cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/42020156

Can Canada create a food labeling system similar to this?

It’s confusing trying to buy Canadian with all the variations of made in, assembled in, grown in, packaged in, etc. Can we copy the Australian food labeling system, perhaps replacing the kangeroo with a maple leaf? I find this much clearer.

  • Lupus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 days ago

    …that’s not how those work.

    If a frozen pizza gets a B that means compared to OTHER frozen pizzas it has a higher nutritional value.

    It compares similar products for nutritional value, not the overall “healthiness” of all products compared with each other.

    So you can compare a salami pizza with a veggie pizza or a cereal bar with cereals, but not a strawberry yogurt with a chocolate bar, because those are not within the same product group.

    • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      It’s true but at the same time the fact that so many people get that system wrong makes me think maybe it’s not that well thought through. These things need to be intuitive.

      • Classy Hatter@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        In Finland, we have “heart label” (Sydänmerkki). The label has text “better choice”, and it’s intended to inform customers about products that are good for heart health. You can find this label pretty much on any product category, including things like cookies, ice cream and pizza. You are expected to know, that the label actually means “better choice for heart health within this product category”. So yea, I agree with you on that intuitive part.

    • oldfart@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s legit the first time I hear it, and I searched nutriscore on the internet when I first saw these odd labels, and read some article about it, so likely more research than most people.

      Do you have a source for this, because my understanding of the Wikipedia page is that you’re not correct, but I’m also aware of my ignorance in this topic.

      • Lupus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        Under “Goals” on the Wikipedia page.

        Its goal is to allow consumers to compare the overall nutritional value of food products from the same group (category), including food products from different manufacturers.

        But, I agree that it’s confusing. The fact that you could miss the point of them even after skimming the Wikipedia shows how flawed their design is by not explaining it in simple terms on the label. And the Wikipedia page is also bad, why is it not mentioned in the first sentence in the introduction part?

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Sounds like a simple labeling update would fix the confusion. All labels should say “Rated B compared to other options among FOOD GROUPING.”

      Or something. I’m sure it would be doable.

    • Pirata@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      It compares similar products for nutritional value, not the overall “healthiness” of all products compared with each other.

      Yes, but nobody knows that, they don’t teach it in school, and people just ignore it anyway because it seems unreliable.

      • Lupus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I’ve seen the explanation on tv once or twice but I agree, it’s confusing.

    • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      That sounds like the kind of system the food industry would lobby for to intentionally confuse their customers.