What about light products?
Tolose weight sustainably, we necessarily pay more attention to our diet. And sometimes we are tempted to consume light products. Their promise is indeed enticing: for the same amount of product consumed, the light version is supposed to weigh less heavily on the scale, in terms of calories. Tempting, but what about the real relevance of light products? Focus on light products, less light than they seem…
What is a light product?
Light products appeared in the 1960s, to gradually become widespread on supermarket shelves – it is estimated that, on average, a hypermarket offers 500 light references. The name light was first attributed todairy products (skimmed milk, yogurt at 0% MG), but today it is found in most food categories: drinks, butter and cream, desserts, cakes, ready mealsand even chocolate!
The name “light” or “light” meets a specific standard: the product can only be qualified as light if its nutrient content orcaloric valueis reduced by at least 25% compared to a reference product. However, the legislation does not impose an overall reduction in the formulation of the said product. Only manufacturers can decide to reduce their product insugars, fats, salt or other nutrients… And they take the opportunity to play the card of ambiguity. The principle: play on the consumer’s desire to lose weight more easily by consuming the product.
What are the different categories of light products?
There is therefore a wide range of light products.
Case of low-sugar foods
Among the light products, there are obviously those that promise a reduced sugar content. But here again, different names mislead the consumer(1):
- “Sugar-free”: a clear name, which means that the product does not contain more than 0.5 g of sugar per 100 g. But beware, the product is not empty of calories, since it may contain fat, including saturated fat.
- The product “low in sugar”: here again, the mention lacks precision. For solid foods, it implies that the product does not contain more than 5 g of sugars per 100 g. For liquids, it implies a sugar content of less than 2.5 g per 100 ml of drink.
- The 0% product: in the case of sugar, the designation indicates that the product contains 0 g of sugar. However, it can be high in fat.
- The product “without added sugar”: this denomination implies that the product does not contain any sweetening substance added to the composition. But that doesn’t mean the product is sugar-free, as it can be naturally sweet. This will be the case, for example, of a compote, which is intrinsically sweet, since it is made withfruit that naturally contain fructose.
Case of low-fat foods
The same goes for low-fat foods. The designation “light” only applies to a specific fat content, which varies according to the product concerned. Thereby :
- Classic earth upis 80% fat. It will be considered “light” or “reduced fat” if it contains between 41 and 62% fat. It will be “light”, “light” or “low in fat” if it contains between 39 and 41% fat. Finally, butter substitutes, which are not butter and cannot be named as such, generally contain between 10 and 39% fat.
- Standard crème fraîche contains about 30-40% fat. For it to be considered “light” or “light”, the fat content must be reduced to 12-30%.
- Biscuits, whether savory ( Aperitif type biscuits ) or sweet, must display a fat content of 2 to 5% lower than the content of the same biscuits, classic version.
- ” Light “cheesemust have at least 25% less fat than its “normal” equivalent.
It should also be specified that a product mentioning a “low fat content” must contain less than 3 g of fat per 100 g, while a product called “fat-free” must not contain more than 0.5 g fat per 100 g.
You will therefore have understood: the denominations are numerous, imprecise, and easily mislead the consumer. Moreover, we are entitled to wonder if light products are really dietary, given the legal vagueness.
Are light products really good for your health?
Current situation of light in France
In 2004, 77.3% of French people consumed low-fat products, and 25% were considered “heavy consumers”, especially women. Since that date, the light market has lost an average of 7% of market share per year, after having had some success (between 1985 and 1995, sales of light products increased annually by 4%, and between 1995 and 2003, the growth of the sector was 9% per year). The French are more and more resistant to light products: 42% would feel a real mistrust of light products(2)tag. It is perfectly conceivable that this distrust is the result of better consumer information and thus, of greater lucidity vis-à-vis the promises of weight loss and health associated with light products.
What are health professionals saying?
They are unanimous: light products are not only a matter of food marketing, but in addition they could make you fat, or even be harmful to your health.
First of all, and as previously explained, the designation “light” does not imply an overall lightening of the food. Thus, manufacturers can decide to produce a low-sugar food, but it will obviously be necessary to compensate for this loss of ingredient by adding another. With, in the end, sometimes unsatisfactory results on the calorie side. It even happens that a light product is more caloric than its classic equivalent!
Then, the consumption of light products has a perverse effect: since the product is light, we are much more likely to take it again and thus, to consume more than usual. Some studies have also confirmed the psychological effect of mentions “low in fat” or “low in calories”: they are a factor favoring overconsumption. Thus, it is possible to affirm that low-fat products could seriously disrupt thenatural mechanisms of food regulation .
In addition, light products, often low in raw ingredients, such as eggsor butter, are systematically rich in synthetic additives. The lack of flavor and/or texture is made up for by adding sometimes controversial substances, such as synthetic flavorings, gums, emulsifiers, thickeners or gelling agents. This is the case, for example, with pork gelatin, which is added to lightYoghurtsto compensate for the loss of density after removal of fat. This is also the case for aspartame (controversial synthetic sugar for its deleterious effects on themicrobiota ) in light drinks , or even salt and sugar, added to the composition of light mayonnaise.
Finally, it is worth pointing out that no scientific study has proven that light products can help you lose weight. The CEDUS (Center for studies and documentation of sugar) confirms that light products would not have any demonstrated interest in weight loss, except, possibly, on certain obese people, and for limited periods of diet in the time. Long-term consumption could even disruptinsulin resistance (case of the absence of MG causing blood sugar levels to skyrocket) or degrade the intestinal flora (influence of certain Sweeteners ).
The balance sheet for light products is therefore rather negative: they mislead the consumer and have no health benefits. Also, before buying a light product, it is better to read the composition label properly, or better yet, consider another, healthier alternative.
Stephen Paul is the lead author and founder of My Health Sponsor. Holder of a diploma in health and well-being coaching with more than 200 articles in the field of health, he makes it a point of honor to offer advice based on reliable information, based on scientific research, and verified by health professionals.