Just stroll around the aisles in a grocery store, and you will see all kinds of labels claiming that the food is "natural," "sugar-free," "low-fat," "high-protein." In fact, these labels are meant to convey only one thing: this product is the healthier option. This trick works because studies of consumer behavior consistently reveal that these labels affect not only purchasing decisions but also the consumption amount and level of guilt associated with it.
The problem is that many of these misleading food labels mean far less than shoppers assume and in some cases, they can encourage worse choices than picking the plain, unlabeled version. Here is what four of the most popular labels stand for.
Why Food Labels Work on Us in the First Place
INSEAD marketing researcher Pierre Chandon was the first to introduce the concept of a "health halo," which describes how one positive attribute listed on the packaging (such as "low-fat" or "organic") makes consumers feel that the whole product is much healthier than it actually is along all the dimensions, including those not covered by the listing at hand 1.
In the frequently cited study, Chandon and Brian Wansink from Cornell University School of Hotel Administration showed that when the same chocolate candies were labeled "low-fat," the subjects of average weight ate 16 percent more of them, while the overweight subjects ate 46 percent more even though their caloric estimates remained the same 2. This is what the "health halo" effect is all about.
Myth vs. Fact: Breaking Down the Big Four Labels
1. "Natural"
The claim: If it's natural, it must be minimally processed and better for you.
The fact: For packaged foods in the U.S., the word "natural" is not legally defined, nor is its use restricted by any government regulation. The Food and Drug Administration has only informally expressed its views on the issue, stating that it will have no objection to the word if used for products containing no artificial coloring, flavors, or other chemicals, though there is no restriction regarding processing level, sugar or salt content, or genetic modification 4.
According to Ross D. Petty, a professor of marketing law at Babson College who has researched "natural" labeling extensively, consumers have a strong belief that the term has meaning and requires regulation, yet products claiming to be "natural" have become less numerous during the early 2010s, mostly due to lawsuits by consumers regarding the meaning of the term 3.
What to check instead: Skip the front-of-package word and read the ingredient list. Fewer, more recognizable ingredients tell you more than "natural" ever will.
2. "Sugar-Free"
The claim: No sugar means no metabolic downside.
The fact: The label "sugar-free" usually denotes the inclusion of sugar alternatives such as sucralose, aspartame, or sugar alcohols rather than ordinary sugar in food products, and does not mean that the product is calorie-free or metabolically inert. The research conducted by Jotham Suez, Eran Segal, Eran Elinav, et al., at the Weizmann Institute of Science indicated that popular non-caloric artificial sweeteners caused changes in gut microbiota in mice and healthy individuals, leading to glucose intolerance, which is a precursor to type 2 diabetes. 5
What to check instead: Look at total carbohydrates and calories per serving, not just the sugar line, and note which sweetener is used if you're sensitive to sugar alcohols.
3. "Low-Fat"
The claim: Less fat automatically means fewer calories.
The fact: This one is associated with the most proven backfire effect. While removing the fat from the products, producers add either extra sugar or refined carbohydrates in order to retain the taste; thus, "low-fat" products have either the same or a higher number of calories than their regular counterparts. As seen in the Wansink and Chandon study above, participants ate more of the snack marked "low-fat" compared to the same snack marked "regular" due to lower feelings of guilt 2.
What to check instead: Compare the calorie count of the "low-fat" version directly against the regular version; if they're close, the fat reduction bought you very little.
4. "High-Protein"
The claim: More protein automatically means a nutritious, muscle-friendly food.
The fact: Protein is truly valuable; hence, such marketing helps build consumer confidence; however, “high-protein” only tells you about one nutrient content. It says nothing about added sugar, saturated fats, or even sodium content. Many protein shakes and bars contain a considerable amount of added sugars in order to balance out the chalky flavor of high-concentration proteins. In other words, the same halo effect is at play when one positive attribute makes people think that all others are also great 1 2.
What to check instead: Look at the full nutrition label together: protein alongside added sugar, saturated fat, and sodium, rather than judging on the protein claim alone.
How to Read a Label Like a Skeptic (Without Falling for Misleading Food Labels)
Turn the package around. Claims on the front of the package are marketing; the Nutrition Facts panel and the ingredient list are strictly regulated and are much more revealing.
Compare, don’t assume. Compare calories, sugar, and sodium when placing the "healthy" variant next to the regular one.
Look out for compensatory substitutions. Whenever an ingredient is cut back, you need to find out what’s taking its place.
Single claims are not complete information. The high protein content or the low fat content is only one characteristic of the food item.
Never forget that serving size is also a part of the marketing game.
Are Any of These Labels Actually Regulated?
They vary in significance. For instance, in the U.S., there are precise definitions associated with claims such as "low-fat," "reduced fat," "sugar-free," and "high-protein" as required by FDA nutrient content claim regulations "low-fat" usually implies 3 grams of fat per serving or less, and "sugar-free" usually means 0.5 grams of sugar per serving or less. This stands out in contrast to "natural," which is not defined at all, and as such, it is unregulated 3 4.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is "natural" a regulated term on food labels?
No. In the U.S., "natural" has no enforceable legal definition for most packaged foods. The FDA has only an informal, non-binding policy on the term 3 4.
Does "sugar-free" mean a product is healthier?
Not necessarily. These products typically contain artificial sweeteners instead of sugar, which research from the Weizmann Institute linked to altered gut bacteria and glucose intolerance 5.
Why can "low-fat" foods still be high in calories?
Manufacturers often replace removed fat with added sugar or starch, keeping calories similar to the regular version, and the label itself has been shown to reduce eating guilt, leading people to eat more 2.
Does "high-protein" automatically mean a food is healthy?
No. It describes one nutrient and says nothing about added sugar, sodium, or saturated fat.
What's the "health halo" effect?
A term coined by researcher Pierre Chandon describing how one positive claim leads people to assume an entire product is healthy on every dimension 1.
What's the best way to avoid being misled by food labels?
Ignore front-of-package claims and go straight to the Nutrition Facts panel and ingredient list, comparing the "healthy" version directly against the regular one this single habit neutralizes most misleading food labels before they influence your cart.
Key Points
"Healthy" food labels aren't necessarily lies, but they're almost always incomplete truths, and learning to spot misleading food labels is one of the most useful skills you can bring into a grocery store. "Natural" tells nothing about processing 3 4. "Sugar-free" usually indicates the use of artificial sugars, which create many metabolic doubts 5. "Low-fat" usually indicates extra added sugar and extra consumption due to the lack of guilty conscience 2. "High protein" means one favorable value but at least several unfavorable ones 1.
The only effective way out of this situation is a straightforward one: forget everything written on the front side of the pack and check out the nutrition facts table and ingredient list instead.
References
[1] Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). The Biasing Health Halos of Fast-Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(3), 301–314. doi.org/10.1086/519499
[2] Wansink, B., & Chandon, P. (2006). Can "Low-Fat" Nutrition Labels Lead to Obesity? Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 605–617. Summarized via Cornell University news: news.cornell.edu/node/277162
[3] Petty, R. D. (Babson College) — research on "natural" food label regulation and consumer litigation, summarized via Loonylabs: loonylabs.org/2015/03/24/natural-food-labels-fda-ftc-usda
[4] U.S. Food and Drug Administration — informal policy statement on the term "natural," summarized via Food Navigator: foodnavigator.com/Article/2008/01/04/natural-will-remain-undefined-says-fda
[5] Suez, J., Korem, T., Zeevi, D., et al., Segal, E., & Elinav, E. (2014). Artificial sweeteners induce glucose intolerance by altering the gut microbiota. Nature, 514(7521), 181–186. nature.com/articles/nature13793
Leave a comment