Front or electronic labeling? Panama discusses how to better inform about food

Civil society organizations, health authorities and the business sector maintain conflicting positions on how consumers should be informed about the nutritional content of foods.

The debate on the nutritional labeling system for foods is gaining strength again in Panama, with positions divided between civil society organizations, health authorities and the business sector.

While some defend front warning labeling as a clear and accessible tool to inform consumers about the risks of certain products, others suggest that electronic labeling could offer more information without making food more expensive.

In the midst of this discussion, which is taking place in the National Assembly, the bills 445 and 402which seek to establish a mandatory nutritional information system to facilitate healthier consumption decisions.

For civil society organizations, front labeling remains the most effective option.

Bethy Cruzadodirector of the Healthy Eating Movement foundation, warned that a system based on applications or digital codes could exclude part of the population.

“Not everyone has a cell phone and, even if they do, there is not always accessibility,” he said, mentioning that even in urban areas there are areas with signal problems.

As he explained, information about food must be accessible to all consumers, including rural and indigenous communities, which is why it considers that the front labeling It is easier to understand and allows you to quickly identify whether a product is suitable for consumption.

In turn, Cruzado stated that studies carried out in the country show that front labeling allows consumers to quickly and easily identify the characteristics of a product. He explained that even children who do not yet know how to read managed to determine if a food was appropriate for their consumption, which – in his opinion – shows that this system is easier to understand for the general population.

In a similar vein, the businessman and former commissioner of the defunct Commission on Free Competition and Consumer Affairs, Rafael Carlesmaintained that the information directed to the consumer must be clear, truthful and visible on the product label.

He recalled that current legislation requires that food warnings appear directly on the packaging and in Spanish. In his opinion, insisting on electronic labeling “does not comply” with these requirements or with the health registration procedures established by the National Directorate of Food Control and Veterinary Surveillance.

From the health sector, the head of Health of Panama, Fernando Boyd Galindohas pointed out the importance of consumers clearly understanding what they are consuming. Recently the minister indicated that even for people with training it can be difficult to interpret nutritional information in small print, which is why he considers it essential that the population have clearer tools to know the content of the products they purchase.

In contrast, the Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Agriculture of Panama (Cciap) has proposed electronic labeling as an alternative to the front warning system.

The business union maintains that there is no international consensus on a single labeling model and warns that the implementation of front seals could make products more expensive and reduce the variety available on the market.

According to Cciap, digital labeling would allow for expanded nutritional information without generating additional packaging costs or transferring expenses to the consumer.

The debate continues while bills 445 and 402 remain in a subcommittee of the Labor, Health and Social Development Commission of the National Assembly, where they have yet to advance.