The Disadvantages of Food Labelling: Beyond the Nutritional Facts

October 31, 2025 •

4 min read

According to research published by the National Institutes of Health, nearly 59% of consumers find nutrition labels difficult to understand. This statistic highlights a significant and often overlooked problem: the disadvantages of food labelling extend far beyond the information provided, creating confusion, enabling deception, and posing challenges for consumers and producers alike.

Quick Summary

This article examines the negative aspects of food labels, including how misleading marketing and vague terms can deceive consumers. It also details the financial and regulatory burdens placed on food manufacturers, particularly small businesses, by complex labelling requirements. The content covers the unintended consequences of food labelling and highlights the need for critical interpretation and better oversight.

Key Points

Misleading Marketing: Vague terms like "natural" or "light" can create a false perception of healthiness, as they are often poorly regulated and exploited by manufacturers.
Consumer Confusion: Complex nutritional information and misleading serving sizes can make labels difficult for many to understand, leading to poor dietary choices.
High Costs for Businesses: Adhering to intricate and changing regulations imposes a significant financial burden on manufacturers, especially small businesses, increasing compliance and production costs.
Risk of Errors: Labelling mistakes can lead to severe consequences, including expensive product recalls, fines, and serious health risks for consumers with allergies.
Unintended Health Consequences: Over-simplified health labels can negatively impact psychological well-being for some individuals and may prompt companies to reformulate products in a way that is not genuinely healthier.
Trust Erosion: When misleading claims are exposed or errors occur, consumer trust in both the manufacturer and the regulatory system is damaged.

The Double-Edged Sword of Food Labelling

While food labels are intended to inform consumers and promote public health, their implementation is fraught with challenges and unintended consequences. The seemingly straightforward concept of transparency can lead to widespread consumer confusion, enabling deceptive marketing tactics and placing significant financial strain on food producers. As the food landscape becomes more complex, so do the drawbacks associated with relying solely on package claims.

Consumer Confusion and Misleading Information

One of the most profound disadvantages of food labelling is the high level of consumer confusion it can create. Instead of simplifying purchasing decisions, intricate labels and marketing language often lead consumers astray.

Healthwashing and Misleading Claims: Manufacturers frequently use attractive, but vague, terms to create a "health halo" around their products. Terms like "natural," "superfood," "lightly sweetened," or "made with real fruit" are often unregulated or misleading. For example, a "natural" product can still be high in sugar and fat, while a "low-fat" product might have an increased sugar content to compensate for taste.
Complex Nutritional Data: The Nutrition Facts panel, while a gold standard for information, is often difficult for the average person to interpret correctly. Issues with confusing serving sizes—which might not reflect how a product is actually consumed—or the distinction between naturally occurring and added sugars can lead to overestimation or underestimation of a product's nutritional value.
Greenwashing: With increasing consumer demand for sustainable products, some companies engage in "greenwashing." This involves using eco-friendly labels, imagery, or vague claims to give the impression of environmental responsibility without substantial, verified evidence. This deception can mislead well-intentioned consumers and damage trust in genuinely sustainable brands.

Significant Costs for Manufacturers

For food manufacturers, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), navigating the complex world of food labelling is a major financial and logistical burden.

High Compliance Costs: Adhering to constantly evolving regulatory standards across different markets is a monumental task that requires significant resources. This includes costs for laboratory analysis, legal counsel, graphic design, and the continuous updating of packaging.
Risk of Errors and Recalls: A single labelling error, such as a missing allergen warning, can have severe consequences, including costly product recalls, legal fines, and reputational damage. For a small business, such an error could be catastrophic.
Supply Chain Complexity: The need for accurate and detailed ingredient information requires robust data management throughout the supply chain. This can be difficult to manage, especially for businesses with multiple suppliers or varying ingredient sources, making it prone to errors and inefficiencies.

Potential for Unintended Consequences

Beyond the direct issues of misleading information and cost, food labelling can have broader, negative effects on consumer behavior and public health strategies.

Exacerbating Eating Disorders: Preliminary research suggests that highly visible, judgmental labels—like red/green traffic-light systems—could have negative psychological impacts on some individuals, potentially exacerbating issues related to disordered eating.
Focus on Nutrient-Specific Labeling: An overemphasis on specific nutrients like fat or sugar can unintentionally cause manufacturers to reformulate products in a way that is not healthier overall. For instance, removing fat often means adding more sugar to maintain flavor, leading to a different, but not necessarily better, nutritional profile.
Reinforcing Stereotypes and Bias: Labeling certain foods as strictly "good" or "bad" oversimplifies complex realities and ignores the nuances of individual health and diet. This can promote food-related biases and reduce open-mindedness towards a diverse range of dietary options.

Comparison of Consumer vs. Manufacturer Disadvantages


Aspect	Disadvantages for Consumers	Disadvantages for Manufacturers
Information	- Misled by marketing terms like "natural" and "light". - Confusion over complex nutritional data and serving sizes. - Misinterpretation of health claims.	- High costs of ensuring regulatory compliance. - Difficulty managing supplier data for accuracy. - Burden of constantly updating labels for recipe changes.
Financial	- Paying a premium for products with misleading health claims. - Buying larger quantities due to misjudged portion sizes.	- Significant financial penalties for labelling errors. - High costs associated with product recalls. - Investment in specialized labelling technology.
Health Impact	- Unknowingly consuming unhealthy additives or high sugar content. - Risk of allergic reactions from undisclosed ingredients. - Potential for negative psychological effects related to eating.	- Reputational damage and loss of consumer trust following incidents. - Pressure to engage in questionable reformulations to meet new label standards.
Regulatory	- Lack of enforcement and loopholes can allow for deceptive practices. - Overwhelming amount of information can cause disinterest.	- Navigating complex and changing regulations across jurisdictions. - Potential for more frequent inspections after past errors.

Conclusion

While the intentions behind food labelling are noble—aiming to inform and protect the public—the execution reveals numerous disadvantages. For consumers, the system can be a source of confusion and misinformation, enabling "healthwashing" and "greenwashing" by manufacturers who exploit regulatory ambiguities. For the industry, particularly smaller businesses, the compliance burden is significant, with costly risks attached to even minor errors. Ultimately, these issues demonstrate that food labelling is a complex tool with limitations. Addressing these disadvantages requires continued regulatory refinement, greater enforcement, and increased consumer education to foster a more transparent and trustworthy food system. It also means recognizing that a truly healthy choice is based on more than just a label, emphasizing critical thinking and a holistic approach to nutrition.

Frequently Asked Questions

Healthwashing is a deceptive marketing practice where a product is presented as healthier than it is, often using unregulated or ambiguous terms like 'natural', 'fresh', or 'low-fat' to create a false perception of healthfulness.

Food labels can be confusing due to complex nutritional data, technical terminology, and intentionally vague or misleading marketing language. Serving sizes may not match actual consumption, and fine print can obscure important details.

For small and medium-sized enterprises, complying with stringent and complex food labelling regulations is costly and resource-intensive. It creates logistical challenges in managing supply chain data and exposes them to high financial risks from potential errors and recalls.

Yes, misleading labels can lead to health problems by encouraging consumers to make poor dietary choices, potentially causing them to consume unhealthy amounts of sugar, fat, or additives. It also poses a serious risk to individuals with food allergies if allergens are mislabelled or not declared.

Greenwashing is a deceptive strategy where companies promote an environmentally friendly image without truly adopting sustainable practices. In food labelling, this involves using eco-friendly symbols or terms to attract environmentally conscious consumers, often without adequate certification or proof.

Yes, some studies suggest that overly simplistic labels, like red/green traffic light systems, could contribute to negative psychological effects, such as exacerbating eating disorders in vulnerable individuals.

The ingredients list is mandated to be transparent by law and provides a factual account of what is in the food, unlike marketing claims that are often designed to sell products. Reading the full list prevents deception and ensures awareness of additives, sugars, and potential allergens.