Food label study probes the effectiveness of health star ratings

The Health Star Rating on packaged foods doesn’t account for the level of processing or the form of whole food, with a new study raising serious questions about whether the system is misleading consumers.

Chloe Jeffers (right) and her son Hamish love healthy food, but she finds many of the health labellings confusing. Picture: Alex Coppel

Shoppers are being misled about the healthiness of many junk foods, researchers fear.

A Deakin University food labelling study found three-quarters of heavily processed food and half of discretionary foods with health star ratings displayed a score of 2.5 stars or more.

Ice cream, corn chips, pancake mixes, snack bars, sweet biscuits and party pies were among items that featured ratings as high as 3 to 4.5 stars.

Lead researcher Sarah Dickie warned the Health Star Rating system may be misleading consumers by giving a “health halo” to many “unnecessary” junk foods.

“The simple message that more stars equals healthier food is widely understood by the public but our research shows the stars don’t always match dietary guidelines and can be confusing to those who use the stars as part of their purchasing decision,” Ms Dickie said.

The Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition study, published in the journal Nutrients, evaluated thousands of newly released products from June 2014 to June 2019.

It assessed health star ratings against the level of processing in foods and Australian dietary guidelines.

Supermarket products with a high Health Star Rating. Picture: Nathan Edwards

Ms Dickie said examples of ultra-processed and discretionary foods with ratings that did not reflect their true nutritional value include a reduced-fat ice cream (4 stars); an original and nut breakfast bar (4); organic cheese-flavoured corn chips (4); oat and honey biscuits (4) and macaroni and cheese parcels (3).

The voluntary scheme displays 0.5 to 5 stars, based on nutrient content. It aims to help shoppers compare similar packaged products.

“Ratings as high as 3 or 4 stars on junk foods can easily mislead consumers about the healthiness of packaged foods,” Ms Dickie said.

“Some may have reduced salt, sugar and fat to obtain a higher rating but they remain ultra-processed junk foods that are not necessary in a healthy diet.

“The algorithm underpinning the Health Star Rating system is based on only a handful of nutrients and doesn’t account for the level of processing or the form of the whole food.”

Australian Food and Grocery Council acting CEO Dr Geoffrey Annison said the expert-designed rating was considered a global “gold standard”.

“The fact that Deakin University is at odds with this suggests that the methodology of their research is flawed rather than the system …” Dr Annison said.

“It is important that we ensure we have the best guide in place to help consumers make informed decisions category to category when constructing a balanced diet.”

Chloe Jeffers, 36, a mother-of-one and Camberwell communications specialist, said she tried to feed her son Hamish, 3, healthy food.

“It’s not easy but I go by the star ratings and pick the options with lower sugar,” she said.

“If you’re not educated otherwise, it’s all you’ve got to go on,” she said.

MORE NEWS:

THE FAVOURITE CINEMA TREAT NOW IN COLES

UNCLAIMED MILLIONS OF YOUR MONEY WAITING TO BE COLLECTED

MACCA’S EYES MAJOR YARRA VALLEY FOODIE TOWN

[e-mail]