Should manufacturers be held accountable for consumer choices? Yes. Without knowing the full extent of the benefits and damages that products can have on a consumer, how are they to make informed choices. Warning labels would also, hopefully, make manufacturers create healthier products.
Should There be Warning Labels on Alcohol?
While moderate alcohol consumption was in the past thought to be associated with some health benefits, such as potentially reducing the risk of heart disease by a small degree, alcohol has also been found to increase the risk of seven different cancers, including breast, colon and mouth cancer. As consumption increases, so does cancer risk. In 2016, cancers attributed to alcohol were responsible for approximately 378,000 deaths worldwide.
A study in the US showed that fewer than half of Americans understand that alcohol consumption increases cancer risk, and a majority of people surveyed say they would support warning labels and drinking guidelines to increase awareness. Among 3,865 Americans surveyed by mail (a sample representative of the U.S. population), 65.1% supported added warning labels to alcohol packaging, and a slightly smaller percentage – 63.9% – backed drinking guidelines. A much smaller percentage – 34.4% – supported banning outdoor alcohol advertising.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, people who said they were aware of the alcohol-cancer link were more likely to support such measures than those who believed there was no risk, or that drinking decreased risk. There was also less support among heavy drinkers. “It is encouraging that a majority of U.S. adults are supportive of information about the risk of alcohol being provided to consumers,” said assistant professor Kara P. Wiseman of the University of Virginia School of Medicine’s Department of Public Health Sciences and UVA Cancer Center. “An important next step in this research will be to determine what types of messages are able to best convey information about alcohol’s harms as they relate to cancer.”
To gauge public awareness of the alcohol-cancer link, Wiseman and colleagues analysed responses to the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey. The survey revealed broad support for campaigns to increase awareness, prompting the researchers to call for such efforts to be implemented. “Collectively, these findings suggest that increasing awareness of the alcohol-cancer link may increase alcohol control policy support, which may ultimately expedite policy adoption and implementation,” the researchers write in a paper outlining their findings. “Furthermore, [more than] 50% of Americans are unaware that alcohol affects cancer risk. Efforts are clearly needed to inform the public about this important modifiable cancer risk factor.”
“It is important that people are made fully aware of the potential harms of alcohol so that they may make informed decisions about alcohol consumption,” said Wiseman, who is also part of UVA’s Center for Behavioral Health and Technology. “By identifying ways to support consistent discussion about alcohol between providers and patients, and developing messaging about the potential harms of alcohol, we may be able to begin to address an important cancer risk factor.”
In the UK, alcohol abuse can lead to a number of health issues and public policy requires advice on alcoholic drink labelling to help people understand the perils of alcohol abuse. The Department of health focuses on three areas regarding alcohol consumption:
- Weekly Drinking
- Single Session Drinking
- Pregnancy and Drinking
Sadly, the Government recommends including the guideline alcohol consumption to not regularly exceed 2-3 alcohol units per day for women and 3-4 units per day for men. Alternatively, 14 units per week for women and 21 units per week for men. There is also a move to recommend only 14 units per week for men rather than 21 units per week.
Your label should ensure relevant information is easy to find and clear for the consumer to read and interpret. It should also be integral to the product and not part of any packaging that will be thrown away when consuming the product. In the UK, there should be a reference to the Portman Group or the Drinkaware campaign – www.drinkaware.co.uk has lots of information to sift through and their findings do point to the need for harsher warning labels on alcohol.
Warning Labels on Sugary Drinks
Pictorial warning labels on sugary drinks may help curb sales, a new study found. In a randomized trial of parents with young children (ages 2 to 12), shopping in a “store” that displayed health-related warning labels on sugary drinks led to a 17% reduction in sales for these beverages, reported Lindsey Smith Taillie, PhD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and colleagues.
Among 325 parents included in the trial, which was conducted in a naturalistic store set in a North Carolina laboratory, 45% of those in the control arm — for whom sugary drinks were only labelled with a traditional barcode — bought their young child one of these drinks versus 28% of the parents who saw health warnings on these drinks.
Of note, the warning labels were effective across the board, as there were no differences between parent demographics, such as race/ethnicity, income, education level, or the age of their child. These pictorial warning labels included a stock image and text highlighting two possible health outcomes that are associated with drinking sugar-sweetened beverages: type 2 diabetes and heart damage. The heart damage label featured an image of an unhealthy heart with the following text below: “WARNING: Excess consumption of drinks with added sugar contributes to heart damage.” The other label featured a foot with necrotic skin reading: “WARNING: Excess consumption of drinks with added sugar contributes to type 2 diabetes.”
“We know from tobacco control research that warnings that include images are effective for reducing consumption,” Taillie explained in a statement. “Our study is one of the first to show that this type of policy works for sugary drinks, too. This data provides evidence to support policies to require strong front-of-package warnings as a strategy to reduce children’s intake of sugary drinks,” she added.
As for their reactions to the warning labels, parents generally felt they were quite effective vs no warning label:
- Felt more in control of healthy eating decisions
- Greater thinking about the harms of sugary drinks
- Stronger negative emotional reactions
- Lower perceived healthfulness of sugary drinks for their child
All in all, parents concluded that these graphic warning labels did in fact lead to lower intentions to serve their child sugary drinks. However, some things that the warning labels didn’t change was the perceived tastiness of sugary drinks, perceived amount of added sugar in sugary drinks, and general appeal of sugary drinks.
Cosmetic Safety is Crucial
Haircare, skincare, toiletry, perfumery, and decorative cosmetic products are all used in our daily routines to keep us clean, maintain healthy skin and teeth, to look good and smell nice. The general term is cosmetics. Cosmetics include shampoos; hair dyes; moisturisers and cleansers; anti-ageing creams; antiperspirants; sunscreens; oral hygiene products such as toothpastes; and fine fragrances and other perfumery products.
Cosmetics are applied directly to skin, hair and nails so it is crucial that they are safe to use. Years of scientific research and testing goes into making each and every item in our bathroom cabinets and make-up bags. It takes whole teams of scientists to develop just one new product.
All cosmetic products supplied throughout the UK must be safe. The safety laws controlling cosmetic products are extremely stringent. In the UK, the manufacture and supply of cosmetics is governed by the UK Cosmetics Regulation, which is part of UK consumer product safety legislation. Compliance is mandatory.
All ingredients must be safe to use, and ingredients are regularly reviewed by independent scientists. If an ingredient was found to be unsafe as it is used in a cosmetic product, it would be banned for use. What is missing are warning labels to remind consumers that these products can be absorbed through the skin. There is also dangers to the environment – think microplastic – that should be clearly noted on the labels.
UK Should Do More Regarding Junk Food Warning Labels
Experts have said that junk food ought to carry cigarette-style health warnings on packaging to tackle obesity. They said food that ‘our grandparents wouldn’t have recognised’, such as cake, fizzy drinks and frozen pizza, should be branded with stark health warnings.
Mexico tried to help combat obesity and the ill effects of junk food with a mandatory, front-of-package food warning. The law requires black informational octagons to be placed on packaged foods that are high in saturated fat, trans fat, sugar, sodium, or calories. Other requirements include that any food which must bear the black octagon cannot include children’s characters, animations, cartoons, or images of celebrities, athletes, or pets on their packaging.
Currently, traffic light labels for food in the UK are voluntary and simply highlight figures for fat, sugar, salt and calories. A study published in BMJ Global Health said ultra-processed foods were the ‘new tobacco’ and called for stricter rules around their packaging. It’s time the UK stepped up and made this industry more responsible.
Success of Tobacco Warning Labels
Canada became the first country to implement pictorial health warnings on cigarette packages in June 2001. Health warnings were required to cover 50% of the front and 50% of the back of the package (one side in English and the other side in French). A message was required to appear on the inside of each package, either on the slide or on an insert. Canada required tar, nicotine, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide and benzene emission numbers to appear on the side of packages.
A new set of 16 health warnings were implemented in 2012. The new warnings are larger and must cover 75% of the front and back of cigarette and little cigar packages. As of March 1, 2012, manufacturers and importers were prohibited from distributing products without the new health warnings. Retailers were given 3 months (until June 19, 2012) to transition to packages displaying the new warnings. Canada also prohibits the terms “light” and “mild” from appearing on packages. Plain packaging has also been introduced to reduce the aesthetic appeal of cigarette packages.
The United Kingdom approved regulations requiring pictorial health warnings on tobacco packages in 2007. Beginning October 2008, new tobacco product stock was required to display pictorial warnings. Manufacturers had one year to ensure all cigarette packs carried the warnings, and two years to ensure all other tobacco products carried the warnings. Health warnings were required to cover 43% of the front and 53% of the back of all cigarette packages. A set of 15 images were rotated on packs. Tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide emission numbers were required on the side of packages. Similar to Canada, the terms “light” and “mild” are prohibited from appearing on packages.
New tobacco packaging regulations based on the EU’s Tobacco Product Directive (TPD) came into force on May 20, 2016, and require new warnings that cover the top 65% of the front and back of the package. The warnings consist of a photo, text and smoking cessation information. Three different sets of 14 warnings will be rotated annually. A descriptive statement about emissions is required on the side panel. Information about tar, nicotine or carbon monoxide content is prohibited.
Plain packaging regulations were approved on March 16, 2015, and came into force at the manufacturer level on May 20, 2016. Retailers were given 1 year (until May 21, 2017) to transition to the new TPD and standardized (plain) packaging. The regulations apply to England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.
The Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modelling network (CISNET) Lung Group in the US has concluding that adding warning labels with graphic depictions of the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking could have averted thousands of smoking-related deaths if approved as originally planned in 2012. If the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does require tobacco companies to include the graphic warning labels on cigarette packages in October 2022, as it’s expected to do, between 275,000 and 794,000 smoking-attributable deaths could be averted by 2100, and between 4 million to 11.6 million life-years could be gained during that period.
Conclusion
Life can get pretty stressful in the world that we live in and most of us don’t have the time nor the inclination to do research on all of the products and their ingredients to ensure a healthy choice. Holding manufacturers accountable to be honest and upfront through warning labels on their products is essential. Since they would rather not do this themselves, it is up to the government to legislate it. They did it with tobacco products and now it’s time to do it with all products.
