Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nutrient Profiling Systems, Front of Pack Labeling, and Consumer Behavior

  • Nutrition (P. Kris-Etherton and K. Petersen, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Atherosclerosis Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Guiding consumers toward more healthful food choices may help address the high prevalence of poor dietary quality and diet-related diseases. The use of front-of-package labels (FOPL) on food items is expanding to provide focused nutritional information or representations, often based upon nutrient profiling systems.

Recent Findings

FOPL provide a source of nutrition and health information that is readily understood by consumers, including those with limited literacy. There is evidence that FOPL can shift consumer behavior toward more nutritious and healthful choices. However, assessments of the effectiveness of FOPL have been restricted in scope and rely largely on simulation models rather than real-world environments.

Summary

FOPL are a direct source of nutritional guidance at the point-of-purchase and provide an opportunity to convey critical information on ingredients that are associated with health promotion and/or increased risk of non-communicable diseases. However, limited evidence regarding the most effective forms of FOPL to achieve behavior change and challenges from the food industry impedes the establishment of standardized nutrient profiles and algorithms. Future opportunities for FOPL include the potential for integrating nutritional profiles with non-nutrient factors affecting health such as food processing and environmental sustainability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Micha R, Shulkin ML, Peñalvo JL, Khatibzadeh S, Singh GM, Rao M, et al. Etiologic effects and optimal intakes of foods and nutrients for risk of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes: systematic reviews and meta-analyses from the Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group (NutriCoDE). PLoS One. 2017;12:e0175149.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Guiding principles and framework manual for front-of-pack labelling for promoting healthy diets [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization - Department of Nutrition for Health and Development; 2019. Available from: https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/guidingprinciples-labelling-promoting-healthydiet.pdf?ua=1Provides an overview of FOPL guidelines.

  3. Thow AM, Jones A, Huckel Schneider C, Labonté R. Increasing the public health voice in global decision-making on nutrition labelling. Glob Health [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Feb 2];16. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6942308/

  4. World Health Organization. Global action plan for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases: 2013–2020. [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2020 Feb 2]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/94384/1/9789241506236_eng.pdf

  5. Solving the problem of childhood obesity within a generation [Internet]. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President; 2010 May. Available from: https://letsmove.obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/white-house-task-force-childhood-obesity-report-president

  6. Johnson RK, Lichtenstein AH, Kris-Etherton PM, Carson JAS, Pappas A, Rupp L, et al. Enhanced and updated American Heart Association heart-check front-of-package symbol: efforts to help consumers identify healthier food choices. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015;115:876–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kelly B, Jewell J, Health Evidence Network, World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe. What is the evidence on the policy specifications, development processes and effectiveness of existing front-of-pack food labelling policies in the WHO European Region? [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2020 Feb 12]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534354/

  8. Medicine I of. Front-of-Package Nutrition Rating Systems and Symbols: Promoting Healthier Choices [Internet]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012 [cited 2020 Feb 12]. Available from: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13221/front-of-package-nutrition-rating-systems-and-symbols-promoting-healthier

  9. Global Strategy on diet, physical activity and health [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2004. Available from: https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/strategy/eb11344/strategy_english_web.pdf

  10. European Food and Nutrition Action Plan 2015–2020 [Internet]. Moscow, Russia: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; 2014. Available from: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/253727/64wd14e_FoodNutAP_140426.pdf

  11. Framework for action - from commitments to action. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations; 2014.

  12. “Best buys” and other recommended interventions for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases. [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2017. Available from: apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/259232/1/WHO-NMH-NVI-17.9-eng.pdf?ua=1.

  13. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity: implementation plan [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2017. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/259349/WHO-NMH-PND-ECHO-17.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

  14. World Health Organization, Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity [Internet]. 2016. Available from: http://www.who.int/endchildhood-obesity/publications/echo-report/en/

  15. Becker MW, Bello NM, Sundar RP, Peltier C, Bix L. Front of pack labels enhance attention to nutrition information in novel and commercial brands. Food Policy. 2015;56:76–86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. James A, Adams-Huet B, Shah M. Menu labels displaying the kilocalorie content or the exercise equivalent: effects on energy ordered and consumed in young adults. Am J Health Promot. 2015;29:294–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. World Cancer Research Fund International. Building momentum: lessons on implementing a robust front-of-pack food label. 2019. wcrf.org/buildingmomentum

  18. Bucher T, Müller B, Siegrist M. What is healthy food? Objective nutrient profile scores and subjective lay evaluations in comparison. Appetite. 2015;95:408–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hawley KL, Roberto CA, Bragg MA, Liu PJ, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD. The science on front-of-package food labels. Public Health Nutr. 2013;16:430–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Labonté M-È, Poon T, Gladanac B, Ahmed M, Franco-Arellano B, Rayner M, et al. Nutrient profile models with applications in government-led nutrition policies aimed at health promotion and noncommunicable disease prevention: a systematic review. Adv Nutr. 2018;9:741–88. Thorough systematic review of NPS and their applications in public health settings.

  21. Arambepola C, Scarborough P, Rayner M. Validating a nutrient profile model. Public Health Nutr. 2008;11:371–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van der Bend DLM, Lissner L. Differences and similarities between front-of-pack nutrition labels in Europe: a comparison of functional and visual aspects. Nutrients. 2019;11:626. Comparison models of prominent FOPL developed and utilized in Europe.

  23. Jones A, Neal B, Reeve B, Ni Mhurchu C, Thow AM. Front-of-pack nutrition labelling to promote healthier diets: current practice and opportunities to strengthen regulation worldwide. BMJ Glob Health [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Feb 2];4. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6936575/Review of the regulatory framework regarding FOPL.

  24. HCSP. Information sur la qualité nutritionnelle des produits alimentaires [Internet]. Paris: Haut Conseil de la Santé Publique; 2015 Jun. Available from: https://www.hcsp.fr/explore.cgi/avisrapportsdomaine?clefr=519

  25. Julia C, Kesse-Guyot E, Touvier M, Méjean C, Fezeu L, Hercberg S. Application of the British Food Standards Agency nutrient profiling system in a French food composition database. Br J Nutr. 2014;112:1699–705.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Julia C, Ducrot P, Péneau S, Deschamps V, Méjean C, Fézeu L, et al. Discriminating nutritional quality of foods using the 5-color nutrition label in the French food market: consistency with nutritional recommendations. Nutr J. 2015;14:100.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Nutrient Profiling Technical Guidance. United Kingdom: UK Department of health; 2011.

  28. Lupton JR, Balentine DA, Black RM, Hildwine R, Ivens BJ, Kennedy ET, et al. The Smart Choices front-of-package nutrition labeling program: rationale and development of the nutrition criteria. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:1078S–89S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. André Q, Chandon P, Haws K. Healthy through presence or absence, nature or science?: a framework for understanding front-of-package food claims. J Public Policy Mark. 2019;38:172–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. The health star rating system in New Zealand 2014-2018. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry for Primary Industries, New Zealand Government; 2018 p. 69.

  31. Temple NJ. Front-of-package food labels: a narrative review. Appetite. 2020;144:104485 Narrative review of design, effectiveness, and implementation issues regarding FOPL.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Thow AM, Jones A, Huckel Schneider C, Labonté R. Global governance of front-of-pack nutrition labelling: a qualitative analysis. Nutrients [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Feb 2];11. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6412334/

  33. Hall KD, Ayuketah A, Brychta R, Cai H, Cassimatis T, Chen KY, et al. Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: an inpatient randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food ontake. Cell Metab. 2019;30:67–77.e3.

  34. Pomeranz JL, Wilde P, Mozaffarian D, Micha R. Mandating front-of-package food labels in the U.S. – what are the First Amendment obstacles? Food Policy. 2019;86:101722.

  35. Poon T, Labonté M-È, Mulligan C, Ahmed M, Dickinson KM, L’Abbé MR. Comparison of nutrient profiling models for assessing the nutritional quality of foods: a validation study. Br J Nutr. 2018;120:567–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Medicine I of. front-of-package nutrition rating systems and symbols: promoting healthier choices [Internet]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010 [cited 2020 Feb 12]. Available from: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13221/front-of-package-nutrition-rating-systems-and-symbols-promoting-healthier

  37. Julia C, Hercberg S. Nutri-score: evidence of the effectiveness of the French front-of-pack nutrition label. Ernähr Umsch. 2017:158–65.

  38. Mhurchu CN, Eyles H, Choi Y-H. Effects of a voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labelling system on packaged food reformulation: the health star rating system in New Zealand. Nutrients. 2017;9:918.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. WHO | Nutrient profiling: report of a technical meeting [Internet]. WHO. [cited 2020 Feb 2]. Available from: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/profiling/WHO_IASO_report2010/en/

  40. Drewnowski A, Dwyer J, King JC, Weaver CM. A proposed nutrient density score that includes food groups and nutrients to better align with dietary guidance. Nutr Rev. 2019;77:404–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Asia RO for S-E, Organization WH. WHO nutrient profile model for South-East Asia Region [Internet]. WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia; 2016 [cited 2020 Feb 13]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/253459

  42. Nutrient profile model. Copenhagen, Denmark: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; 2015.

  43. Nutrient Profile Model. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization; 2016.

  44. Townsend MS. Where is the science? What will it take to show that nutrient profiling systems work? Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:1109S–15S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Scarborough P, Payne C, Agu CG, Kaur A, Mizdrak A, Rayner M, et al. How important is the choice of the nutrient profile model used to regulate broadcast advertising of foods to children? A comparison using a targeted data set. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013;67:815–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Acton RB, Vanderlee L, Hammond D. Influence of front-of-package nutrition labels on beverage healthiness perceptions: results from a randomized experiment. Prev Med. 2018;115:83–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Aschemann-Witzel J, Grunert KG, van Trijp HCM, Bialkova S, Raats MM, Hodgkins C, et al. Effects of nutrition label format and product assortment on the healthfulness of food choice. Appetite. 2013;71:63–74 Critical examination and discussion of the role of consumer preferences and environmental nudges in improved nutrition behaviors.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ducrot P, Méjean C, Julia C, Kesse-Guyot E, Touvier M, Fezeu L, et al. Effectiveness of front-of-pack nutrition labels in French adults: results from the NutriNet-Santé cohort study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0140898.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Egnell M, Talati Z, Hercberg S, Pettigrew S, Julia C. Objective understanding of front-of-package nutrition labels: an international comparative experimental study across 12 countries. Nutrients. 2018;10:1542.

  50. Egnell M, Talati Z, Gombaud M, Galan P, Hercberg S, Pettigrew S, Julia C Consumers’ responses to front-of-pack nutrition labelling: results from a sample from The Netherlands. Nutrients. 2019;11:1817.

  51. Gorski Findling MT, Werth PM, Musicus AA, Bragg MA, Graham DJ, Elbel B, et al. Comparing five front-of-pack nutrition labels’ influence on consumers’ perceptions and purchase intentions. Prev Med. 2018;106:114–21 First US study to compare a recommended FOPL with other common systems.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hodgkins CE, Raats MM, Fife-Schaw C, Peacock M, Gröppel-Klein A, Koenigstorfer J, et al. Guiding healthier food choice: systematic comparison of four front-of-pack labelling systems and their effect on judgements of product healthiness. Br J Nutr. 2015;113:1652–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Khandpur N, Sato PDM, Mais LA, Martins APB, Spinillo CG, Garcia MT, et al. Are front-of-package warning labels more effective at communicating nutrition information than traffic-light labels? A randomized controlled experiment in a Brazilian sample Nutrients 2018;10:688.

  54. Khandpur N, Mais LA, de Morais SP, Martins APB, Spinillo CG, Rojas CFU, et al. Choosing a front-of-package warning label for Brazil: a randomized, controlled comparison of three different label designs. Food Res Int. 2019;121:854–61 Large study conducted in Brazil showing significant differences in the use of different types of warning labels.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Maubach N, Hoek J, Mather D. Interpretive front-of-pack nutrition labels. Comparing competing recommendations. Appetite. 2014;82:67–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Roberto CA, Bragg MA, Schwartz MB, Seamans MJ, Musicus A, Novak N, et al. Facts up front versus traffic light food labels: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43:134–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Roseman MG, Joung H-W, Littlejohn EI. Attitude and behavior factors associated with front-of-package label use with label users making accurate product nutrition assessments. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2018;118:904–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Roberto CA. Evaluation of consumer understanding of different front-of-package nutrition labels, 2010–2011. Prev Chronic Dis [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Feb 2];9. Available from: https://www-cdc-gov.ezproxy.library.tufts.edu/pcd/issues/2012/12_0015.htm

  59. Aron JI, Evans RE, Mela DJ. Paradoxical effect of a nutrition labelling scheme in a student cafeteria. Nutr Res. 1995;15:1251–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hammond D, Goodman S, Hanning R, Daniel S. A randomized trial of calorie labeling on menus. Prev Med. 2013;57:860–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Harnack LJ, French SA, Oakes JM, Story MT, Jeffery RW, Rydell SA. Effects of calorie labeling and value size pricing on fast food meal choices: results from an experimental trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Roberto CA, Shivaram M, Martinez O, Boles C, Harris JL, Brownell KD. The Smart Choices front-of-package nutrition label. Influence on perceptions and intake of cereal. Appetite. 2012;58:651–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Nobrega L, Ares G, Deliza R. Are nutritional warnings more efficient than claims in shaping consumers’ healthfulness perception? Food Qual Prefer. 2020;79:103749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Correa T, Fierro C, Reyes M, Carpentier FRD, Taillie LS, Corvalan C. Responses to the Chilean law of food labeling and advertising: exploring knowledge, perceptions and behaviors of mothers of young children. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019;16:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Taillie LS, Reyes M, Colchero MA, Popkin B, Corvalán C. An evaluation of Chile’s Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases from 2015 to 2017: a before-and-after study. PLoS Med. 2020;17:e1003015.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Freire WB, Waters WF, Rivas-Mariño G, Nguyen T, Rivas P. A qualitative study of consumer perceptions and use of traffic light food labelling in Ecuador. Public Health Nutr. 2017;20:805–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Foo LL, Vijaya K, Sloan RA, Ling A. Obesity prevention and management: Singapore’s experience. Obes Rev. 2013;14:106–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. De la Cruz-Gongora V, Torres P, Contreras-Manzano A, de la Mota AJ, Mundo-Rosas V, Villalpando S, et al. Understanding and acceptability by Hispanic consumers of four front-of-pack food labels. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14:28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Julia C, Péneau S, Buscail C, Gonzalez R, Touvier M, Hercberg S, et al. Perception of different formats of front-of-pack nutrition labels according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors in a French population: cross-sectional study among the NutriNet-Sante cohort participants. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e016108.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Machín L, Aschemann-Witzel J, Curutchet MR, Giménez A, Ares G. Does front-of-pack nutrition information improve consumer ability to make healthful choices? Performance of warnings and the traffic light system in a simulated shopping experiment. Appetite. 2018;121:55–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Ares G, Aschemann-Witzel J, Curutchet MR, Antúnez L, Machín L, Vidal L, et al. Nutritional warnings and product substitution or abandonment: policy implications derived from a repeated purchase simulation. Food Qual Prefer. 2018;65:40–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Pettigrew S, Talati Z, Miller C, Dixon H, Kelly B, Ball K. The types and aspects of front-of-pack food labelling schemes preferred by adults and children. Appetite. 2017;109:115–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Talati Z, Pettigrew S, Ball K, Hughes C, Kelly B, Neal B, et al. The relative ability of different front-of-pack labels to assist consumers discriminate between healthy, moderately healthy, and unhealthy foods. Food Qual Prefer. 2017;59:109–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Ni Mhurchu C, Volkova E, Jiang Y, Eyles H, Michie J, Neal B, et al. Effects of interpretive nutrition labels on consumer food purchases: the starlight randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105:695–704.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Shangguan S, Afshin A, Shulkin M, Ma W, Marsden D, Smith J, et al. A meta-analysis of food labeling effects on consumer diet behaviors and industry practices. Am J Prev Med. 2019;56:300–14 Comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of 60 FOPL intervention studies, evaluating impacts on nutrient intake and industry responses.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Jones A, Shahid M, Neal B. Uptake of Australia’s health star rating system. Nutrients. 2018;10:997.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition 2016-2025 [Internet]. [cited 2020 Feb 14]. Available from: https://www.un.org/nutrition/france-and-australia-announced-establishment-global-action-network-nutrition-labelling

  78. Kurzer P, Cooper A. Biased or not? Organized interests and the case of EU food information labeling. J Eur Public Policy. 2013;20:722–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Swinburn B, Wood A. Progress on obesity prevention over 20 years in Australia and New Zealand. Obes Rev. 2013;14:60–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Kanter R, Vanderlee L, Vandevijvere S. Front-of-package nutrition labelling policy: global progress and future directions. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:1399–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Mandle J, Tugendhaft A, Michalow J, Hofman K. Nutrition labelling: a review of research on consumer and industry response in the global South. Glob Health Action. 2015;8:25912.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Monteiro CA, Cannon G, Moubarac J-C, Martins APB, Martins CA, Garzillo J, et al. Dietary guidelines to nourish humanity and the planet in the twenty-first century. A blueprint from Brazil. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18:2311–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Czarnezki JJ. The future of food eco-labeling: organic, carbon footprint, and environmental life-cycle analysis [Internet]. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network; 2011 Feb. Report No.: ID 1645860. Available from: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1645860

  84. Gadema Z, Oglethorpe D. The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: a policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers. Food Policy. 2011;36:815–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Hallström E, Davis J, Woodhouse A, Sonesson U. Using dietary quality scores to assess sustainability of food products and human diets: a systematic review. Ecol Indic. 2018;93:219–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. McCarthy J, Minovi D, Wootan M. Scroll and shop: food marketing migrates online [Internet]. Center for Science in the Public Interest; 2020 Jan. Available from: https://cspinet.org/sites/default/files/attachment/Scroll_and_Shop_report.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgments

Jeffrey Blumberg, Naglaa El-Abbadi, and Renata Micha have received financial support from a grant funded by Danone to study nutrient profiling systems. Renata Micha has received grant support from the NIH NHLBI (R01 HL130735; R01 HL115189) for support of the Food Policy Review and Intervention Cost-Effectiveness program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, 150 Harrison Avenue, Boston, MA, 02111, USA

    Naglaa H. El-Abbadi, Salima F. Taylor, Renata Micha & Jeffrey B. Blumberg

Authors
  1. Naglaa H. El-Abbadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Salima F. Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Renata Micha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jeffrey B. Blumberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey B. Blumberg.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Salima Taylor declared no conflict of interest. Naglaa El-Abbadi, Jeffrey Blumberg, and Renata Micha have been supported by a grant from Danone to study nutrient profiling systems. Jeffrey Blumberg reports service on scientific advisory boards of AdvoCare, California Prune Board, California Walnut Commission, Church & Dwight, Cranberry Marketing Committee, Guiding Stars Licensing Co., Quaker Oats Co., Segterra, and SmartyPants (all outside the submitted work). Renata Micha reports research funding from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Nestle and personal fees from Bunge and Development Initiatives for the Global Nutrition Report (all outside the submitted work).

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Guarantor

J.B.B. is the guarantor of this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

El-Abbadi, N.H., Taylor, S.F., Micha, R. et al. Nutrient Profiling Systems, Front of Pack Labeling, and Consumer Behavior. Curr Atheroscler Rep 22, 36 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-020-00857-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-020-00857-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation