Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T17:16:48.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The origin of Guideline Daily Amounts and the Food Standards Agency's guidance on what counts as ‘a lot’ and ‘a little’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Mike Rayner ,
Peter Scarborough  and
Carol Williams
Mike Rayner*
Affiliation:
British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 7LF, UK
Peter Scarborough
Affiliation:
British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 7LF, UK
Carol Williams
Affiliation:
Centre for International Child Health, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

This paper provides the rationale for the Guideline Daily Amounts (GDAs) for fat, saturated fat and other nutrients that appear on food labels in the UK. These GDAs are provided voluntarily by manufacturers and retailers and were developed to help people make better use of nutrition labelling – the format of which is prescribed by the European Union's nutrition labelling directive. The paper also describes the basis to some Rules of Thumb for what counts as ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ of fat, saturated fat and other nutrients, in an individual food.

Design:

The paper gives the background to, and purpose of, the GDAs and Rules of Thumb and explains how they were calculated. It briefly describes their subsequent usage by food producers and others.

Results:

Both GDAs and the Rules of Thumb first appeared in a leaflet developed by the authors and published in 1996 by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. GDAs for fat, saturated fat and energy were adopted subsequently by the Institute of Grocery Distribution and then by many retailers and some manufacturers. The Rules of Thumb for fat, saturated fat, sugar and sodium have recently been republished in some leaflets published by the Food Standards Agency in the UK.

Conclusions:

GDAs and Rules of Thumb may provide useful ways of helping consumers make sense of nutrition labelling. The current GDAs and the Rules of Thumb could usefully be updated in the light of recent developments.

Keywords

Food labellingNutrition policy
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , June 2004 , pp. 549 - 556
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2004

References

1Williams, C, Rayner, M, Myatt, M, Boaz, A. Use yourLabel: Making Sense of Nutrition Information. Foodsenseleaflet. London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1996.Google Scholar
2European Commission. Council Directive No. 90/496/EEC of 24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs. Official Journal 6.10.1990; 40–4.Google Scholar
3Cowburn, G, Stockley, L. A Systematic Review of the Researchon Consumer Understanding of Nutrition Labelling. Brussels: European Heart Network, 2003.Google Scholar
4Department of Health. Dietary Reference Values for FoodEnergy and Nutrients for the United Kingdom. Report onHealth and Social Subjects No. 41. London: HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
5Bettman, JR. An Information Processing Theory of ConsumerChoice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1979.Google Scholar
6Rayner, M, Boaz, A, Higginson, C. Consumer use of healthrelatedendorsements on food labels in the UK and Australia. Journal of Nutrition Education 2001; 33: 24–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Myatt, M. MAFF food labelling project: results of the testing ofthe proposed Foodsense leaflet ‘Use Your Label. Unpublishedreport, 1995.Google Scholar
8Food Standards Agency (FSA). Labelling Claims. London: FSA, 2002 (and Salt, Sugar and Fat in this series).Google Scholar
9European Commission. Proposal for a Regulation of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council on Nutrition andHealth Claims made on Foods. 16.7.2003:COM(2003) 424final. Brussels: European Commission, 2003.Google Scholar
10Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). Guidelinesfor Use of Nutrition Claims. CAC/GL 23–1997. Rome: CAC, 1997.Google Scholar
11Department of Health (DoH). Sensible Drinking, The Reportof an Inter-Departmental Working Group. London: DoH, 1995.Google Scholar
12Department of Health. The Health of the Nation. A Strategyfor Health in England. London: HMSO, 1992.Google Scholar
13Department of Health. Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease. Report on Health and Social Subjects No. 46. London: HMSO, 1994.Google Scholar
14Department of Health. Dietary Sugars and Human Disease. Report of the Panel on Dietary Sugars. Report on Health andSocial Subjects No. 37. London: HMSO, 1989.Google Scholar
15Research Services Ltd. Nutrition Labelling Study Report. London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1995.Google Scholar
16Department of Health. Nutritional Aspects of the Developmentof Cancer. Report on Health and Social Subjects No. 48. London: HMSO, 1998.Google Scholar
17Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition. Salt and Health. London: The Stationery Office, 2003.Google Scholar
18Roe, MA, Finglas, PM, Church, SM. McCance & Widdowson'sThe Composition of Foods, sixth summary ed. London: Royal Society of Chemistry and the Food Standards Agency, 2002.Google Scholar
19Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Food AdvisoryCommittee Report on its Review of Food Labelling andAdvertising 1990. London: HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
20Coronary Prevention Group (CPG). Nutritional Labelling ofFoods: A Rational Approach to Banding. London: CPG, 1988.Google Scholar
21Black, A, Rayner, M. Just Read the Label. London: HMSO, 1992.Google Scholar
22Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Food PortionSizes, 2nd ed. London: HMSO, 1988.Google Scholar
23Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. National Food Survey 2000. London: The Stationery Office, 2001.Google Scholar
24Institute of Grocery Distribution (IGD). Voluntary NutritionalLabelling Guidelines to Benefit the Consumer. Watford, UK: IGD, 1998.Google Scholar
25MMR Product and Concept Research. Additional VoluntaryNutrition Labelling Research. Final Report. Watford, UK: Institute of Grocery Distribution, 1997.Google Scholar
26http://www.waitrose.com/food_drink/nutrition/healthyeating/dailyrequirements.asp (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
27http://193.201.200.191/shapeup/healthyeat.html (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
28http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/labelling/ (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
29http://www2.marksandspencer.com/foodmagazine/insidestory/newyear/whatsonthelabel_.shtml (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
30http://www.co-op.co.uk/ (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
31http://www.heinz.co.uk/ (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
32http://www.bhf.org.uk/hearthealth/index.asp?secondlevel=78&thirdlevel=350&artID=407 (accessed 30 05 2003).Google Scholar
33British Heart Foundation (BHF). Guide to Food Labelling. London: BHF: undated.Google Scholar
34Henderson, L, Gregory, J, Irving, K, Swan, G. The National Dietand Nutrition Survey: Adults aged 19 to 64 years. Vol. 2. London: HMSO, 2003.Google Scholar