Scientists at the University of Antwerp investigated whether an alternative food labeling system could help consumers better estimate energy values. The classic method (kilocalories) seems to be the most accurate for the moment, even if the researchers certainly don’t want to exclude alternatives.
The values expressed in kcal/100g are not always the best tool for those who want to eat healthier. Instead of “350 kcal”, the packaging could very well say “half an hour of cycling”. In other words: what if we no longer thought in terms of kcal, but in terms of the time it takes to burn those calories through physical activity?
“People are emotional beings and don’t always understand the value of these numbers,” explains marketing professor Nathalie Dens (UAnwerp). “At the supermarket, our primary brain is focused on being rewarded immediately. We are more likely to choose chocolate than fruit. Many people can hardly imagine kilocalories as a unit of measurement.”
Governments have been concerned about obesity for some time. “There is therefore a call for the introduction of a new labeling system: the caloric equivalent of physical activity, or PACE,” notes Dr. Clara Cutello (University of Antwerp). “This is an alternative label that does not indicate the number of kcal, but shows how long you have to walk or swim to use that energy.”
For example, if you want to burn a 780 kcal pizza, you have to walk for 45 minutes. A 233 kcal croissant corresponds to 20 minutes of cycling. Cutello and his team’s research aimed to determine which labeling system consumers can best use: PACE or kcal number.
Nearly two hundred participants were each shown thirty food images for the study. They had to estimate the number of calories or PACE value of each product. Participants were tested on three different occasions. Only in the first round were they shown the correct solution after the question.
“The classical counting method proved to be the more accurate of the two,” concludes Dens. “Respondents are better at estimating the correct number of calories compared to the duration of sporting effort required.” However, Dens does not want to cancel the PACE method. “With both systems we see that with each test point the estimates become more and more accurate. This shows that consumers have to get used to such a new labeling system.”
Access to all features is reserved for professional healthcare professionals.
If you are a healthcare professional, please log in or register for free to gain full access to this content.
If you are a journalist or would like to inform us, write to [email protected].
2024-01-02 12:16:57
#Researchers #compare #effect #alternative #nutrition #label #consumers