Background
Australian supermarket shoppers have been demanding healthy, better for you, food and drink products for decades. For example, Coca Cola launched diet Coke in the 1980’s. What has changed recently is that shoppers are now demanding more information. The question for manufacturers and supermarkets then becomes what is the best way to explain a product is healthy?
Generally speaking, Australian shopper demand for healthier ranges has changed recently. Shoppers are demanding less UPFs (ultra-processed foods) and are seeking cleaner ingredients and more natural nutrition. The Purity Index is a useful tool to explain how close food is to its original state. The more additives / processed the food the lower the purity index.
The metabolix index is a useful tool to explain how your body reacts to food. For example, white bread can be high GI (glycaemic index), rapid glucose spike whereas lentils are lower GI, slower release. So, lentils can have a better metabolic outcome.
Combined, a PMI (Purity and Metabolix Index) can assist to inform shoppers that the product is healthy i.e. minimally processed and supports a healthy metabolism.
Moving Beyond Traditional Nutrition Labels / Information Panels (NIPs)
Historically, food manufacturers and supermarkets have relied on NIPs (Nutrition Information Panels), HSR (Health Star Ratings), ingredient lists and front-of-pack claims to communicate nutritional value. On pack call outs, e.g. low fat / salt / sugar, have been used to suggest products are healthy.
‘For content claims to support the consumer they need to be accurate and their use limited to healthier foods.’
Consumer perceptions of nutrient claims in Australia: A qualitative study
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 2024 pp168-181
Research highlights many shoppers do not use or trust nutritional claims. Interestingly, 2006 FSANZ research (completed by TNS) discovered 80% of respondents reported not reading a claim on products with a claim. Academic research, such as Perceptions, use and perceived value of nutrition and health claims among Australian consumers: a cross-sectional survey (British Food Journal, 2023, No 9, pp 3175-3198) discovered 12.7% of shoppers considered the claims very or extremely trustworthy vs 27% that considered them not very useful.
Also, there are influencers, such as Mandy Sacher of Real Food Rating, that question the validity of many health food claims. With the increasing influence of digital, on shopper decisions, this commentary may decrease the level of trust shoppers have with healthy food claims.
So, are these claims (including NIPs etc) effective tools to build trust with shoppers? Also, does the information provided align with what information shoppers’ demand?
PMI – Purity and Metabolix Index
The PMI aims to answer shopper questions by providing a more holistic assessment of food quality. Rather than focusing on a claim, e.g. low fat or high protein, the PMI evaluates both the purity of ingredients and the product’s metabolic impact, creating a useful measure that is easier for shoppers to understand.
The Purity Index is a generally accepted scientific food rating system. In comparison, the metabolix index is not currently a recognised scientific food rating system. This creates an opportunity for the industry (manufacturers and supermarkets) to develop the index to align with shopper demands. Importantly this means PMI can then become an index that shoppers use and trust – not just another irrelevant acronym / claim on a pack.
There are other food rating systems, such as NOVA, NPSC and Nutri-Score. Whilst useful, it is debateable whether these systems are aligned with shopper demands. Some may suggest updating the HSR system to better align with shopper expectations. It is questionable whether a government created system, including an improved HSR, will deliver what shoppers want. A better option would be to allow manufacturers and supermarkets to create and manage a system based on the shopper insights they have.
Why This Matters for Manufacturers and Supermarkets
UPF (ultra-processed foods) Risk
“This exposure is important because there is a growing body of scientific evidence linking UPFs to adverse health outcomes, and UPFs have entered the crosshairs of policymakers, with the updated Dietary Guidelines for Americans explicitly advising to avoid highly processed foods and prioritize nutrient-dense foods,”
BNP Paribas research note, June 2026
Manufacturers and supermarkets understand the commercial risk of developing ranges that do not align with shopper demands. The industry has a huge failure rate (often quoted at 80%) for new products. Also, major manufacturers and supermarkets are expected to be partners in public health and support government initiatives. In some countries, e.g. UK HFSS legislation, the government has introduced legislation to limit the promotion of unhealthy foods (HFSS = high in fat, salt and sugar). In Australia food, agricultural and health ministers have decided to make HSR mandatory on packaged food.
“ministers expressed concern that the low uptake has limited the system’s effectiveness and undermined consumer trust.”
Australian food, agricultural and health ministers communication, February 2026
The industry has responded by developing healthier ranges. For example, Woolworths supermarkets ANZ try to range more products with HSR of 3.5 or higher. Also, Woolworths has developed a P/L (private label) health food brand, Macro, to offer shoppers healthier alternatives at a value price.
Share of stomach
Manufacturers and supermarkets are in a competitive industry, that also competes with other channels, e.g. QSR (quick serve restaurants). The industry is under increasing pressure to innovate, grow the category and increase share across all meal occasions. For major manufacturers and supermarkets, category growth opportunities are often about stealing share from other channels e.g. grab and go vs QSR offers. The growth of GYG (Guzman Y Gomez, $1.1B sales, from 224 stores in FY25) since opening their first store in 2006, highlights the growth of better for you options in QSR.
With shoppers demanding healthier ranges the obvious solution to this situation is manufacturers and supermarkets partnering to develop healthier food ranges. PMI gives manufacturers and supermarkets a framework to demonstrate the value of product innovation, that is aligned with shopper expectations. For example,
-
- Reformulating products with fewer artificial ingredients, unnecessary additives.
-
- Increasing the proportion of whole-food ingredients.
-
- Improving fibre, protein and micronutrient density.
-
- Reducing added sugars and highly refined ingredients.
-
- Designing products with improved metabolic outcomes.
Importantly, instead of using vague terms such as “natural” or “better for you,” manufacturers and supermarkets can potentially quantify healthier food through an independent scoring system. This framework could also be used to quantify benefits to the general population if the government asks …
Short-term a PMI framework could improve sales, grow the category, by ensuring ranges align with shopper demands. Long-term PMI could assist manufacturers and supermarkets to develop a competitive advantage. The framework could improve the level of trust shoppers have with their brands and improve the overall relationship with the government.
Much like sustainability ratings have influenced purchasing decisions over the past decade, nutritional quality metrics may become an increasingly important part of food retailing.
Summation
For decades shopper demands for healthy, better for you, food and beverage ranges have been increasing. Now shoppers are demanding even more information. Simply put, shoppers expect to know not only what is in their food but also how it may affect their health. To provide this level of information is a challenge for manufacturers and supermarkets.
PMI (Purity and Metabolix Index) offers manufacturers and supermarkets an opportunity to simply explain how healthy food ranges are. No single metric can fully define a healthy food, a well-designed PMI framework has the potential to become a valuable tool for product development, category management and shopper communication.
For forward-thinking FMCG businesses, the question may no longer be whether nutritional quality should be measured more effectively — but how can manufacturers and supermarkets meet the growing demand for healthier, better-for-you foods?
As shopper demands continue to evolve, those manufacturers and supermarkets that embrace transparent, science-informed measures, such as PMI, will be better positioned to deliver value, build trust and drive sustainable category growth.