But our new research<\/a> on parenting and food in Australia found the Health Star Ratings are often confusing, misunderstood and have little credibility among shoppers.<\/p>\n If Health Stars are mandated, the system will also need a major overhaul to be trusted and useful for shoppers.<\/p>\n How do Health Star Ratings work?<\/p>\n The government set up the front-of-pack Health Star Rating system in 2014 in collaboration with the food industry, public health and consumer groups. <\/p>\n Product ratings range from (bad) \u00bd to (good) 5 stars. <\/p>\n Calories, saturated fat, sugars and sodium decrease the rating. Fibre, protein, and the content of fruit, vegetables, nuts and legumes increase it. <\/p>\n The good and bad offset each other. This means companies can strategically formulate products to boost the rating and mask unhealthy ingredients.<\/p>\n Processing and additives \u2013 such as sweeteners, colouring, emulsifiers, preservatives and artificial flavourings \u2013 are not part of the calculation<\/a>. <\/p>\n Previous research<\/a> has found the ratings can incentivise ultra-processed foods over minimally and unprocessed foods, and misrepresent healthfulness. Some researchers<\/a> have also suggested practical ways to modify the rating algorithm to account for processing.<\/p>\n The Health Star Rating\u2019s own consumer research<\/a> found 74% of consumers do not understand that the rating cannot be used to compare dissimilar products. <\/p>\n What parents told us<\/p>\n In our interviews with 34 parents in Australia, participants often described the Health Star Ratings as \u201cmisleading\u201d, \u201cnot helpful\u201d and \u201con the wrong product\u201d. One participant called it the \u201cfake health star rating\u201d. <\/p>\n They gave many examples: <\/p>\n Like you might buy 100% orange juice or fruit juice and it might have only half a star health star rating, but then you can buy like a box of processed muesli bars and it will have five stars. \u2013 Mother of three high school aged children, urban WA<\/p>\n Coco Pops or Nutrigrain have three and a half star rating, and what exactly does that mean? \u2013 Mother of one primary school aged child, urban WA<\/p>\n Participants wondered if the Health Stars were something companies paid for, a \u201cmarketing thing\u201d. <\/p>\n Positivity bias<\/p>\n Part of the problem with the Health Stars is the positivity bias of the symbol. As one participant put it, \u201cAll stars are good. Right?\u201d <\/p>\n Another noted their children comment on the stars, saying \u201cbut look Mum, it\u2019s five stars.\u201d <\/p>\n However, parents were not convinced: <\/p>\n A lot of packaged stuff is rated as five stars. I\u2019m like yeah, well, don\u2019t know about that. It\u2019s still packaged. \u2013 Mother of two primary school aged children, urban NSW<\/p>\n Participants thought discretionary foods should not have any stars. As one participant said: <\/p>\n The other day, we saw a mud cake and it has a two out of five star health rating. How can that be a two out of five star?\u2026 Like there should not even be a star available for this. \u2013 Mother of pre-school aged child, urban NSW<\/p>\n Burden on parents<\/p>\n Parents often disregarded the rating. For example: <\/p>\n This particular thing, you know, had all sorts of additives, had actually had a much higher rating than something that actually didn\u2019t have any additives\u2026 what I ended up buying was rated slightly lower. \u2013 Mother of two primary school aged children, rural Victoria<\/p>\n Instead participants used ingredients lists, apps such as Yuka, and \u201chours of internet research\u201d to guide healthier choices. <\/p>\n But there was a sense of frustration that the burden was on them. Participants said:<\/p>\n I feel like food labels are extremely deceptive and by producers, purposely confusing. \u2013 Mother of one primary school aged child, urban SA<\/p>\n It has to be government driven because companies won\u2019t change unless they\u2019re forced to by the government. \u2013 Father of two primary school aged children, urban Tasmania<\/p>\n We need a food labelling system that works<\/p>\n Still, the parents we spoke to think a front-of-pack system is valuable. As one participant explained:<\/p>\n I do think if I had a better system for that, that would get a lot of use. \u2013 Mother of two primary school aged children, urban NSW<\/p>\n Parents repeatedly stated a desire for transparency over food, for information they can trust and food policies that prioritise consumer health. <\/p>\n As one mother put it, the \u201cmulti-billion dollar\u201d food industry will not do this on their own, and \u201cthat\u2019s where the government needs to step in.\u201d <\/p>\n If Health Stars are mandatory, how could labelling be overhauled?<\/p>\n Chile, Mexico, Brazil and other countries, including Canada from 2026, are now using \u201cstop-sign\u201d warnings to steer consumers away from the least healthy products. Large Black Octagons<\/a> alert consumers to high sugar, sodium and saturated fats, and ultra-processing.<\/p>\n Starting in 2026, a new front-of-package symbol will be required on many Canadian foods and drinks that are high in saturated fat, sugars or salt.![\"New](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251202-56-w9jgob.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Canada.ca\/en\/health<\/a><\/p>\n