Food needs 'traffic light' labels, say health lobbyists

Calls to use colour-coded labels to show whether foods are healthy or unhealthy have sharply divided anti-obesity groups and the food industry.

Public health lobbyists are pushing for some form of "traffic light" labelling of food, urging the idea on MPs at the health select committee's obesity inquiry.

Under this system food manufacturers would label their foods with a panel of coloured spots relating, possibly, to the amounts of salt, sugar, fat and saturated fat.

Red would indicate a predetermined "high" level and the least healthy, amber medium, and green low, the healthiest. Alternatively each food package would have a single colour spot.

Britain's Food Standards Agency is promoting a multi-spot voluntary system. It says research shows traffic-light labelling "is key" to helping people understand the levels of fat, saturated fat, salt and sugar and to "take charge of their own health".

But it has split the British food industry: one camp has adopted traffic lights; the other has turned to labels stating how much of the daily guideline amount of sugar, salt, fat and calories you will get from the product.

In New Zealand, Kellogg's has already started on the latter system on its cereals. By December its snacks will carry the labels too.

On Monday, the Food & Grocery Council - which represents giants such as Goodman Fielder, Heinz Wattie's and Coca-Cola - will discuss adopting a Kellogg's-style system.

Obesity Action Coalition executive director Celia Murphy said that under a traffic light system, many muesli bars, most potato crisps and sugary soft drinks, cordials and lollies would be marked red for unhealthy.

The primary reason was to provide easily understood information on which consumers could make healthy choices. "The second is to get manufacturers to clean up the food supply. If manufacturers are going to have a lot of red labels there may be incentives for them to get more greens."

Kellogg's system was helpful to the well-informed, she said, but it used a lot of numbers, which many would find confusing.

The National Heart Foundation says multiple traffic lights would confuse consumers and single ones would over-simplify nutrition information.

The Food & Grocery Council strongly opposes traffic light labelling.

"We as the industry believe it's far too simplistic," said its executive director, Brenda Cutress.

Europe used many different types of traffic light labelling systems; consumers there were "more confused than helped".

Massey University nutritionist Professor John Birkbeck gives low marks to traffic lights and the Kellogg's system, saying both tried to simplify nutritional messages.

"Unfortunately it just isn't simple."

Government food agencies are not investigating traffic light labelling but the Health Ministry is watching international developments "to determine what we may do".