A health expert has called New Zealand's Health Star Ratings system "outdated" and "nonsense" in the wake of bottled plain sparkling water receiving just two stars, while sugary milk drinks get four.
AUT Professor of Public Health Grant Schofield says the system is designed to support the food manufacturing industry.
- Health-star ratings: Are they really truthful?
- Nestle drops Milo's 4.5 health star rating because it's half-sugar
While the Government calls the system "a reliable way to compare foods", Prof Schofield says it leaves consumers bewildered by what they should be eating.
"Big food does what big tobacco does, it creates confusion," he says.
The Health Star Ratings programme is a trans-Tasman system developed in collaboration with public health experts, the food industry and consumer groups.
Prof Schofield says 3900 products on supermarket shelves have the rating, but calls it "nonsense" and a "voluntary system".
"You can you have natural products like water, milk, butter and cheese rating lower than highly processed sugary foods," he says.
New data was recently released from Sodastream revealing none of the sparkling water products on NZ supermarket shelves rated higher than two stars - despite not having any sugar content at all. At the same time, some beverages which are significantly higher in sugar content can receive over four stars.
"It's ridiculous that a product like plain bottled water only has two stars. Drinking water in its natural state is a normal human habit, it's what we've done since we inhabited the planet," says Prof Schofield.
The Ministry for Primary Industries website has guidelines on how to use the system.
"You can trust the Health Star Ratings you see on packaged foods," says the MPI.
"They are an independent rating developed by the New Zealand and Australian Governments in collaboration with public health experts, the food industry and consumer groups."
The ministry does include some caveats with how the information should be interpreted.
"Health stars shouldn't be used to compare different types of food such as peanut butter versus cereal," says the MPI.
"Health Star Ratings can help you make better food choices, but this doesn't mean you can eat large amounts of food with more stars."
Prof Schofield says the problem with the Health Star Ratings algorithm is that it under-emphasises the impact of sugar on the body.
He also points to a new, nationwide survey of more than 1000 New Zealanders, also commissioned by Sodastream, which shows four in every ten (39 percent) Kiwis are confused by food labelling. He believes inconsistencies in Health Star Ratings are adding to this.
"It was worrying to see that confusion over labelling was even higher among some of our most vulnerable communities, including those that have disproportionately higher rates of obesity and diabetes, such as low income households (47 percent) and Maori (44 percent)," he says.
Prof Schofield is calling for compulsory front-of-pack labelling of all free sugars on packaged products.
SodaStream NZ spokesperson Shannon Zaloum says they collected nutritional panel information from all of the bottles of unflavoured sparkling water on New Zealand supermarket shelves that were available.
"The low star rating on some plain water products in supermarkets suggests the product is unhealthy, when in fact water and sparkling water is relatively low cost, readily available and doesn't contain any kilojoules. It is the best liquid for hydrating your body," says Zaloum.
Guidelines from the World Health Organisation say women and men should consume 2.2 - 2.9 litres of water per day, or 4.5 litres if there are additional losses through perspiration.
Newshub.
