The gram thresholds written into the Code
The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code sets three specific cut-offs for fibre claims on packaged food. A product can say it is a source of fibre once a serving contains at least 2 g. It can call itself a good source at 4 g per serve. Only at 7 g per serve can a label say excellent source.
These are not rounded guidelines. They are the exact figures written into the claims schedule, and a food authority can ask a manufacturer to prove the number on a nutrition panel matches the claim on the front of the pack.
There's a fourth rule that trips people up: an increased-fibre claim needs at least 25% more fibre than a stated reference food, and that reference food itself has to already contain at least 2 g per serving. So 'increased fibre' is always a comparison, not a fixed amount.
What actually counts as fibre in the first place
Before any of those gram thresholds apply, a substance has to meet the Code's actual definition of dietary fibre. It's described as the part of plants, their extracts, or synthetic analogues that resists digestion and absorption in the small intestine, usually undergoing complete or partial fermentation in the large intestine.
That definition also requires at least one recognised physiological effect, and the Code lists laxation first among them. The definition specifically includes lignins and carbohydrate chains built from three or more sugar units, which is a deliberately technical line meant to rule out shorter carbohydrates that don't behave the same way in digestion.
Eat For Health notes this definition was first gazetted in August 2001. Since then, approved AOAC test methods have brought specific ingredients like inulin, fructo-oligosaccharides and polydextrose inside the legal definition, which is why they can be counted on a nutrition panel the same way wheat bran or oat fibre can.
One spelling, one legal meaning
Fibre and fiber describe exactly the same substances under this framework. Fibre is the Australian and British spelling, fiber is the American one, and neither spelling changes which compounds qualify or how many grams are needed for a claim.
This matters when reading imported research or international labels, because a study reporting results in 'fiber' grams per day is using the identical measurement standard, just with different spelling conventions.
Reading a panel with these numbers in mind
Once you know the 2 g, 4 g and 7 g thresholds, a nutrition panel stops being marketing copy and starts being a data point. BIOMEWARD's blend, for instance, combines PHGG, psyllium, resistant potato starch, acacia and inulin, and its research page links to 36 papers, 35 human studies and one laboratory study, sourced through PubMed or DOI, including null results where a trial didn't find an effect.
Framing a claim this way just means checking what a study actually measured rather than what a brand says about itself. The label wording, source, good source, or excellent source, is a direct readout of a specific gram figure on a nutrition panel, nothing more and nothing less.
Australian nutrient reference values set daily fibre targets of 25 g for women and 30 g for men, which gives the 2 g, 4 g and 7 g claim thresholds some context: even an excellent source, at 7 g per serve, is one part of a much larger daily figure.