1. Executive summary
[ pdf 98 kb ]
There is currently a prohibition on health and related claims in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Food Code), with the exception of claims relating to the benefit of maternal consumption of folate [1] .
As part of a review of the regulatory framework with regard to the use of nutrition, health and related claims on food labels, a pilot label monitoring survey was undertaken. The purpose was to further assess a set of 1262 food labels, previously collected in 2003, to determine the proportion that carried nutrition, health and related claims, thus providing baseline data for the period prior to FSANZ commencing work on developing a new standard for nutrition, health and related claims (Proposal P293).
The consistency of the claims with the current labelling provisions was determined as part of this survey. The labelling provisions included were those provided in the Food Code, the Code of Practice on Nutrient Claims in Food Labels and Advertisements (CoPoNC), the New Zealand Dietary Supplements Regulations (NZDSR) and the fair trading legislation in both Australia and New Zealand. The claims were also assessed against the classification framework for nutrition and health claims under development by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) as set out in Proposal 293.
Assessment of claims against the proposed framework
Of the 1262 labels collected in 2003 in Australia and New Zealand, 43% carried nutrition claims or health claims. A greater proportion of the labels collected featured nutrition claims (42%), rather than health claims (11%). Of the 542 labels that carried claims, the proportion that carried nutrition claims was the same in both Australia and New Zealand (99%). However, of the labels that carried claims, health claims featured on a greater proportion (33%) of labels from New Zealand than labels from Australia (20%). Approximately 40% of health claims (66 claims) were National Heart Foundation endorsements, and 23% of health claims (38 claims) were function claims.
Assessment of claims against current labelling provisions
The majority (87%) of labels with claims assessed were consistent with the requirements of the labelling provisions used for this survey (469 out of 542 labels with claims). A total of 84 claims on 73 labels were found to be inconsistent with the labelling provisions. Of these claims, the majority (61%) came from labels collected in Australia; overall 91% inconsistent claims (77 claims) related to labelling provisions in the Code, 1% (1 claim) to the NZDSR and 7% (6 claims) related to CoPoNC.
A total of 153 labels collected in Australia were identified as having 220 claims to be assessed against CoPoNC, providing an average of 1.4 CoPoNC claims per label. After the labelling provisions of CoPoNC were applied to the 220 claims on labels, these were found to be consistent with labelling requirements in almost all (97%) cases. Six labels were found to be inconsistent (5 for an incorrect ‘fat free’ claims and 1 for a missing reference to the whole class of the food).
Four high level health claims were assessed. Two of these were biomarker enhancement claims, and were consistent with the current labelling provisions. One, which referenced a serious disease and provided advice of a medical nature, was assessed as inconsistent with the labelling provisions. One high level health claim made reference to a non-serious disease, and one general level health claim referred to a physiological condition. Consequently both were inconsistent with the provisions of Standard 1.1A.2 Transitional Standard for Health Claims. One general level health claim was also considered to be inconsistent with the provisions of both Standard 1.1A.2 and NZDSR, as it referred to a non-serious disease and provided prophylactic advice.
Whilst the labels collected in Australia were assessed against a greater number of provisions than those from New Zealand, the extra requirements of CoPoNC did not appear to be the cause of the higher number of inconsistent label claims for labels collected in Australia.
As the Label Monitoring Survey enters its second phase under the FSANZ Evaluation Strategy for 2004-2008 the 2005 label collection has been completed and further collections planned for 2006-2008. The 2003 information provided in this report will be a valuable benchmark for comparison with current nutrition, health or related claims. It should be noted, however, that the 2003 data might not accurately represent the nature of claims on food products currently available in the market place.
[1] FSANZ has permitted a trial health claim on claims about the benefit of maternal consumption of folate, to prevent neural tube defects (eg. spina bifida) in developing foetuses and more than one hundred products have temporary permission to carry the claim.
back | top of page