Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs
It could soon be harder to ignore the nutritional red flags on your favorite junk food.
This week, the Food and Drug Administration unveiled a long-awaited proposal that would require food and drink manufacturers to display nutrition labels on the front of most of their packages, with the goal of helping shoppers make healthier choices as they breeze through grocery store aisles.
“It’s time we make it easier for consumers to glance, grab, and go,” FDA Commissioner Robert Califf said in a statement. “Adding front-of-package nutrition labeling to most packaged foods would do that.”
Under the proposal, front-of-package labels would indicate how much of the daily recommended intake of those three nutrients is in a serving, and whether the food is “low,” “medium” or “high” in each.
The labels would take the form of a black-and-white box — a design chosen after a 2023 FDA study found that it helped people make quicker and more accurate decisions about a food’s healthiness compared to other label styles.
The front label wouldn’t replace the existing, more detailed nutrition facts on the back of packages, but would act as a complement to them, according to the FDA.
It will be up to the incoming Trump administration whether to finalize the proposal.
Peter G. Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, applauded the move, calling it “long overdue.” He said it could drive healthier consumer choices, push companies to produce healthier products and help combat the growing tide of preventable diseases in the United States.
The reception from the food and beverage industry was more chilly.
“The FDA’s proposed rule for front-of-package nutrition labeling appears to be based upon opaque methodology and disregard of industry input and collaboration,” said Sarah Gallo, senior vice president of product policy at the Consumer Brands Association, which represents major manufacturers of packaged goods.
The proposed labels are part of a larger, government-wide push to curb diet-related chronic illnesses like heart disease, diabetes and cancer — leading causes of death in the US and significant drivers of health care spending.
A large body of evidence shows that a key culprit in the rise of these conditions is the excess consumption of sodium, saturated fats and added sugars.
President-elect Donald Trump has made combating chronic disease a top health priority, and his choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has long crusaded against the use of preservatives and chemicals in US food, pushing for a nationwide crackdown.
If the rule is finalized, manufacturers with $10 million or more in annual food sales would have three years to comply, while smaller businesses would get four years.
But will these labels actually change Americans’ eating habits? The jury is still out.
When Congress passed a law in 2010 requiring chain restaurants to post calorie counts, the results were mixed. A 2016 review of 38 studies found little overall impact in consumer behavior, with researchers concluding that it isn’t an effective tool for promoting healthier food choices.
Even if the labels don’t alter how people shop or eat, there’s evidence they could nudge the food industry to make some changes.
Take Chile, for example: When the country passed a law requiring manufacturers to place warning labels on foods high in sodium, sugar, unhealthy fats or calories, the results were striking.
Within just one year, the proportion of sugary foods dropped from 80% to 60%, and sodium-heavy foods went from 74% to 27%, according to a 2020 study.
