Healthy Skepticism Library item: 19402

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Stanton RA
Do doctors need to exercise caution when recommending products with the Heart Foundation Tick? Yes.
MJA 2011; 194:(6):284-285
http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/194_06_210311/sta10096_fm.html

Abstract:

Rosemary Stanton believes that the Heart Foundation Tick program misguides consumers

YES

The National Heart Foundation of Australia plays a valuable role in bringing heart disease to public attention. However, shortcomings of their Heart Foundation Tick program1 demand caution.

Media releases proclaim that the Tick has been “awarded to” or “earned by” particular foods. These must meet the Heart Foundation’s nutritional criteria, but companies then pay to use the Tick. For food companies, whose purpose is to make a profit, the Tick is a marketing exercise. By tweaking products (where necessary) and paying for the Tick, companies gain credibility by linking their brand to the positive emotions attached to the Heart Foundation. The extra cost is passed on to the shopper.

Effects on food prices
The cost of food is a particular concern for people on low incomes, who have a higher incidence of diet-related health problems.2 Processed foods that bear the Tick almost invariably have a higher price, while cheaper products in many food categories may have a nutritional profile at least as good as those with the Tick — sometimes better. Rolled oats with the Tick are 4.5 times the price of house-brand oats. How can this be justified? A similarly expensive Tick approved product dilutes rolled oats with 20% wheat starch, adding inulin for extra fibre. Why? …