Qualified Health Claims on Package Labels

Qualified health claims arising from the landmark 1999 Pearson v. Shalala ruling were predicted to be in widespread use, either filling an important consumer information void or misleading the masses. Yet the results from the current content analysis, which examines more than 1200 instances in which...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of public policy & marketing 2009-10, Vol.28 (2), p.253-258
Main Authors: Bone, Paula Fitzgerald, France, Karen Russo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Calcium
Consumer behavior
Content analysis
Dietary supplements
Disclaimers
Essays and Commentaries
Federal regulation
Food law
Food security
Food supply
Green teas
Heart diseases
Indigent care
Labeling
Marketing
Nutrients
Packaging
Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Qualified health claims arising from the landmark 1999 Pearson v. Shalala ruling were predicted to be in widespread use, either filling an important consumer information void or misleading the masses. Yet the results from the current content analysis, which examines more than 1200 instances in which qualified health claims could have been made, reveal that qualified health claims are relatively uncommon on product packages. Indeed, these claims are less common than their consumer-equivalent structure—function claims and are significantly overshadowed by structure—function claims for which little scientific evidence exists.
ISSN:0743-9156
1547-7207
DOI:10.1509/jppm.28.2.253