If you walk through any grocery store today, you will come across aisles of packaged food labelled with different promises. In today’s marketplace, the labels on packaged foods have tremendous power. These marketing phrases, carefully crafted by various brands, often serve as persuasive tools for shaping consumer choices. From “Natural” to “Low-Calorie” and “Organic,” these advertising slogans and brand catchphrases captivate our attention, promising healthier options and superior quality. But do these brand messaging tactics truly reflect what lies within the product?
..Most likely not.
These labels are often purposely misleading, using just the right language to avoid being flagged as false advertising but still remaining appealing to the consumer. Here are the most common examples of misleading marketing buzzwords in the marketplace today.
The 3 Pillars of Misleading Marketing
Greenwashing
Greenwashing involves misleading consumers by portraying products as environmentally friendly or sustainable when they might not truly meet those standards. Labels like “Organic” and “Eco-Friendly” might imply natural or eco-conscious practices, but not all products bearing these terms genuinely adhere to rigorous environmental standards. Some might use these labels as a marketing tactic without full commitment to sustainable production methods or genuine organic ingredients. As the world slowly shifts more and more towards more “natural” preferences in their diet, people have to constantly look out for greenwashing with regard to their packaged food.
Healthwashing
Healthy snacks are all the rage right now and brands will do anything to sell their products as the ultimate healthy snack in the market. Healthwashing is a practice where products are presented as healthier choices through labels like “Low-Fat” or “Sugar-Free,” while concealing harmful additives or compensatory elements. For instance, “Low-Fat” items might contain higher sugar content to compensate for taste, while “Zero Trans Fat” products can still harbour small amounts of trans fats per serving. These labels might mislead consumers into thinking they are making healthier choices without considering other potential health impacts.
Humane Washing
Humane washing involves labels such as “Cruelty-Free” or “Free Range” that suggest ethical and humane treatment of animals. However, these claims might not always reflect the actual conditions in which animals are raised or treated. For instance, although “Free Range” suggests that animals have access to the outdoors, in reality, they might have limited outdoor access and experience no difference in living conditions. Similarly, “Cruelty-Free” might not encompass the entirety of an animal’s life cycle, potentially misleading consumers about the actual welfare standards upheld by these products.
10 Marketing Gimmicks You Need To Keep An Eye Out For
“Sugar-Free”: Sweet Deception
Products labelled “Sugar-Free” might not necessarily be devoid of sugars. For instance, in the US the FDA allows up to 0.5 grams of sugar per serving for products that claim to be “zero-sugar”, creating a misleading impression of the actual amount of sugar present [1]. Manufacturers compensate for the removed sugar with higher fat content or artificial sweeteners, impacting taste and texture. While your snack might FEEL like a healthy, sugar-free alternative, the real ingredients will provide a clear idea of why they are not. Consumers must scrutinise ingredient lists thoroughly to identify hidden sugars and other additives that might compromise health.
“Fruit-flavoured”: Real Fruit or Chemical Mirage?
Despite the implication of authentic fruit, items labelled “Fruit-Flavoured” predominantly rely on artificial flavours. The FSSAI asserts that flavours can be added to thermally processed fruit beverages, fruit drinks, and ready-to-serve fruit beverages. However, anything that contains fruit flavouring must have an “added flavouring” or similar label [3}. Let’s face it, fruit-flavoured food never accurately reflects what the actual fruit tastes like and often contains even higher levels of sugar than promised. Consumers should exercise caution as these foods often use synthetic compounds to mimic fruit flavours – like Limonene (lemon or orange flavouring) and Isoamyl Acetate (banana oil) – leading to a misleading impression of being healthy.
“Gluten-Free”: Beyond the Label
While the “Gluten-Free” label indicates products with less than 20 parts per million of gluten, not all gluten-free items bear this designation [2]. This would be fine normally, as gluten is not necessarily bad for you; however, when it comes to people dealing with celiac disease, an autoimmune disorder characterised by an adverse reaction to gluten, even the smallest trace of gluten can trigger a reaction in the immune system. People have to delve deeper, maybe look for certification or examine ingredient lists for potential gluten sources like wheat, barley, or rye to ensure that their dietary needs are being met.
“Low-Calorie”: Numbers Game
The FDA mandates that foods labelled “Low-Calorie” contain 40 calories or fewer per Reference Amount Customarily Consumed or RACC, a metric used to determine how much an average person can eat in one sitting [1]. Therefore, understanding portion sizes is crucial. Meals and main dishes must have 120 calories or less per 100 grams of food. While these items might appear healthier due to lower caloric content, they could lack the essential nutrients required for a balanced diet.
“Low-Carb”: A Label Without Guidelines
Surprisingly, the FDA lacks specific guidelines for products labelled “Low-Carb.” This absence leaves consumers at the mercy of varying interpretations by manufacturers. To make informed choices, individuals must verify actual carb content instead of solely relying on the label’s claim.
“Low-Fat”: Defined by Standards
The FDA defines “Low-Fat” as products containing no more than 3 grams of fat per 50 grams. For meals and main dishes, foods should contain less than 3 grams of fat per 100 grams, with less than 30% of calories coming from fat [1]. This label emphasises relative fat content compared to average products within the same category. That is not really helpful for the average consumer when all they’re trying to do is find the right products for their needs. What feels like a low-fat, healthy choice might not be so healthy after all.
“Made With Whole Grains”: The Refined Truth
You’ve heard of whole-grain bread, and a lot of us probably opt for it thinking it is the healthier option for a nice, healthy breakfast. Despite claiming to contain “Whole Grains,” many products primarily feature refined grains. Whole-grain products are those that contain every part of the grain advertised, whereas refined grain means that it has been milled. Manufacturers can label items as such even if they lack significant whole-grain content, underscoring the necessity of scrutinising ingredient lists for a genuine whole-grain presence. You might have noticed that “whole-grain” bread often has full-formed grains stuck to the crust, mostly to convince consumers that this is indeed what they are looking for.
Speaking of grains, “multigrain” is another red herring to look out for. While “Multigrain” implies a blend of various healthy grains, most grains used are often refined. Contrary to expectations, these products might lack the nutritional benefits associated with whole grains, potentially misleading health-conscious consumers.
“No Cholesterol”: The Misconception Behind the Label
Food products sporting a “No Cholesterol” label technically adhere to FDA regulations, ensuring they contain no more than 2 milligrams of cholesterol per serving, this label might mislead consumers into assuming the complete absence of cholesterol-containing ingredients [1]. In reality, items labelled as cholesterol-free can still incorporate ingredients containing cholesterol, as long as these ingredients are listed separately on the label. From cooking oil to snacks, “low cholesterol” is a popular marketing phrase, especially in India. A lot of Indian snacks have high cholesterol and those with health concerns actively look for alternatives. It becomes harder and harder to do so when the labels do not accurately showcase what is in the product itself. This discrepancy between the label claim and actual ingredient composition requires consumers to carefully review the ingredient list for full transparency regarding the cholesterol content in these supposedly cholesterol-free foods.
“Natural”: Truly Au Naturale?
The term “Natural” lacks a specific FDA definition, resulting in varied interpretations among consumers. Manufacturers capitalise on this ambiguity, attracting individuals seeking products free from artificial additives, even if these items contain processed or refined ingredients, necessitating a closer inspection of ingredient lists for clarity.
“Zero Trans Fat”: Hidden Fats
We all know about trans fats and people want to avoid them. However, this might be more difficult than you think. In products with labels advertising “Zero Trans Fat,” servings can still contain up to 0.5 grams of trans fat [1]. Consuming multiple servings can elevate trans fat intake considerably. Vigilance in examining serving sizes and thorough scrutiny of ingredient lists becomes imperative for health-conscious consumers aiming to avoid trans fats.
Conclusion: The Need for Informed Consumerism
To navigate the maze of deceptive marketing tactics on food labels, consumers can empower themselves by adopting a vigilant approach. Scrutinising labels goes beyond the eye-catching claims and requires a thorough examination of ingredient lists and nutritional information. By focusing on keywords like “Sugar-Free,” “Low-Calorie,” or “Natural,” consumers can dissect these claims, identifying hidden sugars, artificial additives, or vague definitions. Building awareness against these marketing ploys facilitates smarter purchasing decisions, allowing individuals to sidestep misleading labels and make informed choices aligned with their dietary needs and health objectives.
Unbox Health tests packaged foods for label accuracy and safety parameters via our partner network of NABL-accredited and FSSAI-certified labs. Join the waitlist now to get early access to our comprehensive and unbiased product ratings.
References:
1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK209851/
2. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2013/08/05/2013-18813/food-labeling-gluten-free-labeling-of-foods
3. https://aurigaresearch.com/natural-artificial-flavours-fssai-regulations-say/