You Won’t Believe How FDA-Approved “Healthy” Labels Are Secretly Sabotaging Your Snack Choices!

New research from Oregon State University and Tufts University reveals that consumers are increasingly inclined to opt for healthier snack options when these products carry a “healthy” label, particularly if the label is endorsed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The study found that not only do consumers prefer these labeled products, but they are also willing to pay a premium for them. According to lead author Katherine Fuller, an assistant professor at Oregon State University, “Trust in government was an important part for people and they were willing to pay more for that label.”

This research is especially timely as the FDA is in the process of updating its definition of “healthy” for the first time since 1992, a move that aligns the standard with current nutrition science and federal dietary guidelines. The agency has also proposed an “FDA healthy” icon for food packages, which is currently awaiting approval.

The Study Design

Published in the journal Food Quality and Preference, the research utilized data from a 2023 experiment involving 276 shoppers at six grocery stores located in lower-income communities in the Boston area. Participants were given tablets that displayed images of 15 real-world snack products—nine of which met the new FDA healthy standard and six that did not.

In the study, participants first viewed the products without any special labeling. They then saw the same products again, with those meeting the FDA standards appearing either with a generic healthy label or the FDA-specific healthy label. To simulate a real shopping experience, each participant received $5 in cash and a $10 store gift card, allowing them to purchase items based on the scenarios presented.

“Giving study participants purchasing power in a setting that mirrored a real shopping experience let us better observe how the labels might influence behavior,” said senior author Sean Cash, chair of the Division of Agriculture, Food and Environment at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University.

Key Findings

The results largely confirmed existing assumptions regarding healthy labeling while providing new insights. When there was no label, consumers selected healthier snack options approximately 60% of the time. This figure increased to about 67% when a healthy label was introduced. Both the FDA label and a generic label enhanced selection rates, but only the FDA label produced a statistically significant effect.

Furthermore, consumers were willing to pay an average of $0.59 more for a healthy product carrying an FDA-endorsed label compared to one without any label. Fuller noted a parallel with prior research on the USDA organic label, which also correlates with a price premium. This suggests that brands featuring the FDA “healthy” icon could gain a competitive edge in the market.

Interestingly, the study revealed a distinction between two types of trust: generalized trust and trust in government specifically. The effectiveness of the FDA label varied based on how much trust consumers placed in government institutions, while the generic label’s effect was more closely tied to generalized trust. The stronger the institutional trust, the greater the FDA label’s impact on purchasing decisions.

“Our findings demonstrate that labels act as signals for consumers, and policy can shape how well those signals work,” Cash explained. “When labels are viewed as credible, such as when they have the endorsement of a government agency, they are more likely to influence eating patterns and purchasing habits.”

This study's timing is crucial, as front-of-package labeling in the United States remains largely unregulated and driven by the industry. Manufacturers often use terms like “natural,” “low fat,” or “supports immunity” on packaging without much nutritional basis or oversight. Many consumers struggle with the Nutrition Facts panel, finding it dense and difficult to interpret while shopping.

Moreover, recent evidence indicates that U.S. citizens express low trust in health-related food claims, a reality shaped by past incidents of mislabeling, fraud, and food safety scandals. In this context, the FDA’s institutional credibility serves as a crucial signal that generic healthy claims cannot replicate. “Right now, there is a lot of misinformation about what is healthy and what isn’t healthy,” Fuller stated. “Having a clear label, supported by scientific research, saying this is healthy because we checked, is important.”

As the FDA healthy icon awaits final approval, the full market impact of the updated standard remains to be seen. However, the research suggests that brands able to display this label will likely enjoy a measurable advantage in consumer preference and pricing willingness.