1. 90/496/cee

IRMM, EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Flected in the issuing of Council Directive 90/496/Cee on the Nutritional Labelling of Foodstuffs. Title: 0303>>0305 pag 311-344. Council Directive 90/496/EEC of 24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs • No longer in force OJ L 276, 6.10.1990, p. 40–44 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT) Special edition in Finnish: Chapter 15 Volume 010 P. 7 - 12 Special Most Viewed Articles. How Languages Are Learned Pdf.

Fisconetplus 5. Service Public Federal Finances. La fabrication, la mise sur le march. La Commission rend ces informations publiques. La restriction s’applique.

Contributions: SSgB co-designed the audit, devised the data analysis methodology and wrote the first draft of the paper. LFC coordinated the research, co-designed the audit, and critically reviewed the paper. AL and SE collected the data in the countries, encoded them electronically and helped with the analysis.

JMW collected parts of the data, provided input on the methodology and critically reviewed the paper. CH and MMR contributed to the audit design and data collection, and provided comments on the paper. Objectives: The European Union (EU)-funded project Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life (FLABEL) aims to understand how nutrition information on food labels affects consumers’ dietary choices and shopping behaviour. The first phase of this study consisted of assessing the penetration of nutrition labelling and related information on various food products in all 27 EU Member States and Turkey. Methods: In each country, food products were audited in three different types of retailers to cover as many different products as possible within five food and beverage categories: sweet biscuits, breakfast cereals, pre-packed chilled ready meals, carbonated soft drinks and yoghurts.

Results: More than 37 000 products were audited in a total of 84 retail stores. On average, 85% of the products contained back-of-pack (BOP) nutrition labelling or related information (from 70% in Slovenia to 97% in Ireland), versus 48% for front-of-pack (FOP) information (from 24% in Turkey to 82% in the UK). The most widespread format was the BOP tabular or linear listing of nutrition content.

Guideline daily amounts labelling was the most prevalent form of FOP information, showing an average penetration of 25% across all products audited. Among categories, breakfast cereals showed the highest penetration of nutrition-related information, with 94% BOP penetration and 70% FOP penetration. Conclusions: Nutrition labelling and related information was found on a large majority of products audited.

90/496/cee

These findings provide the basis for subsequent phases of FLABEL involving attention, reading, liking, understanding and use by consumers of different nutrition labelling formats. In light of the growing prevalence of diet-related diseases, governments, retailers and food companies promote nutrition labelling to help the consumer make healthy, informed food choices. In addition, the World Health Organization includes nutrition labelling as part of its global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. Nutrition labelling aims at highlighting essential information about the nutritional value and composition of products.

Currently, such information is not compulsory in the European Union (EU) unless a nutrition or health claim is made (, ). According to a recent review , consumers showed widespread interest in nutrition information on food packages, though this interest varied across situations and products.

Most consumers reported good subjective understanding of the most common signposting formats, which is supported by findings showing reasonable objective understanding (; ). On the other hand, virtually no insight exists as to how labelling information is, or will be, used in a real-world shopping situation, and how it affects consumers′ dietary patterns (; ). Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life (FLABEL) is an EU-funded project which has been set up to elucidate whether the use of nutrition labelling on food products impacts on consumers’ dietary choices and shopping habits. Fundamental to this objective is the assessment of current exposure of consumers to nutrition information on food labels. At present, data on the penetration of nutrition information on food labels in Europe are scarce, with previous studies reporting an average prevalence of tabular nutrition information of 56%. However, that audit involved only a subset of countries, considered only tabular nutrition information, and did not look at all products within a product category.

On the other hand, two surveys from the United States, where nutrition labelling became mandatory in 1994, reported virtually complete labelling of pre-packaged foods from a broad range of product categories (; ). To our knowledge, the results presented in this paper constitute the first EU-wide study to give a real-life insight into current exposure of consumers to nutrition information on food labels. Auditing period, setting and product categories The audit period lasted from September 2008 to April 2009 and data collection was carried out in all 27 EU Member States and Turkey.

In each country, three types of food retail stores were selected with an emphasis on broad coverage of different product manufacturers: a food retailer from the top five in terms of market share, a consumer cooperative (or national retailer if a consumer cooperative was not available), and a discounter (hard discounter if possible). All products within the following five categories were examined: sweet biscuits, breakfast cereals, pre-packed chilled ready meals, carbonated soft drinks and yoghurts. The criteria for choosing these product categories were that they were pre-packaged foods, both foods and beverages, both meal and snack items, and foods consumed at different times and in different contexts. The five different food categories were defined as follows:. Sweet biscuits—main ingredients flour, sugar, fat; including chocolate coated, with jam, in bags, packs, so on. Breakfast cereals—cereals to be eaten at breakfast time (with milk), excluding cereal bars. Pre-packed chilled ready meals—fresh ready meals stored at 2–8 °C, ideally containing a carbohydrate source (rice, pasta, potatoes), a protein source (meat, poultry, fish) and vegetables.

This includes vegetarian varieties, and dishes that constitute a meal (even if not containing the three elements above). Carbonated soft drinks—non-alcoholic fizzy drinks that people drink as refreshment, in cans or bottles. Yoghurts—fermented milk products containing the word ‘yoghurt’ on the pack, natural or fruit flavoured, single pack or multipack, also drinkable yoghurt. Data collection process Two data collection grids were developed for use in the stores, a product and a nutrition information grid. The product grid was used to record the product name, brand name, manufacturer, pack size, and if applicable, variety. The nutrition information grid was used to record the nutrition information found on each food package, such as the type of labelling scheme (for example, traffic lights, guideline daily amounts (GDA), health logo, nutrition table), the format of the schemes (that is, horizontal, vertical, tabular), the presence of nutrition information (for example, ‘Big 4’ (that is, energy, carbohydrates, protein, fat) or ‘Big 8’ (that is, ‘Big 4’ plus sugar, saturated fat, fibre, sodium)), or the presence of nutrition or health claims as defined by current European law (, ).

In this study, logos on food packages were considered as ‘health logos’ if their use was restricted to food products that fulfilled certain nutrient criteria (which may vary from logo to logo and may consider dietary guidelines) and as such represented a healthier option in that category. Information was considered as front-of-pack (FOP) if it was displayed in the principal field of vision , which in turn was guided by the placement of product name and brand. The remaining area was defined as back-of-pack (BOP). Data analysis Descriptive statistics (percentages, minima, maxima, means) and graphs were computed using Microsoft Excel 2003 SP 3. Penetration of nutrition information by country In total, 37365 products from five food and beverage product categories were audited in 84 individual retail stores across all 27 EU Member States and Turkey. The vast majority of stores were located in capital or big cities, with the exact choice guided by easy access from the nearest airport or major train station. An average of 85% (range 70–97%) of these products displayed on the back of the pack one or more of the items considered, versus 48% (range 24–82%) for FOP penetration.

Countries at the top end of the range for provision of BOP information were Ireland, UK and The Netherlands, whereas Slovenia and Cyprus represented the bottom end. For FOP information, the leading countries were the UK and Ireland, while Turkey showed the lowest penetration. Whereas penetration of FOP nutrition claims ranged from 12% in Estonia to 37% in Ireland and Portugal, with a European average of 25% , health claims and health logos were used on very few products (data not shown). The average penetration of health claims was 4% BOP (from 0.5% in Spain and Czech Republic to 8% in Ireland) and 2% FOP (from. Traffic light labelling was only encountered on products audited in Spain (3% FOP, 3% BOP) and the UK (3% FOP, 2% BOP) (data not shown). Penetration of nutrition information by category Among the five categories of products audited, breakfast cereals showed the highest penetration of items considered in this audit, providing BOP information on 94% of products (from 79% in Bulgaria to 100% in France, Ireland and The Netherlands) and FOP information on 70% of products (from 43% in Turkey to 93% in France and Germany) (data not shown). Typically, the minimum information provided was the BOP nutrition table (94%), mostly containing the ‘Big 8’ (78 versus 15% ‘Big 4’).

On the other hand, sweet biscuits had the lowest penetration of nutrition-related information (76% BOP, 25% FOP), and the split for the BOP nutrition table (76% penetration) was even between ‘Big 8’ and ‘Big 4’ at 38% each. Yoghurts were the only product category where the ‘Big 4’ were more prevalent than the ‘Big 8’ (51 versus 36%, total BOP nutrition table 88%). At the same time, yoghurts showed the highest penetration of health claims, reaching up to around 30% (BOP) in Ireland and Bulgaria, and around 20% in the UK, Romania, Denmark, Belgium, Malta and The Netherlands. Of note, no ready meals fitting the criteria the FLABEL consortium defined for this category were found in the following five countries: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Italy, Malta and Romania. However, these countries do have chilled ready meal-type foods that are available unlabelled and unpackaged over the deli counter.

Taken together, a large majority of the more than 37000 products audited carried tabular/linear nutrition information, which is at present voluntary in the absence of nutrition or health claims. These findings provide the basis for subsequent studies involving attention, reading, liking, understanding and use by consumers of different nutrition labelling formats, which will be explored in the next phases of the FLABEL project.

Major outcomes of FLABEL will be best practice guidelines for research into nutrition labelling as well as a research-based best practice proposal for nutrition labelling, tested in a real-world store environment. The authors thank the retailers who granted access to their stores and the local contacts for helping with the data collection in the different countries. The support by the European Community of Consumer Cooperatives, Tesco Stores Ltd, the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UEAPME) and the Confederation of Family Organisations in the European Union deserves special mention. The help of Fanny Rollin of EUFIC in drafting the manuscript is gratefully acknowledged. The authors acknowledge the 7th EU Framework Programme Small Collaborative Project FLABEL (Contract no. 211905) has been the major source of information for this paper. The content of the paper reflects only the views of the authors; the European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained in this paper.

---------------------------------------------- Once my torrents start to get a few seeds I sometimes remove them from my client to allow for better upload speeds for other torrents I have uploaded. The suite life of zack and cody season 1 download torrent. If this torrent in the future becomes unseeded and remains that way for a few days, send me an email to sparktorrent@gmail.com and provide a link to this page in the email.