What about all those “lite”, “reduced salt”, “less fat”, “no added sugar” claims?

There are plenty of tricks of the food labeling trade, so don’t believe everything you read, particularly claims on the front of a packet. Words like “light” or “lite” should be taken with a grain of salt (or sodium). Quite often foods described as “light” or “lite” might be lower in fat than other products produced by the same brand, but higher in fat than other similar products, so still high in fat. Or they might be low in fat and high in sugar, so not necessarily healthy and still fattening. Similarly, a product that is promoted, as having “reduced salt” doesn’t mean a product is actually low in salt – it depends on the point of comparison, which is often unclear. And just because a product “contains no added sugar” (often used to promote fruit juice), this doesn’t mean the sugar content is low.

Can I take words such as “healthy” and “natural” at face value?

Be suspicious. These ill-defined words have no legal or formal meaning, and so manufacturers can get away with using them without being accused of breaching advertising or labeling regulations.

What about health benefit claims?

Look at the small print, particularly qualifiers that follow statements about a specific health benefit, such as the product that will “help to reduce digestive discomfort”. If you read the small print, it might say that this can reduce digestive comfort “as part of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle”. Subtext: if you have balanced and healthy lifestyle you probably don’t need it.

What does gluten free really mean?

This varies from country to country, but generally only foods that contain 20 ppm (parts per million, sometimes labeled as mg/kg) or less can be labeled ‘gluten-free’. The term can be used on specialist substitute gluten-free products like breads, flours and crackers, which may contain gluten-free wheat starch.

Products that are naturally gluten-free can also be labeled as such, which has helped clear up confusion around gluten-free grains such as amaranth, buckwheat, quinoa, millet, and sorghum.

Yet the gluten-free label is also used on products that don’t contain gluten and which you probably wouldn’t have thought to have contained gluten in the first place, like tinned tomatoes and spring water. Some argue that this is the food industry exploiting the “gluten-free” trend to make their products sound healthier than they are, a redundant form of labeling that creates more confusion than clarity.

Can I still use something past its “best before” date?

This can get confusing, as there’s a difference between how long food can be kept before it begins to deteriorate, and how long food can be kept before it becomes unsafe to eat. There are two types of date marking: “use by” or “expires on” dates, and “best before” dates. Food that that has passed the “use by” or “expires on” date shouldn’t be eaten and can’t be legally sold, as they can pose a health or safety risk. Food that has passed the “best before” date is likely to be past its best in terms of texture taste and appearance, but is probably still safe to eat.

It’s all so confusing, isn’t there a simple rule?

Yes, try to avoid or cut down on processed foods that come with complicated labeling. If manufacturers don’t want us to easily identify what’s in a product, they probably have something to hide.

Article by Margo White and supplied by Les Mills International.