Many people pursuing a healthy physique are willing to spend money ordering healthy meals with muscle gain, weight loss, or slimming claims. Some service providers seized the business opportunity and market their healthy meals claiming the used healthy ingredients and the nutritional contents of their menus were calculated by registered dietitians to help consumers achieve their ideal weight. However, the Consumer Council’s meal ordering trial and test on nutrient contents revealed that not all the menus of such meals were designed by dietitians. Among the 9 randomly selected healthy meal samples, 8 had nutrition labels, but all of them had the claimed value of at least 1 nutrient not matching with the test results, with a discrepancy exceeding the requirements of the relevant technical guidance notes. The total fat content of the sample with the most serious discrepancy was found to exceed its labelled content by over 2.3 times. The Council stresses that most consumers purchase healthy meals with the aim of achieving balanced weight control through strictly regulating their nutrient intake. If the actual nutrient content is not consistent with the labelled value, consumers might choose the wrong product, not only interfering with the weight loss plan but even increasing other health risks.
In addition, the price of such healthy meals varied greatly, with the average price per meal varying by as much as over 2 times. If 3 meals per day were ordered consecutively for 1 month (i.e. 90 meals in total), the cost could be as high as $14,000. Consumers should also pay attention to other additional costs and various meal delivery restrictions to keep their budget in check. Before deciding any purchase of healthy meals, consumers are reminded to consider various factors in making an informed choice, such as the quality of the food and its effectiveness, the convenience of its service, whether it is good value for money, as well as the possibility of cooking their own healthy meal.
The Council reviewed the websites of 9 service providers of healthy meal delivery services and collected 13 menus targeting weight loss and slimming for comparison. Surveyed items included menu features, charging methods, order quantity, delivery time, and relevant terms of service. Council staff also ordered meals posing as consumers in order to assess its service quality, while the accuracy of nutrition labels was also tested.
One of the biggest selling points of healthy meals is that the nutrients in different menus have been calculated to help consumers achieve weight loss goals while remaining nutritionally balanced. Although most of the samples were not regarded as prepackaged food and might not require nutrition labels, given the selling point of the meals, consumers would naturally expect to have nutrition labels on the packaging for reference. As such, service providers should ensure that the nutritional information provided is accurate. In view of this, the Council randomly selected 9 healthy meal samples from various service providers for testing, comparing their actual nutrient content with the claimed information on the nutrition label of the meal box. Apart from 1 sample which did not include a nutrition label for comparison, all of the remaining 8 samples each had at least 1 labelled nutrient inconsistent with the test results, with a difference even exceeding the requirements of the relevant technical guidance notes. Among them, the discrepancy of the total fat content of 3 samples, carbohydrate content of 5 samples, protein content of 1 sample, and energy content of 2 samples exceeded the labelled value by more than 20%, which did not comply with the tolerance limit set down in the “Technical Guidance Notes on Nutrition Labelling and Nutrition Claims” of the Centre for Food Safety (CFS). The sample with the largest disparity had a claimed total fat content of 8.7g per serving, but the test result was 28.8g, a difference of 231%, which may cause consumers who originally hoped to lose weight to consume more fat instead, thus affecting the weight loss outcome. The Council has submitted information of the relevant samples to the CFS for follow-up.
Moreover, Council staff conducted a mystery taste test on the food as consumers and found that the portions of most of the meals were rather small. Even female staff who were lighter eaters did not feel full after eating the whole portion. If the consumer does not have strong willpower, they might consume snacks after the meal which would deflect their goal of weight loss, thus the efficacy of the healthy meals is doubtful.
Consumers opting for healthy meals might be influenced by claims of the service providers, such as healthy ingredients, and that the menu had been accurately calculated by professionals. However, the Council found that among the 9 service providers surveyed, besides 1 service provider that failed to provide relevant information, only 1 service provider claimed that the menu was designed by registered dietitians, 2 service providers claimed that they had their menu designed by dietitians, while the remaining 5 only prepared healthy meals according to different nutritional guidelines or dietary recommendations instead of dietitians. The Council reminds consumers that only registered dietitians can prescribe medical nutrition therapy and are qualified to provide nutritional consultation services to healthy people and chronically ill patients. Consumers should consider their health conditions and make prudent choices.
To reach the target weight, consumers might need to consume this type of healthy meals for a period of time. The survey found that various nutritional meal service providers offered different meal plans, ranging from a minimum order of 1 meal per day for 2 days, to a maximum of 3 meals per day for 60 days. The cost would depend on the number of days ordered and/or the calories on the menu. Taking the plans of 1 meal per day as an example, the average cost per meal was about $81 to $115; for plans with 2 to 3 meals per day, the average cost per meal ranged from $64 to $219, a price difference of over 2.4 times.
If consumers choose 3 healthy meals per day to meet the above basic needs and consecutively order for 1 month (90 meals in 30 days), the cost could reach as high as $14,340 (taking 5 days a week as an estimate). Consumers need to evaluate their own affordability as well as whether it is worth ordering this type of healthy meals. Besides, as these plans need to be paid online in advance, often involving several thousand dollars or more, consumers should consider the risks of prepaying in full. Despite nearly half of the service providers allowing cancellation of orders, there could be an administrative fee of $100 to $300.
Moreover, consumers should pay heed to the meal delivery arrangements and various surcharges. 8 service providers had designated delivery areas, in which 2 did not deliver to the New Territories while the other 3 would charge an additional fee of at least $25 to $100 per day (depending on the location) for deliveries to remote areas (such as Tseung Kwan O, Discovery Bay, Tung Chung, etc.). The delivery time and frequency of each service provider also varied. Some only delivered meals before 8am with no other timeslots available, which may not be suitable for non “9-to-6” office workers. As for the arrangements under inclement weather conditions, 2 service providers clearly stated that they would deliver meals as usual or postpone for a day, whereas 5 service providers indicated that the delivery would depend on when the severe weather warning is lifted. Consumers are advised to carefully read the delivery terms and restrictions prior to ordering.
As healthy meals are generally frozen or refrigerated for storage after being made, the insulation equipment used during transport is particularly important. In this survey, most of the service providers used refrigerated trucks, freezer trucks, and/or thermal bags to deliver the meals, but 1 service provider delivered the food in paper bags. As the food could easily deteriorate if placed at room temperature for a long period of time, the situation was not ideal. As takeaway food, consumers should pay heed that healthy meals should be packed in takeaway boxes and the negative impact of disposable tableware on the environment.
The Council reminds consumers that nutritional requirements depend on many factors, such as gender, age, activity level, and health condition, while muscle gain and weight loss also require a multi-pronged approach. As healthy meals on the market generally do not specify which type of people they are suitable for, consumers should first understand their own physical condition before ordering. If consumers need to lose weight due to illness, they should first consult a doctor or a dietitian for personalised dietary counselling as a better safeguard. The Council reminds consumers that even healthy people should maintain a balanced nutritional intake in weight-loss programmes and the results would vary from person to person. Consumers should incorporate appropriate exercise and avoid relying on a single weight-loss method. If time permits, home cooking is the most ideal as it allows better control of the amount of ingredients and seasonings, and is also more economical. When cooking, the ratio of seasoning should be based on the principle of less salt, sugar, and oil. Consume fruits and dairy products or their substitutes between meals to maintain a balanced nutritional intake to stay healthy. Consumers are advised to formulate a practicable diet and exercise plan and set reasonable goals for progressive weight control.
Download the article (Chinese only): https://ccchoice.org/548healthymeal
Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.