The Health Star Rating System Explained
Introduced in 2014 in Australia and New Zealand, the Health Star Rating (HSR) is a front-of-pack labelling system that ranks packaged foods from half a star to five stars. The rating is determined by an algorithm considering positive nutrients like fibre and protein, and negative ones such as saturated fat and sugar, calculated per 100g or 100mL. This system aims to offer a quick visual guide for comparing similar products. Following a 2019 review, the algorithm was updated to better align with dietary guidelines, leading to changes like lower ratings for most fruit juices. Fresh fruits and vegetables automatically receive five stars. Despite updates, the system's effectiveness and limitations are still debated.
The Arguments for HSR Effectiveness
Simplifying Consumer Decisions
The HSR simplifies comparing products in supermarkets, especially for those with low nutritional literacy. Its ease of use is a key benefit, contributing to high consumer awareness and usage. A 2024 New Zealand survey found that 44% of respondents used health stars often when buying new packaged foods.
Incentivizing Healthier Products
The HSR encourages manufacturers to improve their products' nutritional profile to achieve a higher star rating. Studies in Australia and New Zealand suggest this leads to product reformulation and a reduction in the energy density of some rated foods. Public health advocates view this as a positive step for population health.
Evidence of Healthier Purchases
Some research indicates a link between the HSR and healthier consumer purchases. An Australian study observed that increased HSR adoption correlated with healthier household packaged food purchases, suggesting potential public health benefits with wider use.
The Criticisms and Limitations of the HSR System
The Voluntary Loophole
A significant flaw is the voluntary nature of the HSR. Manufacturers often only display the rating on healthier products, hindering comprehensive comparisons across entire categories and contributing to low overall uptake. This selective application is a major reason calls exist to make the system mandatory.
Rating Inconsistencies and "Health Halos"
The HSR algorithm has been criticised for giving high ratings to some processed foods, creating a misleading 'health halo'. While the notorious Milo example led to changes, similar issues persist, causing consumer confusion and distrust.
Ignoring Food Processing
The system focuses on individual nutrients rather than the level of food processing, which is a major factor in a food's healthfulness. This can lead to natural, whole foods receiving lower ratings than ultra-processed alternatives. The HSR does not adequately penalise ultra-processed foods, which are linked to negative health outcomes.
Consumer Misinterpretation
Many consumers don't fully understand the HSR, often incorrectly comparing different food types instead of products within the same category. Distrust also arises from perceived industry influence and a lack of clear government oversight. Effective implementation requires better consumer education.
HSR vs. Other Labeling Systems: A Comparison
| Feature | Health Star Rating (HSR) | Nutri-Score (European) | Traffic Light Labels (UK) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rating Format | Stars (0.5 to 5), numeric | Letter-based (A to E) with corresponding colours | Colour-coded signals (red, amber, green) |
| Effectiveness | Moderate, mixed results due to voluntary nature and algorithm issues | Considered effective by some studies, but faces political opposition | Proven effective in highlighting high levels of fat, sugar, and salt |
| Main Critique | Voluntary uptake, algorithm anomalies, and ignoring food processing | Controversies over penalising some traditional foods (e.g., olive oil) | Some suggest HSR is more easily interpreted than multiple lights |
| Key Benefit | Simple visual summary for quick comparison within categories | Provides quick, clear guidance on overall nutritional quality | Highly effective in communicating high/low levels of specific nutrients |
The Path Forward: Mandating and Refining
The HSR's limitations have prompted discussions on improvements. Due to low voluntary uptake, mandatory implementation is being considered if targets aren't met by late 2025. A mandatory system would increase coverage and improve comparisons. Further algorithm refinement, including considering food processing levels, is also proposed. Enhanced consumer education and stronger governance are crucial for increasing trust and effectiveness. For more information, visit the Australian government's Health Star Rating website.
Conclusion
The Health Star Rating system offers valuable benefits in simplifying nutritional information and encouraging manufacturers to improve products. While useful for comparing similar items, its voluntary nature, algorithmic flaws, and failure to account for food processing limit its overall impact. Making the system mandatory and refining its criteria are crucial steps for the HSR to fully achieve its public health goals.
