The obesity epidemic and the country’s first case of mad cow disease may have a significant impact on food packaging. Find out what changes are likely and which are already underway:

Food packaging may be in for a major upheaval. The obesity epidemic and the discovery of mad cow disease in the U.S. are putting pressure on the food industry to change the way it labels and packages foods. In fact, according to trade magazine Packaging World, a “packaging revolution may be at hand” now that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is in the process of revising its health claims approval system.

The Effect of Obesity

The obesity problem gained widespread attention several years ago when a 2001 report from the U.S. Surgeon General stated that an epidemic of obesity was costing the U.S. over $100 billion a year and claiming about 300,000 American lives annually. In its aftermath, companies such as Kraft Foods Inc. have been hit with lawsuits, with plaintiffs’ lawyers asserting that their food products—in Kraft’s case, Oreo cookies—were hurting consumers’ health. While the Kraft suit has been dropped, food companies have been jolted nonetheless. Many are now seeking to improve the nutritional content of their products as well as to revamp their packaging to reflect that.

For example, PepsiCo’s Frito-Lay of Plano, Texas, has started affixing a new “Smart Snack” ribbon label to the front of its baked-chip products. The label highlights the fact that those products meet nutrition guidelines established by Kenneth Cooper, a well-known physician who is billed as the father of modern aerobics and who is a paid consultant to PepsiCo Inc. Food packaging changes are also likely for Kraft Foods of Northfield, IL. The company formed its Obesity Advisory Council, a group that’s expected to generate suggestions on how to implement the company’s commitment to health initiatives, such as the reduction of fat and calorie content of some foods and the reining in of portion sizes of single-serve packages.

Paving the Way for More Health Claims

In a move that will have huge implications for the way food products are labeled, an FDA initiative seeks to allow companies to make health claims on food packages that they could not make before. In particular, the FDA will permit less than 100% scientifically supported health claims on food labels. It has specified three new qualified levels of health claims—B, C and D—that would each come with a disclaimer. For example, a B disclaimer would describe the evidence behind the claim as “not conclusive” while a C claim would state that it’s “limited and not conclusive.” Moreover, a D claim would indicate that scientific evidence is scant. While placing the letters B, C and D on packages would not be a requirement, says Sebastian Cianci, an FDA spokesman, the FDA is looking into using some kind of grading system. Additionally, companies could still strive for an A-level health claim, which is unqualified and supported by conclusive evidence.

Mad Cow Brings Up Question of Stricter Food Labels

The country’s first confirmed case of mad cow disease could also have an impact on food packaging. In the wake of the discovery of an infected cow in Washington state last month, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle—joined by three farm groups and the Consumer Federation of America—has called for the immediate implementation of a law that would require U.S. foodmakers to place country-of-origin labels on meat to restore consumer confidence in U.S. beef (the infected cow was traced to Canada). While the labeling law was approved two years ago and is now voluntary, it has been stalled in Congress because of its cost. And aside from being too expensive, the U.S. meat industry says the law would be too unwieldy to implement, vehemently opposing it. According to Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute, mandatory labeling is a “costly and cumbersome law whose true purpose is to impede imports.” In the first year of implementation alone, it would cost $3.9 billion, he says. Aside from meat, the law would also affect seafood, fruits, vegetables and peanuts.

While it remains to be seen whether these developments will bring about sweeping changes to food packaging, they will no doubt encourage U.S. foodmakers to take new approaches to how they label and package products.

Sources:

Healthy Race to Develop New Food Packaging
Stephen Barlas
Packaging World, November 2003
www.packworld.com/articles/Features/16918.html?ppr_key=11.2003&sky_key=11.2003&term=11.2003

Frito-Lay Puts ‘Smart-Snack’ Label on Baked Potato Chips
Betsy McKay
The Wall Street Journal, August 6, 2003
www.phaionline.org/news/wsj8-6.html

Daschle: U.S. Needs Labeling Now to Show Beef Safety
Charles Abbott
Reuters, January 7, 2004
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040107/pl_nm/madcow_daschle_dc_1

U.S. Beef Industry Balks at Labeling Despite Mad Cow Crisis
AFP, January 10, 2004
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040110/hl_afp/us_madcow_health_040110173838