Labeling food and drinks with how much walking or running is needed to burn them off could help tackle the obesity crisis, researchers say.
While all packaged food must display certain nutritional information, such as calorie content,there is limited evidence that the approach changes what people buy or eat. Meanwhile,waistlines continue to expand.
A new study backs another approach to labeling: displaying small symbols showing how much physical activity is needed to compensate for consuming the item.
A fizzy drink containing 138 calories, for example , could be accompanied by a small symbol of a person showing it would take 26 minutes of walking or 13 minutes of running to burn off.
The team say the approach puts calories in context and may help people to avoid overeating, or spur them to move about more in a bid to burn off the energy they have consumed. They also suggest it might encourage food producers to make products with less calories.
“We think there is a clear signal that it might be useful,” said Prof Amanda Daley of Loughborough University, first author of the research. “We are not saying get rid of current labeling, we’d say add this to it.”
Daley said a simple approach is important since it is thought we only spend about six seconds looking at food before deciding whether to buy it.
“In that [time] We got to have something that you can easily understand and make sense of without having to have a PhD in mathematics to work out what [eating] a quarter of a pizza actually means, ”she said.
“If I tell you something is going to take you 60 minutes of walking to burn, I think most people understand that and know that minutes of walking is a long way. ”
Writing in theJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Daley and her colleagues report how they analyzed data from 26 previously conducted studies exploring the impact of an exercise -based labeling system.
The team found that compared with no labeling or other labeling taken taken, participants selected on average about 83 fewer calories per meal when exercise-based labels were present on food or menus. That’s less than a single chocolate digestive biscuit at 103 calories .
Digging deeper, the team found people selected 110 fewer calories when the exercise-based labels were used compared with no labeling alone.
“In restaurants and coffee shops, where we eat most of our high-calorie foods, you would typically see no labeling at all,” said Daley.
However, there was no clear benefit compared with other types of labeling as as calorie-only labeling, daily intake labeling or “traffic light” labeling.
Similarly, an analysis based on studies that looked at calories actually consumed revealed individuals ate about 195 calories fewer when food was labeled with exercise-based information compared with no labeling.
While the gains may sound small, Daley said such reductions add up across meals.
“People think that obesity is caused by gluttony. It isn’t.Obesityis caused by all of us eating just a little bit too much, ”she said.
However, the research has limitations: most of the studies were based on hypothetical situations or laboratory-based work, and there was a limited number of them.
The studies also varied considerably in how they explored the impact of exercise-based labeling.
Duncan Stephenson, deputy chief executive of the Royal Society for PublicHealth, welcomes the research, saying the charity’s own work showed such exercise-based labeling both made consumers think twice about their purchases, and motivated them to think about exercising.
But, he said, “real-life” studies are now needed to test the system’s impact in supermarkets and restaurants.
Dr Stacey Lockyer of the British (Nutrition) Foundation also said an approach which reduces people daily intake by up to calories is worth considering. She said that, on average, adults overshoot their daily recommended calories by this amount, while overweight and obese adults consume approximately 350 excess calories per day.
Lockyer noted that there is evidence an exercise-based labeling system appeals to consumers.
Dr Frankie Phillips, a registered dietitian and spokesperson for theBritish Dietetic Association, said exercise- based labeling could also prove confusing, while a focus on calories – although a useful indicator – does not tell a consumer whether food or drink is “healthy”.
“For example, calories labeled on a sandwich might come to around 823 kcal whereas a chocolate confectionery bar might be 728 kcal, ”she said. “If calories are given central importance then the chocolate bar would appear to be a better choice, whereas a more balanced approach would obviously show that a sandwich is far superior nutritionally, despite being higher in calories.”
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings