A Q&A with Dr. Christina Roberto on food labeling, system-level changes to curb obesity, and strategic science  

Consumers are used to seeing the black-and-white nutritional facts on the back of their food in the supermarket, but the FDA has proposed a new label that would put basic nutritional info on the front of products.  

This front-of-package proposed label would show the percentage of the daily recommended amount of sodium, added sugar, and saturated fat included in a serving, and rates whether a serving has a “low,” “medium,” or “high” level of each.

CHIBE affiliate Dr. Christina Roberto has conducted many studies looking at labeling systems to improve the choices people make with food. In this Q&A, Dr. Roberto tells us her opinions on this proposed label, her thoughts on system-level changes to curb obesity, and her approach to working with policymakers on food science.

What do you think of the proposed front-of-package food label, and how could it work on both an individual level and an industry-level? 

Food labeling is a really important way to let consumers know what’s in their food. There are very few actions we take to hold industry accountable to transparency in our food supply, and food labeling is a straightforward way of giving consumers that information they deserve and have a right to know.

We got the nutrition facts label in 1993. It’s very familiar to everyone, but it has a lot of information, with lots of numbers, percentages for the daily value, etc. And it’s very detailed with small text.  We’ve done enough research at this point to know that many consumers are not flipping over the package and looking at that label. They just don’t have the time.

There are also eye tracking studies that have found that when consumers do flip over the packaging, they’re not studying the whole label. So, a very simple solution is to take some key information from that nutrition facts label and throw it on the front of a food package so that in 2 seconds you can see whether something is high in salt, sugar, or saturated fat. Those are 3 things that if you don’t know anything else about healthy eating, you can pay attention to and try to consume less of.

When people see food labels, if they are designed well, they change their behavior, and they do encourage people to make healthier choices.

Also, labels can encourage the industry to reformulate products to make them at least a bit healthier. A company might not want its product to say “Hey, warning! High in sodium,” so they may lower the sodium in their products, and that’s good for everyone because it changes the whole food supply.

The one caveat to that (and we’re seeing this happen in Chile) is the industry can respond by tinkering in other ways with their products to increase nutrients that we might be concerned about like non-sugar substitutes. 

To help tackle the obesity problem in the United States, do you think we need more system-level changes rather than interventions targeted at the individual?

It is critical that we are able to offer people compassionate, effective care for obesity at the individual level. It’s also wonderful and exciting that we now have next generation anti-obesity medications that are very effective.

But if we are serious about preventing nutrition-related chronic diseases and helping all kids in this country grow up at a healthy weight, then we need system-level changes.

The reality is that we have pursued individual-level changes for decades, and they have largely failed. Even these promising medications still have all the usual drawbacks of drugs including side effects, problems with medication adherence, and a lack of data on their long-term effects.

We need policies that will address the fact that junk foods are cheap, widely available, heavily marketed, served in large portions, and addictive.

You use an approach called “strategic science” where you work with policymakers and partners to identify and answer the research questions that they most need answered. Do you have any advice for how other researchers can use this method?

Researchers shouldn’t be hesitant to reach out to policymakers and other change agents like advocacy organizations or regulators asking them to meet. But the key is to signal that you are interested in hearing their perspective on the types of research that is needed to help them advance policies.

I have found that when I reach out saying I’m a researcher with expertise in a topic and I’m eager to connect to understand how I might be able to help them get answers to pressing questions, they are usually quick to reply.

Scientists are trained to conduct rigorous research and get it published in academic journals. Even when we take steps to disseminate it, those steps tend to focus on letting change agents know about our study and the results. But Strategic Science is about building bridges between scientists and policymakers that create a two-way exchange of information.

To form those partnerships, researchers have to bring humility and curiosity to those interactions.  I may have studied a topic for nearly 2 decades, but I’m still curious and eager to learn from people who have been working on the same topic from another angle.

My strategic science projects with policymakers or community partners where they helped shape the research question have ended up being among my most rewarding and impactful work.