Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Guide to Food Labelling and Advertising

Section VI: Nutrient Content Claims
Sections 6.1 to 6.1.9

6.1 General Principles

6.1.1 Definition

A nutrient content claim is any statement or expression which describes, directly or indirectly, the level of a nutrient(s) in a food or group of foods.

6.1.2 Basis for Criteria

6.1.2.1 Consistency in Terminology and Uses (Amended 10/06/97)

Descriptive terms for the levels of nutrients in foods such as "good source of", "high in", "low in" and "free" may assist consumers in identifying foods with particular nutritional properties. Consumers may become confused or be misled if the quantity represented by a descriptive term is inappropriate or varies from food group to food group. Therefore, consistency in terminology and use is necessary. In the following sections, terminology and quantitative criteria are outlined for the use of positive and negative claims. Criteria are also provided in tables for individual nutrients.

6.1.2.2 Serving Size and Reference Amount as Basis for Nutrient Content Claims (Amended 10/06/97)

The serving of stated size is used as a basis for many nutrient content claims. In the case of the claim "fat free", both the reference amount and the serving of stated size of the food are used as the basis for the claim. In the future, it is anticipated that both reference amount and serving size would serve as the basis for all nutrient content claims.

6.1.3 Legal Basis

Compositional criteria are provided for nutrient content claims using terms such as "free", "low", "lean", "extra lean", "light", "source", "good source", "high in", "more" and "reduced/less". Some of these requirements are in the Food and Drug Regulations, while others are guidelines based on the general prohibition in subsection 5(1) of the Food and Drugs Act against false and misleading representations on labels and in advertisements for foods (see Summary Tables of claims under specific nutrients, Section 6.2.1 to 6.2.6).

6.1.4 Nutrition Information Required When a Claim is Made

A general requirement for all claims is a declaration of the particular nutrient claimed and in the case of sodium, potassium, cholesterol and fatty acid claims, declaration of additional nutrients (see Sodium (Salt) and Potassium, Section 6.2.5 and Fat, Fatty Acids and Cholesterol, Section 6.2.3). These declarations must be based on a serving of stated size of the food as sold (B.01.002A and B.01.300 to B.02.303, FDR). Specific labelling requirements exist for claims for special dietary use such as "low sodium", "low calorie" and "sugar free" (see Summary Tables of claims, Sections 6.2.5.3, 6.2.1.3 and 6.2.4.5).

6.1.5 Synonyms

In most instances, synonyms will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

6.1.6 Negative Claims

6.1.6.1 Low, Free (Amended 10/06/97)

Negative or avoidance claims such as "low" or "free" are generally associated with energy and nutrients of which consumers want to consume less (e.g., energy, fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sugar, sodium). Certain of these are considered to be claims for special dietary use and are controlled by Division 24 of the Food and Drug Regulations. For the unregulated claims, criteria are based on a consideration of the distribution and levels of these substances in foods and, where appropriate, current usage. In line with traditional practice, the levels selected for the term "low" afford the greatest protection to the vulnerable consumer such as one who is following a therapeutic diet. In the case of "free", the levels selected are considered to be nutritionally insignificant. Therefore, the use of the terms "low" or "free" or equivalent terms is to be limited to foods which contain no more than the prescribed quantities of the nutrient per serving of stated size. However, the claim "fat-free" is to be limited to foods which contain the prescribed quantity of fat per serving of stated size and reference amount (see the Summary Tables of claims for the specific nutrients, Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.3, 6.2.4 and 6.2.5).

For the specific labelling and advertising requirements applying to foods represented as "sugar-free", "low-calorie", and "low-sodium", see also the Food and Drug Regulations, sections B.24.005 and B.24.010; B.24.007 and B.24.012; and B.24.008 and B.24.013, respectively, and Foods for Special Dietary Use, Section 7.15.1.

6.1.6.2 % (Name of the Nutrient) Free

The claim "% (name of the nutrient) free" in respect to fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sodium/salt and sugar should not be used on food labels and in advertisements. Such claims may create an erroneous impression regarding the character or merit of the subject foods, and are considered to constitute a potential violation of section 5 (1) of the Food and Drugs Act.

Rationale: By seeking to emphasize a supposedly-low amount of a named nutrient in a food, such a claim presents a misleading impression of the relative contribution of the named nutrient to the whole food.

Example: A claim of "97% fat free" suggests to consumers that the food is very low in fat, when in fact the actual amount of fat (grams) per serving may be quite significant or even high.

Rationale: Such claims are open to many interpretations, including the impression that the subject food contains x% less of the named nutrient than a similar food not so described, or that x% of the named nutrient was originally present in the food, and was removed to make it healthier.

Example: Apple sauce, bearing the claim "99% fat free" might create the impression that another apple sauce has more fat because it does not bear the same claim and that indeed the apple sauce described as "99% fat free" was manipulated to extract all the fat.

6.1.6.3 Non-Addition

Claims which indicate non-addition often imply that the nutrient claimed may not be present in the food. Such claims would not be valid if the said nutrient were added indirectly to the food through another ingredient, except as a naturally-occurring, low-level constituent of that ingredient.

Generally, a negative statement indicating the non-addition of a nutrient to a food is acceptable when one of the following two conditions is met:

• the nutrient does not occur naturally in the food, has not been added and is not present or detectable in any of the ingredients or components which have been added together to form the food; or,
• the nutrient does occur naturally in a food and/or at a very low level in an ingredient which has been added to the food.

Note: In both cases mentioned above, the total amount of nutrient present in the food must be declared in the manner prescribed by the Regulations.

See also No Sugar Added, Unsweetened, Not Sweetened, Section 6.2.4 and No Salt Added, Unsalted, Section 6.2.5.

6.1.7 Positive Claims

Proposals for positive claims are contained in the consultation documents on Nutrient Content Claims, January 1996, available from Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

6.1.7.1 Contains, Good Source, Excellent Source, High, Very High

Positive claims such as "good source" and "high" are generally associated with nutrients of which consumers wish to consume more, such as protein, potassium, vitamins, and mineral nutrients, dietary fibre and essential fatty acids (see Sections 6.2.2 to 6.2.6). The Food and Drug Regulations stipulate minimum levels for claims pertaining to protein, vitamins and mineral nutrients.

The terms "good source" and "excellent source" are considered acceptable for protein, vitamins and mineral nutrients because they are the descriptors which have been used traditionally and are familiar to consumers. The terms "high" and "very high" are also deemed appropriate. Other terms will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In general, these other terms will be considered to imply nutrient levels associated with "excellent source" and "very high".

Minimum levels of protein, vitamins and mineral nutrients have been established as a result of an evaluation of the distribution of these nutrients in foods and correct usage. These levels are found in the summary tables of protein claims (Section 6.2.2.2) and vitamin and mineral nutrient claims(Section 6.2.6.4).

6.1.7.2 Protein

A claim may not be made for protein or amino acids collectively or by name unless a reasonable daily intake of the food, as defined in Schedule K of the Food and Drug Regulations (see Annex 1), has a protein rating of 20 or more (see Section 6.4.2). (B.01.305, FDR)

6.1.7.3 Vitamins and Mineral Nutrients

A claim may not be made for a vitamin or mineral nutrient unless a serving of the food contains at least 5 percent of the "recommended daily intake" (D.01.004, D.02.002). At these minimum levels, a statement that a food "contains" or is "a source of" a particular nutrient is considered appropriate. However, more emphatic claims such as "high in" and "a good source", or "very high in" and "an excellent source" should be applied only to foods with higher levels of nutrients (see Section 6.2.6).

6.1.7.4 Source of Nutrients

A general statement indicating that a food is "a source of nutrients" without identifying the specific nutrients, requires that a serving of the food so described contain the minimum levels of vitamins, mineral nutrients and protein outlined in this section, and triggers full nutritional labelling (i.e., energy, protein, fat, carbohydrate, sodium, potassium and all vitamins and mineral nutrients for which there are established "recommended daily intakes" and which are present at a level of 5 percent of the "recommended daily intake" or more per serving of stated size). For claims such as "contains 8 essential nutrients", each essential nutrient referred to must be present, in a serving of the food so described, at levels sufficient for a source claim (e.g. minimum 5 percent of the "recommended daily intake" for each vitamin and mineral nutrient and minimum protein rating of 20).   A declaration of the amount of each nutrient per serving of stated size is required in the prescribed manner.

6.1.7.5 Fortified, Enriched and Vitaminized (Amended 10/06/97)

The Food and Drugs Act and Regulations specify the nutrients which may be added to foods as well as the levels of these nutrients that may be present in such foods (D.03.002) (see Annex 2). Under these controlled conditions, no objection has been taken to claims such as "enriched with...", "fortified with..." or "vitaminized with..." when the nature of the addition is specified and the content in the food of the nutrient is declared as a percentage of "recommended daily intake" as required by the Regulations. Thus, there is no objection to claims such as "vitamin C enriched", "vitaminized with riboflavin" or "fortified with iron". However, where fortification is mandatory, such claims must not imply that the product is uniquely different from similar products.

However, the terms "fortified" or "enriched" are not acceptable when they refer to the addition or increase of an ingredient or component to a food, even though that ingredient or component may be a source of a nutrient, for example; "fortified with milk".

6.1.8 Claims for Food Combinations

Claims relating to the nutrient content of combinations of foods are acceptable providing the following conditions are satisfied:

1. the total content of the nutrient(s) to which the claim refers is declared per stated serving of combined foods;
2. the claim is limited to foods which are usually consumed together, e.g., cereal and milk, bread and peanut butter;
3. the food sold contributes at least one third of the total content of the nutrient for which a combination claim is made, unless the nutrient declaration for the combined foods is present only as a part of nutrition labelling.

Examples of acceptable claims include:

"A serving of 2 slices of white bread with 35 g of peanut butter provides 22% of the recommended daily intake of folacin."

"A serving of 30 g of (naming the breakfast cereal) with 125 ml of milk is a good source of protein."

In the latter example, the quantities of breakfast cereal and milk mentioned must have a protein rating of at least 20. (B.01.305(1)(a), FDR)

6.1.9 Comparative Claims (Amended 27/08/96; 31/01/97)

Definition: Comparative claims are those which compare directly or indirectly the nutritional properties of two or more foods.

Comparative claims may refer to positive characteristics of a food such as "contains 50% more protein than...", "increased in...", "contains as much as...", or the potentially negative characteristics such as "contains 25% less fat than...", "reduced in...", "lower in...".

Conditions for Use: Comparative claims are potentially misleading unless they:

1. involve similar foods;
2. clearly identify the foods being compared and the differences between them;
3. are based on differences which are both nutritionally and analytically significant; and
4. are accompanied by other relevant nutrition information regarding the compared foods.

When a comparative claim is made, the following conditions apply:

(a) The reference food must be a similar food.

The reference food which is used as a basis for the comparison of nutritional properties must either be another brand of the same food, a different version of the same food, e.g., partly skimmed milk as reference for skim milk, regular cola as reference for diet cola, a substitute food, e.g., butter as reference for margarine, or at minimum, in the same food group in Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating as the advertised food.

It is not appropriate to compare foods from different food groups of Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating, since each food group has its own particular pattern of nutrients. The food groups are not interchangeable and daily consumption of foods from each group is recommended. For example, it is not appropriate to compare the protein content of a hamburger with that of an orange or, conversely, to compare the vitamin C content of an orange with that of a hamburger (see Section VII, Annex 2, for Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating).

(b) The reference food and the amount of difference must be clearly identified.

Incomplete comparisons such as "less fat" or "less salt" are considered to be misleading.

The following information must be part of, or appear in close proximity to, the most prominent comparative claim:

• the amount of difference, expressed as a percentage, fraction or an absolute amount. If the servings of food being compared are not equal in size, these sizes or quantities must also be indicated.
• the identity of the reference food(s). The reference food must be described so that it can be easily identified by consumers.

If the reference food is not a single brand of product but rather an entire class of product, the energy or nutrient value that is the basis for the comparative claim, i.e., reference value, must be representative of the brands within this class.

Also, if the class of product is subject to a regulatory standard which establishes a minimum level for the claimed nutrient, this minimum may be used as the reference value. For example, a fat comparison with regular mozzarella cheese may use 20 percent fat, the minimum fat content required by the standard, as the reference value.

Examples of acceptable comparative claims include:

• "at least 40 fewer Calories per 120 g serving than brand X fish sticks";
• "33% less sodium than our regular potato chips".

(c) The comparison is to be based on a significant difference with the reference food.

Reductions or increases in energy value or nutrient content of less than 25 percent per serving from the reference value are of questionable nutritional significance and are not acceptable. If the reference food is another brand or version of the same food, e.g., light bread vs. bread, the minimum 25 percent difference in energy or nutrient value must be based on equivalent weight if the products are sold by weight, or based on equivalent volume if the products are sold by volume.

In the case of small portions or where the level of the nutrient in the unaltered or reference food is initially low, a difference of 25 percent may not result in a significant absolute difference. For example, if the fat content of partly skimmed milk were reduced from 2 percent to 1.5 percent, this would result in a 25 percent reduction, but the actual amount of difference in the fat content of a serving of 250 ml would be only 1.25 g. Hence, in addition to a minimum 25 percent difference, there must also be a significant absolute difference between the foods being compared. Minimum absolute differences of energy value and specific nutrients are outlined in the following tables:

NUTRIENT INCREASES

ENERGY AND NUTRIENT REDUCTIONS

Finally, manufacturers are to take into consideration the variability of the nutrients in both the advertised and the reference foods before making a comparative claim. Where there are wide variations in nutrient and energy values, the values for some of the items of the advertised food could be the same as, or may overlap the values for the reference food. The extent of this variability will depend upon the nature of the food, the nutrients involved, the precision of the formulation and the processing method used. Claimed differences are, therefore, to be based on statistically-defensible analytical data. Comparison with the values provided in tables of food composition, such as the Canadian Nutrient File, is to be avoided since these values may not be representative of products currently on the market.

When a food is claimed to be the "highest" in a particular nutrient or in energy value, this food should have at least 25 percent more of that nutrient or energy value than the food on the market with the next highest level of that nutrient or energy value. Similarly, a food claimed to be the "lowest" in a particular nutrient or in energy value is to have at least 25 percent less of that nutrient or energy value than the food on the market with the next lowest level.

(d) Relevant nutrition information regarding the compared foods must be provided.

Comparative claims for particular nutrients may lead consumers to believe that the advertised food is nutritionally superior overall to the reference food. Since this is not usually the case, these claims may be deceptive. For example, it can be misleading to claim that a food is lower in sodium than a reference food when the consumer is not made aware that the advertised food is also higher in fat and cholesterol. Manufacturers should ensure that such deception does not occur by providing sufficient information regarding the nutrient profiles of both advertised and reference foods.