Vending Times, a trade magazine for, you guessed it, the
Vending Industry (machines, coffee service and micromarkets), recently
announced that Mrs. Freshley’s has a new product, 7 Grain Cookies. You can read
a little about them here,
but the important information (i.e., nutrition content) is not yet posted.
Other cookies by this company have, on average, 200 to 300 calories per package
– the serving size.
Without my explaining, can you guess the problem with a 7
grain cookie? Here is a hint and a term nutrition and obesity prevention researchers
often use – “health halo.” You probably figured it out. By saying that this
high sugar, high calorie item has 7 grains, people are distracted from the fact
that it is still an item that should be consumed in extreme moderation.
Cookies, pastries and such are in the discretionary category and I believe the
latest version of US Dietary Guidelines suggest that discretionary calories
take up no more than 10% of a day’s worth of calories (actually the new guidelines
refer to added sugar not being more than 10% of calories). Therefore, if you
were a small, active women consuming 1800 calories a day, this pack of cookies
would be all you were allotted in discretionary calories for the day. The fact
that the cookies might supply you with some whole grains, a positive thing,
doesn’t change the fact that they are cookies. (BTW, other health halos you
might see on discretionary food and beverage items, REAL sugar, raw sugar, honey,
molasses– it’s all sugar, and in this context, not different than corn syrup or
table sugar).
Label declarations such as these (e.g., 7 grains) can give
us a false sense of the healthiness of an item. Of course, healthiness is a
moving target, but let’s stick with sugar and calories – we do want to limit
them across the board, throughout each day. In a similar fashion to label 'nutrient disclosures', researchers have found that some Front of Pack labels (of
which I am a huge fan) can also create a health halo! Hamlin, McNeill and Moore(2014) conducted an experiment on choices people make after seeing different
types of Front of Pack labels and found that across all types (2), having a
label led people to buy that product more often than if it did not have a
label, regardless of what the label said. This is only one study, and others
show that the labels can be helpful in leading to a reduction in calories, salt
or sugar purchased, but it is definitely something that should give us pause,
especially because one of the label formats tested was my favorite, the
multiple traffic light.
When I think of this in the context of our soon to be
implemented calorie disclosure law for vending machines, it occurs to me that
maybe, simpler IS better. In other words, if every single product has a label
and the only thing on the label is calorie content – then choosing the smallest
number would be the (usually) right thing to do. I have that parenthetical
usually, because a 100 kcal pack of cookies might not be a better choice than
the 200 kcal package of granola bars, BUT – it would still be the least
caloric.
Lastly, the 2016 calorie label law (passed in 2010) is very
specific about the placement, color, font and size of the calorie disclosure.
If you take a look at the pictures below, you can see why that is important.
I took these photos at vending machines where I work and
offer some comments in the captions.
This is industry criteria, notice the calorie, sugar and sodium limits to be called a Choice Plus snack |
Notice the sodium - its too high to be a Choice Plus but the snack is in a Choice Plus Slot. Also this snack has a Front of Pack label which could be a health halo. |