wars

Posted by Suzy Badaracco (not verified) on 12/01/2007 - 17:41

I am curious as to your take on the label wars I have been tracking (trends forecaster) regarding the coupe being attempted by PepsiCo, Nestlé, Kraft and Tesco among other who have launched a nutrition labeling system rejected by the country's Food Standards Agency (FSA)? I have read the charge is being led by Sainsbury's - why the fuss? What are the major differences between the labeling concepts?

Traffic light system

Posted by David Ralph (not verified) on 12/01/2007 - 17:05

As a keen sportsman, I need to eat foods that can provide an energy source. These foods tend to be high in sugars, fats and carbohydrates. So using the traffic light system means that I will be sourcing foods that potentially will have a lot of red lights! However, such a system will not tell me, necessarily, the exact amount of the required sugars, fats, etc I am looking for.
I am totally confused as to why there is a need to adopt any such system.
The solution is very simple:
1/ Make it legal to post nutritional information on all products, covering the important details of fats, sugars, salt, calorific values, etc.
2/ Make it legal to then declare the GDA's for each of the catagories.
By doing this the consummer will then very quickly get used to reading the information, so that they can then make an informed opinion.
Having something showing a red traffic light does not always mean it is bad - it depends upon what you are looking for in your foods. If every body only started to each foods showing green traffic lights, the reultant ill health due to lack of eating a correct and balanced diet could end up costing the nation millions!

Traffic light labelling

Posted by Peter Maynard (not verified) on 11/01/2007 - 13:58

I heartily endorse the FSA Traffic Light scheme. It is without a doubt the clearest indication available of the amounts of fat, sats, sugar and salt in a food. It should have a strong influence on manufacturers when they reformulate foods, who will want to avoid having to put red lights on their products. This is no doubt why some retailers have decided to introduce their own schemes.

Nevertheless there are a few inconsistencies. Take salt. The FSA
guidelines say 'red' is greater than 1.5g/100g or greater than 2.4g per portion. However, elsewhere on their salt pages they state that 'a little' salt is less than 0.25g, and 'a lot' of salt is more than 1.25g. Some scope for rationalisation here?

trafic light labels

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 10/01/2007 - 20:25

The GDA system is confusing and a cynical attempt by some retailers to avoid labelling profitable products as "red".

I took my kids shopping in Tesco and they soon lost track of all the percentage GDAs in a total weeks shopping basket as did I.

By contrast just a glance would suffice with the FSA colour code system and tell you that you had an essentially healthy choice with some "treats". I am switching to the retailers who support the FSA I hope others do too unless and until they come in line.

Traffic lights

Posted by Alison Stevens (not verified) on 09/01/2007 - 23:48

I noticed in my local Sainsburys that their own (extremely expensive) 'Taste the Difference' onion rings were given a traffic light label based on one onion. The label was predominantly green. Cheaper and non Sainsburys own brand onion rings were given a label based on 100 grammes. This label was predominantly red. I cannot see how this confusing practice will help people achieve healthier lifestyles. I can see how it might help Sainsburys achieve healthier profits!

Nutritional Food Labelling

Posted by Louise (not verified) on 09/01/2007 - 19:08

I know the labels need to be kept simple but why cannot the two systems be amalgamated using the traffic lights as you currently intend to do but either adding to or replacing the amount in grams per 100g with the percentage of the Guideline daily amount. As I'm sure more people know the maximum percentage of guideline daily amount they should have of each of these things compared to the amount of people who know these amounts in grams.
As even after reading through a few webpages related to this I still couldn't tell you what is the recommended maximum amount of sugar I should have in a day but as a guideline daily amount I would know it's definately not more than 100%.

This gives those people who have the time to look closely at products the information they need to compare between a group of items which all have the same colour coding and those who don't have the time to check the quick glance colours to help them choose healthily.

traffic light system

Posted by Hazel (not verified) on 06/01/2007 - 21:35

Hi I am doing a degree and i am researching Obesity, can you enlighten me, will children be taught via health promotions how many of each 'traffic light colours' they are allowed or will we, as parents educate them into choosing mainly the green foods, occasionally from the orange and rarely from the red, I would be most interested in your comments, also will this apply to school meals?
Thanks