EU food label up for grabs as final decision approaches – EU Policies

After several years of preparation, the battle for an EU-wide food label is entering its final stages. According to the EU Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Stella Kyriakides, food products sold throughout the bloc early be marked with a standardized pan-European front of package (FOP) label.

Until now, the French-backed Nutri-Score had been considered one of the candidates. However, after the recent Summit on the future of food, it has become clear that the Commission is unlikely to recommend this system as a reference label. Indeed, during the summit, the Commission’s DG SANTE deputy director for food sustainability, Claire Bury, left little room for doubt when she said “it won’t be Nutri-Score” and that the Commission is “looking at a variety of different schemes evaluative”, and weighing “the advantages of each one”.

With this heavy blow to a system once I consider a virtual triumph, the competition has been thrown wide open, making the exact shape of an eventual block-wide FOP tag far from clear. But this unexpected development in the FOP saga confirms that the flawed Nutri-Score is a long way from the complete solution to healthier food choices that its supporters have led you to believe, contradicting countries that already use it voluntarily.

Origins of a doomed system

For years, Nutri-Score has been the darling of Europe increase food labeling contest. Originally developed in France and now administered by Belgian retail giant Colruyt Group, the system has already been adopted by several European countries, including France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany and the Netherlands, which have long pushed for the Nutri-Score to become the mainstay of food EU’s “Farm to Shape” strategy. And just last year, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) expressed its support, vocation the EU Commission to make Nutri-Score mandatory throughout Europe.

Like all FOP labeling systems, the Nutri-Score aims to provide shoppers with rapid nutritional information to support healthy dietary choices, in their particular case by assessing the sugar, fat, and salt content of products per serving of 100 g/ml in a five-point sliding index. scale. Products marked with a dark green “A” are considered the most favorable for consumers’ diets, while those labeled with a yellow “C” to a red “E” are considered the least favorable. However, the Nutri-Score’s fundamental flaws undermine its bid to improve public health in Europe amid a growing obesity epidemic.

Mislead consumers and harm local producers

While Stella Kyriakides has praised the efforts of individual countries in implementing FOP labels so far, she has also warned that the use of disparate labels has increased trade costs and created confusion among consumers.

The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM), for example, recently found Nutri-Score has an improper “judgment bias” that prevents consumers from making well-informed food choices. According to the AGCM, the Nutri-Score’s arbitrary classification of food content does not assist consumers in making a proper assessment to ensure adequate daily nutrient intake based on “the individual’s nutritional needs and profile.” What’s more, the authority has focused on the Nutri-Score’s unsubstantiated use of a 100g/ml serving size instead of proper servings tailored to specific foods.

Other experts have also criticized the broader flaws in the algorithm, including the Nutri-Score’s “point blindness” to processed foods. This is because Nutri-Score did not account for sweeteners such as glucose-fructose syrup or other additives commonly used in processed foods in its calculations. It is this omission that sees chocolate powder received the same nutritional rating as a hummus tub.

This same reductionist quality of the Nutri-Score algorithm results in Mediterranean staples like Parmesan, Parma ham, olive oil, and wine. receiving unfairly negative scores. Despite being made without the unhealthy additives found in mass-produced packaged food products, these products are often marked with “C” through “E” labels due to their salt and sugar content, regardless of the recommended intake for individual products, unnecessarily discouraging consumers. while putting local producers at a serious competitive disadvantage.

Playing catch up with science

Nutri-Score’s biased assessment of Mediterranean products is out of step with scientific research, which widely supports the health benefits of the Mediterranean diet. As Pietro Paganini, president of the European think tank on sustainability Competere, has said indicated, “over the years, science has highlighted the importance of wine within a balanced diet”, which is “included in the nutritional regimen considered -scientifically- among the healthiest in the world, the Mediterranean Diet”. In short, the inability of the Nutri-Score algorithm to capture the broader nutritional benefits of the Mediterranean diet makes it an unsuitable system for Europe.

Alarmingly, their algorithm has even had to be updated to bring it a bit in line with proper dietary guidelines. Last month, the Nutri-Score Scientific Committee proposed a better classification of plant-based oils such as olive, walnut and rapeseed. Despite being lower in saturated fat than their counterparts, these oils currently have the same low Nutri-Score rating. The Nutri-Score Committee also agreed to reconsider the algorithm’s assessment of certain fatty fish, as well as the need for further differentiation between high-fiber whole foods and refined foods, with a similar review for the Nutri-Score assessment of beverages that wait for the end. of the year. Still, the move to expand the Nutri-Score algorithm may prove too small too late with the Commission’s decision fast approaching.

In the wake of the latest comments from the European Commission, it is clear that the debate over the European FOP label is looking for something of a reset. While some aspects of the Nutri-Score may be retained in a future standardized label, there is no doubt that the end result should be a much more credible and useful alternative for consumers.

Image: Photos by Jo Zimny/Flickr