Catherine Saxelby's Foodwatch | 5 reasons why I'm in favour of The Tick

5 reasons why I'm in favour of The Tick

Article Index
5 reasons why I'm in favour of The Tick
4 commonly asked questions
A quick history of The Tick
The foods that have been with The Tick the longest
All Pages

Do you look for the red-and-white “Tick” of approval when you shop?  Is it really giving you the healthiest choice on the shelf? Or is it something that companies just buy to make their product look better for you?  I’ve long been a supporter of the Tick program and think it’s proved that it’s got the clout to make the Australian food supply healthier without alienating shoppers.

 

1. It's simple, quick and reliable

It's one simple, easy-to-spot logo. It gives shoppers a quick and dependable way to pick the healthier choice within the same food range. It's been around for over 22 years and is a de-facto front-of-pack labelling guide, simpler than the Traffic Light system now being considered and definitely simpler than the %DI (Per cent of Recommended Daily Intake) with its cluttered thumbnails.

 

2. It keeps manufacturers focused on nutrition

The Heart Foundation Tick on a food or meal indicates it has been independently tested and shown to meet the Heart Foundation's nutrition criteria for that category of food. It's not the absolute perfect choice. But it's a healthier choice compared to similar foods or meals (Source: The Tick Update Dec 2010).

Because companies are contracted to the Tick Program under a licensing agreement, they are legally bound to comply with Heart Foundation standards. Non-compliance leads to corrective action (forcing them to make label changes) or to remove the product from the shelves. Not insignificant consequences! It also reviews ads and packaging to make sure advertising doesn't overstate its case.

The Heart Foundation's efforts to get manufacturers to cut back on salt has had a big impact on the whole food supply. The best example is cereal. When one particular breakfast cereal company used the Tick criteria as a benchmark to reformulate 12 of their cereals, 235 tonnes of salt were removed from the food supply in one year.

 

3. It's tailor-made for a category

Each food category (e.g. oils, breads, muesli bars, frozen dinners) has its own nutrition criteria. And rightly so. It wouldn't make sense to set the same criteria for oil and for bread. There are 60 sets of standards for supermarket foods.

For example, the Heart Foundation tests frozen dinners for their saturated fat, salt, fibre and content of vegetables, but oils are only tested for the type of fat. Why? Oils have virtually no salt, no fibre and all have around the same total fat. The analysis pivots on whether an oil is high in polyunsaturated and monounsaturated, with less than 20 per cent saturated fat.

So, for foods in the Ready To Eat breakfast cereals category, foods have to meet standards for energy, saturated fat, trans fats, sodium and percentage wholegrain or fibre, to get the Tick, whilst a food in the cheese category has to meet standards for saturated fat, sodium and calcium, to get the Tick. See below.

Criteria

Oils – two standards apply

• Saturated fat must be less than 20 per cent of the total fat
• Trans fat must be less than 1 per cent of the total fat

Breads – four standards apply

• Saturated fat must be 1.5 g per 100 grams or less
• Trans fat must be  0.2 g per 100 grams or less
• Sodium must be 400 mg per 100 grams or less
• Fibre must be 4 g per 100 grams or more

Breakfast cereals – five standards apply

• Energy must be 800 kJ per serve or less
• Saturated fat must be 1.5 g per 100 grams or less
• Trans fats must be 0.2 g per 100 grams or less
• Sodium must be 400 mg per 100 grams or less
• Wholegrain content must be 50 per cent wholegrains or more

     Or
Fibre must be 3g per serve or more

4. It's updated

The Heart Foundation revises its cut-offs which forces food companies to meet levels of lower salt, less or no trans fat, lower kilojoules, smaller portion size and more vegetable servings. You see there is a continual product improvement, nutritionally, of Tick products over time. A good thing for consumers!

The downside is that sugar is not yet a limiting criteria for any of the food categories. Considering the criteria are always evolving as new research becomes accepted, hopefully agreed sugar levels are not too far off, making it easier still for parents and families to shop wisely.

 

5. It's realistic

The Tick doesn't set standards that will produce foods that taste terrible. Anyone can bake a bread with no added salt, but would anyone buy it? No. Ditto for salt-free cereal, soup and crispbread. But I bet you've hardly noticed the gradual drop in salt in a Tick bread or cereal.

Sodium (salt) comparison mg per 100 grams of bread

Regular bread 600-800 mg
Tick cut-off criteria less than 400 mg
Salt-free bread less than 120 mg

Tick foods are not always "perfect" as far as nutritionists are concerned. However, relative to what else is out there, they are "better for you". The Heart Foundation is gradually, unnoticeably adjusting people's tastebuds back to a point where excess salt, trans fat, and lack of fibre isn't the norm in our everyday food. A hefty task!

Note: Catherine Saxelby has no vested interest in writing this article besides informing her readers! No payment or request was received from The Heart Foundation.