Why nutrient “warnings” and prohibitions are a bad idea
As recently reported in The Ontarion and other news outlets, Health Canada is seeking feedback on their proposal for mandatory front-of-package (FOP) labels on foods high in sugars, sodium, and saturated fat. These particular nutrients are deemed “a public health concern,” contributing to obesity, heart disease, and high blood pressure. Though rising obesity rates and increasingly sedentary lifestyles are understandable causes for concern, I believe there are actually many flaws in adopting the FOP labelling system.
The first major issue with the FOP labelling lies in its name. This movement, pushing for conspicuous labels to catch the consumer’s eye, appears to make the assumption that Canadians are unable to turn a product around.The exact information to be highlighted in these “warnings” can be found in greater detail, mere centimeters away.
Food packaging is already required by law to include ingredient and nutrient information, including the sugar, sodium, and saturated fats now under target. By claiming that FOP labels will “Provide quick and easy guidance to help [Canadians] make informed choices about packaged foods,” Health Canada is apparently assuming that we are currently unable to do so.
Secondly, these labels have the potential to be very misleading. While nutrients such as sugar or salt can undoubtedly have negative impacts when consumed in large amounts, they are still essential to the diet. I do understand that the purpose of FOP labels is to provide an obvious caveat for those contemplating a meal or snack with “excess” nutrient amounts, yet by attaching an unfavourable connotation to these nutrients, we unwittingly categorize any food rich in one or more of them, such as nuts, as “unhealthy.”
Similarly, I find it very dangerous to use words “unhealthy” or “guilty” in association with food of any kind. It would be foolish to argue that some foods do not inherently provide more sustenance for our bodies, but I also do not think it does any favours to shame the consumption of certain products. In true cliché form, I really do believe that a healthy, balanced life means everything in moderation.
For decades, products classically defined as “unhealthy,” such as pop, burgers, candy, and fries, have existed in our schools and homes without triggering an obesity crisis. The issue is not, and has never been, that these foods exist. The true problem arises with the interaction of our sedentary lifestyles and the over-consumption of prepackaged, cheap, convenient foods, as well as the inaccessibility or impracticality of fresh, nutritious foods such as fruits and vegetables.
By banning or “dumbing down” these products and their labels, we are over-simplifying a complex problem. Teaching children that certain foods are “bad” for them can cause distorted concepts of what is okay for their bodies, and brings shame upon those whose families eat meals outside the realm of spinach salad and grilled chicken—which is hopefully all of them. Whether nixing pizza lunches, regulating what parents can pack their children, or announcing calories, sugars, etc. for all to see and judge, no avenue of “nutrition law” will educate youth—and the public at large—on the holistic approach required for true health.
In a time where mental health is finally being addressed and discussed, deadly illnesses such as eating disorders are coming to the forefront in terms of awareness and treatment.Though these are incredibly complicated illnesses that cannot be attributed to any single factor, the fact remains that society’s constant obsession with dieting, “good” foods, and what “should” be eaten play a role in establishing powerful but misled behavioural and thought patterns. No person—whether they suffer from an eating disorder or not—should avoid a product because a little sticker initiates feelings of danger or remorse.
If Health Canada truly wants to improve health for its citizens coast to coast, a shift in their approach will be necessary. Rather than teaching children what is and is not “allowed,” we should be demonstrating firsthand the challenges and rewards of balancing to supply our bodies with their unique needs. Rather than insulting the public with assumptions about their abilities to read labels, we should more readily make available the information they need to make informed choices. Rather than pretending our diets are the sole reason—and not also our bubble-wrapped, technology-obsessed, pathetically sedentary lifestyles—for growing health concerns, we need to be honest with ourselves and with each other.
It isn’t going to be easy. But it is certainly necessary.
Photo by Mariah Bridgeman.