Traffic light labels get the green light

The embattled Health Star Rating (HSR) system has received yet another blow to its credibility after New Zealand research has called its effectiveness into question.

Recent research conducted by the University of Otago suggests that not only is the HSR system confusing to consumers, so too is the existing Daily Intake Guide system.

Traffic lights are the real stars

A recent study of more than 750 New Zealanders has shown that a Multiple Traffic Light label is more effective in helping consumers identify and avoid less healthy options than the HSR and Daily Intake Guides.

The study compared the three front-of-pack nutrition labels as well as the back-of-pack Nutrition Information Panel. Consumers made similar choices towards the healthiest muesli option when either a star rating or multiple traffic light labels were featured, but the traffic light label helped consumers identify and avoid less healthy mueslis.

In the study, participants also rated the healthiness of the options tested and were found to be significantly better able to differentiate between their nutrition profiles when they featured the colour-coded traffic lights.

“These findings show most people can identify healthy products with either the stars or traffic light labels. However, a traffic light label appears much more likely to help people distinguish less healthy choices. If we want to use labels to reduce obesity, we need a label that promotes quick identification of unhealthy products,” said Dr Maubach, who led the research.

Lack of evidence

The star rating label came out of the previous Australian Government’s decision to reject traffic light labelling, which Dr Maubach says is “deeply ironic”.

“Politicians rejected an expert panel’s recommendation to support the Multiple Traffic Light format on grounds of insufficient evidence, despite many published studies demonstrating its effectiveness, yet there is no peer-reviewed research into this new format,” Dr Maubach said.

The initial HSR system was roundly criticised by the Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC) for “failing to accommodate the AFGC’s existing Daily Intake Guide”. The HSR system was updated to allow for the ongoing use of the Daily Intake Guides, which are already printed on thousands of products.

But Dr Maubach says the study has confirmed earlier findings that the industry-developed Daily Intake Guide is of no more help to consumers than the existing Nutrition Information Panel.

“The Daily Intake Guide is simply not a helpful format and policymakers need to introduce a label that consumers will find meaningful,” Dr Maubach said.

Mandatory, not voluntary

Interpretive front-of-pack nutrition labels should be mandatory, rather than voluntary, Dr Maubach says.

“A light-touch regulatory approach that relies on voluntary action is not in consumers’ best interests. All packaged foods should feature the same nutrition labels so shoppers have a fair chance to understand foods’ nutritional merits,” Dr Maubach said.

“A mish-mash of Health Star Ratings, Daily Intake Guides and no labels at all will only exacerbate the confusion we know exists and do little to promote healthier food choices.”

The University of Otago research has been peer-reviewed by the international journal Appetite. An article on the research is currently being finalised for the journal.