Inspire Glycaemic load and glycaemic index: communicating the story to consumers 22nd June 2005

inspireGlycaemic load and glycaemic index: communicating the story to consumers

22nd June 2005

• Current perceptions of GI and GL

• Changes in awareness

• The future of GI and GL

• Communicating and developing GI and GL

agenda

Background

© Dragon 1 Craven Hill London W2 3EN +44 (0)20 7262 4488

Purpose of the research

• Following last years research into glycaemic index

-‘Another complicated world or the next big idea?’

• Dieting and healthy lifestyles, the context

• Consumer familiarity and awareness with GI

• The role for GL

• Direction for retailers


Research method and sample

• Two focus groups of 6

• ABC 1 women aged 35-55 with families of mixed ages

• Well educated on health matters ‘opinion forming’

• All expressed interest in healthy diet for themselves and their families

• Half interested in loosing weight

• Groups conducted June 2005

Health and dieting


Health is…

• Common sense, instinctive

-‘Everyone knows what you should and shouldn’t eat.’

• About balance

• A lifestyle choice, not a pressure

• Defined by general wellbeing (of body and mind)

• Ideal of simple and whole food - restricted by busy lives


Health is not…

• Calorie counting

• Weight loss and low fat living

• Intrinsic to our culture

• Convenient


Dieting is negative

• Anti-healthy living, radical and counter-intuitive

• Temporary, short term

• Rigid, impractical. Impossible for family eating

• Suspicious, hidden agendas from manufacturers

• Acceptable with medical trigger

Negative, short term, pressure


Positive dieting is healthier eating

• Depending on objective, positive associations linked to longer term diets

Healthier EatingWeight Control

Pressure

Discipline

Choice

Flexibility

Modern ideals, foods, solutionsTraditional ideals, foods, solutions

Time and weight saving solution

Short term, results

Time investment

Long term, reassured

Glycaemic index


Glycaemic index

“The Glycemic Index measures the speed at which you digest food and convert it into glucose, the body’s own energy source. The faster the food breaks down, the higher the rating on he index. The index sets sugar (glucose) at 100 and scores all foods against that number.”


Glycaemic index continued

“When you eat a high GI food, you experience a ‘rush’ in the blood sugar and your body releases a hormone, insulin. This does two things, firstly it reduces the level of glucose in your bloodstream by sending it to various body tissues for immediate short term use or by storing it as fat. Secondly it inhibits the conversion of body fat back to glucose for the body to burn.”


The GI diet, reactions

• Spontaneous awareness, accurate and rich knowledge

• Based on real food and common sense. Simple appeal

• Intrinsically healthy

• Clear lifestyle flexibility

-’A way of eating, not a diet.’

• Likened to Rosemary Conley rather than the Atkins ‘fad’

• Sound basis, linked with diabetic associations, ‘scientific’. Highly motivating factor

• Knowledge of the anomaly foods, but not put off by this

Instinctive and comfortable


The GI diet, reservations

• Rules appear obvious, = simple, unprocessed food and cooking

-‘It’s a fancy name for something I already know.’

-’Its going back to old fashioned food’

• However practically, placing foods was less obvious

• Based on scientific knowledge, but low awareness of any medical support. Do Dr’s support this?

• Can it work without committing to exercise?

• Controlled enthusiasm, realistic expectations

‘It’s a step toward healthy living, but its not the answer.’


Changes in perceptions

2004-Some awareness through occasional health related press articles

-Rich, varied knowledge

-Fad? Buzz word

-Fat

-Diabetes support

2005 -Wider awareness from education push in press

-Same level of knowledge

-Here to stay

-Lifestyle

-Sugar

-Diabetes and lifestyle


Portion sizes

• Weight control requires portion control

• Leads to confusion

- ‘Everyone's portion is different’

- Like specificity, e.g. WW points book / system

• Healthy eaters require portion freedom

- Portion control is tricky to manage when cooking for the family

- ‘Healthy eating isn’t about depravation’

• This attitude split effects popularity & appropriateness of GL

Glycaemic load


Glycaemic load

“Glycaemic index only gives half the true picture. It compares 50g of usable carbs within each food to decide if it has a high, medium or low GI. GI doesn’t take into account the average portion sizes we actually eat or how many carbs there are in an actual portion. GL is based on GI but also factors in the carb content of an average portion.”

The GL Diet: Diet Freedom, Nigel Denby


Glycaemic load

• No knowledge in either group of concept

• Understood concept but not easily, needed practical examples

‘So if I ate a large tin of beans and a small tin of the same beans they would have different GL’s and the same GI’s?’

• The talk about carbs prompted some questions about Atkins (which GI didn’t) and confusion about the principle of ‘burning up sugars’, particularly evident with the placement exercise


Glycaemic load

• Overall, no awareness, no knowledge at all

• Reactions mixed

- ‘GI makes more sense now.’

- ‘Understandable, but complicated.’ rouses suspicion

• Not viewed as GI progression, instead as a strand of GI theory most suited to those watching weight

• Dependent on people understanding basics of GI

• All question ‘average portion’ & therefore usefulness of measurement

Divides opinions


Glycaemic load

GL divides opinions

Dieters Healthy eaters


Glycaemic load for dieters

• Adds clarity to GI diet

• Helps with prioritising

• Seen as a crucial build on the GI theory, but not a replacement

• Is a friendly and sensible guide to dieting, can trust it

• Has similarities to Weight Watchers points systems

• Would need specified portion size

• Needs support through press to increase knowledge, make accessible

Positive eating plan


Glycaemic load for healthy eaters

• Healthy eaters are cynics about GL

• Too confusing to be practical

• GL transforms the GI healthy eating plan into a negative diet

• Is against progression, seen as a short lived spin-off

- ‘It makes GI look faddy, I’m asking what next..’

• Open to mis-interpretation and abuse by manufacturers & retailers

Restrictive

High, medium or low?

Exercise


Exercise

high medium low


Making decisions

• Most decisions based on sugar content

• There were aspects which made this decision harder

- high fibre content ‘I think it slows the rate of absorption.’

- sugar variants, natural sugars and sweeteners

- filling foods that have sugars e.g banana

• Good understanding that (highly) processed are digested quicker and hard to digest food is lower

• Most difficult to place were pasta, cereals, alcohol, foods with sauces (beans)

No fast rule, labelling needed


What changes with GL?

• Respondents were asked to point out products that would change category if we used the GL measurement

• Only carrot, melon and dried banana were chosen, as portion sizes for each were deemed to be small

• Suggested apple juice might go down, but not sure

- ‘We’ve got no way of knowing unless it’s on a label.’

• Was not easier than last year!

Information and guidance is essential

Labelling


Which foods need clarity?

• Overall, most difficult were alcohol, pasta, meat, sweets with sugar, substitutes, fruits• All wanted clear GI labelling and guidance to some degree• All (bar 1 rejector of GL) wanted upfront bold GI guidance, like

the Tesco GI on pack sticker, not recessive like M&S• Comfortable about this taking precedence over most other

nutritional information, including calories, fibre and vitamins• Some concerns about the importance of this information over

broader issues such as ‘bad fats’ and high salt content • Concerns also over the abuse of such a system from

manufacturers using this as a sales tool


On pack examples

Comms should be single minded and bold


Labeling for different needs

• Other labelling needs were related to dieting vs healthy eating attitude split• Dieters wanted average portion size alongside both GL and GI

information on as many products as possible• They weren’t confident on their own ranking of natural foods• Healthy eaters only wanted guidance on processed foods. No

more-’You cant tell me not to eat fruit and veg, that’s ridiculous.’• All wished for consistency across retailers, a standard logo, size,

colour and position


Labeling needs

Educational Fitting into Lifestyle

Food groups Brands

Weight Loss Healthy Lifestyle


Tesco

• Relatively little spontaneous awareness of Tesco activity

• Prompted, there was some awareness of Tesco GI book and Steve Redgrave TV ad on Diabetes & GI

• Comms to date linked to diabetes rather than healthy eating plan

• Little change in perception of retailer through this activity, is expected

• However, does lend salience to stature and longevity of GI (GL), however not as powerful as press coverage

Summary


Overall, 2 agendas

Weight loss, results driven

Healthy lifestyle

GL

Role

GI

Role

GI Passive GI Active

Emotional Involvement

Functional Involvement

Drive with definite rules,

structured solutions

Drive by easing doubt, providing

flexibility & freedom


Conclusions

• GI is here to stay

• Welcomed as a healthy eating guide, not a diet

• As basis is so substantial and broad, its inevitable that it will spout other spin off diets

• GL should take care not to be a spin-off

• People do, however expect diets to progress. Progression should stay true to the original ideas and learnings - stay friendly!


Implications for manufacturers and retailers

• Retailers shouldn’t develop GI and GL independently of one another, this would lead to huge confusion and overall rejection

• Manufacturers have a responsibility to be consistent and open with their labelling policies. Don’t use GI & GL as a sales tool

• Whilst press coverage is driving awareness, retailers can take the responsibility fore educating shoppers through shopping experience

Thank youFor further information contact:

Claire Nuttall

[email protected]

Dragon, 1 Craven Hill, London W2 3EN

+44 (0)20 7262 4488

www.dragonbrands.com

Documents

Inspire Glycaemic load and glycaemic index: communicating the story to consumers 22nd June 2005