BACKGROUND: Foods with advisory labeling (eg, "may contain") are increasingly prevalent. Consumers with food allergies might ignore advisory labeling advice. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether consumers with food allergy heeded advisory labels and whether products with advisory labels contained detectable peanut allergen. METHODS: Surveys (n = 625 in 2003 and n = 645 in 2006) were conducted at Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network patient conferences. Food products bearing advisory statements regarding peanuts were analyzed for the presence of peanut. RESULTS: Consumers were less likely to heed advisory labeling in 2006 (75%) compared with in 2003 (85%, P < .01); behavior varied significantly according to the form of the statement. Peanut protein was detected in 10% (20/200) of total food products bearing advisory statements, although clinically significant levels of peanut (>1 mg of peanut or >0.25 mg of peanut protein) were detected in only 13 of 200 such products. CONCLUSION: Consumers with food allergy are increasingly ignoring advisory labeling. Because food products with advisory labeling do contain detectable levels of peanuts, a risk exists to consumers choosing to eat such foods. The format of the labeling statement did not influence the likelihood of finding detectable peanut, except for products listing peanuts as a minor ingredient, but did influence the choices of consumers with food allergy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Allergic patients are taking risks by increasingly disregarding advisory labeling.
BACKGROUND: Foods with advisory labeling (eg, "may contain") are increasingly prevalent. Consumers with food allergies might ignore advisory labeling advice. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether consumers with food allergy heeded advisory labels and whether products with advisory labels contained detectable peanut allergen. METHODS: Surveys (n = 625 in 2003 and n = 645 in 2006) were conducted at Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network patient conferences. Food products bearing advisory statements regarding peanuts were analyzed for the presence of peanut. RESULTS: Consumers were less likely to heed advisory labeling in 2006 (75%) compared with in 2003 (85%, P < .01); behavior varied significantly according to the form of the statement. Peanut protein was detected in 10% (20/200) of total food products bearing advisory statements, although clinically significant levels of peanut (>1 mg of peanut or >0.25 mg of peanut protein) were detected in only 13 of 200 such products. CONCLUSION: Consumers with food allergy are increasingly ignoring advisory labeling. Because food products with advisory labeling do contain detectable levels of peanuts, a risk exists to consumers choosing to eat such foods. The format of the labeling statement did not influence the likelihood of finding detectable peanut, except for products listing peanuts as a minor ingredient, but did influence the choices of consumers with food allergy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Allergic patients are taking risks by increasingly disregarding advisory labeling.
Authors: Julie Barnett; Kate Muncer; Jo Leftwich; Richard Shepherd; Monique M Raats; M Hazel Gowland; Kate Grimshaw; Jane S Lucas Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-09-26 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Marion E Groetch; Lynn Christie; Perla A Vargas; Stacie M Jones; Scott H Sicherer Journal: J Nutr Educ Behav Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Scott H Sicherer; Perla A Vargas; Marion E Groetch; Lynn Christie; Suzanne K Carlisle; Sally Noone; Stacie M Jones Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2011-11-13 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Shelley Dua; Monica Ruiz-Garcia; Simon Bond; Stephen R Durham; Ian Kimber; Clare Mills; Graham Roberts; Isabel Skypala; James Wason; Pamela Ewan; Robert Boyle; Andrew Clark Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2019-07-15 Impact factor: 10.793