If we walk through the supermarket with our eyes wide open, it seems that there is hardly a product that can do without an additional message. The promises are “100 percent natural”, “no flavor enhancers”, “full taste without additives” or “no artificial aroma”. A wide variety of labels are stuck to around 2,000 foods. In this way, the food industry serves two urgent consumer wishes: more information and more nature. But such an imprint is rarely an indication of quality.
Table of Contents
Label proliferation is rampant
“The manufacturers come up with most of the slogans and seals. This makes them arbitrary and merely clever advertising tools,” says agricultural economist Prof. Achim Spiller from the University of Göttingen, who advises the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for Agricultural Policy. Last autumn, the committee presented Minister Ilse Aigner with a report in which it criticized the rampant proliferation of labels, called for a legal framework for better labeling and proposed a few, distinguishable core labels. It will probably be some time before consequences arise from this.
But the pressure on manufacturers is growing. “Various food scandals have warned consumers that they are more critical and interested than they were ten years ago. This is a very positive trend,” says Prof. Spiller. Customers ask more often what is in the food, where it comes from and how it is produced. Interested parties have long been able to use apps to scan the barcodes of processed foods and download their “inner values” directly to their smartphones in the supermarket (more information about the apps at . It is undisputed that there is a gray area between clear product design and clear misleadinggives. “The labels that have come into fashion, such as ‘without artificial flavors’, do not make any false statements from a legal point of view, but pretend to be of a quality that has nothing to do with reality,” criticizes Christiane Groß, spokeswoman for the non-profit association foodwatch.
Labels can lie like printed
For example, packet soups are advertised as “without flavor enhancers” – but the ingredients include yeast extract. Cherry yoghurt “without colourants” is colored with beetroot powder. And fruits that are shown large on the pack often only appear as aromas. It is logical that consumers feel fooled. But such paraphrases are perfectly legal.
“There is a ban on deception in food law. But the specific design of the regulations leaves many loopholes for the industry,” criticizes Groß. A market check by the consumer advice centers showed that there is a system to the glamor: They examined 151 products with image-promoting messages. A comparison with the lists of ingredients revealed trickery in 92 percent of the cases in the “without flavor enhancer” category alone. “Some additives are often exchanged for non-suspicious substitutes with a similar effect, as a kind of declaration-friendly alternative,” says Nora Dittrich from the consumer center in North Rhine-Westphalia. But what is actually behind which designation can hardly be deciphered by consumers without knowledge of food chemistry.
Clear guidelines are all the more important. “We want to ensure that consumers get all the information they need to be able to judge the content and quality of a product. Deviating from this would only play into the hands of those who absolutely do not want more transparency. The manufacturer lobby is powerful, just think of the failure of the food traffic light,” says foodwatch spokeswoman Groß. Are we ourselves to blame for the misery, because for a long time the motto “main thing cheap” applied? A little bit. But in recent years a change in values has set in. “If they can identify differences in quality, many consumers are willing to pay more,” emphasizes Groß. “For example, sales of eggs from caged hens have plummeted since the type of housing has to be stated on the carton.”
Something is moving.
There is another way, as the example of Frosta shows. In accordance with a self-imposed purity law, the frozen food manufacturer changed all recipes and production processes in 2003 and since then has relied on good ingredients instead of additives. After initial losses, Frosta rose to become the industry leader, and customers appreciate quality and transparency.
ingredients in our food
Questions to Ilse Aigner (CSU), Federal Minister of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection. Your ministry finances the Internet portal . There, consumers can point out misleading labels or ingredients
Tolfioow: The portal has been online for six months. How’s it going?
Ilse Aigner: After 100 days, over 3800 reports had already been received. This shows that there is a considerable need for information. This is also confirmed by the feedback from many citizens, who tell us clearly: “You are on the right track. We want more transparency.” I think people are entitled to that.
The industry previously described the portal as a “pillory”. Has attitude changed?
I have the impression that many companies that initially criticized the project are now taking the opportunity to communicate with critical customers and respond to suggestions. Consumers appreciate opennessmodern companies know that. Some manufacturers have changed the recipes or adjusted the font sizes as a result of consumer reports.
How can consumer confidence be further strengthened?
With the certainty that the food contains what it says on the outside. Take, for example, the fact that more and more people want to know whether their food comes from their home country. My house is currently working on guidelines for a regional label. We expect to present the first results in 2012 as part of the International Green Week. The aim is to get a reliable seal off the ground that serves as a guide for customers and is available to providers as a voluntary tool.
Translation help – It says so, it’s really in there
- “Without flavor enhancers”: “without artificial flavor enhancers”, “without flavor-enhancing additives” – all sorts of things that the manufacturers do not reliably differentiate. In the case of the former imprint, neither chemical additives such as glutamate (E 620-E 625) nor ingredients such as soy protein hydrolyzate, seasoning or yeast extract should be used. The other two labels simply mean that there is no glutamate – other flavor-enhancing ingredients (see above) can still be in there.
- “Natural flavors”: If a product advertises them as such, it is possible that a natural raw material creates the flavor – in the case of strawberries, mostly mold and wood fibers. Only if the fruit is expressly named, e.g. B. “natural strawberry flavor” or “strawberry extract”, it is also in there.
- “No added preservatives”: This is often written on salads and bread spreads that contain ingredients and additives such as brandy vinegar, mustard seed, L(+)-tartaric acid, citric acid or the acidifier acetic acid – and they definitely have a preservative effect. Benzoic acid (E 210) is often used as a preservative in fish and chicken salads – it is considered an allergy trigger. In connection with ascorbic acid (E 300) it is suspected of causing cancer. Then it would be better to preserve it with mustard seed and vinegar.
- “Without dyes”, “without artificial dyes”: Sounds good, but coloring is used anyway. Beetroot juice, carrot and pumpkin powder, concentrates of spirulina algae or black currants are considered coloring foods and are primarily found in confectionery and dairy products.
- “100 percent natural”, “natural”: If the ingredients include emulsifiers (E 431-E 495) such as triphosphate or antioxidants, they extend the shelf life – this is anything but natural.
- “According to the law”: This phrase advertises the waiver of certain additives. hypocritical! The substance in question must not be used in the food group anyway.
- “Without household sugar”: Admittedly, such a product does not contain any sucrose (beet or cane sugar), but it may have been sweetened generously with fructose or glucose, honey, lactose or malt sugar, starch or cellulose.
