Warn or inform the population?

2024-03-20 06:02:00

Guest pen

Front labeling: warn or inform the population?

If labeling is on everything, it is on nothing.

For several weeks now, the media has been talking about initiative 5504 “Law to promote healthy eating.” It has already passed the second reading in the Congress of the Republic and has raised interest from different groups.

Initiative aims to improve the nutritional value of foods, but ends up punishing them.

As a representative of the industry in Guatemala, I think it is important to clarify that we are not opposed to public and private efforts being made to reduce overweight and obesity rates. We consider that, as a priority, the approach must be regional and that is why the industry has firmly supported, for years, an orderly and consensual process for the construction of front labeling regulations at the Central American level.

In the specific case of initiative 5504 in Guatemala, of course we want to promote healthier eating, but to truly achieve the noble purpose of the initiative, it is essential to focus on informing Guatemalans for better decision making, encouraging changes in lifestyle and, at the same time, promote innovation in industries. Initiative 5504 contemplates the implementation of “nutritional warning” seals on products, in the form of black octagons labeled “High En”, which will be applied to those products that exceed the parameter established in the initiative for the content of nutrients relevant to public health, such as sodium, saturated fats and sugars, among others. Currently, the initiative considers the parameter of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), used in only two Latin American countries, to determine these limits. Here the question is easy: Would the consumer know how to distinguish which product is more nutritious if, in a supermarket shelf or in the neighborhood store, he finds two products with the same number of stamps or identical stamps? For example, if cookies are labeled “high in sugar,” crackers are labeled “high in sodium,” and potato chips are labeled “high in saturated fat,” how would you decide which to choose? Also, if two products contain the same three seals, how would you know if cookie A is better than cookie B? Would the purpose of the initiative to promote healthier eating be fulfilled or would we only be erroneously alerting the consumer? Front labeling, on the one hand, aims to guide the consumer and, on the other hand, encourage the industry to make changes in its formulations to increasingly offer consumers products with less saturated fat, sodium and sugar content. . The bill in its current state establishes a parameter that does not incentivize the industry to innovate its portfolios. Even if the content of nutrients of public health interest is reduced, the products will continue to display the same warning seal. In turn, the consumer will end up losing because more than 78% of prepackaged foods will have stamps, making comparison difficult and rendering the objective of promoting better decision-making for the benefit of health null and void. Improving health must be approached in a comprehensive way. Alerting is not informing and what the consumer needs is to learn to better interpret the information presented to them to make a decision. There are other graphic models for front labeling, different from the black warning octagon, which have been recognized by international organizations and could better contribute to the informative purpose of front labeling. These graphic models, by incorporating technical parameters that encourage innovation and reformulation of products by industries, can promote an improvement in the nutritional profile of foods and then, yes, healthy eating would really be promoted.