GMA Launches “Nutrition Keys” Initiative…Straight Into the Ground

Posted By elissa on Jan 30, 2011 | 2 comments

Last November, I made note of a proposed “front-of-package” nutrition labeling initiative on the part of the food industry. I dubbed it “Smart Choices 2.0,” in honor of the industry’s first – and rather disasterous – attempt to sow cut through consumer confusion. At the time, I doubted the seriousness of the effort, but admitted that “I’d like to be wrong.”

But as it turns out, I wasn’t.

Admittedly, “Smart Choices” was a farce, and it’s obvious that the industry learned from its mistake. The new program, “Nutrition Keys,” is not farcical… rather, it’s pointless.

Here’s the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association on the subject:

“Today’s sophisticated consumer wants more information about their food than ever before,” said Leslie Sarasin, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Food Marketing Institute.  “Nutrition Keys, combined with the many innovative nutrition education tools and programs in retail stores, is helping us meet that challenge and exceed consumer expectations.”

Uh-huh. For the record, this is what “more information… than ever before” looks like:

In other words, all they’ve done is taken selected info from the back (or side) of the box/package, and put it on the front! There’s no context. Is that 14g sugar added or natural? Is it a lot… or a little? Is 450 calories too much? Is 360mg sodium bad?

So this helps consumers make more informed choices… how?

While I don’t often read the Huffington Post for health info, I loved this observation by David Katz, MD:

A colleague of mine at NuVal had the following insight about this innovation: “Well, if the problem was people’s inability to turn the package around, then I guess this could be the solution.”

Seriously. I can’t help but agree with Michael Jacobsen and the CSPI on this:

The whole point of front-label nutrition information or symbols should be to convey quickly and simply how healthful a food is. A system with green, yellow, and red dots to indicate whether a food has a good, middling, or poor nutritional quality would probably be a lot more effective than industry’s system. Alternatively, numerical ratings from -100 to +100 or 0 to 10 would allow people to easily compare one brand of food to another.

Dr. Jacobsen calls it “Strike Two for Front of Package Food Labeling.” It’s an apt description.