Where has all the “light” gone?

As a consequence of the prescription in the FDR, it has become more difficult to clearly differentiate between regular and “lighter” foods, although clever marketers have devised distinct label features to help differentiate foods “with less” and foods “with more” of certain ingredients or nutrients. The prescriptive nature of the FDR in respect of nutrient representations is most obvious in the case of comparative claims, but it does have further reaches. In proposed regulations published in Canada Gazette I in 2005, Health Canada sought to bring in even further prescription. These proposed regulations have not been finalized.

Rules are good. Industry likes to promote its products. Health Canada regulates nutrient content claims to promote better food choices by Canadians. But prescription for the sake of prescription is the wrong approach. Would it be so bad to have the word “light” twice as large as the nutrient referred to, and the amount difference grouped together on the main panel? Or to have the option of having additional supporting information appear grouped together with the nutrition facts table elsewhere, and in a more reasonable type height? After all, the FDR permits this in the case of “diet” products, where the validating claim (such as “sugar-free”) does not have to be grouped together with the term “diet.” It may just be worth shedding some light on prescriptive practices that work against getting a good message out to consumers.