Philippine food manufacturers are resisting the proposed front-of-pack labeling (FOPL) policy, citing potential compliance and production costs even as health concerns rise nationwide, according to a nutrition official.

“They are one of the reasons for the pushback to adopt or finalize the PNPM (Philippine Nutrient Profile Model), and without PNPM, there will be no policy applications like FOPL,” Queenie Kyle G. Wapericua, Nutrition Officer II at the National Nutrition Council (NNC), told BusinessWorld in an interview.

“The reason is that it is expensive. I mean, they will definitely incur costs, but it doesn’t mean that they can’t do it,” she added.

Under the proposed policy, food packaging would carry labels flagging high levels of ingredients such as sodium, sugar, and unhealthy fats, based on thresholds set under the PNPM. Because these warnings would sit on the front of the package rather than in the nutrition facts panel, they are designed to be read at a glance on the shelf — putting key health information directly in shoppers’ line of sight.

“According to the study conducted when we developed the PNPM, almost 90% of products available in the market exceeded the threshold,” Ms. Wapericua said — a figure suggesting the policy would apply to the vast majority of packaged products on store shelves.

She noted that black octagonal warning labels would help Filipinos make better health decisions by summarizing potential risks that are otherwise detailed in nutrition facts.

“When we have front-of-pack labeling, it will sort of give direct information to the consumer,” she said. “Very few Filipinos really know how to read nutrition facts.”

“The first thing Filipinos look at when they choose an item in groceries is the expiration date,” she added.

The push for FOPL could also lead more Filipinos to choose healthier alternatives as noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) continue to rise. In the national nutrition survey, NCDs accounted for 73.3% of deaths nationwide, while obesity prevalence among adults aged 20 to 59 reached 44.5% in 2025 — figures that frame the public-health stakes behind the NNC’s position.

While the initiative could promote healthier lifestyles among consumers, the nutrition official underscored that the proposal may add pressure on manufacturers to reformulate their products.

“Not all manufacturers would reformulate their food items without legislation or a bill in place,” Ms. Wapericua said.

Alongside reformulation, the policy may also affect the prices of goods.

“That could be one of the negative impacts, but it would not reach a point where it’s too expensive because they still need to follow a regulation,” she said.

“The cost of health issues from NCDs and the expenses for medicine are more expensive compared to prevention,” she added. “Many do not notice it, but the cost on health has more impact among Filipinos.”

Several legislative measures to mandate FOPL have been filed in Congress, including House Bill (HB) No. 130, or the Healthy Food Marketing Environment Act, and HB No. 8284, or the Healthy Food Marketing and Labeling Act.

“Many lawmakers have already passed a bill… It’s now up to Congress on how they will consolidate all of them,” Ms. Wapericua said. How Congress moves to consolidate the competing bills, and whether the NNC advances adoption of the PNPM, are the steps that would determine whether FOPL moves forward in the Philippines.

— Almira Louise S. Martinez, BusinessWorld

Source: BusinessWorld