Description of normalization for nutrition claim in 2008 and 2010 (N2008 = 975,N2010 = 666).

Note:aBecause the vitamin and mineral were always claimed broadly, and seldom subdivided into specific vitamin or mineral, we simplified this to calculate the percentage with nutrition information for this two nutrients and might overestimate the value.bThe number of the numeric value for energy, fat, sugar and sodium with “”, “≥” or range were 3, 9, and 1 in 2008, while which were 0, 9 and 4 in 2010. The minimum values for those positive factors were used.cExcluding vitamin and mineral, there were only 21 and 7 nutrient comparative claims in 2008 and 2010, respectively. Because a “normal food” should be chosen to evaluate whether it fulfilled the content demand, those few nutrient comparative claims were deemed qualified to simplify this question.