It should come as a surprise to no one that a recent in-depth review of the foods on our supermarket shelves revealed most of the food on offer is highly processed and unhealthy.
The "State of the Food Supply" report from researchers at Auckland University found more than two-thirdsof packaged foods were considered ultra-processed: full of refined ingredients, added sugar, salt, fat and additives. They also found 59 per cent of the packaged foods in our supermarkets have a low star rating (less than 3.5) - even in "healthier" categories.
It also wasn't super surprising to hear that Health Star ratings are going to stay voluntary for five more years. This was the recommendation of the review of that system, released last week. If there's not bigger uptake by then, it may become mandatory.
What hasn't been widely reported here, though, was something a bit more exciting for those of us who want more transparent food labelling. The Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation, at the same time as they released the Health Stars review, also called for a review into the labelling of sugar on foods.
The Forum requested that Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) review nutrition labelling for added sugars, with a view to separating out the added sugars from the total sugars on labels. The Forum also said that a "pictorial approach" applied to sugary drinks "warrants further consideration".
That sparked speculation in the Australian media about a potential teaspoons-of-sugar label on sugary drinks. Quickly followed, predictably, by strong opposition from the beverage industry. No marketer of sugary drinks would want us to easily know there is 10, or 12, or 16 teaspoons of sugar in the drink we're holding, after all.
If this does happen, though, it will be a very good thing. Not just because it will highlight how much sugar is in drinks. But also because it will help stop some of the sugar nonsense we currently see on labels of all kinds of foods, from drinks to cereals to so-called health foods.
Star ratings are still not compulsory. Photo / File
At the moment, the only information we have on labels about sugar is the "total sugar" number found in the nutrition information panel. We can't tell from that how much of the sugar in a food is naturally occurring – say in a dairy or fruit-based food – and how much is added or "free" sugar, added to the food during manufacturing.
Right now, food and drink manufacturers both large and small are playing fast and loose with sugar claims on their products. We see things like "no refined sugar" and "sweetened with fruit" on the front of packages, which no doubt sucks lots of us in to thinking that food is somehow healthier than others. It very likely is not.
This small but significant label tweak has the power to drive real behaviour change. It could see consumers making better choices and manufacturers re-formulating in meaningful ways. Let's hope regulators don't bow to industry pressure, and make it so.
• Niki Bezzant is editor-at-large for Healthy Food Guide; www.healthyfood.com
