Uso da rotulagem nutricional e percepção sobre a confiabilidade das informações por consumidores

SOUSA, Lisane Moreno Lorena de; STANGARLIN-FIORI, Lize; COSTA, Esther Heyde Selke; FURTADO, Fernanda; MEDEIROS, Caroline Opolski

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original • Rev Nutr 33 • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-9865202033e190199 copiar

Uso da rotulagem nutricional e percepção sobre a confiabilidade das informações por consumidores

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

RESUMO

Objetivo

Este estudo avaliou o uso da rotulagem nutricional e a percepção sobre a confiabilidade das informações por consumidores.

Métodos

Pesquisa transversal, exploratória e de abordagem quantitativa, realizada no município de Curitiba, Brasil. Participaram 536 estudantes, de uma instituição pública, respondendo um questionário estruturado. Foram realizadas análises descritivas, teste Qui-Quadrado e teste exato de Fisher, considerando nível de significância de 5%.

Resultados

A idade média dos participantes foi 21,11±2,83 anos, sendo 59,3% do sexo feminino. Quanto ao uso das informações nutricionais, 41,6% utilizavam às vezes e 14,7% sempre, principalmente porque gostavam de saber o que estavam comprando e consumindo (35,8%). A falta de paciência (29,5%) e de preocupação com a composição do alimento comprado (34,2%) foram os principais motivos pelos quais não utilizarem as informações. A alegação nutricional mais utilizada foi “sem gordura trans” (42,5%) e o tipo de alimento em que mais se utilizou a rotulagem nutricional foi leite e derivados (42,0%). O uso frequente das informações nutricionais foi maior entre as mulheres (p<0,01) e os praticantes de atividade física (p=0,04). Muitos indivíduos confiavam nas informações presentes nos rótulos dos alimentos (61,9%), porém, destes, 43,6% não as utilizavam no momento da compra. Não foram observadas diferenças entre a confiança das informações, os dados sociodemográficos ou de saúde dos entrevistados.

Conclusão

Muitas pessoas ainda não usam as informações nutricionais, sendo necessário esforços para mudar este panorama. Alterações na rotulagem nutricional podem mudar este processo, com o uso de informações mais claras, de fácil entendimento, que não gerem dúvida ao consumidor.

Palavras-chave
Alegação de propriedades funcionais; Informação nutricional; Rotulagem de alimentos; Adulto jovem

Variables		Frequency (n=536)						Confidence in the information presented on nutrition labeling (n=532¹ 1 Four consumers did not answer this question; )
		Total (n=536)		Male (n=218)		Female (n=318)		Yes (n=332)		Depends on the food (n=143)		No (n=57)		p-value
		n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	p-value
Gender
	Female	318	59.3					193	58.1	87	61.4	35	61.4	0.64
	Male	218	40.7					139	41.9	56	39.2	22	38.6	0.64
Age
	Up to 20 years	218	40.7	100	45.9	180	56.6	178	53.6	74	51.7	27	47.4	0.38
	21-25 years	280	52.2	92	42.2	126	39.6	137	41.3	55	38.5	23	40.4	0.38
	=26 years	38	7.1	26	12.0	12	3.7	17	5.1	14	9.8	7	12.3	-
Respondent’s sector of activity
	Health Sciences Sector	158	29.5	39	17.9	119	37.4	92	27.7	52	36.4	13	22.8
	Agrarian Sciences Sector	102	19.0	48	22.0	54	17.0	76	22.9	19	13.3	7	12.3
	Human Sciences Sector	81	15.1	36	16.5	45	14.2	48	14.5	22	15.4	11	19.3
	Social Sciences Sector	71	13.2	38	17.4	33	10.4	46	13.9	18	12.6	7	12.3
	Biological Sciences Sector	48	9.0	24	11.0	24	7.5	23	6.9	16	11.2	8	14.0
	Arts. Communication and Design Sector	11	2.1	1	0.5	10	3.1	5	1.5	1	0.7	4	7.0
	Earth Sciences Sector	7	1.3	5	2.3	2	0.6	6	1.8	1	0.7	0	0.0
	Legal Sciences Sector	6	1.1	3	1.4	3	0.9	2	0.6	3	2.1	0	0.0
	Professional and Techno-logical Education Sector	5	0.9	4	1.8	1	0.3	2	0.6	2	1.4	1	1.8
	Exact Sciences Sector	3	0.6	2	0.9	1	0.3	3	0.9	0	0.0	0	0.0
	Education Sector	2	0.4	0	0.0	2	0.6	2	0.6	0	0.0	0	0.0
	Other area	38	7.1	15	6.9	23	7.2	23	6.9	9	6.3	6	10.5
	No reply	4	0.7	3	1.4	1	0.3	4	1.2	0	0.0	0	0.0
Income (MW)
	Up to 3MW	204	38.1	80	36.7	124	39.0	125	37.7	54	37.8	24	42.1	0.93
	More than 3 to 10MW	221	41.2	91	41.7	130	40.9	136	41.0	58	40.6	24	42.1
	More than 10MW	61	11.4	29	13.3	32	10.1	37	11.1	19	13.3	5	8.8
	Not informed/No reply	50	9.3	18	8.3	32	10.1	34	10.2	12	8.4	4	7.0
Region where living
	Urban	524	97.8	213	97.7	311	97.8	322	97.0	142	99.3	56	98.2	0.50
	Rural	6	1.1	4	1.8	2	0.6	6	1.8	0	0.0	0	0.0
	Both	1	0.2	0	0.0	1	0.3	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	1.8
	No reply	5	0.9	1	0.5	4	1.3	4	1.2	1	0.7	0	0.0
Nutritional Statusl² 2 was considered: low weight; BMI =18.50 and =24.99 kg/m2: eutrophic; BMI =25.00 kg/m2: and overweight (overweight and obesity) World Health Organization [35,36].
	Eutrophic	361	67.4	150	68.8	211	66.4	225	67.8	92	64.3	41	71.9	0.12
	Overweight	115	21.5	56	25.7	59	18.6	62	18.7	40	28.0	13	22.8
	Low weight	46	8.6	8	3.7	38	11.9	34	10.2	9	6.3	3	5.3
	No reply	14	2.6	4	1.8	10	3.1	11	3.3	2	1.4	0	0.0
Practices Physical Activity
	Yes	298	55.6	144	66.1	154	48.4	176	53.0	88	61.5	31	54.4	0.40
	No	232	43.3	72	33.0	160	50.3	151	45.5	54	37.8	26	45.6	0.40
	No reply	6	1.1	2	0.9	4	1.3	5	1.5	1	0.7	0	0.0	-
Health Problems
	No	376	70.1	172	78.9	204	64.2	236	71.1	93	65.0	45	78.9	0.22
	Yes	160	29.9	46	21.1	114	35.8	96	28.9	50	35.0	12	21.1	0.22

Variable		Participants						p-value
		Total (n=536)		Female (n=318)		Male (n=218)
		%	n	%	n	%	n
Factors that influence the purchase of food¹ 1 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer
	Price	79.9	428	81.8	260	77.1	168	0.18
	Taste	78.0	418	80.5	256	74.3	162	0.09
	Expiration date	40.1	215	42.8	136	36.2	79	0.13
	Quantity in packaging	39.4	211	40.3	128	38.1	83	0.61
	Product ingredients	36.6	196	44.7	142	24.8	54	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Brand	33.0	177	32.7	104	33.5	73	0.85
	Nutritional information on the label	26.5	142	28.0	89	24.3	53	0.34
	Practicality	6.2	33	5.7	18	6.9	15	0.56
Where to look for nutritional information on foods¹ 1 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer
	In the media (e.g.: TV. newspapers. internet. magazines)	66.0	354	71.4	227	58.3	127	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	With friends and family	26.3	141	28.0	89	23.9	52	0.28
	With health professionals (doctor. nutritionist. but not limited to)	24.4	131	28.3	90	18.8	41	0.01^* 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
	I don’t know about this	18.8	101	14.8	47	24.8	54	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	In books	14.9	80	16.0	51	13.3	29	0.38
Frequency of using nutritional information on food labels² 2 The person should only point out one alternative as an answer
	Sometimes	41.6	223	47.5	151	33.0	72	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Rarely	33.2	178	31.1	99	36.2	79
	Ever	14.7	79	14.2	45	15.6	34
	Never	10.4	56	7.2	23	15.1	33
Reason for not using nutritional information³ 3 This question was answered only by those who indicated the frequency of never or rarely in relation to the frequency of use of the nutritional information on food labels
	I don’t care about the composition of the food I’m buying	34.2	80	30.3	37	38.4	43	0.05^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	I have no patience to read	29.5	69	30.3	37	28.6	32
	I don’t understand the information	20.1	47	25.4	31	14.3	16
	I don’t have time to read	6.8	16	4.9	6	8.9	10
	The letters are too small	5.6	13	3.3	4	8.0	9
	No reply	3.8	9	5.7	7	1.8	2
Factors that motivate the use of nutritional information on food labels⁴ 4 This question was answered only by those who indicated the frequency of sometimes or always in relation to the frequency of use of nutritional information on food labels.
	I like to know what I am buying and consuming. because I like to take care of my health	35.8	108	33.2	65	40.6	43	0.23
	I have doubts about its composition	32.1	97	33.2	65	30.2	32
	I’m on a diet	12.6	38	10.7	21	16.0	17
	Product purchase for the first time	4.6	14	6.1	12	1.9	2
	I have a health problem that requires more care with food	3.6	11	4.1	8	2.8	3
	No reply	11.3	34	12.8	25	8.5	9
Nutritional claims used when purchasing a product¹ 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
	“Trans fat-free”	42.5	228	49.1	156	33.0	72	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	“Source of vitamins and minerals”	38.1	204	39.3	125	36.2	79	0.47
	“Rich in fiber”/“Source of fibers”	34.9	187	40.3	128	27.1	59	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	I don’t use any nutrition claims	24.4	131	19.2	61	32.1	70	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	“Lactose-free”	13.6	73	17.6	56	7.8	71	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	“Gluten-free”	10.8	58	11.3	36	10.1	22	0.65
Types of foods that usually use nutritional information¹ 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
	Stuffed crackers and snacks	45.0	241	46.9	149	42.2	92	0.287
	Milk, cheese and yogurts	42.0	225	46.5	148	35.3	77	0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Canned food and sausage	40.5	217	41.2	131	39.4	86	0.68
	Breads and toast	33.4	179	38.7	123	25.7	56	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Diet and light products	28.7	154	33.6	107	21.6	47	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Other	5.2	28	3.1	10	8.3	18	<0.01^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
Most used nutritional information format printed on food label²
	Nutritional table	63.6	341	64.5	205	62.4	136	0.03^* * Significance from the Chi-Square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses
	Explanatory images	11.9	64	13.8	44	9.2	20
	Symbols and logos	11.2	60	11.9	38	10.1	22
	Other	1.1	6	0.9	3	1.4	3
	Do not use	12.1	65	8.8	28	17.0	37

Variable	Nutritional Status							Health Problems
	Low weight (n=46)		Eutrophic (n=361)		Overweight (n=115)		p-value	Yes (n=160)		N (n=376)		p-value
	n	%	n	%	n	%	p-value	n	%	n	%	p-value
Frequency of using nutritional information on food labels ¹ 1 The person should only point out one alternative as an answer
Sometimes	21	45.7	152	42.1^ab	45	39.1	0.34	71	44.4	152	40.4	0.58^* * p-value <0.05
Rarely	15	32.6	117	32.4^ab	41	35.7		51	31.9	127	33.8
Never	6	13.0	35	9.7^ab	13	11.3		12	7.5	44	11.7
Always	4	8.7	57	15.8^ab	16	13.9		26	16.3	53	14.1
Nutritional claims used when purchasing a product ² 2 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer; Different letters in a row present results that are significantly different (p<0.05).
“Trans fat-free”	26	56.5	146	40.4^ab	50	43.5	0.11	67	41.9	161	42.8	0.84
“Source of vitamin and minerals”	25	54.3^a	139	38.5^bv	34	29.6^b	0.01^* 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;	60	37.5	144	38.3	0.86^* * p-value <0.05
“Rich in fibers” / “Source of fibers”	18	39.1	121	33.5^ab	41	35.7	0.72^* * p-value <0.05	56	35.0	131	34.8	0.97^* * p-value <0.05
“Lactose-free”	9	19.6	50	13.9^ab	14	12.2	0.47^* * p-value <0.05	46	28.8	27	07.2	<0.01^* * p-value <0.05
“Gluten-free”	1	2.2	45	12.5^ab	11	09.6	0.09^* * p-value <0.05	20	12.5	38	10.1	0.41^* * p-value <0.05
Other	4	8.7	23	6.4^ab	10	08.7	0.63^* * p-value <0.05	11	06.9	26	06.9	0.99^* * p-value <0.05
I don’t use any nutrition claims	6	13.0	94	26.0^ab	27	23.5	0.15^* * p-value <0.05	32	20.0	99	26.3	0.12^* * p-value <0.05
Types of foods that usually use nutritional information² 2 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer; Different letters in a row present results that are significantly different (p<0.05).
Stuffed crackers and snacks	27	58.7	160	44.3^ab	49	42.6	0.15^* * p-value <0.05	76	47.5	165	43.9	0.44^* * p-value <0.05
Milk. cheeses and yogurts	22	47.8	148	41.0^ab	51	44.3	0.60^* * p-value <0.05	83	51.9	142	37.8	<0.01^* * p-value <0.05
Canned food and sausage	16	34.8	147	40.7^ab	49	42.6	0.66^* * p-value <0.05	63	39.4	154	41.0	0.73^* * p-value <0.05
Breads and toast	13	28.3	124	32.4^ab	45	39.1	0.30^* * p-value <0.05	52	32.5	127	33.8	0.77^* * p-value <0.05
Diet and light products	7	15.2^b	102	28.3^ab	42	36.5^a	0.02^* * p-value <0.05	46	28.8	108	28.7	0.99^* * p-value <0.05
Other	1	2.2	20	5.5^ab	7	06.1	0.59^* * p-value <0.05	10	06.3	18	04.8	0.49^* * p-value <0.05
I don’t use any	7	15.2	51	14.1^ab	14	12.2	0.83^* * p-value <0.05	13	08.1	63	16.8	<0.01^* * p-value <0.05

Reasons for having no confidence in nutrition label information	Examples of consumers’ statements^* 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;	Number of consumers (n=200)^**
		n	%
Believe in the manipulation / alteration of information by companies, for their own benefit	“Companies tend to manipulate information for their own interest” “... I almost always think they manipulate data” “You can lie to sell more”	28	14.0
Difficulty of interpretation, as the inform-ation is not clear	“Dividing portions on labels often makes it difficult” “Sometimes the language used is very redundant and the consumer ends up having confidence in something that he cannot even understand” “I am not aware of technical terminologies”	27	13.5
Believe that companies omit important information, for their own benefit, such as selling more product	“Most artificial and other industrialized foods do not describe the entire composition” “There are products that still omit important information” “Failure not to warn consumers”	27	13.5
Do not believe all the information on the labels	“Some have false claims” “The information posted is not always completely reliable” “Not all information on labels is true”	22	11.0
Lacks confidence in the methods / references used to compose nutrition labeling	“Quantification method “I don’t know where the information is coming from” “Because there may be fluctuations in the data”	18	9.0
Lack of confidence in the food industry	“I don’t trust the food industry, I don’t believe in industrial honesty” “I don’t trust the food industry very much” “For the food industry, in many cases, they aim only at profit”	15	7.5
Appeal for healthy marketing	“Because I believe they modify it to look more “healthy’” “Because labels can be manipulated to look healthy” “I believe they want to show something healthy and it is not”	15	7.5
Confidence depends on the brand / company	“It actually depends on the brand” “There are unreliable brands” “I always try to buy products from small / local brands because I don’t believe large corporations to be reliable”	11	5.5
They claim that information on the nutrition labeling (front or in the nutrition table) does not match the ingredient list or product type	“Some foods have trans fat, for example, below the label. Therefore, even though it is present in the composition, the label says ‘trans fat free’ ” “The composition of the food, does not match the one on the label, sometimes” “The information in the nutritional table sometimes doesn’t match the list of ingredients”	10	5.0
Believe that inspection is flawed	“I think the inspection is flawed” “Inspection is not efficient” “Because the inspection is doubtful”	10	5.0
They believe that Brazilian legislation on labeling is flawed	“Legislation is flawed” “... I think RDC fails”	5	2.5
Believes that there may be an error in food production	“I think there may be a production error” “Variation in large-scale production”	4	2.0
Do not believe due to reports of fraud and adulteration of products	“Due to possible fraud” “There are cases of adulteration of the product”	3	1.5
Ignoring the food’s origin favors mistrust	“Food’s origin”	1	0.5
Did not provide the reason^***		15	7.5

	Variable	Confidence in the information presented on nutrition labeling (n=532)¹ 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
		Yes (n=332)		Depends on the food (n=143)		No (n=57)		p-value
		%	n	%	n	%	n	p-value
Frequency of using nutritional information on food labels² 2 The person should only point out one alternative as an answer;
	Sometimes	43.1	143	42.7	61	31.6	18	<0.82
	Rarely	34.9	116	30.1	43	31.6	18
	Always	11.1	37	20.3	29	21.1	12
	Never	10.8	36	07.0	10	15.8	9
Nutritional claims used in the purchase of a food³ 3 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer; Different letters in a row present results that are significantly different (p<0.05).
	“Source of vitamins and minerals”	40.7	135	35.7	51	29.8	17	<0.23
	“Trans fat-free”	40.4	134	49.0	70	40.4	23	<0.20
	“Rich in fiber” / “Source of fibers”	33.1	110^b	43.4	62^a	21.1	12^c	<0.01^* 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
	“Lactose-free”	13.0	43	15.4	22	12.3	7	<0.74
	“Gluten-free”	09.9	33	09.8	14	19.3	11	<0.10
	Other	03.9	13^b	11.9	17^a	12.3	7^a	<0.01^* 1 Four consumers did not answer this question;
	I don’t use any nutrition claim	24.7	86	23.8	34	24.6	14	<0.98 * Significance from the chi-square test (p-value <0.05), according to gender, from valid responses;
Types of foods that usually use nutritional information³ 3 The person could check more than one alternative as an answer; Different letters in a row present results that are significantly different (p<0.05).
	Stuffed crackers and snacks	44.3	147	46.2	66	49.1	28	<0.77
	Milk, cheese and yogurts	40.7	135	43.4	62	47.4	27	<0.60
	Canned food and sausage	39.2	130	44.8	64	36.8	21	<0.44
	Breads and toast	32.5	108	35.0	50	35.1	20	<0.84
	Diet and light products	25.9	86	35.0	50	28.1	16	<0.13
	Others	05.4	18	05.6	8	01.8	1	<0.48
	I do not use	14.2	47	14.7	21	12.3	7	<0.91
Nutritional information format present on the most used food label² 2 The person should only point out one alternative as an answer;
	Nutritional table	64.5	214	65.0	93	56.1	32	0.32
	Explanatory images	12.7	42	07.7	11	17.5	10
	Symbols and logos	10.2	34	13.3	19	12.3	7
	Others	00.6	2	01.4	2	03.5	2
	Do not use	12.0	40	12.6	18	10.5	6

Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas Núcleo de Editoração SBI - Campus II , Av. John Boyd Dunlop, s/n. - Prédio de Odontologia, 13059-900 Campinas - SP Brasil, Tel./Fax: +55 19 3343-6875 - Campinas - SP - Brazil
E-mail: sbi.submissionrn@puc-campinas.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] CONTRIBUTIONS

CO MEDEIROS, L STANGARLIN-FIORI and EH SELKE contribution to the conception and design. LML de SOUSA and F FURTADO contribution to data collection. CO MEDEIROS, LML de SOUSA, L STANGARLIN-FIORI, F FURTADO, and EH SELKE contribution to interpretation of data; elaboration of the article, critical review of intellectual content; final article approval.