Download Supplementary Appendix 4

1
Appendix 4.
Overview of product group descriptions, criteria and rationales
Development of international criteria for a front of package food labelling system:
international Choices Programme
2
INTRODUCTION
The detailed rationales below refer to the set of nutrient profiles that have been defined for the
Choices programme in the paper: “Development of international criteria for a front of package
food labelling system: international Choices Programme”. Table 1 and 2 show the overview
of these nutrient profiles: including descriptions of the product groups and the specific
criteria.
Table 1. Overview of generic1 and product group specific criteria, including description of
basic product groups2
Product group2
Overview Choices criteria3,4
Fresh or fresh frozen fruit, vegetables and legumes
All types of fresh fruit, vegetables, and potatoes without
additives, including freshly frozen and/or sliced fruit &
vegetables. Pre-cut leek, pre-sliced melon, cucumber, broccoli,
deep-frozen spinach (without added cream), raspberries.
Processed fruit & vegetables
All types of processed fruit & vegetables, with the exception of
fruit juices and frozen or pre-sliced fruit & vegetables without
further processing. E.g.: tinned tomatoes, tinned carrots, tinned
kidney beans, deep-frozen spinach à la crème, deep-frozen
vegetables, tomato juice, dried lentils,
pickles, mixed vegetable juices, dried apricots or figs, pine on
juice, fruit cocktail in own juice or syrup, apple sauce, candied
dates, strawberry purée, olives, mixed fruit & vegetable purées or
juices.
Fruit Juices
All kinds of fruit juices with a minimum of 98% own juice.
Orange juice, apple juice, multi-fruit juice.
All products without additives comply
Water (plain)
Includes natural (mineral) waters and other bottled waters, each
of which may be non-carbonated or carbonated
Potatoes (unprocessed)
All unprocessed uncooked potatoes, without additives, including
uncooked peeled, sliced and/or chilled potatoes.
Potatoes (processed), pasta, noodles
All kinds of potato products, pasta and similar grain products,
used for a main dish. Boiled/ fried potatoes, mashed potato,
(wholemeal) pasta.
Rice
All kinds of rice, used for a main dish. Boiled, dried unpolished
rice, white rice, whole grain rice.
Bread
All kinds of bread or substitutes for bread with the exception of
breakfast cereals. Wheat bread, wholemeal bread, crisp bread,
croissants, rye bread, speciality rolls, crackers.
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Fibre: ≥ 1.3 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Fibre: ≥ 0.75 g/100kcal5
Energy: ≤ 48 kcal/100mL
Sodium: ≤ 20mg/100mL
All products without additives comply
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Fibre: ≥ 1.3 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Fibre: ≥ 0.7 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 500mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 13 en%
3
Product group2
Grains and cereal products
All kinds of grains and cereal products (other than bread and
breakfast cereal), flour, breadcrumbs, binding agents, pancake
mixes.
Breakfast cereal products
All kinds of breakfast cereal products (muesli, cruesli, outs,
cornflakes, rice crispies).
Meat, poultry, eggs (unprocessed)
All kinds of unprocessed meat, poultry and eggs (including deepfrozen meat without further processing). Beef, pork, turkey, egg.
Processed meat, meat products and meat substitutes
All kinds of processed meat/poultry, meat products and
(vegetable) meat substitutes. Ready-to-eat meatballs, spiced or
salted meat (fresh or deep-frozen), salami, smoke-dried beef,
grilled ham, tempeh, tofu, dairy-based meat substitute, fungusbased meat substitute.
Fresh or fresh frozen fish, shellfish and crustaceans
All kinds of unprocessed fish, crustaceans and shellfish
(including deep-frozen fish without further processing).
Uncooked herring, cod (fresh or deep-frozen), fresh eel, lobster
crab, mussel, shrimp.
Overview Choices criteria3,4
Fibre: ≥ 1.3 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g
Fibre: ≥ 1.3 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 500 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 20 g/100g
Fibre: ≥ 1.3 g/100kcal5
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g6
Sodium: ≤ 100 mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en %
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g6
Sodium: ≤ 900 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or
≤ 30 % of total fat
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 100 mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Processed fish or fish products
All kinds of processed fish, processed crustaceans and processed
shellfish. Cod parings, fried fillet of haddock, deep-fried octopus/
squid (cephalopod), pickled mussels, herring in tomato sauce,
tinned sardines, tinned tuna, spiced or salted fish (fresh or deepfrozen).
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or
≤ 30 % of total fat
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 450 mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
Milk (-products)
All kinds of milk and milk products. E.g.: low fat milk, buttermilk
semi-skimmed milk, full-cream milk, low fat yoghurt, semiskimmed yoghurt, yoghurt drink, low fat custard, low fat fruit
yoghurt, evaporated milk, coffee cream,
cream (for culinary use), milk substitutes like soymilk.
Cheese (-products)
All kinds of cheese and cheese products. 20+ cheese, 30+ cheese,
Edam, Brie 50+, 48+ Gouda cheese, blue cheese, gorgonzola,
gruyère, soft herb cheese.
SAFA: ≤ 1.4 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g6
Sodium: ≤ 100 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 5 g/100g
Oils, fats and fat containing spreads
All fats and oils used as spreads on bread and/or the preparation
of food. Oil (all types), low-fat margarine, margarine, butter,
oil/fat products for roasting and frying (solid or liquid).
SAFA: ≤ 30% of total fat
TFA: ≤ 1.3 en%6
Sodium: ≤ 1.3 mg/kcal
Added sugar: not added
Main course
All ready-to-cook meals that are intended to be eaten as main
dish during lunch or dinner. Meals for steaming, ready-to-cook
meals, pizza, mixes for main dishes, deep-frozen meals
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g or ≤ 1.3 en%6
Sodium: ≤ 2.2 mg/kcal
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
Fibre: ≥ 1.25g/100kcal5
Energy: 400-700kcal/serving
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
Filled sandwiches/rolls
SAFA: ≤ 15 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g6
Sodium: ≤ 900 mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
4
Product group2
All ready-to-eat filled sandwiches/rolls
Overview Choices criteria3,4
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g or ≤ 1.3 en%6
Sodium: ≤ 1.9 mg/kcal
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
Fibre: ≥ 0.8g/100kcal5
Energy: ≤ 350 kcal/serving
National deviation example
SAFA: ≤ 2 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g6
Sodium: ≤ 400 mg/100g
Added sugar: not added
1)
Generic criteria are translated from population intake goals (1) as described in the paper: “Development of
international criteria for a front of package food labelling system: international Choices Programme”.
2)
Based on the product group classifications as used in food-based dietary guidelines in more than 20 countries
Australia (2) Belgium (3), Caribbean (4), Canada (5), China (6), Denmark (7), Finland (8), France (9), Germany
(10), Greece (11), Hungary (12), Malaysia (13), Mexico (14), Namibia (15), Netherlands (16), Philippines (17),
Portugal (18), Singapore (19), Spain (20), Sweden (21), Turkey (22), UK (23), various countries (24, 25).
3)
If possible the generic criteria were fixed per product group: either as en% or g/100g. However when this
would lead to needless exclusion of low energy dense foods, both generic criteria (en% or g/100g) can be used.
4)
Details on the rationales behind the product group specific criteria can be found below.
5)
For each product group the fibre in a product has to come from ingredients products of the same product
group.
6)
Naturally occurring trans fat from meat or milk is excluded.
Soft white cheese (Israel)
Soft white spreadable cheeses with percentage moisture on a fatfree basis (MFFB) > 67%. Cottage cheese, white cheese spreads
5
Table 2. Overview of generic1 and product group specific criteria, including description of
discretionairy product groups.
Product group
Overview Choices criteria2,3
Soups
All kinds of soups and broths. Tinned soup, deep-frozen soup, soup in
stand-up pouches, soup served by the catering industry
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 300 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g
Energy: ≤ 100 kcal/100g
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 450 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5g/100g
Energy: ≤ 100 kcal/100g
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 750 mg/100g
Energy: ≤ 100 kcal/100g
Meal sauces
All sauces that constitute a substantial component of the meal (portion
size > 35 g). E.g. Pasta sauce, béchamel sauce, vegetable sauce, meat
sauce, fish sauce, cheese sauce, mustard sauce, gravy.
Other sauces (on water basis)
All sauces that constitute only a minor component of the meal
(portion size < 35 g) without added emulsifying agent AND have a fat
content < 10% w/w.
E.g. Ketchup, soy sauce, chocolate sauce, fruit sauce, barbecue sauce.
Other sauces (emulsions)
All sauces that constitute only a minor component of the meal
(portion size < 35 g) to which an emulsifying agent is added OR have
a fat content ≥ 10% w/w.
E.g. Mayonnaise, salad dressing, dip sauce, marinade, mustard,
vinaigrette.
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g & 30 % total fat
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g & 1.3 en%
Sodium: ≤ 750 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 13 en% & 2.5g/100g
Energy: ≤ 350 kcal/100g
Snacks (including pastry, edible ice cream, sweet snacks and
savoury snacks)
All kinds of sweet, savoury, and sweet baked products intended to be
eaten as a small snack between meals or as a minor component of a
meal.
E.g. Savoury products: potato crisps, popcorn; Sweet products:
sweets, all types of chocolate, candy bars; Sweet baked products:
biscuits, cookies, all types of cake and pastries. Ice cream: vanilla ice
cream, sorbet, yoghurt ice, sorbet ice, milkshake.
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g or ≤ 1.3 en%
Sodium: ≤ 400 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 20 g/100g
Energy: ≤ 110 kcal/serving
Beverages
Liquid food products that are normally consumed from a cup, mug or
glass (incl. products packed in portions in packaging, bottles, etc.),
with the exception of dairy products and fruit juices.
E.g. coffee, tea, (light) soft drinks, fruit drinks.
Bread toppings incl. hummus like products
All kinds of food product that are ment to be put on bread/toast and
not fall under earlier mentioned product groups. E.G. jam, peanut
butter, thunasalad, hummus, tahini
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g
Sodium: ≤ 20 mg/100g
Energy: ≤ 20 kcal/100mL
SAFA: ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 1.3 en%
Sodium: ≤ 400 mg/100g
Added sugar: ≤ 30 g/100g
SAFA: ≤ 1.1 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
TFA: ≤ 0.1 g/100g or ≤ 1.3 en%
Sodium: ≤ 100 mg/100g or
≤ 1.3 mg/kcal
Added sugar: ≤ 2.5 g/100g or ≤ 13 en%
1)
Generic criteria are translated from population intake goals (1) as described in the paper: “Development of
international criteria for a front of package food labelling system: international Choices Programme”.
2)
If possible the generic criteria were fixed per product group: either as en% or g/100g. However when this
would lead to needless exclusion of low energy dense foods, both generic criteria (en% or g/100g) can be used.
3)
Details on the rationales behind the product group specific criteria can be found below.
All other products
All kinds of food product that do not fall within any of the above
mentioned product groups.
E.g. baking product, seasonings, vinegar.
6
PRODUCT GROUP SPECIFIC CRITERIA: DETAILED RATIONALES
Rationale All products comply:
Fresh or fresh frozen fruit, vegetables and legumes, unprocessed potatoes; water
Fruit, vegetables, legumes and potatoes are carriers of essential nutrients. Consumption
should be stimulated. The same is the case for plain water. Thus the main rationale is
alignment with recommendation to consume more fresh fruit and vegetables and drink plain
water.
Rationales SAFA criteria:
Fish, fish products, fats and oils and emulsion-based sauces (30% total fat)
These are products high in fat. Applying the generic SAFA criterion (13 en%) would imply
that none of these products would qualify for a Choices stamp. Because the quality of fat is
more relevant than the SAFA quantity, the SAFA criterion for these products is expressed as
percentage of total fat, rather than percentage of energy. This way consumption of unsaturated
fatty acids is stimulated. In summary: the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to
consume sufficient unsaturated fatty acids.
Milk products (1.4g/100g):
With the current generic insignificancy level for SAFA (1.1 g/100g) semi-skimmed milk does
not comply. International legislation (26) and seasonal influences determine the fat content of
the milk. Semi-skimmed milk consumption is important for intake of calcium, protein and B
vitamins. Therefore it has been agreed to keep the SAFA criterion for milk products at
1.4g/100g. In summary: the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to consume
semi-skimmed milk.
Cheese (15g/100g):
The percentage of cheeses for the combined European test database that comply with the
generic criteria is zero (see Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product group). The
discriminating nutrients are sodium and saturated fat. Saturated fat content is determined by
the content of milk (milk fat consists of 2/3 SAFA), which is a legally required ingredient in
cheese (26, 27). The criterion of 15g SAFA/100g allows reduced-fat cheese to comply. Thus
the main rationale is to allow healthier choices within the product group cheese.
White soft cheese, Israel (2g/100g):
Data from Israel indicated that these products are an important source of essential nutrients
(such as calcium and B-vitamins) in the Israeli diet (See Appendix 1. Israeli Case study).
7
There was not enough data available that indicate this is also the case for other parts of the
world, especially Europe. Therefore it was decided that this criterion would (for now) be
applied to Israel only. Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to consume
dairy products.
Rationales sodium criteria
Water (plain) and beverages (20mg/100mL):
All plain waters comply with the criteria. Mineral waters can be high in sodium levels. To
ensure that sodium content does not increase above undesirable levels the 20mg/100mL is
used as sodium criterion, which is the European directive (28). Thus the main rationale is
alignment with recommendation to limit intake of salt.
Bread and breakfast cereal products (500mg/100g):
Few breads and breakfast cereals comply with the generic sodium criteria according to the
combined European test database (see Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product
group). Therefore, a product group specific criterion for sodium was set for bread, based on
the sodium benchmarks from available food standards (29, 30). The same cut-off was also
used for breakfast cereal products. In summary: the main rationale is to stimulate innovation
to lower the salt content in these product groups.
Processed meat (900mg/100g) & processed fish (450mg/100g):
The percentage of processed meat and fish (products) complying with the generic criteria is
relatively low (see Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product group). A product group
specific criterion for processed meat was set based on available food standards (31, 32).
Processed fish contain less salt therefore the cut-off was set at 50% of the processed meat
criterion. Thus the main rationale is to stimulate innovation to lower the salt content in these
product groups.
Cheese (900mg/100g):
As mentioned above the discriminating nutrients in cheese are sodium and saturated fat.
Sodium is needed for the cheese making process and for conservation (33). The lower the fat
level, the more sodium is needed. The proposed level of 900 mg/100g was seen as a realistic
target. Thus the main rationale is to stimulate innovation to lower the salt content in this
product group.
White soft cheese, Israel (400mg/100g):
Data from Israel indicated that these products are an important source of essential nutrients
(such as calcium and B-vitamins) in the Israeli diet (See Appendix 1. Israeli case study).
8
There was not enough data available that indicate this is also the case for other parts of the
world. Therefore it was decided that this criterion would (for now) be applied to Israel only.
Thus the main rationale is to stimulate innovation to lower the salt content in this product
group.
Main course (2.2mg/kcal) & filled sandwiches (1.9mg/kcal):
When applying the generic criterion for sodium (1.3 mg/kcal) few main courses would
comply (see Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product group). Thus the proposed
sodium criterion was set at 2.2 mg/kcal for main course, which is the median sodium level in
the product group of main courses in the combined European test database. For filled
sandwiches, the sodium criterion was determined by the weighted average of the criteria for
bread and toppings assuming that a sandwich consists of 60% bread and 40% topping.
Average energy densities were assumed to be 2 kcal/g for bread and 2.5 kcal/g for bread
toppings. The calculation of the criteria is as follows:

60% x Sodium criterion bread (500mg/100g = 2.4mg/kcal) + 40% x Sodium criterion
bread toppings (400mg/100g = 1.6mg/kcal) =  1.9 mg/kcal
This still resulted in few complying products for both groups; however experiences in the
Netherlands show that these are not too strict to motivate producers to innovate. There are
examples on the Dutch market that fulfil the criteria. This illustrates that the combined
European test database is of limited value for these product groups. In summary: the main
rationale is to stimulate innovation to lower the salt content in these product groups.
Soups (300mg/100g), meal sauces (450mg/100g) & sauces water/emulsion based
(750mg/100g):
Applying the generic sodium criteria to these products, which are relatively salty, would result
in very few products that can comply. Thus, to stimulate innovation of products that remain
acceptable for consumers regarding sodium levels, a product group specific sodium criterion
was set at levels based on various food standards (29, 30, 34). In summary: the main rationale
is to stimulate innovation to lower the salt content in these product groups.
Snacks & bread toppings (400mg/100g):
Sodium criterion for snacks was set in such a way that around 5% of the savoury snacks
would comply (Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product group). This same level was
applied to the product group bread toppings. Thus the main rationale is to stimulate
innovation to lower the salt content in these product groups.
9
Rationales added sugar criteria
No added sugar: fruit juices; processed potatoes, pasta, noodles; rice; unprocessed meat,
poultry; unprocessed & processed fish; cheese (products); oils and fats:
To prevent any unnecessary addition of sugar, there is no added sugar allowed in all product
groups mentioned above. Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendations to limit
intakes of added sugar.
Breakfast cereals (20g/100g):
Breakfast cereals are commonly consumed across the globe. Sugar is a very common
ingredient and levels are relatively high, especially in products targeted to children (35, 36).
In summary: the main rationale is to stimulate innovation to lower the added sugar content in
this product group.
Milk products (5g/100g):
Gradually lowering added sugar without the use of artificial sweeteners is challenging.
Current developments show that innovation in dairy products in the Netherlands, a country
that is working with the criteria for 3 years cannot go below 5 g added sugar per 100g,
without use of sweeteners because of taste. In summary: the main rationale is to stimulate
innovation to lower the added sugar content in this product group.
Snacks (20 g/100g):
A sugar criterion was needed in order to prevent that high sugar-containing sweets would
qualify for a health stamp and to assure that daily intake of added sugar could not exceed
maximal daily recommendations (< 25 en%) as set by the US Institute of Medicine (37).
Calculation of maximal sugar levels for snacks (applying 20 g/100g):
 Per 100g, a snack may contain 20 g sugar. For an average 45 g snack, this will be 9 g sugar
 3 times a day a sweet snack x 9 g sugar  27 g sugar from snacks
Sugar from the rest of the diet (applying the generic added sugar criterion: <13 en%):
 Total energy intake (2000 kcal – 330kcal (snacks) = 1670 kcal) of which 13 en% of added
sugar (generic criterion): 54.3 g sugar
Maximal daily energy intake from added sugar in diet according to Choices:
 27 g + 54.3 g = 81.3 g (x 4 kcal) = 325.2 kcal
 = 16.3% of total daily energy (2000kcal), which is below the IOM upper limit (25
%energy) (37)
In summary: the main rationale is alignment with recommendations to limit intakes of added
sugar.
10
Bread toppings, sandwich fillings, including hummus like products (30g/100g):
For this heterogeneous product group there was a need to define criteria as g/100g, in order
not to stimulate innovation by addition of energy. The added sugar criterion was set at
30g/100g to allow a few low sugar marmalades to comply. Thus the main rationale is to
stimulate innovation to lower the added sugar content in this product group.
Rationales fibre criteria
There are generic fibre criteria for the following product groups: processed fruit and
vegetables; processed potatoes, pasta and noodles; bread; grains and cereal products;
breakfast cereal products. All these product groups are important sources of fibre. Fibre must
come from ingredients that are already present in the food: To assure inclusion of cell wall
polysaccharides of vegetables, fruit and whole grains, the health effects of which have been
clearly established, and exclusion of synthetic, isolated or purified oligosaccharides with
diverse, and in some cases unique, physiological effects (38, 39). Product group specific fibre
criteria have been set for fruit juice, rice and main course. For the other groups the generic
fibre criterion will be applied.
Fruit juice (0.75g/100kcal):
Fruit contains 1.75 times more energy when compared to vegetables. This is based on median
values of fresh fruit and vegetables in the combined European test database (see Appendix 3a.
Detailed characteristics per product group). This can be explained by higher intrinsic sugar
levels in fruits. Generic criterion for fibre is 1.3 g/100 kcal for processed fruit and vegetables.
Fibre criterion for fruit juices is set at 0.75 g/100kcal, which is 1.3 (g/100kcal) divided by
1.75. Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to increase fibre intake.
Rice (0.7g/100kcal):
The generic fibre criterion 1.3g/100kcal is too strict for rice. Based on the indicator foods in
the European test database, it was decided to set the fibre criterion at 0.7 g/100kcal, so that
brown rice would comply (Appendix 3b. Indicator foods). Thus the main rationale is to allow
choice within the product group “ rice”.
Filled sandwiches (0.8g/100kcal):
For filled sandwiches, the fibre criterion was determined by the weighted average of the
criteria for bread and toppings assuming that a sandwich consists of 60% bread and 40%
topping. Average energy densities were assumed to be 2 kcal/g for bread and 2.5 kcal/g for
bread toppings. The calculation of the criterion is as follows:
11

60% x Fibre criterion bread (1.3 g/100kcal) =  0. 8 g/100kcal. No fibre criterion was set
for toppings.
Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to increase fibre intake.
Rationales energy criteria
Energy criteria have been established for two product groups within the basic product groups,
namely the “main courses” and “filled sandwiches”, as these are major contributors to the
daily energy intake. Also for fruit juice an energy criterion has been set, as there is a concern
that fruit juices also contribute substantially to energy intakes. Furthermore, energy criteria
have been set for all products in the non-basic product groups. These foods do not
substantially contribute to the supply of essential nutrients, but as they are eaten frequently
they are important suppliers of energy.
Table 3. Overview of recommendations for daily energy intake, main courses and snacks
Target group
Daily energy
recommendation1
Recommended
Recommended
energy from main
energy from
courses2
snacks2
Elderly
1800 kcal/d
486 kcal/serve
108 kcal/serve
Adult women
2000 kcal/d
540 kcal/serve
120 kcal/serve
Adult men
2500 kcal/d
675 kcal/serve
150 kcal/serve
Children 2-12
1546 kcal/day
1
Based on references (40,41)
2
Based on calculation shown in Figure 1
95 kcal/serve
Energy criterion:
Energy criterion:
400-700 kcal/serve
110 kcal/serve
Main courses (400-700kcal/serve), sandwiches (350kcal/serve) and snacks (110kcal/serve):
The energy criteria are based on recommended energy intakes (see Table 3). Since 10% is
recommended to come from beverages (42), this leaves 90% of the total daily energy
recommendation for meals and snacks. The remaining energy is allocated as follows, based on
certain assumptions about meal patterns: Breakfast (20%) Lunch (30%), Dinner (30%), 3x
Snack (20%), see Figure 1. For main courses the energy criterion was set at 400-700
kcal/meal. The lower level (400 kcal) is to assure sufficient energy intake for vulnerable
groups (elderly). The higher level (700 kcal) is to control for too high energy intake. For
12
sandwiches the energy criterion was set at 350 kcal as that is half of maximal total energy for
lunch/dinner. For snacks the average energy recommendation for adults (women,
120kcal/serving) and children (95kcal/serving) was calculated (rounded: 110 kcal/serving). In
summary the main rationale is alignment with recommendation for energy intake.
2,000 kcal/day
Recommended
energy intake for
women
< 200 kcal/day
Day’s beverage
intake
(10 en%)
Remaining
energy1,800 kcal/day
Breakfast
(20% en%)
Lunch
(30 en%)
Dinner
(30 en%)
540 kcal/serving
3x Snack
(20 en%)
120 kcal/serving
Figure 1. Overview of recommended energy intake during the day: basis for energy criteria
(as calculated for adult women)
Fruit juices (48kcal/100mL):
Pure (100%) fruit juice contributes to fruit intake. However there is evidence that fruit juice
consumption contributes to high energy intake, weight gain and diabetes (43, 44). Therefore,
while initially there was no differentiation between fruits and fruit juices, there now is a new
focus on limiting fruit juice intake. Because sugar levels are determined by Codex and EU
fruit directive (45, 46) there is little room to innovate. Therefore an energy criterion has been
set at 48kcal/100mL to exclude the fruit juices that are high in energy.This level is similar to
the 3rd quartile of the European test database for fruit juices (Appendix 3a. Detailed
characteristics per product group). Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendation
to limit energy intake from fruit juices.
Soups (100kcal/100g), sauces (100 or 350 kcal/100g):
It was decided that non-basic product groups should be minimized in their contribution to
daily energy intake. Therefore energy criteria were set for all non-basic product groups. For
the soups and sauces this was based on the following: Energy density is correlated with water
13
content (47). For products with high water content (>50% w/w) it was decided to use
100kcal/100g as criteria. While for products with low water content (<50% w/w) this is
350kcal/100g). See Table 4. Thus the main rationale is alignment with recommendation to
limit energy intake from soups and sauces.
Table 4. Overview of water content and energy criteria in non-basic product groups
Average water content1
Energy criteria
(% w/w)
[kcal/100g]
Soups
> 50
100
Meal sauces
> 50
100
Sauces emulsions
< 50
350
Sauces non-emulsions
>50
100
Non-basic product group
Snacks
110
Beverages
20
1Based
on references (48, 49).
Beverages (20 kcal/100mL):
There are clear concerns that any higher kcal beverage will adversely affect energy intake,
weight gain and related health problems (50, 51). Beverages should not contribute more than
10% to daily energy intake (42; see Figure 1). However people would not stop drinking
energy containing drinks. Therefore reformulation should be stimulated into the healthier
direction. Currently, regular energy containing drinks contain 10-12 g/100g of sugar (=40-48
kcal/100g). As a first step, but without forcing manufacturers to use artificial sweeteners, was
set at 20 kcal/100g or 100mL. This represents 5 g of sugar. The intention is that this will be
further lowered. With the use of sweeteners, lower levels of energy in beverages can be
reached. There is however a considerable number of consumers who do not consume
sweeteners (52, 53) and there are possible concerns about the effects of excessive sweetness
on long-term habituation to sugar and sweet foods (54, 55). Therefore it was decided to also
aim for a less sweet taste. When consumers are getting used to this, it will also benefit sugar
14
levels in other product groups, such as milk products. As the energy in beverages mainly
comes from sugar, it was decided that there is no additional need for a sugar criterion for this
group. The percentage of complying products is 36%. This is relatively high. These, however
are exclusively coffee, tea, flavoured water and light beverages.
The changes from the original Netherlands-based criteria

All insignificancy levels are changed to 5% of the WHO recommendations for
total daily diet/100g

The recommendation for sodium was 2400mg/d, this is now 2000mg/d,
aligned with WHO recommendations (Joint Consultation FAO/WHO, 2003).

There is an agreed procedure for addition of new product groups, or change of
criteria.

New product groups have been defined: water, rice, breakfast cereals, bread
toppings & (only for Israel) white soft cheese. The Israeli case is included as
an example of a national adaptation of criteria.

For existing product groups, specific criteria have been added for fruit juices
(energy) and revised for fish products (SAFA), main dishes (fibre), soups
(sodium) & beverages (energy).

Fibre only counts when it comes from ingredients that are already naturally
present in the food.
.
15
OTHER Online Supplementary Material to the paper:
“Development of international criteria for a front of package food labelling system:
international Choices Programme”
Appendix 1. Israeli case study
This document gives an overview of the discussion points raised by the Israeli Scientific
Committee that were brought as input to the meeting of the International Scientific
Committee. This is an example of how local dietary habits and food composition are brought
into the discussion.
Appendix 2. Development of a test database on food composition
This document describes how the test database on food composition was prepared: Foods
needed to be classified according to the Choices product group classification. In addition,
assumptions needed to be made for serving sizes for snacks and for missing data (TFA and
added sugar).
Appendix 3a. Detailed characteristics per product group
In an introductory file an overview of the test database is given. The other files contain keynutrient content and data descriptions for all products groups.
Appendix 3b. Indicator foods
This file contains indicator foods on separate worksheets for all product groups. Indicator
foods are typical foods that comply or do not comply with the criteria. Both data source and
discriminatory nutrients (for which these foods do not comply) are given.
16
REFERENCES
1. Joint Consultation FAO/WHO. Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Report of a
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation. FAO/WHO. WHO Technical Report Series 916. 2003.
Geneva, World Health Organisation.
2. National Health and Medical Research Council; Dietary Guidelines for all Australians.
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/dietsyn.htm last accessed October 2009
(Australia)
3. Vlaams Instituut voor Gezondheidspromotie; De actieve voedingsdriehoek.
http://www.vig.be/content.asp?nav=themas_voeding&selnav=205 last accessed October 2009
(Belgium)
4. The South-eastern Michigan Dietetic Association Caribbean; Islands Food Pyramid.
http://www.semda.org/info/pyramid.asp?ID=8 last accessed October 2009 (Caribbean)
5. Health Canada; Canada's food guide. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/indexeng.php last accessed October 2009 (Canada)
6. Chinese Nutrition Society; Food Based Dietary Guidelines
http://www.fao.org/ag/humannutrition/nutritioneducation/fbdg/49850/en/chn/ last accessed
October 2009 (China)
7. Ministeriet for familieog for forbrugeranliggender; Kostråd og Kostkompasset.
http://www.altomkost.dk/forside.htm last accessed October 2009 last accessed October 2009
(Denmark)
8. National Nutrition Council; Finish Nutrition Recommandations 2005.
http://www.mmm.fi/ravitsemusneuvottelukunta/Kuvat_ENG.htm last accessed October 2009
(Finland)
9. Les Agences françaises de sécurité sanitaire: le Bateau Alimentaire.
http://www.lexpress.fr/informations/le-bateau-alimentaire_641424.html last accessed October
2009 (France)
11. Supreme Scientific Health Council. Hellenic Ministry of Health. Dietary guidelines for adults in
Greece. https://www.nut.uoa.gr/english/index.asp?page=30201 last accessed October 2009
(Greece)
10. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Ernahrung, Die Dreidimensionale Lebensmittelpyramide.
http://www.dge.de/ last accessed October 2009 (Germany)
12. Ministry of Health of Hungary Dietary Guidelines to the Adult population of Hungary.
ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/esn/nutrition/dietary_guidelines/hun.pdf last accessed October 2009 (Hungary)
13. Nutrition Society of Malaysia, Malaysian Food Based Dietary Guidelines.
http://www.nutriweb.org.my/downloads/dietary_english.pdf last accessed October 2009
(Malaysia)
14. Secretary of Health, National Institute of Medical and Nutrition Science Guías Alimentarias de
México.http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/nutrition/education_guidelines_mex_en.stm last accessed
October 2009 (Mexico)
17
15. Ministry of Health and Social Services. Food and Nutrition Unit. Food and nutrition guidelines for
Namibia. ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/esn/nutrition/dietary_guidelines/nam.pdf last accessed October 2009
(Namibia)
16. Voedingscentrum, Schijf van Vijf. http://www.voedingscentrum.nl/nl/eten-gezondheid/gezondeten.aspx. last accessed October 2009 (Netherlands)
17. The National Nutrition Council (NNC) FNRI food pyramid.
http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/nutrition/education_guidelines_phi_en.stm last accessed October 2009
(Philippines)
18. Rodrigues SSP, Franchini MPH, Graça BP and de Almeida MDV. (2006) A New Food Guide for
the Portuguese Population: Development and Technical Considerations. J Nutr Educ Behav 38,
189-195. (Portugal)
19. Nutrition Works, Healthy Diet Pyramid. http://www.nutrition.com.sg/he/hepyr.asp last accessed
October 2009 (Singapore)
20. Extension Systems, Dietary Guidelines for the Spanish population. http://www.aces.edu
/urban/spanish/pyramid.html last accessed October 2009 (Spain)
21. National Food Administration, the Food Circle.
http://www.slv.se/upload/nfa/documents/food_nutrition/The%20Food%20Circle.pdf last accessed
October 2009. (Sweden)
22. Ministry of Health of Turkey/Hacettepe University Department of Nutrition and Dietetics. Dietary
Guideline for Turkey. http://www.bdb.hacettepe.edu.tr/dokumanlar/dietaryguidelines.pdf
Last accessed December 2009. (Turkey)
23. British Nutrition Foundation, Healthy Eating a Whole Diet Approach. http://www.nutrition.org.uk
/upload/BNF%20Healthy%20Eating(5).PDF last accessed October 2009 (United Kindom)
24. World Health Organisation (2003). Food based Dietary Guidelines in de European Region.
http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E79832.pdf last accessed October 2009
25. Painter J, Ray JH, Lee YK (2002). Comparisons of international food guide pictorial
representations. J Am Diet Assoc 102, 483-489.
26. Council Regulation (EC) (2007). No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common
organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products
(Single CMO Regulation) Appendix 12-13.
27. Codex General Standard for cheese (1978), Codex Stan 283-1978.
28. Council Directive 98/83/EC (1998) On the quality of water intended for human consumption.
Official Journal of the European Communities, November 1998. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1998:330:0032:0054:EN:PDF
29. National Food administration (2009) The Keyhole symbol.
http://www.slv.se/upload/nfa/documents/food_regulations/keyhole_2009.pdf Last accessed
December 2009.
30. Health Check program (2009). Heart & Stroke foundation.
http://www.healthcheck.org/sites/default/files/editor/HealthCheck_NutrientCriteria_Retail_Octobe
r09.pdf Last accessed December 2009.
18
31. National Heart Foundation of New Zealand (2002). Pick theTick, The Food Information Program.
Guidelines for Tick Approval. The National Heart Foundation of New Zealand 2002. Internet:
http://www.heartfoundation.org.nz Last accessed January 2009
32. Food Standards Agency (2005). Effects of reducing salt in processed food on the population's salt
intake - the salt model http://www.food.gov.uk/healthiereating/salt/saltmodel last accessed
October 2009.
33. Mistry VV (2001). Low fat cheese technology. Int Dairy J 11, 413–422.
34. Kinnunen TI (2000). The Heart symbol: a new food labelling system in Finland. Nutrition Bulletin
25, 335-339.
35. Popkin BM (2008). The World Is Fat: The Fads, Trends, Policies, and Products That Are Fattening
the Human Race. New York, Avery-Penguin Group.
36. Rudd Centre for food and obesity (2009). Evaluating the Nutrition Quality and Marketing of
Children’s Cereals http://www.cerealfacts.org/media/Cereal_FACTS_Report.pdf
37. Institute of Medicine (2002). Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fat, Fatty acids,
Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids. 2002. Washington, The National Academies Press.
38. Cummings JH, Mann JI, Nishida C, and Voster HH (2009). Dietary fibre: an agreed definition.
Lancet 373, 365-366.
39. Pascoe DA, Fulcher RG. (2008). Biochemistry and compartmentalization of cereal grain
components and their functional relationship to mammalian health. In: Marquant L and Jacobs DR
(eds) Whole grains and health. Ames: Blackwell Publishing. pp 89-165.
40. Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. Human Energy Requirements (2001). Food and
Nutrition Technical Report Series. Rome: FAO.
41. Health Council of the Netherlands (2002). Dietary reference intakes: energy, proteins, fats,
andvdigestible carbohydrates. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2001;
publication no. 2001/19ER (corrected edition: June 2002).
42. Popkin BM, Armstrong LE, Bray GM, Caballero B, Frei B and Willett WC (2006). A new
proposed guidance system for beverage consumption in the United States. Am.J.Clin.Nutr 83, 529542.
43. Sanigorski AM, Bell AC, Swinburn BM (2007). Association of key foods and beverages with
obesity in Australian schoolchildren. Public Health Nutr 10, 152-157.
44. Odegaard AO, Koh WP, Arakawa K, Yu MC, Pereira MA. (2010). Soft Drink and Juice
Consumption and Risk of Physician-diagnosed Incident Type 2 Diabetes: The Singapore Chinese
Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 171, 701-708.
45. Codex General Standard for fruit juices and nectars (2005), Codex Stan 247-2005.
46. Council Directive 2001/112/EC of 20 December 2001 (2001). Relating to fruit juices and certain
similar products intended for human consumption.
19
47. Crowe TC, Fontaine HL, Gibbons CJ, Cameron-Smith D, Swinburn BA (2004). Energy density of
foods and beverages in the Australian food supply: influence of macronutrients and comparison to
dietary intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 58, 1485-91.
48. Stichting Nederlands Voedingsstoffenbestand (2006). NEVO food composition database.Den
Haag: Voedingscentrum.
49. Foods Standards Agency (2002). McCance and Widdowson's the Composition of Foods: Summary
Edition (6th Edition). London: Food Standards Agency.
50. Malik VS, Schulze MB, Hu FB (2006). Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a
systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 84, 274-288.
51. Vartanian LM, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD (2007). Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition
and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 97, 667-675.
52. Euromonitor international (2009). trade sources/national statistics.
http://www.euromonitor.com/research_methodology.aspx last accessed October 2009
53. Mattes RD, Popkin BM (2009). Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: effects on
appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms. Am J Clin Nutr 89, 1-14.
54. Avena NM, Rada P, Hoebel BG (2008). Evidence for sugar addiction: behavioral and
neurochemical effects of intermittent, excessive sugar intake. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32, 20-39.
55. Avena NM, Rada P, Hoebel BG (2009). Sugar and Fat Bingeing Have Notable Differences in
Addictive-like Behavior. J Nutr 139,623-628.