Big Food companies including Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kellogg Company, Kraft Foods, PepsiCo and Unilever have with the assistance of The Keystone Center developed The Smart Choices Program in a partnership with some academicians, health and research organizations and retailers. This is their new checkmark logo.
Take a look at the qualifying criteria and share what you think of them by adding a comment below. Is the intention to avoid tougher regulation like a mandatory traffic light system? Is The Smart Choice Program a first step in quietly accepting that GDA-labeling is actually confusing and misleading to consumers? What do you think of the new nutritional criteria?
See also Marion Nestle’s blog on this topic, and Camillas comments or my second post on this topic.
#1 by Anonymous at October 30th, 2008
Hello Morten and others
Thanks for this link.
The criteria are relatively complicated and I have not had the time to look into them in details. But two things struck my eyes after a quick glance:
1. The threshold values for nutrients should always be assessed per 100 gram and not per serving. When you use per serving as they do, it means that small packages of unhealthy food will pass
2. The limit for added sugar at ≤25% of total calories is extremely high, far above the WHO limit at ≤10% of total calories, and further below in the citeria, they conclude from the WHO 10% limit that it is ok if a breakfast cereal contains ≤ 12 g added sugar per serving. That corresponds to 40 g/100 g if the producer claim a serving size to be 30 g!!!!! The calculation of ‘allowed’ sugar per meal does not take into account sugar eaten in between meals.
So, GDA is indeed misleading, but this is not a good alternative. I am afraid that what you suggest is true: that they are trying to avoid a more strict labelling scheme.
Best regards,
Camilla Udsen, Senior food Adviser, Danish Consumer Council