Consumers may soon have a clearer way to identify healthier food options, thanks to research suggesting a simple “high in” label is more effective than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s proposed front-of-package nutrition labeling system. A new study, published in The Lancet Public Health, found that labels directly stating “high in” added sugars, sodium, or saturated fat helped participants quickly and accurately identify less healthy choices, surpassing the clarity of the FDA’s more detailed “Nutrition Info Box.” This finding comes as the FDA prepares to implement mandatory front-of-package labeling by 2025, aiming to combat diet-related illnesses and improve public health.
The research, led by the University of California (UC) Davis, involved an online trial with over 13,000 adults across the United States. Participants were presented with various food packages displaying either the proposed FDA label or the simplified “high in” labels. The study builds on previous research indicating that the FDA’s Nutrition Info Box may be most effective for individuals with already strong nutrition literacy, potentially widening the gap in understanding for others. The goal is to create a system that empowers all consumers to make informed decisions about their diets.
Understanding the FDA’s Proposed Label
The FDA’s proposed rule, announced in 2023, requires a “Nutrition Info Box” on the front of most packaged foods. This box details ratings of “low,” “medium,” or “high” for saturated fat, sodium, and added sugars, based on the percentage of the Daily Value (DV) as defined by the agency. The DV represents the recommended daily intake of a nutrient. While the FDA views this as a crucial step toward transparency, researchers argue that the complexity of the ratings system may hinder its effectiveness for the average shopper.
“The FDA’s effort to provide shoppers with an at-a-glance guide is essential,” says Jennifer Falbe, associate professor of nutrition and human development at UC Davis and the study’s corresponding author. However, she explains, the research team found that a more direct approach – simply stating “high in” a specific nutrient – resonated more strongly with participants. To illustrate, a candy bar might bear a label reading “high in added sugars,” while a frozen pot pie could display “high in sodium” and “high in saturated fat.”
“High In” Labels Outperform in Trial
The UC Davis team’s randomized trial directly compared the FDA’s proposed label to alternative designs. The results were clear: the “high in” labels consistently outperformed the FDA’s version. Participants were able to identify healthier choices more quickly and accurately when presented with the simplified warning. Labels specifying the particular nutrient – “high in sodium,” for example – were likewise more effective than the broader FDA label.
Interestingly, the FDA’s proposed label even led to some misperceptions. Researchers found that participants sometimes viewed meat and candy as healthier than they actually were, likely because the label listed some “low” ratings alongside the “high” ratings. “That’s probably because the FDA label listed two ‘lows’ and one ‘high’ for these products,” Falbe explained. “The two ‘lows’ may have created a false health halo, another reason the FDA should go with a ‘high in’ label.”
Brittany Lemmon, Ph.D. Candidate in epidemiology and lead study author, emphasized the potential impact of a clear warning system. “A lot of people overconsume added sugars, sodium, and saturated fat, so to be able to quickly spot that ‘high-in’ label makes it very effortless to say, ‘maybe I should avoid that today,’” she said. The researchers believe that a prominent “high in” label, displayed alongside the existing Nutrition Facts panel, could significantly influence consumer behavior.
Implications for Public Health
The findings have significant implications for public health initiatives aimed at reducing the prevalence of diet-related chronic diseases, such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and obesity. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), these conditions are leading causes of death and disability in the United States. Clearer food labeling could empower individuals to make healthier choices, potentially reducing the burden of these diseases.
The study also highlights the importance of considering nutrition literacy when designing public health interventions. While the FDA’s proposed label may be helpful for those with a strong understanding of nutrition, a simpler, more direct approach may be more effective for the broader population. The researchers acknowledge that the FDA is balancing multiple considerations, but argue that the potential benefits of a “high in” label outweigh the drawbacks.
The research team included collaborators from Stanford University School of Medicine and the University of Illinois Chicago School of Public Health. The full study is available in The Lancet Public Health.
The FDA is currently reviewing public comments on the proposed rule and is expected to finalize the regulations in 2025. The agency has not yet publicly responded to the findings of the UC Davis study, but the research is likely to inform ongoing discussions about the optimal design of front-of-package nutrition labeling. Consumers can stay updated on the FDA’s progress on the agency’s website.
Disclaimer: This article provides information for general knowledge and informational purposes only, and does not constitute medical advice. It is essential to consult with a qualified healthcare professional for any health concerns or before making any decisions related to your health or treatment.
What do you think about these proposed changes to food labeling? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and please share this article with anyone who might identify it helpful.
