Caffeine’s Consumer Conundrum

While highly studied and approved for safe use by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and many other global regulatory agencies, caffeine remains a controversial ingredient and a heated topic of discussion. March is National Caffeine Month and at the International Food Information Council (IFIC) we are observing the month by shedding light on consumer knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to caffeine–as well as potential implications and opportunities to improve consumer understanding about this controversial ingredient. Consumers Love Caffeine The recent IFIC Spotlight Survey: Caffeine, conducted with a representative sample of 1,000 US adults (18 years and older) revealed that the vast majority of consumers (88%) consume caffeine. Of those, eight in 10 report consuming it daily, and close to half (47%) say they consume caffeine multiple times per day. The top two reasons given for caffeine intake are “it’s part of my routine” (30%) and “I enjoy the taste of products that contain caffeine” (21%). Energy is also a key driver of caffeine consumption with 17% saying “it gives me a quick boost of energy” and 13% stating that “it makes me feel awake/alert for longer periods of time.” Most respondents report consuming caffeine from coffee (54%), followed by soft drinks (17%). Just over three-fourths (78%) say that caffeine is safe to consume. Caffeine Confusion While consumers seem content with their caffeine consumption, this IFIC Spotlight Survey illuminated key places where knowledge deficits exist. For instance, only 35% of those surveyed know that the federal government is responsible for approving the safe use of caffeine as an ingredient in the food supply. Importantly, only a small number (6%) correctly identified the safe daily amount of caffeine for a non-pregnant, healthy adult. Further, 46% of respondents admitted they are “not sure” how much caffeine […]

insights

The Dairy Dilemma: Simultaneously Under-Consumed & Misunderstood

Dairy foods and beverages hold the not-so-coveted title as one of the most under-consumed food groups on the plate. In fact, according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA), approximately 90% of individuals do not consume the recommended three servings per day. More specifically, consumption appears to be the lowest among Black and Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) subpopulations.   Rampant food and nutrition misinformation is counter to the goal of helping consumers build healthy dietary patterns. When food groups are not consumed in recommended amounts, nutrient inadequacies are exacerbated. Inadequate dairy intake can jeopardize health and wellness by limiting intake of three out of four under-consumed nutrients of public health concern – vitamin D, calcium, and potassium. The extent to which historically underserved communities are disproportionately affected by increasing rates of diet-related disease and food insecurity is widely chronicled, including in the National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health.   The International Food Information Council (IFIC) has a long history of conducting consumer research on US eating trends and behaviors to support improved diet quality. With the annual IFIC Food & Health Survey entering its 20th year, we have been inspired to augment our research methodology to gain greater insight into underserved populations’ perceptions, attitudes, behaviors, and needs. Specifically, we have committed to 1) tripling the number of respondents in the IFIC Food & Health Survey to better study and understand population subgroups (e.g., ethnic groups, those with lower income, etc.); and 2) oversampling certain demographics in standalone projects so that we can contribute subpopulation insights with greater statistical power.   A Complicated Web of Dairy Perceptions and Consumption Conundrums  It is important to understand motivators and barriers to providing equal access, availability, and actionability that enables the US population to regularly consume dairy foods and beverages in ways that meet their […]

insights

The Salty Truth: Do We Stay The Same ‘Coarse’ Or Have We Been Getting It All Wrong?

Debriefing on the consumer research findings central to this article sparked animated discussion among our staff – dietitians and veteran communicators who have long worked to effectively explain nutrition nuances to consumers, utilizing consumer insights. Salt is special. Inextricably linked to taste, salt can impact all five taste sensations (yes, even bitterness, sweetness, sourness, and umami – depending on other ingredients and amount used!). Beyond taste, salt plays a functional role in food production as a binder, stabilizer, and food preservative. Salt, also known as sodium chloride, is one of the “OG” dietary guidance recommendations (going back to the original 1977 “Dietary Goals for the United States”). Salt is 40% sodium, thus sodium has been a long-standing nutrient of public health concern, a mainstay recommendation for reduction in Dietary Guidelines, nutrition education, and food labeling circles, and fodder for food reformulation. However, American sodium intake remains consistently above the recommendation – with average consumption around 3,400 mg per day compared to the 2,300 mg daily limit. While IFIC’s consumer research is designed to yield answers, our latest IFIC Spotlight Survey: American Consumer Perceptions of Sodium in the Diet raises questions about our approach to providing nutrition information to consumers. Consumer knowledge, feelings, and actions affect our ability to better align behaviors with recommendations and this survey indicated: 1) a dearth of will to restrict sodium; 2) a remarkable lack of consumer knowledge of quantitative sodium recommendations; and 3) inaction among the majority. Is There A Lack of Will To Limit Sodium? Nineteen consecutive years of data from the IFIC Food & Health Survey tell us taste is the number one driver of food purchase decisions. Every year, flavor has edged out price, sometimes by 15 percentage points or more. Healthfulness is next – but has only been a close third […]

insights

Sweet Spot For Science: Navigating What Consumers Think & Know About Low- & No-Calorie Sweeteners

It is well known that babies are born with a natural taste preference for sweetness, which is thought to increase acceptance of their mother’s milk. Still, as we move on in years, it’s not so sweet to consume too much added sugar. With intake well exceeding recommended limits in the US, low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) offer a promising alternative, allowing consumers to satisfy their innate preference for sweetness without contributing to the rising risk of obesity and metabolic diseases. Enter complication and controversy. The mere mention of LNCS has long been rife for polarization with some touting their safety and effectiveness and others claiming the opposite. This dichotomy is perfectly represented in our IFIC Spotlight Survey: American Perceptions of Sweeteners in Foods & Beverages. Let’s look at the latest findings. Fearmongering Fallout It’s official – the message about added sugar overconsumption has gotten through. The annual IFIC Food & Health Survey consistently shows that consumers widely associate “low in sugar” with food and beverages that are healthier. Further, in the 2024 Survey more than three in four Americans (76%) reported trying to limit or avoid sugars. This was an increase from 2023 (72%). Still, I won’t sugarcoat it – sugar substitute safety is poorly understood. Despite the clear benefits of LNCS, misinformation and polarized opinions continue to cloud public perception, making it difficult for consumers to understand their true safety and value. In fact, nearly two in 10 Americans are not sure who has approval authority over the use of LNCS in the US, and one in 10 believe there is no US authority responsible. This tracks. In the IFIC Spotlight Survey, 42% of Americans reported their perceived safety of LNCS is informed by their own “research” – which is chilling given there’s more than a spoonful of misinformation […]

insights

Prescription For Change: Consumer Perceptions Of Weight Loss Medications

Obesity is a global epidemic, and the United States is no exception. Over the past few decades, obesity rates have surged. Between August 2021 and August 2023, two in five (40.3%) American adults had obesity, and nearly one in ten (9.4%) had severe obesity (BMI ≥ 40). In 2023, 23 states reported adult obesity rates exceeding 35%—a stark contrast to 2013, when no state had reached this threshold. More Than Meets The Eye Obesity is a complex disease with emotional, physical, and social dimensions. While the public discourse often oversimplifies weight management to “eat less, move more” and finger-pointing prevails, the reality involves genetic predispositions, co-morbidities, lifestyle factors, and medications. Obesity can also be deeply emotional and personal. Solutions must be comprehensive and tailored, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the condition. Further, the scale is not necessarily a linear destination for most consumers. As scientists have worked to crack the code on how to best support Americans in successfully achieving and sustaining weight management, Americans have continued to lose weight and “find” it again – on repeat – pointing to the need for an innovative and enduring solution. A Trip Down Memory Lane Weight loss medications have been part of medical history since the FDA approved the first one in 1947. However, next-gen obesity medications have been game-changers. The advent of GLP-1 receptor agonists in 2014, and their increased use in recent years, revolutionized obesity treatment. While their effectiveness has generated excitement, barriers such as cost and potential side effects remain. Consumer perceptions of obesity medications have also evolved. According to the annual IFIC Food & Health Survey, the percentage of Americans preferring medication to lifestyle changes increased from 16% in 2012 to 27% in 2024, reflecting growing acceptance of pharmaceutical interventions. In total, the innovation and disruption to the […]

insights

Consumer Survey on Plant Alternatives to Meat Shows That Nutrition Facts Are More Influential Than the Ingredients List

Download the full report. Survey Highlights   Every so often a new food trend captures our attention, only to fade once the novelty wears off. Other times, food trends have more staying power. The original veggie burger dates back decades, but more recently a new generation of plant alternatives to animal meat has exploded on the food scene, distinguished from their predecessors by the intent to mimic animal meat’s taste and texture.   We know there is consumer interest, but we know little more about what people think of plant alternatives. The International Food Information Council’s (IFIC’s) latest consumer survey takes a closer look.  Who participated in this survey? The survey was conducted among 1,000 U.S. adults ages 18+ in December 2019. To orient survey takers, the emerging food category was described as “meatless burgers, chicken, fish, sausages and other ground products that attempt to mimic the flavor and texture of animal protein but are made with only plant products.” Throughout the survey, these types of foods were collectively referred to as “plant alternatives to animal meat.”  Most consumers identify as omnivores. The survey began by asking participants what type of diet they follow and provided definitions for the following options: omnivore, vegetarian, vegetarian on some days but not all days, vegan and pescatarian. Not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority (66%) of people in our survey identified as omnivores.   Almost 50% of people have eaten a plant alternative to animal meat. Nearly half (49%) of survey participants reported having tried these newer meatless products. Looking closer, here are a few factors associated with the likelihood of having eaten a plant alternative to meat:  New food curiosity drives consumption. While there are a variety of reasons why people have tried plant alternatives to animal meat, the top reason for doing so is liking to try new foods (41%).  Among the people in our survey who have not tried one of these products, the top reason was the anticipation that these alternatives won’t taste good (31%). Other commonly reported factors for not having tried a product included that the respondents were not trying to eat less […]

Media

New Research: Evaluating Online Grocery Shopping Trends

It was only a few years ago that online food shopping seemed be a relatively novel concept. Yet it is certainly gaining ground, with new research from the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation revealing that over one-third of the time, consumers are shopping for groceries online. This research sheds light on the patterns and habits of online shoppers. The attached report presents the results of 1,000 interviews among adults about online grocery shopping, which were conducted from February 14-19, 2018, and were weighted to ensure nationally representative results. Check out a summary of the findings below. Who Grocery Shops Online? Who Cares About Nutrition Info?  Not Everyone Reads Nutrition Info. Big Takeaways Online shopping seems here to stay. From meal kits to shopping for weekly groceries, the options consumers have for online shopping will likely continue to grow. These insights can help us better understand how shoppers make decisions about food online, and how food decisions and tradeoffs might shift as more consumers seek out online alternatives. This blog includes contributions from Alyssa Ardolino, RD and Alex Lewin-Zwerdling, PhD *Data was collected from an online national panel by Lincoln Park Strategies.

Media

2016 Food and Health Survey: “Food Decision 2016: The Impact of a Growing National Food Dialogue”

The International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation’s 2016 Food and Health Survey, “Food Decision 2016: The Impact of a Growing National Food Dialogue,” marks the 11th edition of an ongoing investigation into the beliefs and behaviors of Americans. The Survey, commissioned by the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation, delves deeply into issues of health and diet, food components, food production, sustainability, and food safety. For eleven years, the Survey has uncovered important insights and trends for health professionals, government officials, educators, and others who seek to understand and improve the health of Americans. The 2016 Food & Health Survey continues this tradition, with a special focus on understanding the complex array of factors that influence food decisions in the United States.   How to Earn CPE Credit Step 1. Watch the 2016 Food and Health Survey Webcast for Health Professionals (video above) Step 2. Follow this link to complete an on-line evaluation of this CPE Module. Step 3. Download the Certificate of Completion (PDF) and put it in your files to verify completion of the CPE program and to receive one CPE credit hour. Resources: “Fast Facts” Press Release (HTML) Press Release (PDF) Executive Summary (25mb PDF) Full Survey Results (PDF | PPT*) Media Webcast Slides Infographic * Please feel free to use these slides in your presentations. We ask that you do not manipulate or change data reportings, and that you attribute any data and slides to the International Food Information Council Foundation 2016 Food and Health Survey. Related News and Analysis: Americans Remain Divided on Perceptions of GMO Labeling, IFIC Foundation Research Says Even on Food Issues, Politics Divides Americans A “Booming” Generation: Beliefs, Barriers and Behaviors Americans Don’t Know How Much Food They Waste <!– Past Food and Health Surveys: 2015   |   2014   |   2013   |   2012   |   […]

Media