Plain food packaging for snack foods decreases purchase intention and brand perception but increases actual consumption among some consumers, according to French and Belgian researchers. Carolina O.C. Werle, et al., “Is plain food packaging plain wrong? Plain packaging increases unhealthy snack intake among males,” Food Quality and Preference, December 2015. Billed as the first to examine “the impact of plain packaging on consumers’ perceptions and actual consumption of unhealthy food items,” the study used brand- and plain-packaged M&M’s® to explore the effects of plain packaging on (i) product and brand attitudes as well as the intention to consume an unhealthy snack, (ii) food intake once consumers have sampled the product, and (iii) food intake when plain packaging is combined with low-fat claims. The results evidently indicate plain food packaging “negatively impacts product and brand attitudes as well as intention to consume an unhealthy snack when consumers only evaluate the packaging.”…
Tag Archives packaging
The National Advertising Division (NAD), an investigative unit of the U.S. advertising industry’s system of self-regulation, has referred to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) an ad campaign for Danisa “Traditional Butter Cookies,” which are manufactured by the Mayora Group in Indonesia and distributed by Takari International, Inc. NAD evaluated the campaign in April 2015 after Campbell Soup Co. challenged several aspects of the product’s marketing, including the claim that the cookies are “produced and packed in Denmark” and “baked following the original recipe from Denmark,” as well as the use of Scandinavian imagery. Further, Campbell argued that FDA requires any product labeled as “Butter Cookies” to use only butter as a shortening ingredient, but multiple independent studies have shown the presence of a non-butter fat ingredient in the Danisa product. Takari International argued it could not be liable for packaging claims or discrepancies…
After a review by the National Advertising Division (NAD), the advertising industry’s self-regulation investigative arm, Gobble, Inc. has agreed to discontinue claims that packaging for its meal-delivery services is “eco-friendly.” NAD requested substantiation for several claims appearing on Gobble’s website, including the company’s use of “insulated liners that are biodegradable so that you can dispose of them in your trash with minimal impact on the environment.” In response to the inquiry, Gobble stated it would permanently and voluntarily withdraw its packaging claims of biodegradability and eco-friendliness, but noted it had a good-faith belief that the claims were true when first publishing them. Issue 585
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected Stanislaus Food Products Co.’s attempt to revive a lawsuit alleging that several major manufacturers of tin cans conspired to cede the market to a single company, USS-POSCO Industries (UPI). Stanislaus Food Prods. Co. v. USS-POSCO Industries, No. 13-15475 (9th Cir., order entered October 13, 2015). “This appeal, which centers on tin mill products used to package food, teaches that there’s no substitute for concrete evidence,” the decision begins. Stanislaus, a tomato cannery, alleged that UPI, a joint venture of U.S. Steel and POSCO America Steel Corp., conspired with other tin mill producers to allocate the tin can market to UPI and fix the prices of tin mill products. Stanislaus cited the fact that POSCO never entered the western U.S. market as evidence of conspiracy; the court considered the practicality of the allegations and found them lacking. “A scheme like Stanislaus alleges would not…
School meals may contain enough bisphenol A (BPA) to exceed low-dose toxicity thresholds, according to Stanford and Johns Hopkins researchers. Jennifer Hartle, et al., “Probabilistic modeling of school meals for potential bisphenol A (BPA) exposure,” Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, September 2015. Using federal school nutrition guidelines as well as information obtained from San Francisco Bay Area schools, the researchers modeled BPA exposure scenarios for elementary and middle schoolers consuming a mix of fresh and packaged foods at school lunch. The results evidently showed exposures ranging from 0.00049μg/kg-BW/day for a middle-school student with a low-exposure breakfast, to 1.19μg/kg-BW/day for an elementaryschool student eating a high-exposure lunch. “During school site visits, I was shocked to see that virtually everything in school meals came from a can or plastic packaging,” Stanford Prevention Research Center Postdoctoral Fellow Jennifer Hartle is quoted as saying. “Meat came frozen, pre-packaged, pre-cooked and pre-seasoned. Salads…
Germany’s highest court has ruled that Swiss chocolatier Lindt & Sprüngli did not violate German confectioner Haribo’s trademark “Gold Bear” when it began selling a chocolate bear wrapped in gold foil in 2011. Haribo has produced Gold-Bear® gummy bears for several decades, which are sold in gold packages featuring a yellow bear wearing a red ribbon and bow tied around its neck. Lindt’s gold-clad chocolate bear also wears a red ribbon tied in a bow around its neck, styled after the company’s chocolate Easter bunny products. Haribo claimed in 2012 that consumers were likely to be confused by Lindt’s packaging; a trial court agreed, but an intermediate appellate court overturned the ruling. The Federal Court of Justice has affirmed the appellate ruling, reportedly saying in a German-language statement that it wants to avoid the danger of “product design monopolisation.” Information about Haribo’s 2012 complaint appears in Issue 462 of this…
A New York state court has vacated a New York City prohibition on expanded polystyrene foam (EPS) after a challenge by several food companies, supermarkets and food-service businesses that used EPS in their food packaging. Dart Container Corp. v. De Blasio, No. 100734/15 (N.Y. Super. Ct., order entered September 21, 2015). The court provides a history of the municipal ban—more specifically, a statute dictating that EPS would be prohibited in favor of recyclable materials unless the commissioner of the Department of Sanitation of New York (DSNY) found it to be recyclable—which went into effect July 1, 2015, with penalties delayed until January 2016. Among the plaintiffs are Dart Container Corp., the largest EPS manufacturer, and Plastics Recycling Inc., an EPS recycler, which offered proposals that would designate EPS as recyclable and thereby permit it under the city statute. “The mandate to the Commissioner was to determine whether EPS should be designated…
Citing a “plethora of new data” published since issuing its toxicological profile for perfluoroalkyls in 2009, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has reissued the profile seeking additional information about the alleged health effects of exposure to the synthetic chemicals. PFOA and PFOS are the two perfluoroalkyls produced in the largest amounts in the United States and are used in coatings for paper and cardboard packaging to repel oil, grease and water. Comments are due by December 1, 2015. See Federal Register, September 2, 2015. Issue 577
The National Toxicology Program’s (NTP’s) Office of Health Assessment and Translation is inviting information submissions about ongoing studies or upcoming publications targeting evidence of an association between exposures to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and immunotoxicity to assist in the preparation of a monograph on the topic. PFOA and PFOS are chemical compounds that have been widely used in commercial and industrial applications, including food packaging and water-resistant coatings. NTP is also seeking scientists with expertise in areas such as epidemiology, immunotoxicology and biostatistics to serve on an ad hoc panel to peer review the draft monograph. Information submissions and nominations of scientific experts are due by September 30, 2015. See Federal Register, August 14, 2015. Issue 575
An Illinois federal court has granted summary judgment in favor of Kellogg North America Co. in a lawsuit disputing the patented design of resealable cookie packaging. Intercontinental Great Brands LLC v. Kellogg N. Am. Co., No. 13-0321 (N.D. Ill., order entered August 3, 2015). Intercontinental Great Brands (formerly Kraft Foods Global Brands) sued Kellogg and its affiliates alleging patent infringement, and Kellogg argued that the patent was invalid. Kellogg’s resealable container, which “was designed to ‘circumvent the Kraft patent while maintaining similar properties,’” allows consumers to open a package of cookies then reattach the plastic flap to maintain freshness. Kellogg argued that the patent was invalid because the asserted claims in the patent are obvious, and the court agreed. The standard of obviousness includes considerations of four factors: (i) the scope of prior art, (ii) differences between the prior art and the claim at issue, (iii) the level of ordinary…
