Food Labelling Forum summary report: 21 January 2004

Baroness Howarth OBE
Board Member, Food Standards Agency

Baroness Howarth explained that the Food Standards Agency was established as a UK-wide non-Ministerial Government Department in April 2000. It has an independent Board and is accountable to Parliament and the devolved authorities through Health Ministers. The Agency works hand-in-hand with Government, but can act independently from Government. This is an important separation.

The three core values, to which the Food Standards Agency is publicly committed, are:

• Putting the consumer first
• Being open and accessible
• Being an independent voice

Significant progress has been made in food labelling since the establishment of the Food Standards Agency. The Food Labelling Forum is an important event to help the Agency to hear consumers' views and concerns and to facilitate communication between different interest groups and individuals.

The Agency aims to help ordinary people choose the food they want or need, and know what they are eating.

Health and nutrition claims, Dr Jonathan Back, Head of Labelling Policy, Claims and Advertising Branch

The presentation outlined current uses of health and nutrition claims and the legislation already in place and discussed why new legislation is required. It gave an update of where we are on negotiations on the EU proposal for new health and nutrition claims legislation.

Background
A claim is a non-mandatory message that states, suggests or implies that a food has particular characteristics. Nutrition claims (such as 'low fat') and health claims (such as 'good for your heart') are made to communicate consumer information, such as a health message or diet message; to aid choice; to differentiate products; and to increase sales.

Research commissioned by the Agency on consumer understanding of health claims published in 2002 concluded that claims are useful but that they are not always clear or understood by consumers.

An audit and analysis of health claims on the UK market was carried out in 2003. The audit aims to establish the number, type and status of claims already on the market and to assess the level of substantiation against current legislation and codes of practice. This audit will help to inform the UK position on EU negotiations and is due to be published shortly.

Current legislation
In general, some types of health claims are permitted under EU and UK legislation. In addition, the Joint Health Claims Initiative (JHCI) self-regulatory Code of Practice provides an opportunity for companies to have their health claims assessed. For nutrition claims, there is guidance that covers criteria for claims about fat, sugar, salt and fibre content of foods.

Further legislation could provide the consumer with protection from false and misleading claims on all foods, including food supplements, and ensure that claims are substantiated. Additionally, legislation would harmonise Community rules on the use of claims and improve the free movement of goods within the internal market.

The EU proposal
The EU proposal on health and nutrition claims was published in July 2003. UK consultation took place from July to October 2003. Discussions with Member States and in the European Parliament are on-going and could be concluded within the next few months.

The draft proposal would establish a list of approved nutrition claims – with this including the criteria for each claim. For health claims, the proposal would require prior approval by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), although the Commission, having consulted with EFSA, will adopt an initial list of generally accepted claims. Restrictions on certain types of claims are being proposed, although reduction of disease risk claims, which are currently prohibited, will be allowed under the regulation.

Nutrient profiling aims to minimise the risk that nutrition and health claims on foods high in fat, salt or sugar might undermine public health advice to reduce intake of these nutrients. For example, a prominent ‘good for your heart’ claim on a low fat product that is also high in salt, but provides this information less prominently, is not providing a clear message to consumers about the product’s characteristics. The proposal aims to establish a framework for nutrient profiling.

Conclusions
There is general agreement that the proposal is needed and acceptance that this is a complex issue. It is recognised that there is a difference of opinion between consumers and industry on certain aspects of the EU proposal. The Agency is attempting to address this in the negotiations and aims to ensure consumers are not misled or confused by nutrition or health claims, yet minimise the impact of the regulation on the food industry.

Food authenticity
Dr Mark Woolfe, Head of Standards and Authenticity Branch

The presentation gave an outline of the reasons behind the authenticity programme, the content of the programme and what it has achieved. It discussed which issues are of highest priority for the future.

Overview of programme
The programme contributes to the Agency’s programme to promote honest and informative labelling to help consumers make informed choices; it assists in the improvement of enforcement of food standards; supports food labelling policy and identifies and tackles misdescription of foods.

Misdescription of food includes not meeting the requirements for a legal name, substituting an ingredient with a cheaper one and using an undeclared process such as irradiation or freezing during the preparation of the food.

The legal basis for the labelling of foods includes the name of a food or ingredient, the processes used to prepare the food, the origin of the food and the quantitative ingredients declaration (QUID).

Surveys
As part of the authenticity programme, consumer surveys are undertaken to determine consumer understanding of descriptions, claims and labelling of foods. Surveys undertaken include consumer understanding of 'freshly squeezed' and 'from concentrate' for fruit juices, country of origin labelling and consumer attitudes to misdescription.

Surveys are also undertaken to assess the authenticity of food. Examples of recent surveys include an investigation into the misdescription of potatoes with respect to their varietal identification and a survey into the misdescription of chicken that identified in a small number of samples undeclared water and proteins from sources other than chicken.

The results of these surveys are reported on the Agency website.

Future work
Subjects for future surveys were discussed. It was highlighted that approximately four surveys per year can be undertaken and, therefore, it is necessary to list the issues in order of priority. Input was sought from the audience on their priorities on issues of concern.

Allergens
Sue Hattersley, Head of Chemical Safety and Toxicology Branch 2, Dr Jonathan Back, Head of Labelling Policy, Claims and Advertising Branch

These two talks gave a background to food allergy and intolerance, including prevalence, symptoms and routes of exposure. They covered what the Agency is doing to identify and tackle the issues in terms of raising awareness and labelling and discussed the new EU legislation in this area.

Sue Hattersley

Background
Many foods have been reported to cause food allergy with various symptoms. The 'big eight' are those foods that cause over 90% of allergy. These are:

• Milk
• Eggs
• Peanuts
• Tree nuts
• Fish
• Shellfish
• Soya
• Wheat

Those allergens that can cause anaphylaxis are:

• Peanuts
• Nuts
• Seafood
• Spices
• Sesame and other seeds

People can be exposed and/or sensitised to foods through several routes. These are:

• Oral
• Inhalation
• Skin
• Across the placenta
• Breast feeding

About 20-30% of the UK population think they have an adverse reaction to food, while tests show that 1-2% of adults and 5-8% of children have allergies or intolerances to foods.

There is no cure for food allergy. Therefore, allergies and intolerances have to be managed through avoiding the food in question or using antihistamines or adrenaline to treat the symptoms arising from accidental exposure. Proper food avoidance requires education, reading ingredient labels and finding out about hidden and cross-reactive allergens.

Work in progress/future work
The Agency is working to raise awareness through initiatives such as the 'Be Allergy Aware' campaign. The Agency also provides information for consumers via its website and funds a large research programme addressing food allergy issues. In addition, food allergy was looked at twice by the Agency's Board in 2003, firstly to discuss the general issues involved and secondly to agree a detailed action plan to help food allergic consumers when eating out.

An audit of information on food allergy and intolerance has been carried out to identify what is currently available and where gaps exist. It found that there was a great deal of information already in the public domain but that gaps existed in the provision of information for caterers and enforcement officers and for patients attending NHS clinics. The Agency is currently developing a best practice advice pack for caterers that will be published on the website.

Future work includes ensuring that the progression of on-going Agency initiatives, such as the introduction of HACCP into catering establishments and traceability into the food chain, takes due account of food allergy concerns. The Branch is also planning to work with others to help meet the gaps identified in the provision of information for, and training of, caterers and enforcement officers.

Jonathan Back

Outline of the new EU Directive
A new EU Directive agreed last year (2003/89/EC) will provide a comprehensive ingredients listing so that those with food allergies are able to identify the ingredients that they need to avoid.

Under current food labelling rules, ingredients used to make a pre-packed food must be listed in descending order. But some exemptions allow manufacturers not to list all the ingredients of a food, for example the 25% rule. The new Directive established those 'allergens' for which ingredient listing exemptions should not apply and requires that products derived from the specified allergens must be labelled with reference to that allergen.

The listed allergens are:

• Cereals containing gluten
• Crustaceans
• Eggs
• Fish
• Peanuts
• Soybeans
• Milk
• Nuts
• Celery
• Mustard
• Sesame seeds
• Sulphur dioxides and sulphites (at concentrations of more than 10mg/kg or 10 mg/l expressed as SO₂)

Some of the ingredients derived from the listed allergens are no longer thought to be allergenic because they have been highly refined or processed, for example refined peanut oils and glucose syrup from wheat. The new rules make provision for such ingredients not to have to be listed with reference to the source allergen if it can be shown that they are no longer allergenic. The timetable for this procedure and for the implementation of the Directive was given.

The rules include flexibility to account for technical constraints involved in manufacturing and some minor specific derogations that apply to some ingredients/compound ingredients making up less than 2% of the final product. These exceptions do not include the listed allergens.

'May contain' labelling
Two alternative phrases have been developed to replace 'may contain' warnings, in consultation with a wide range of interested parties. The Agency is currently consulting on the most appropriate alternative wording and will encourage manufacturers to use the resultant phrase through its Clear Labelling Advice.

EU proposal on nutrition and health claims

Industry concerns

• Concerns were raised about the need to substantiate claims under the new proposal. Issues voiced by industry included that many businesses, especially small businesses, would find it difficult to fund the research required and that this, in addition to proposals such as nutrient profiling, are likely to have a knock-on effect of limiting the product range available to consumers as producers remove those lines that are not economically viable. The Agency reinforced the view that if a claim cannot be substantiated, then it should not be made. Further worries were that the prohibition of certain claims might limit the availability of information to the consumer.
• One participant felt that there is a conflict between the consumer and the industry. The Agency responded that the proposal must be flexible to manage these differing demands. The Agency acts as a regulator to balance the need to protect consumers and the needs of industry.

Need for the new legislation

• The need for the new proposal was questioned, as the 1990 Food Safety Act already bans misleading/false claims. It was pointed out that under present legislation, enforcement officers are finding it difficult to validate misleading claims and that it is clear from consumer research that consumers do have concerns about such claims on labels because they feel that some are false and misleading.

Content of the proposals

• Doubts were also raised about the appropriateness of disease reduction claims as the benefits of these are likely to affect different people in different ways. The Agency responded that it will be important to ensure that claims are valid for all who would consume a product and that, hopefully, this would be covered in the approval process.
• In response to a query on the prohibition of claims on products for children, the Agency emphasised that discussions on the proposal are still on-going and that the implications of any proposed prohibition, such as on products for children, would be considered carefully.
• It was clarified that the Agency does not see gluten/lactose free claims as health claims, but noted that it is important that they are covered by legislation. In addition there is provision for additional claims, such as for glycemic index, to be added to the proposal in due course.
• It was confirmed that the proposed legislation covers advertising as well as food labelling.

Endorsement and sponsorship

• The endorsement or sponsorship of products was highlighted as an important issue. It was felt that, in general, consumers like charity and professional endorsements. Different types of endorsement were discussed. The Agency noted that if endorsements are made, they must be clear, accurate and have established criteria that are widely understood.

Audit on health claims

• The Audit is due to be published within the next few months.

Authenticity

The Agency was keen to discuss the prioritisation plans for food surveys.

Impact of programme on animal welfare

• In response to several queries regarding animal welfare, the Agency noted that analytical methods are being developed to check claims in order to strengthen mandatory regulation or voluntary codes. Examples included detecting differences in egg mineral content to verify free-range claims and using DNA to determine the origin of fish.

Chicken with added water

• The Agency is pressing the European Commission to take action on chicken with added water and non-poultry proteins. The Commission is expected to publish a communication indicating that the use of water-retaining agents in chicken, such as pork proteins, is prohibited. This is of particular importance to consumers who observe a halal diet.

Allergens

Research programme

• The Agency is carrying out research in order to understand why allergy prevalence is increasing, but pointed out that the research is not complete yet. The Agency is aware of opportunities provided by joint funding.

Clarity of allergen labelling

• Many consumers called for a standardisation of the labelling of allergens in terms of the marking, size and location. The Agency noted that it has published guidance on clear labelling which recommends the use of a 'contains' box, but would like to hear consumer's views on this. It was also suggested that consumers raise these issues with manufacturers. Further to this, the use of universally recognised icons for allergens was discussed to avoid difficulties with languages. The Agency noted that a major problem with allergen logos is that people are unsure whether they indicate the presence or absence of the allergen. In addition, inconsistent use of logos can lead to misunderstanding, which is potentially dangerous. This point of view was supported by the Anaphylaxis Campaign.
• It was noted that current legislation does not cover areas such as catering and nut trace contamination warnings. When working to reduce the frequency of these 'may contain' warnings, industry involvement is very important.

Product information from manufacturers

• Several participants who suffer from allergies and intolerances felt that in general insufficient information was available from manufacturers, and noted variability, with some manufacturers providing very comprehensive information, but others being unhelpful. It was suggested that manufacturers should have ingredients information on their websites. The BRC highlighted that many retailers do produce 'free from' lists if consumers contact customer services at the head office of the relevant company. A further issue raised by participants was that the endorsement of 'free from' claims must be monitored.
• Consumers also requested that manufacturers should not change product ingredients without a notification on the label, for example with the word 'new'; or use ingredients interchangeably, for example as with the use of glucose syrup derived either from wheat, which contains gluten, or corn, which is safe to those with coeliac disease.
• Several participants pointed out that if manufacturers made their labels and/or off-label information clear, so that allergic and intolerant consumers could confirm that their product was safe for them to eat, then they would have a dedicated and loyal market for these products.
• One participant noted that when developing products aimed at young children manufacturers could take account of existing guidelines containing advice on when children should be exposed to nuts.
• UK companies were also recognised for pioneering allergy labelling in the EU.

Catering

• Consumers felt that consumer information and training need to be improved in catering establishments. The Agency noted that they are hoping to cover many of these issues in a catering pack to be published on the website in the next few months advising catering establishments of good practice.

Gluten Intolerance

• Several consumers highlighted the fact that some products legitimately claiming 'gluten free' status can still contain levels of gluten that can cause reactions in sensitive individuals. The Coeliac Society noted that no safe levels of gluten have been identified. The panel responded that the Agency is still waiting for information on thresholds and detection levels for gluten from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The new EU Directive will require that wheat containing gluten added to a foodstuff will have to be declared in all cases.

Labelling of allergen derivatives

• There was concern over the rules regarding the labelling of derivatives of allergens. In many cases individuals sensitive to the source allergen do not react to their derivatives, although this was not the case for one participant who stated that her son reacts to glucose syrup when derived from wheat. The new legislation allows manufacturers to provide evidence to the Commission to show that individual derivatives do not cause allergic responses in individuals sensitive to the source allergen.

Allergens in additives

• Additives, such as food colourings and preservatives, have to be listed in pre-packed foods, either by name or by E-number, and so can be avoided by consumers, if they choose to do so. The possibility of some additives having adverse effects on children's behaviour is being addressed within the food intolerance research programme.

Labelling of toiletries as sources of allergens

• The possibility was raised that children can develop allergies due to exposure to toiletry products containing ingredients derived from nuts. The Agency stated that this is not covered by the Agency's remit as these products are not foods.

Vegetarian and vegan labelling and welfare and production systems

Vegetarian and vegan definition

• There was much discussion regarding the need for a definition of 'vegetarian' and 'vegan'. This is a complicated issue as there are many views on what the terms 'vegetarian' and 'vegan' mean. The Agency was keen to hear the audience's views on how this issue should be progressed. Several participants called for definitions of these terms. Other suggestions included labelling products as 'free from', 'no animal fat, fish, egg or meat' or 'no animal has suffered to make this product'. A further issue was the education of retailers and caterers on what the terms 'vegetarian' and 'vegan' mean.
• The Agency confirmed that this is a priority. Some information on schemes used by the food industry had been collated and the Agency would like to take this forward. The Chair concluded from the discussion that definitions are what consumers want.

Coatings used on fruit and vegetables

• The use of coatings, such as shellac and beeswax, and content of glue used for stickers on loose fruits and vegetables in the UK was highlighted as of importance to some vegetarians and vegans.

New Directive – 2003/89/EC

• It was confirmed that the 2% derogations allowed under the new 'allergen'; directive would not allow animal fats to be present and not labelled.

Welfare and Production Systems

• One participant suggested that labels could have a warning such as 'production of these eggs entails' and that standard operating procedures (SOP's) could be used to inform consumers of the production systems used.
• One delegate called for fuller labelling on the country of origin and slaughter on meat and fish products and on the handling methods used. The Agency explained that origin information is required on beef, which is an area on which Defra leads, and the Agency is pressing for more country of origin information on a range of foods, particularly meat and certain meat products. We are hoping, and will continue to press for, the Commission to publish a proposal on country of origin labelling.

Religiously slaughtered meat

• The issue of religiously slaughtered meat was also brought up covering the potential for meat that was slaughtered with no pre-stunning to be on general sale without being labelled as such. The Agency noted that we are very interested to hear views on this complicated issue.

Clear labelling

Print size

• Several participants felt that label print was not large enough for essential information. Suggestions to tackle this problem included using a font size that is at least half the size of the brand name size. A further issue was the number of languages used on labels and whether this was helpful.
• The Agency has issued advice on clear labelling that includes guidance on appropriate print sizes and colours and how essential information should be presented. The Agency is planning to carry out a survey to look at the extent to which this advice has been taken up by industry and will set out plans to address issues identified. Legislation does state that labels must be legible, but it was observed that legibility is different for different people.

Food supplements

• A specific concern raised by one participant highlighted the difficulties in fitting all of the information required by law on labels for food supplements, as these labels are often small.

Enforcement

Enforcement was highlighted by several participants as an area of specific interest, particularly through a request to include enforcement on the Forum agenda for next year. The Chair confirmed that enforcement would be included.

Resources

• A specific query on the adequacy of controls on PGLs (protected geographic location) and PDOs (protected designation of origin) led to more general discussion regarding addressing the shortfall of funds to local authorities to develop and disseminate analytical techniques and for trading standards and environmental health officers and enforcement. It was highlighted that work is being done on this area. For example an extensive research project on PDO cheeses was aimed at developing analytical methodology for use in enforcement. The project end product will be a robust protocol that will be put into the public domain. It was pointed out that there are often problems, as some techniques may not be available in public analyst laboratories. In addition, more resources are being provided in some areas, for example raising food safety issues with local councils, but this results in funding being reduced in other areas.

Allergen survey

• There was a request for data on allergen content of take-away meals to be collected through a survey led by the FSA. The Agency agreed to consider this suggestion.

Legislation issue

• One participant noted that some manufacturers of non-food products are taking advantage of direct sales provisions allowing less information to be supplied on labels. For example, cosmetics product legislation states that if a package is too small, information for products must be displayed in the store.

Agency targets

• One participant felt that the Agency should have specific measures of performance with deadlines, targets and methods of measuring progress. The Chair noted that the Agency is working to an Action Plan for Food Labelling, agreed by the Agency Board, which is published on the web with regular updates. This shows clearly what the Agency wants to achieve and how it is progressing with respect to food labelling. The Chair felt that while labelling practice is improving, consumers continue to call for improvements, which means that standards must continue to rise to keep pace with expectations.

Providing off-label information and education

• Suggestions for alternative methods of providing information to the consumer were free phone lines, website links or through barcode technology.
• One participant asked what the Agency was doing in terms of education. Initiatives include disseminating information through our website to help educate people; leafleting on areas that are an issue, for example best before dates and working with the Department for Education and Skills on education in schools. Food and nutrition is on the national curriculum.

GM labelling

• An update on the new GM legislation was given. The Agency and Defra are working together on two new GM regulations and are planning to carry out a joint consultation on the GM food and feed and traceability labelling regulations. New lower thresholds will replace those currently in place. A manufacturing representative felt that manufacturers will not include GM ingredients in their products because consumers will not buy them. This said, manufacturers cannot guarantee the total absence of GM due to adventitious contamination although they are doing everything they can to supply GM free products.

Quantitative ingredients declarations (QUID)

• In response to a query on the tolerances for QUID legislation, it was stated that there are no specific guidelines on tolerances, but that this should be discussed with local trading standards officers. A rough estimate of 2% was given.

Baroness Howarth OBE, Board Member, Food Standards Agency

Baroness Howarth commended the rich debate that had taken place and summarised the main themes of the discussions. These included:

• the ethical debates, driven by religious and personal requirements and preferences, particularly in relation to animal welfare;
• the complexity of the relationships between the Agency, other Government departments and local authorities and the fact they are working together to achieve improvements over many areas;
• the priorities of industry, which is in general working hard to bring about improvements in labelling;
• the needs of the ordinary consumer who were encouraged to keep the pressure up on issues of interest;
• the increased complexity, as food and consumers become more global; and
• communication in general, particularly of scientific developments and of consumer needs.

Finally, the Chair thanked Baroness Howarth for her words, and the speakers and the attendees for contributing to a very successful event. Thanks were also given to Church House for accommodating the Forum.

The next Forum is planned for October 2004 in Scotland.