The Food Standards Code regulates health claims on Australian food labels. General-level health claims highlight food–health relationships, e.g. ‘contains calcium for strong bones’. Food companies making claims must notify Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) and certify that a systematic literature review (SLR) substantiating the food–health relationship has been conducted. There is no pre- or post-notification assessment of the SLR, potentially enabling the food industry to make claims based on poor-quality research. The present study assessed the rigour of self-substantiation.

Food–health relationships notified to FSANZ were monitored monthly between 2013 and 2017. These relationships were assessed by scoping published literature. Where evidence was equivocal/insufficient, the relevant government food regulatory agency was asked to investigate. If not investigated, or the response was unsatisfactory, the project team conducted an independent SLR which was provided to the government agency.

Australia.

Self-substantiated food–health relationships.

There were sixty-seven relationships notified by thirty-eight food companies. Of these, thirty-three relationships (52 %) from twenty companies were deemed to have sufficient published evidence. Four were excluded as they originated in New Zealand. Three relationships were removed before investigations were initiated. The project initiated twenty-seven food–health relationship investigations. Another six relationships were withdrawn, and three relationships were awaiting government assessment.

To ensure that SLR underpinning food–health relationships are rigorous and reduce regulatory enforcement burden, pre-market approval of food–health relationships should be introduced. This will increase consumer and public health confidence in the regulatory process and prevent potentially misleading general-level health claims on food labels.

To analyse patterns of knowledge, comprehension, attitudes and practices regarding the traffic light label placed on processed food packages to inform Ecuadorian consumers about levels of added fat, sugar and salt.

Twenty-one focus group discussions organized by age group, sex and place of residence. Interviews with representatives of companies that manufacture or market processed foods. Analysis of regulations and structured observations of processed food labels.

Cities and towns in Ecuador’s coastal, highland and eastern lowland regions.

One hundred and seventy-eight participants in twenty-one focus group discussions and nine key informants.

Focus group participants knew about the traffic light label and understood the information it conveys, but not all changed their attitudes and practices related to the purchase and consumption of processed foods. Children, adolescents and adult males reported using the information infrequently; adolescents interested in health and adult women used the label the most to select products. Representatives of companies that manufacture or market processed foods generally opposed the policy, stating that the information is misleading. Nevertheless, some companies have reduced levels of added fat, sugar or salt in their products.

The traffic light label is an effective tool for conveying complex information. Its potential contribution to reduce consumption of products with high levels of fat, sugar and salt could be enhanced by promoting healthy diets among consumers who have not changed purchasing and consumption behaviour, by placing the label on front panels and by monitoring the production and marketing of processed foods.

To determine whether the ratings from the Australian front-of-pack labelling scheme, Health Star Rating (HSR), and the ability to carry health claims using the Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC) for core dairy products promote foods consistent with the Australian Dietary Guidelines.

The Australian nutrient profiling model used for assessing eligibility for health claims was compared with the nutrient profiling model underpinning the HSR system to determine their agreement when assessing dairy products. Agreement between the extent to which products met nutrient profiling criteria and scored three stars or over using the HSR calculator was determined using Cohen’s kappa tests.

The four largest supermarket chains in Sydney, Australia.

All available products in the milk, hard cheese, soft cheese and yoghurt categories (n 1363) were surveyed in March–May 2014. Nutrition composition and ingredients lists were recorded for each product.

There was ‘good’ agreement between NPSC and HSR overall (κ=0·78; 95 % CI 0·75, 0·81; P<0·001), for hard cheeses (κ=0·72; 95 % CI 0·65, 0·79; P<0·001) and yoghurt (κ=0·79; 95 % CI 0·73, 0·86; P<0·001). There was ‘fair’ agreement for milk (κ=0·33; 95 % CI 0·20, 0·45; P<0·001) and ‘very good’ agreement for soft cheese (κ=0·84; 95 % CI 0·75, 0·92; P<0·001). Generally, products tended to have HSR consistent with other products of a similar type within their categories.

For dairy products, the HSR scheme largely aligned with the NPSC used for determining eligibility for health claims. Both systems appeared be consistent with the Australian Dietary Guidelines for dairy products, with lower-fat products rating higher.

Proposed Australian regulation of claims on food labels includes requirements for products carrying a health claim to meet nutrient profiling criteria. This would not apply to nutrition content claims. The present study investigated the number and healthiness of products carrying claims and the impact of the proposed regulation.

Observational survey of claims on food packages across three categories: non-alcoholic beverages, breakfast cereals and cereal bars. Nutrient profiling was applied to products carrying claims to determine their eligibility to carry health claims under the proposed regulation.

Three large metropolitan stores from the three major supermarket chains in Sydney, Australia were surveyed in August 2011.

All claims on 1028 products were recorded. Nutrition composition and ingredients were collected from the packaging, enabling nutrient profiling. The proportion of products in each category carrying claims and the proportion of these that did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria were calculated.

Two-thirds of products in the three categories (ranging from 18 to 78 %) carried at least one claim. Of those carrying health claims, 31 % did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria. These would be ineligible to carry these claims under the proposed regulation. Additionally, 29 % of products carrying nutrition content claims did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria.

The number of products carrying nutrition content claims that did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria suggests that comprehensive regulation is warranted. Promotion of unhealthy foods using claims is potentially misleading for consumers and hinders their ability to select healthier foods. Implementation of the proposed regulation represents an improvement to current practice.

To examine the workings of the nutrition-related scientific advisory bodies in Europe, paying particular attention to the internal and external contexts within which they operate.

Desk research based on two data collection strategies: a questionnaire completed by key informants in the field of micronutrient recommendations and a case study that focused on mandatory folic acid (FA) fortification.

Questionnaire-based data were collected across thirty-five European countries. The FA fortification case study was conducted in the UK, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Czech Republic and Hungary.

Varied bodies are responsible for setting micronutrient recommendations, each with different statutory and legal models of operation. Transparency is highest where there are standing scientific advisory committees (SAC). Where the standing SAC is created, the range of expertise and the terms of reference for the SAC are determined by the government. Where there is no dedicated SAC, the impetus for the development of micronutrient recommendations and the associated policies comes from interested specialists in the area. This is typically linked with an ad hoc selection of a problem area to consider, lack of openness and transparency in the decisions and over-reliance on international recommendations.

Even when there is consensus about the science behind micronutrient recommendations, there is a range of other influences that will affect decisions about the policy approaches to nutrition-related public health. This indicates the need to document the evidence that is drawn upon in the decisions about nutrition policy related to micronutrient intake.

1.1 A new Nutrition Committee for the European Union, should be created to give independent scientific and policy advice on nutrition, diets and physical activity to the Commission. This should be supported by a strengthened Nutritional Unit within the Commission.

2.1 There needs to be a comprehensive and coherent nutritional policy for the EU

2.2 The development of European dietary goals should continue after the completion of the Eurodiet Project.

2.3 The European Commission should revise its Recommended Daily Allowances for vitamins and minerals using a systematic, evidence-based approach. Recommended Daily Allowances should be set at a level which would prevent deficiencies and lower the risk of disease.

2.4 The European Commission should produce, preferably every four years, a report on the state of nutrition, diet and physical activity in the EU. This report should contain proposals for action

To identify challenges in translating scientific evidence of a nutrient and health relationship into mandatory food fortification policy.

A case study approach was used in which available evidence associated with the folate–neural tube defect relationship was reviewed against the Australia New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council's Policy Guideline for mandatory food fortification.

Three particular challenges were identified. The first is knowing when and how to act in the face of scientific uncertainty. The second is knowing how to address the special needs of at-risk individuals without compromising the health and safety of the population as a whole. The third is to ensure that a policy is sufficiently monitored and evaluated.

Despite the availability of compelling evidence of a relationship between a particular nutrient and a health outcome, a definitive policy response may not be apparent. Judgement and interpretation inevitably play significant roles in influencing whether and how authorities translate scientific evidence into mandatory food fortification policy. In relation to the case study, it would be prudent to undertake a risk–benefit analysis of policy alternatives and to implement nutrition education activities to promote folic acid supplement use among the target group. Should mandatory folate fortification be implemented, comprehensive monitoring and evaluation of this policy will be essential to know that it is implemented as planned and does more good than harm. In relation to mandatory food fortification policy-making around the world, ongoing national nutrition surveys are required to complement national policy guidelines.

To propose a policy framework for the regulation of functional foods and health claims within a public health context.

This article reviews the empirical evidence and public health principles associated with functional foods and health claims to analyse the issues, challenge the assumptions that have emerged and explore options for moving forward.

Functional foods and health claims are among the more controversial and complex issues being debated by food regulators internationally. Proponents of functional foods and health claims state that functional foods may reduce health care expenditure and health claims are a legitimate nutrition education tool that will help them inform consumers of the health benefits of certain food products. Conversely, opponents of these developments respond that it is the total diet that is important for health, not so-called ‘magic bullets’. Moreover, they argue that health claims will enable manufacturers to indulge in marketing hyperbole and essentially blur the distinction between food and drugs. This topic provides a valuable case study of public policy in relation to food and health.

The need to maintain a general prohibition on health claims while accommodating specific exemptions supported by scientific substantiation is recommended. Nutrition education and monitoring and evaluation are integral to the proposed regulatory framework. The intention of this policy position is to encourage research and development of innovative food products while avoiding an inappropriate medicalization of the general food supply.