Health Risk Factors and Their Effect on Consumers' Use of Nutrition Facts Panels

It is particularly important for consumers with specific diseases to attend to appropriate nutrient data in the Nutrition Facts Panel (NFP). Results for participants 45 years or older show that (1) consumers diagnosed with both high blood pressure and high cholesterol are more likely to access sodium and cholesterol NFP information than consumers with only one or neither condition, and (2) there are few differences in attention to less well-publicized hut relevant nutrients. The results show a greater need for at-risk consumers to attend to negative (e.g., trans fat) and positive nutrients (fiber) associated with their specific health condition. ********** Prior to the implementation of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA 1990), public trust of product health claims was in decline and lawsuits filed on behalf of consumers deceived by false health and nutrition claims were plentiful. Scores of deceptive advertising lawsuits were filed by state attorneys general against firms and organizations such as Kraft, Campbell's Soup, Sara Lee and the Beef Industry Council (Kinnear and Root 1988). Some nutrition claims even garnered Supreme Court attention (see Kraft v. FTC 1993). To reduce this confusion, Congress set specific provisions in the NLEA regarding presentation of nutrient content and manufacturers' health claims. In turn, this law resulted in the creation of the standardized Nutrition Facts Panel (NFP). The NFP provides nutrient information that allows consumers to verify nutrition claims made on the front of packages and in advertisements. This legislation is important because government spending for nutrition education is highly disproportionate to food industry advertising. In 1997, the federal government spent approximately $330 million on nutrition education while advertising expenditures by the food industry were about $7 billion (Philipson 2001). By 2008, $818.4 million was spent on nutrition education (Food and Nutrition Service 2010) while food industry advertising was estimated to be about $37.3 billion (Elitzak 2010). In other words, the government spends only 2.2% on education relative to the amount spent by the food industry on advertising. Thus, a better understanding of how to maximize use of NFP information to improve consumers' health and welfare is a critical consumer welfare issue. Many analyses have been conducted to better quantify the general effectiveness of the NFP. However, little attention has focused on understanding whether the NFP is helping consumers with specific health issues (e.g., hypertension) avoid foods with high levels of pertinent negative nutrients (e.g., sodium). Thus, the purpose of our study was to review four mutually exclusive groups of consumers with differing health-related disease risk levels. Specifically, we assess how consumers diagnosed with hypertension and/or high cholesterol use the Nutrition Facts Panel. Our primary interest lies in these at-risk consumers' utilization of appropriate nutrients in the NFP. Drawing from large government data sets, we conduct analyses that address the following questions. First, is morbidity related to the attention given to specific, and relevant, nutrient information in the Facts Panel? Second, do consumers suffering from both hypertension and high cholesterol report greater attention to NFP information than those with only a single condition? Finally, to what extent do older consumers (45 years or older) with neither risk condition attend to NFP information? Based on our findings, we offer implications for consumers and public policymakers. PROVISION OF NUTRITION INFORMATION AND THE NFP For more than fifty years the US government has collected statistical data to provide insight into the general health of its population. The 1956 National Health Survey Act mandated that periodic surveys be designed to collect data on the quantity, geographic spread and severity of illnesses and disabilities. …