Recent research by the University of Florida has revealed that food labels intended to guide Americans towards healthier dietary choices may inadvertently produce the opposite effect. This discovery is particularly significant as it emerges when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering the implementation of mandatory front-of-package food labels. This prospective regulation introduced by the FDA would involve labels that prominently display the amounts of saturated fat, sodium, and added sugars—each quantified as a percentage of the recommended daily intake and categorised into one of three levels: low, medium, or high.

The study, published in the journal Food Policy by researchers from the UF/IFAS, focused on labels that declare the product within as “healthy.” It was observed that these labels generally reduced the amount consumers were willing to pay for yoghurt unless the claim was substantiated by official FDA endorsement and an explanation of the criteria used by the agency to classify the food as healthy.

Jianhui “Jeffrey” Liu, a doctoral candidate in the UF/IFAS food and resource economics department and the study’s lead author, emphasised the importance of clarifying label meanings to consumers. Liu and his colleagues conducted experiments with 308 participants, who were shown various label designs on packages of strawberry Greek yoghurt and asked to state their willingness to pay. These designs included one with a ‘healthy’ label, one with a ‘great taste’ label, one that combined both labels and a control design without any labels. The findings were telling: compared to the control, the price consumers were prepared to pay dropped by 18% for yoghurts labelled as “healthy” and by 25% for those labelled as both “healthy” and having “great taste”. However, yoghurts with a “great taste” label did not significantly influence willingness to pay positively or negatively.

The results suggest that health labels trigger an assumption of compromised flavour and enjoyment. Liu noted, “Merely stating ‘healthy’ on a product might not suffice and could actually have adverse effects if consumers are uncertain about what makes the food healthy or if they presume the label implies a sacrifice in taste.”

Interestingly, the negative perception linked with the ‘healthy’ label was alleviated when it was accompanied by explanatory text stating, “The product you have just observed features a ‘healthy’ symbol. This label indicates that the product meets the FDA’s proposed criteria for being designated as ‘healthy,’ which specifically requires the product to be low in saturated fat, added sugar and sodium.”

The study further indicated that although consumers might be confused or sceptical about health claims, their trust in the credibility of authoritative sources can significantly influence their purchasing decisions.

Liu hopes that these insights will assist policymakers and industry professionals create more effective packaging labels that enable consumers to make more informed food choices. He believes this research supports a broader cultural shift towards healthier eating habits, which could enhance public health and lessen the impact of diet-related diseases nationwide. According to Liu, “This study has the potential to affect every consumer and food manufacturer in the country by laying the groundwork for more transparent, effective, and impactful public health interventions.”

More information: Jianhui Liu et al, Assessing consumers’ valuation for Front-of-Package ‘Health’ labeling under FDA guidelines, Food Policy. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102804

Journal information: Food Policy Provided by University of Florida