Do you have to test for all food label claims?
Food labelling claims are a great way to sell your product – especially at retail level, when the label is compared to that of a competitor product. However, claims often come at a cost if testing is required. This article explores which permitted claims require testing, and which do not.
Nutrient content claims:
Testing is always required for the claims listed in Table 1 of the labelling regulations (R. 146). These include claims such as ‘source of energy’, ‘low-fat’, ‘lactose-free’, ‘non-alcoholic’, ‘high in fibre’ and ‘very high in Vitamin C’. Additional testing may be required for some claims (such as amino acid analysis, in the case of a protein claim), which may add significantly to your expense. Even if the claim is worded as ‘naturally contains…’ or ‘naturally free from…’, the product must be tested to ensure that it still complies with the requirements under Table 1; for example, ‘naturally cholesterol-free’. Comparative claims such as ‘lite’, ‘reduced…’ or ‘lower in…’ would also require testing of the nutrient that is being compared.
Note that under the regulations of the Agricultural Product Standards (APS) Act, some class designations (prescribed product names) contain words similar to nutrient content and comparative claims, e.g. ‘low-fat milk’, ‘full-fat cream cheese’, ‘reduced-sugar jam’, ‘reduced-oil mayonnaise’ and ‘light tuna’. These are not subject to the criteria listed in R. 146, and therefore do not require the same testing. However, the APS regulations may require different testing.
Allergen claims:
For any allergen claims, testing is required to ensure that the product is indeed free from the common allergen. Remember to specify which allergen(s) the product is free of; a generalised ‘allergen-free’ statement will not be permitted. Regarding gluten, a level of less than 20ppm is required for a ‘gluten-free’ or ‘naturally gluten-free’ claim. To use the statement ‘may contain [allergen]’, refer to regulation 45 of R. 146; testing will probably be required as part of your due diligence to prevent allergen cross-contamination.
Vegetarian claims:
No testing is required by the regulations. However, some companies do perform testing to confirm that no contamination with an animal ingredient has occurred.
Ingredient claims:
Additive-related claims such as ‘preservative-free’ and ‘naturally preservative-free’ do not require testing; but you must ensure that the product does not contain any added preservatives. However, in the case of sulphur dioxide, its presence need not be declared on the label if the product was tested and found to contain less than 10ppm.
Other claims relating to a product characteristic, property or substance:
Claims such as ‘naturally caffeine-free’ do not require testing. However, a characteristic such as a product being genetically modified is specifically dealt with in a regulation under the Consumer Protection Act, making it mandatory to test the product before ‘GMO-free’ may be claimed.
‘Misleading’ descriptions:
Terms such as ‘free-range’, ‘fresh’, ‘natural’, ‘pure’, ‘premium’, ‘traditional’, ‘original’, ‘authentic’, ‘homemade’ and ‘handmade’ are claims that do not require testing.
Endorsements:
Most permitted endorsements (such as the CANSA and Heart Mark logos) require testing, or at least fees are payable for permission to carry the endorsement on your label. Every endorsement has different requirements, so it’s best to contact the endorsement body in each case to establish what their requirements are.
Contact the FACTS regulatory and nutrition team for help with testing requirements for your labelling claims. Our team can even assist you to find the most appropriate testing method and laboratory for your needs, and interpret the results that you receive within the context of your specific product category.
Other articles you may be interested in:
FACTS Testing Catalogue
Facilitated testing: what are the benefits?
Testing methods: why one size does not fit all
Vegan labelling: Testing to validate claims
Meat fraud: Testing to detect species substitution
Sulphur dioxide: Regulations, testing and limitations
To claim or not to claim – the ‘Allergen-free’ controversy