Food labels akin to warning labels
Until they're added at scale to packaged food in the United States, how can one interpret warnings from food labels?
When I speak about natural beekeeping at beekeeping clubs and conferences, I start my presentation with food label examples and the lack of shared definitions and understanding. “Natural” food means just as little as “natural” beekeeping – the FDA regulates the term on packaging and provides some educational initiatives, but no entity ensures consumers know nutrition and labeling practices. For instance, the FDA doesn’t include a definition for “natural” on labels:
“The FDA has considered the term ‘natural’ to mean that nothing artificial or synthetic (including all color additives regardless of source) has been included in, or has been added to, a food that would not normally be expected to be in that food. However, this policy was not intended to address food production methods, such as the use of pesticides, nor did it explicitly address food processing or manufacturing methods, such as thermal technologies, pasteurization, or irradiation. The FDA also did not consider whether the term ‘natural’ should describe any nutritional or other health benefit.”
According to the American Society of Nutrition, this means foods packaged with the “natural” label can be grown with pesticides, and can include genetically-engineered or modified organisms (GMOs), drugs (non-synthetic), high fructose corn syrup, hormones, or antibiotics.
A high school student recently published an article in THE SEATTLE TIMES plainly describing the current state of deceptive food labeling. The contributor Aryan Velu writes, “Science has shown ultra-processed foods to be harmful to human health, contributing to heart disease, diabetes and obesity…Under current rules, ultra-processed foods can be marketed as healthier-seeming options with technically correct label claims like ‘Sugar-free!’…however, such descriptions can be deceptive.”
When it comes to revenue-driven food producers, there’s no incentive for them to pull back the curtain on the label gap and help consumers understand. When marketing honey, I position this gap as an opportunity for beekeepers: YOU become the educator and tell the story of your practices.
Food label packaging makes a difference. A 2020 article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) referenced consumer habits changing in countries outside the United States once front-of-label warnings were added to sugar-filled and unhealthy foods. The article further presents ways of leveling the understanding of these labels across all demographics through design. Iconography can help break through language and literacy barriers, which harkens back to historical use of design during periods of history when larger segments of populations were illiterate. It reminds me of how businesses relied on imagery for brick-and-mortar signage. On a trip to Boston many years ago, an architectural tour pointed out how some contemporary store signs around the city still use an image that aligns with their business or service. It’s a homage to the city’s early years when not many people knew how to read. For example, consumers would look for scissors on a sign to find a barber shop. Today, the food signage we hold in our hands could lean on strategic iconography to help provide clear and equitable messaging.
Two years ago, universities from around the world partnered in a randomized controlled trial testing special icon warnings on food labels with consumers in South Africa. Participants in the study were twice as likely to correctly identify ingredients when the warning labels were implemented as compared to other designs in the study.
Food choice feels like a fantasy.
Aside from strategic icons on labeling, can you imagine a world where you see pictures of cramped, sunless swine houses on packs of pork chops throughout the grocery store? Or pictures of chickens in feces-covered wire cages on free-range egg cartons? (The free-range label doesn’t require access to grass.) How would this impact consumer choice and producers’ animal welfare practices?
Food choice feels like a fantasy. It’s not only challenging to understand the source and production practices of the ingredients in grocery store food, but where’s traceability on restaurant menus too? We don’t really have a choice when we’re only given veiled options. This week, Berkeley became the first city to ban Confined Animal Feed Operations (CAFOs), also known as factory farms or feed lots. At first glance of the headline, I thought it meant that food sellers within the city limits couldn’t offer CAFO-produced meats. However, it’s rather a statement that bans CAFOs from existing within the city (where no factory farms currently exist).
Perhaps Berkley’s effort will inspire food labeling practices next. For instance, I’d love to be able to open a restaurant menu and see the sources of the ingredients and the producers’ practices. I often seek out and prioritize restaurants that support regional farms, but there’s still a chore in learning which farms and then learning those farm practices. It’s rare to find a restaurant that presents all of this up front. In an earlier post about how we as consumers are paying more for nutrient-deficient food, I shared how a restaurant near my home that supports local farms doesn’t go the extra mile in selectively choosing farms with ethical practices. Once I looked at each farms’ practices I saw they varied widely. One farm takes a marketing spin that they’re the “official purveyor” for a highly regarded non-profit that runs renowned food awards. (I’m omitting the names of the entities intentionally, but feel free to message me and I can provide details.) That sounded impressive to me. However, when I read more about their operation, their pigs never touch soil and are raised indoors—mainly because they’ve been bred for those conditions. The farm makes it seem like they’re doing these production-bred pigs a favor by keeping them out of the sunshine and away from rooting in the earth.
It’s hard to pull out the facts when consumers need to navigate muddy messaging. Take a peek at an earlier post for some helpful food label-related resources.
