The Choices Programme is an internationally applicable nutrient profiling system with nutrition criteria for trans fatty acids (TFA), saturated fatty acids, sodium, added sugar and for some product groups energy and fibre. These criteria determine whether foods are eligible to carry a “healthier option” stamp. In this paper a nutrient intake modelling method is described to evaluate these nutritional criteria by investigating the potential effect on nutrient intakes. Data were combined from the 2003 Dutch food consumption survey in young adults (aged 19–30) and the Dutch food composition table into the Monte Carlo Risk Assessment model. Three scenarios were calculated: the “actual intakes” (scenario 1) were compared to scenario 2, where all foods that did not comply were replaced by similar foods that did comply with the Choices criteria. Scenario 3 was the same as scenario 2 adjusted for the difference in energy density between the original and replacement food. Additional scenarios were calculated where snacks were not or partially replaced and stratified analyses for gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI) and education. Calculated intake distributions showed that median energy intake was reduced by 16% by replacing normally consumed foods with Choices compliant foods. Intakes of nutrients with a maximal intake limit were also reduced (ranging from −23% for sodium and −62% for TFA). Effects on intakes of beneficial nutrients varied from an unintentional reduction in fat soluble vitamin intakes (−15 to −28%) to an increase of 28% for fibre and 17% calcium. Stratified analyses in this homogeneous study population showed only small differences across gender, age, BMI and education. This intake modelling method showed that with consumption of Choices compliant foods, nutrient intakes shift towards population intake goals for the nutrients for which nutrition criteria were defined, while effects on beneficial nutrients were diverse.

In 2014, the Dutch government agreed with the food sector to lower salt, sugar, saturated fat and energy in foods. To reformulate, an integrated approach of four disciplines (Nutrition & Health, Food Technology, Legislation, and Consumer Perspectives) is important for food companies (Framework for Reformulation). The objective of this study was to determine whether this framework accurately reflects reformulation processes in food companies. Seventeen Dutch food companies in the bakery, meat and convenience sector were interviewed with a semi-structured topic list. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed. Interviews illustrated that there were opportunities to lower salt, sugar and saturated fat (Nutrition & Health). However, there were barriers to replacing the functionality of these ingredients (Food Technology). Most companies would like the government to push reformulation more (Legislation). Traditional meat products and luxury sweet bakery products were considered less suitable for reformulation (Consumer Perspectives). In addition, the reduction of E-numbers was considered important. The important role of the retailer is stressed by the respondents. In conclusion, all four disciplines are important in the reformulation processes in food companies. Reformulation does not only mean the reduction of salt, saturated fat and sugar for companies, but also the reduction of E-numbers.

Food additives (E-numbers) are allowed in foods, but many consumers have a negative perception of them. The objective was to study the opinion of food experts about the causes and ways to reduce consumer distrust about E-numbers. Thirteen food experts from universities, research institutes, the government, food industry organisations, media, a nutrition information organisation, a consumer association and two other non-governmental organisations (NGOs) were interviewed with a semi-structured topic list, based on a model of risk perception. Interviews were transcribed, coded by an open-coding approach and analysed. Results indicated that, according to food experts, consumer distrust of E-numbers arose from negative communication by traditional media, social media and books. Food experts suggested that the information sources and the reliability of E-number information are important for consumers. Food experts also suggested reducing consumer distrust by avoiding negative label claims and making collective agreements with all parties about honest and transparent communication. According to interviewed food experts, food companies need to explain clearly and honestly why they use E-numbers in food. A nutrition information organisation and the government were often mentioned as appropriate parties to undertake action. The interviews suggested that consumers had no confidence in the food industry.

The primary goal of front of pack (FOP) labelling is to help consumers make healthier choices through communication. A secondary goal is to encourage producers to improve the nutritional composition of their products. Evidence has shown that (FOP) labelling can help consumers to make healthier food choices and has been an incentive for producers to improve product composition. As FOP labelling is seen as an important tool to improve food environments for public health purposes, the WHO supports initiatives of governments to implement an FOP labelling system. Based on the experiences of a wide range of countries over many years, possible success factors for such an FOP system have been defined, six of which are discussed in the present paper and used to evaluate the Dutch Choices Programme that was started in 2006. In the course of time a large number of producers joined the programme and the logo was recognised by more than 90 % of the consumers, but by 2016 the Dutch consumer organisation argued on the basis of their own research that a quarter of the consumers did not understand the colour coding of the logo and as a result the Dutch government decided to no longer support this logo and to introduce a nutrition app. The challenge that remains is to find a system that consumers understand well and that still encourages manufacturers of food to improve product composition. New technology-based data collecting initiatives might provide the right tools to develop such a system.

A more sustainable diet with fewer animal-based products has a lower ecological impact but might lead to a lower protein quantity and quality. The extent to which shifting to more plant-based diets impacts the adequacy of protein intake in older adults needs to be studied. We simulated how a transition towards a more plant-based diet (flexitarian, pescetarian, vegetarian, or vegan) affects protein availability in the diets of older adults. Community. Data from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2019-2021 of community-dwelling older adults (n = 607) was used MEASUREMENTS: Food consumption data was collected via two 24 -h dietary recalls per participant. Protein availability was expressed as total protein, digestible protein, and utilizable protein (based on digestibility corrected amino acid score) intake. The percentage below estimated average requirements (EAR) for utilizable protein was assessed using an adjusted EAR. Compared to the original diet (∼62% animal-based), utilizable protein intake decreased by about 5% in the flexitarian, pescetarian and vegetarian scenarios. In the vegan scenario, both total protein intake and utilizable protein were lower, leading to nearly 50% less utilizable protein compared to the original diet. In the original diet, the protein intake of 7.5% of men and 11.1% of women did not meet the EAR. This slightly increased in the flexitarian, pescetarian, and vegetarian scenarios. In the vegan scenario, 83.3% (both genders) had a protein intake below EAR. Replacing animal-based protein sources with plant-based food products in older adults reduces both protein quantity and quality, albeit minimally in non-vegan plant-rich diets. In a vegan scenario, the risk of an inadequate protein intake is imminent.