Search

Abstract Background Serving sizes on the Nutrition Facts table (NFt) on Canadian packaged foods have traditionally been unregulated and non-standardized. The federal government recently passed legislation to regulate the serving sizes listed on the NFt. The objective of this study was to compare the serving sizes on food product NFts to the recommendations in the 2003 Nutrition Labelling regulation (Schedule M) reference amounts, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) ranges, and Canada’s Food Guide recommendations. An additional objective was to determine if food and beverage products that report smaller serving sizes have a higher calorie density, compared to similar products with a larger serving size. Methods Data for 10,487 products were retrieved from the 2010 Food Label Information Program (FLIP) database and categorized according to Schedule M categories. Correlations between calorie density and manufacturer stated serving size were tested and the proportion of products meeting recommendations were tabulated. Results 35% of products had serving sizes on the NFt that were smaller than the Schedule M reference amount and 23% exceeded the reference amount. 86% of products fell within the CFIA’s recommended serving size ranges; however, 70% were within the lower-half of the range. Several bread and juice categories exceeded CFG’s recommendations, while several dairy product categories were smaller than the recommendations. Of the 50 Schedule M sub-categories analyzed, 31 (62%) exhibited a negative correlation between serving size and calorie density. Conclusion While most products fell within the CFIA’s recommended serving size ranges, there was a tendency for products with a higher calorie density to list smaller serving sizes.

Abstract One of the input parameters in food allergy risk assessment is the amount of a given food consumed at an eating occasion. There is no consensus on how to use food consumption data when assessing the risk from unintended allergen presence in food products. A sensitivity analysis was performed to establish the optimal food consumption estimate for a deterministic food allergy risk assessment. Exposure was calculated for consumption percentiles (50th percentile, P50 to maximum) using the iFAAM consumption database in conjunction with an allergen concentration range from 1 to 1000 ppm. The resulting allergen intakes were compared to the allergic population reference doses proposed by Taylor et al. (2014) for 10 major allergenic foods. Optimal consumption percentiles were defined as those which predicted an intake below the relevant reference dose and met the defined acceptable risk level confirmed by probabilistic risk assessments. Analysis showed that, for 99% of the food groups, the P50 consumption met our criteria, while the P75 did so for 100% of the food groups. We suggest that the P75 is the optimal point estimate for use in deterministic food allergy risk assessment. It meets the safety objective and is adequately conservative for a public health context. Graphical abstract Image 1 Highlights • We derived single food consumption values for food groups for deterministic allergen risk assessment. • For almost all food groups the median consumption amount fulfils the defined safety objective in the risk assessment. • With the P75 consumption, deterministic and probabilistic risk assessment have a similar conclusion for all food groups. • The sensitivity analysis developed can be applied to any ED-value chosen as a safety objective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Serving sizes on the Nutrition Facts table (NFt) on Canadian packaged foods have traditionally been unregulated and non-standardized. The federal government recently passed legislation to regulate the serving sizes listed on the NFt. The objective of this study was to compare the serving sizes on food product NFts to the recommendations in the 2003 Nutrition Labelling regulation (Schedule M) reference amounts, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) ranges, and Canada's Food Guide recommendations. An additional objective was to determine if food and beverage products that report smaller serving sizes have a higher calorie density, compared to similar products with a larger serving size.Methods: Data for 10,487 products were retrieved from the 2010 Food Label Information Program (FLIP) database and categorized according to Schedule M categories. Correlations between calorie density and manufacturer stated serving size were tested and the proportion of products meeting recommendations were tabulated.Results: 35% of products had serving sizes on the NFt that were smaller than the Schedule M reference amount and 23% exceeded the reference amount. 86% of products fell within the CFIA's recommended serving size ranges; however, 70% were within the lower-half of the range. Several bread and juice categories exceeded CFG's recommendations, while several dairy product categories were smaller than the recommendations. Of the 50 Schedule M sub-categories analyzed, 31 (62%) exhibited a negative correlation between serving size and calorie density.Conclusion: While most products fell within the CFIA's recommended serving size ranges, there was a tendency for products with a higher calorie density to list smaller serving sizes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What Is Already Known About This Topic?: There are no consistent regulations on possible unintended allergen presence in food. The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) has been committed to developing a quantitative risk assessment methodology for the unintentional intake of allergens., What Is Added by This Report?: This study aims to derive the optimal food consumption point for a deterministic food allergy risk assessment under the TNO framework based on Chinese national consumption data. A case study has been presented as an illustration., What Are the Implications for Public Health Practice?: A robust evidence-based food consumption input in quantitative risk assessment of unintended allergens is necessary for future public policy on Precautionary Allergen Labeling for specific products to meet the safety objectives and to be adequately conservative., Competing Interests: No conflicts of interest., (Copyright and License information: Editorial Office of CCDCW, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2022.)

Background: Serving sizes on the Nutrition Facts table (NFt) on Canadian packaged foods have traditionally been unregulated and non-standardized. The federal government recently passed legislation to regulate the serving sizes listed on the NFt. The objective of this study was to compare the serving sizes on food product NFts to the recommendations in the 2003 Nutrition Labelling regulation (Schedule M) reference amounts, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) ranges, and Canada's Food Guide recommendations. An additional objective was to determine if food and beverage products that report smaller serving sizes have a higher calorie density, compared to similar products with a larger serving size., Methods: Data for 10,487 products were retrieved from the 2010 Food Label Information Program (FLIP) database and categorized according to Schedule M categories. Correlations between calorie density and manufacturer stated serving size were tested and the proportion of products meeting recommendations were tabulated., Results: 35% of products had serving sizes on the NFt that were smaller than the Schedule M reference amount and 23% exceeded the reference amount. 86% of products fell within the CFIA's recommended serving size ranges; however, 70% were within the lower-half of the range. Several bread and juice categories exceeded CFG's recommendations, while several dairy product categories were smaller than the recommendations. Of the 50 Schedule M sub-categories analyzed, 31 (62%) exhibited a negative correlation between serving size and calorie density., Conclusion: While most products fell within the CFIA's recommended serving size ranges, there was a tendency for products with a higher calorie density to list smaller serving sizes.