Search

We assessed the prevalence of front-of-package (FoP) claims in the Brazilian packaged food supply and examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients. Using data from a random 30% subsample of 11,434 foods and beverages collected in the five largest food retailers in Brazil in 2017 (n = 3491), we classified claims into nutrition, health, and environment. We examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients using 95% confidence intervals. Claims were found in 41.2% of the products. Nutrition claims were the most prevalent (28.5%), followed by health (22.1%), and environment-related claims (5.2%). More than 85% of the breakfast cereals, granola bars, and nectars contained claims, which were found in 51% of the dairy beverages. Foods with nutrition claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients (65.3%, 95% CI 62.3, 68.2% vs. 54.1% 95% CI 52.1, 56.0). Products with health (52.9%, 95% CI 49.3, 56.4% vs. 58.5%, 95% CI 56.6, 60.3) and environment-related claims (33.5%, 95% CI 27.0, 40.8% vs. 58.6%, 95% CI 56.9, 60.2%) were less likely to be high in critical nutrients. FoP claims are prevalent in Brazil, and nutrition claims are more likely to have a poorer nutritional profile. Policymakers should consider restricting the presence of claims on unhealthy products.

Although the adverse effects of trans fat consumption are well documented, industrially-produced trans fats are still used in a variety of food products. Our objective was to investigate the presence of trans fat information on the nutrition facts panel, in the list of ingredients, and the use of trans fat claims in packaged food and beverages marketed in Brazil. This was a cross-sectional study that used data from packaged food and beverages available in the five supermarket chains with the largest market share in Brazil. Of the 11,434 products that were analyzed, 81.3% did not present a source of trans fats in the list of ingredients. The percentages of products with specific (hydrogenated fats or oils) and unspecific trans fat terms (margarine, vegetable fat, and vegetable cream) in the list of ingredients were 4.1% and 14.6%, respectively. Bakery products, cookies and crackers, candies and desserts, snacks, and convenience foods had the highest percentages of trans fat claims. We also found claims in products with ingredients that are sources of trans fats. In conclusion, trans fat ingredients were found in almost one-fifth of the Brazilian packaged foods. The current Brazilian legislation is not sufficient to inform consumers about the content of trans fats in packaged foods. Along with measures to restrict the use of industrially-produced trans fats, improvements in nutritional labeling are also needed.

Background: Brazil is currently debating the implementation of front-of-package labels. This study tested if Warning labels (WLs) improved consumer understanding, perceptions, and purchase intentions compared to Traffic-Light labels (TLLs) in 1607 Brazilian adults. Methods: In this online, randomized controlled experiment participants saw images of 10 products and answered questions twice—once in a no-label, control condition and then again in a randomly assigned label condition. The relative differences in responses between WLs and TLLs between control and label conditions were estimated using one-way ANOVAs or Chi-square tests. Results: Presenting WLs on products compared to TLLs helped participants: (i) improve their understanding of excess nutrient content (27.0% versus 8.2%, p &lt, 0.001), (ii) improve their ability to identify the healthier product (24.6% versus 3.3%, p &lt, (iii) decrease perceptions of product healthfulness, and (iv) correctly identify healthier products (14.0% versus 6.9%, p &lt, 0.001), relative to the control condition. With WLs, there was also an increase in the percentage of people: (v) expressing an intention to purchase the relatively healthier option (16.1% versus 9.8%, p &lt, and (vi) choosing not to buy either product (13.0% versus 2.9%, p &lt, 0.001), relative to the control condition. The participants in the WL condition had significantly more favorable opinions of the labels compared to those in the TLL group. Conclusions: WLs would be more effective at improving consumer food choices.