Effect of Front-of-Package Information, Fruit Imagery, and High-Added Sugar Warning Labels on Parent Beverage Choices for Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fruit drinks are widely consumed by young children, and many parents mistakenly believe that these drinks are healthy, potentially due to front-of-package claims and imagery. Research is needed on the influence of this marketing and how labeling regulations could change behavior. Objective: To assess the effects of a front-of-package 100% vitamin C claim, fruit imagery, percentage juice and teaspoons of added sugar disclosures, and high-added sugar warnings on parents' choices, knowledge, and perceptions of beverages. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted May to July 2021 as a single-exposure (no follow-up) online survey of primary caregivers of children ages 0 to 5 years throughout the US. Interventions: Participants were shown no-, low-, and high-added sugar beverages and asked to choose 1 for their child. Participants were randomized to see high-added sugar beverages with 1 of 7 front-of-package conditions: (1) claim and imagery (control); (2) no claim; (3) no imagery; (4) no claim or imagery; (5) claim, imagery, and percentage juice disclosure; (6) claim, imagery, and warning; or (7) claim, imagery, warning, and teaspoons of added sugar disclosure. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were type of beverage chosen (eg, high-added sugar beverage) and resulting calories and added sugar (in grams). Secondary outcomes were fruit drink knowledge (added sugar and percent juice) and perceptions. Results: There were 5005 participants included in the final analysis (mean [SD] age, 31.5 [8.3] years; 3587 female participants [71.7%]), including 714 participants in group 1, 717 participants in group 2, 710 participants in group 3, 717 participants in group 4, 708 participants in group 5, 729 participants in group 6, and 710 participants in group 7. Compared with participants in the control group, who had a mean (standard error [SE]) of 9.4 (0.5) g of added sugar and 81.9 (1.6) kcal in chosen beverages, only participants who saw warnings with teaspoons of added sugar disclosures had significantly reduced added sugar (-1.3 g; 95% CI, -2.6 to -0.1 g [-14.2%; 95% CI, -26.7% to -1.8%]; P = .04) and calories (-5.3 kcal; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.9 kcal [-6.5%; 95% CI, -11.8% to -1.3%]; P = .02) in selected beverages. In warning conditions (ie, 6 and 7) compared with the control group (mean [SE] 41.0% [1.8%]), the proportion of participants choosing high-added sugar beverages was significantly reduced, by 5.5 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5 to 10.5 percentage points [13.4%; 95% CI, 1.2% to 25.6%]; P = .03) and 6.4 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4 to 11.4 percentage points [15.6%; 95% CI, 3.3% to 27.8%]; P = .01), respectively. The no claim or imagery condition (4) significantly reduced the proportion of parents choosing high-added sugar beverages (-7.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -12.6 to -2.6 percentage points [-18.4%; 95% CI, -30.6% to -6.3%]; P = .003). Percentage juice disclosures did not affect beverage choice. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that added sugar warnings and prohibitions of front-of-package claims and imagery may reduce parents' purchases of high-added sugar beverages for their young children but that percentage juice disclosures may not change behavior. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04811690.

Dietary Supplements for Weight Loss: Legal Basis for Excise Tax and Other Government Action to Protect Consumers from a Public Health Menace.

PURPOSE: Dietary supplements sold for weight loss pose a risk to public health due to deceptive claims and unscrupulous manufacturing practices in the context of weak federal regulation. Efforts to strengthen U.S. federal oversight have not been successful, thus action at the state and local levels should be explored. This study investigates proposed action to impose excise taxes on weight-loss supplements. METHODS: We reviewed U.S. federal law on taxation at federal, state, and local levels and precedent for taxation of harmful consumer products to promote public health. We assessed the rationale, legal viability, and potential effectiveness of proposed excise taxes on weight loss supplements. RESULTS: Taxation of tobacco and sweetened beverages is effective in reducing consumer use. Imposition of excise taxes on weight-loss supplements is within the authority of federal, state, and local governments, though is least politically feasible at the federal level. State or local taxation of these products has clear rationale, legal viability, and likelihood of effectiveness in reducing the public health burden posed by these products. CONCLUSIONS: Excise taxation is an effective policy intervention to reduce consumer use, particularly among youth, and is a promising public health strategy to decrease consumer exposure to noxious weight-loss supplements.

Changes in the calorie and nutrient content of purchased fast food meals after calorie menu labeling: A natural experiment.

BACKGROUND: Calorie menu labeling is a policy that requires food establishments to post the calories on menu offerings to encourage healthy food choice. Calorie labeling has been implemented in the United States since May 2018 per the Affordable Care Act, but to the best of our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the relationship between calorie labeling and meal purchases since nationwide implementation of this policy. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between calorie labeling and the calorie and nutrient content of purchased meals after a fast food franchise began labeling in April 2017, prior to the required nationwide implementation, and after nationwide implementation of labeling in May 2018, when all large US chain restaurants were required to label their menus. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We obtained weekly aggregated sales data from 104 restaurants that are part of a fast food franchise for 3 national chains in 3 US states: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The franchise provided all sales data from April 2015 until April 2019. The franchise labeled menus in April 2017, 1 year prior to the required nationwide implementation date of May 2018 set by the US Food and Drug Administration. We obtained nutrition information for items sold (calories, fat, carbohydrates, protein, saturated fat, sugar, dietary fiber, and sodium) from Menustat, a publicly available database with nutrition information for items offered at the top revenue-generating US restaurant chains. We used an interrupted time series to find level and trend changes in mean weekly calorie and nutrient content per transaction after franchise and nationwide labeling. The analytic sample represented 331,776,445 items purchased across 67,112,342 transactions. Franchise labeling was associated with a level change of -54 calories/transaction (95% confidence interval [CI]: -67, -42, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent 3.3 calories/transaction increase per 4-week period (95% CI: 2.5, 4.1, p < 0.0001). Nationwide implementation was associated with a level decrease of -82 calories/transaction (95% CI: -88, -76, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent -2.1 calories/transaction decrease per 4-week period (95% CI: -2.9, -1.3, p < 0.0001). At the end of the study, the model-based predicted mean calories/transaction was 4.7% lower (change = -73 calories/transaction, 95% CI: -81, -65), and nutrients/transaction ranged from 1.8% lower (saturated fat) to 7.0% lower (sugar) than what we would expect had labeling not been implemented. The main limitations were potential residual time-varying confounding and lack of individual-level transaction data. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that calorie labeling was associated with small decreases in mean calorie and nutrient content of fast food meals 2 years after franchise labeling and nearly 1 year after implementation of labeling nationwide. These changes imply that calorie labeling was associated with small improvements in purchased meal quality in US chain restaurants.

Associations between Governmental Policies to Improve the Nutritional Quality of Supermarket Purchases and Individual, Retailer, and Community Health Outcomes: An Integrative Review.

Supermarkets are natural and important settings for implementing environmental interventions to improve healthy eating, and governmental policies could help improve the nutritional quality of purchases in this setting. This review aimed to: (1) identify governmental policies in the United States (U.S.), including regulatory and legislative actions of federal, tribal, state, and local governments, designed to promote healthy choices in supermarkets; and (2) synthesize evidence of these policies' effects on retailers, consumers, and community health. We searched five policy databases and developed a list of seven policy actions that meet our inclusion criteria: calorie labeling of prepared foods in supermarkets; increasing U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits; financial incentives for the purchase of fruit and vegetables; sweetened beverage taxes; revisions to the USDA Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) food package; financial assistance for supermarkets to open in underserved areas; and allowing online purchases with SNAP. We searched PubMed, Econlit, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Business Source Ultimate to identify peer-reviewed, academic, English-language literature published at any time until January 2020; 147 studies were included in the review. Sweetened beverage taxes, revisions to the WIC food package, and financial incentives for fruits and vegetables were associated with improvements in dietary behaviors (food purchases and/or consumption). Providing financial incentives to supermarkets to open in underserved areas and increases in SNAP benefits were not associated with changes in food purchasing or diet quality but may improve food security. More research is needed to understand the effects of calorie labeling in supermarkets and online SNAP purchasing.

Leveraging corporate social responsibility to improve consumer safety of dietary supplements sold for weight loss and muscle building.

The potential dangers associated with dietary supplements sold for weight loss and muscle building are well documented and increasingly garnering the attention of the media, public, and government leaders. Public health professionals have an opportunity to improve population health in the context of dietary supplement use by translating scientific evidence into action. In this commentary, we discuss the potential to motivate corporate social responsibility (CSR) among manufacturers and retailers of dietary supplements sold for weight loss and muscle building. We examine levers available to public health professionals for generating voluntary corporate self-regulation by reviewing examples from successful CSR initiatives in other domains of public health and offering recommendations highlighting effective advocacy strategies. We encourage public health professionals to use one or multiple advocacy strategies to improve consumer protections for dietary supplements sold for weight loss and muscle building.

Evaluating the Impact of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Proposed Nutrition Facts Label Changes on Young Adults' Visual Attention and Purchase Intentions.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed modifying the Nutrition Facts Label (NFL) on food packages to increase consumer attention to this resource and to promote healthier dietary choices. AIMS: The present study sought to determine whether the proposed NFL changes will affect consumer attention to the NFL or purchase intentions. METHOD: This study compared purchase intentions (yes/no responses to "would you purchase this food?" for 64 products) and attention to NFLs (measured via high-speed eye-tracking camera) among 155 young adults randomly assigned to view products with existing versus modified NFLs. Attention to all individual components of the NFL (e.g., calories, fats, sugars) were analyzed separately to assess the impact of each proposed NFL modification on attention to that region. Data were collected in 2014; analysis was conducted in 2015. RESULTS: Modified NFLs did not elicit significantly more visual attention or lead to more healthful purchase intentions than did existing NFLs. Relocating the percent daily value component from the right side of the NFL to the left side, as proposed by the FDA, actually reduced participants' attention to this information. The proposed "added sugars" component was viewed on at least one label by a majority (58%) of participants. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that the proposed NFL changes may not achieve FDA's goals. Changes to nutrition labeling may need to take a different form to meaningfully influence dietary behavior. CONCLUSION: Young adults' visual attention and purchase intentions do not appear to be meaningfully affected by the proposed NFL modifications.

Restaurant Menu Labeling Policy: Review of Evidence and Controversies.

In response to high rates of obesity in the USA, several American cities, counties, and states have passed laws requiring restaurant chains to post labels identifying the energy content of items on menus, and nationwide implementation of menu labeling is expected in late 2016. In this review, we identify and summarize the results of 16 studies that have assessed the impact of real-world numeric calorie posting. We also discuss several controversies surrounding the US Food and Drug Administration's implementation of federally mandated menu labeling. Overall, the evidence regarding menu labeling is mixed, showing that labels may reduce the energy content of food purchased in some contexts, but have little effect in other contexts. However, more data on a range of ong-term consumption habits and restaurant responses is needed to fully understand the impact menu labeling laws will have on the US population's diet.

The Smart Choices front-of-package nutrition label. Influence on perceptions and intake of cereal.

Numerous front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labeling systems exist, but it is unclear if such labels influence behavior. A single-summary label called Smart Choices (SC) appeared briefly on products in the United States in 2009. The current study aimed to evaluate (1) the influence the SC symbol has on the serving and consumption of cereal; and (2) the impact of providing calorie and serving size information on a FOP label. Two hundred and sixteen adults were randomized to a high-sugar breakfast cereal that had either (1) no label; (2) the SC symbol; or (3) a modified SC symbol with serving size information. Participants rated perceptions of healthfulness, taste, and purchase intent, estimated calories per serving and poured and ate the cereal for breakfast. Participants in the SC label conditions were better able to estimate calories per serving, but there were no differences across groups on perceptions of healthfulness, taste, purchase intent, and levels of vitamins, and sugar or amount of cereal poured or consumed. These results suggest that calories per serving information on FOP labels can increase knowledge, but the SC symbol had little impact on behavior. Studies examining FOP label influence on purchasing, consumption, and product reformulation are greatly needed to determine label utility.