Contents
Nutriscore: lights and shadows on food labeling
Labeled
The Nutriscore classification system has virtues that help to simplify the information, but also unsolved errors
Since Nutriscore, a food classification system for its front labeling, was born, it has not been without controversy. Many nutritionists and health experts reject it. But, no matter how much controversy it generates, since the European Commission, through its regulations, decided to propose that the labeling of products carry a complementary indicator on the front, with the aim of making it easier for consumers to understand the values nutritional content of the product, it seems that Nutriscore will be the system that will arrive in Spain in 2021, (in France it has been in force since 2017 and in Belgium, since 2019), as announced by the current Minister of Consumption, Alberto Garzón.
To understand its operation and the controversy generated
Regarding it, we consulted the keys to its operation with the pharmacist Clara Gómez-Donoso and the professor Maira Bes Rastrollo, author and supervisor, respectively, of the study recently published by the University of Navarra in which it is determined that, the worse the The Nutriscore nutritional score for a food the higher the risk of premature mortality. «The algorithm on which it is based Nutriscore assigns points based on nutritional composition per 100 grams or 100 milliliters of product and takes into account the content of less healthy elements (calories, sugar, saturated fat and sodium) and of the most favorable (fiber, protein and the percentage of fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts and olive oils or other similar ones in composition) ”, explain the authors, who also comment that the final score is classified into five categories to show a graduation of five colors and letters on the front labeling. Thus, the best nutritional quality is marked with the letter A and in dark green, and the worst with the letter E and in red. The rest of the letters, B, C and D, represent midpoints, which are accompanied by a profession of colors: dark green, light green, yellow, orange and red.
What needs to be improved
The researchers agree that, although in their opinion Nutriscore is a reliable system, it is not perfect and improvements should be made. «There are several aspects that can be improved within the limitations it presents: it does not distinguish between different types of fat (monounsaturated, polyunsaturated, saturated and trans) and does not take into account the degree of processing of the food ». Due to these faults within the algorithm, there may be cases, in which, for example due to the inadequate distinction of the different types of fats, olive oil gets a C rating, or by not taking into account the degree of processing of the food, a reason why a light soda can obtain a better rating.
The two professionals support their study, stating that, although with a “room for improvement”, they consider Nutriscore as a valid option. “From a public health point of view, the fact that it is not perfect should not make us throw it away as it is a necessary measure and Nutriscore is the front labeling model that generates the most consensus in Europe, and the one that it has recently been chosen by the Government of Spain ”, they affirm.
Even so, they emphasize “the need to improve the system and to accompany (Nutriscore) with other educational strategies and food policies broad that favor a greater consumption of raw materials and minimally processed foods, but that for this reason should not prevent the measure from going ahead.
The most critical view
There are many nutritionists and professionals in the world of nutrition who position themselves against the implementation of this system. Juan Revenga, nutritionist, biologist and collaborator of the CoCo application, comments that, although Nutriscore has virtues, it is not the appropriate system. “When this model was introduced in 2014 as an alternative to the many complex nutritional traffic lights that had existed so far, it was a marvel. It is a clear system and easy to interpret by the consumer. If we compare it with the maremágnum that we had before, the things that Nutriscore values positively are well valued, and it does the same with the negative evaluation “, he explains, and continues:” The problem is that, when this system is moved to real life, it does not work; it has a number of bugs that make it a useless tool. ‘
To the question of what, then, would be the problem that must be addressed so that consumers can make a conscious and healthy purchase, he refers to the need to improve nutritional training. “I’m not saying that everyone should be a nutritionist, but yes it is necessary to disseminate elementary knowledge; greater nutritional awareness from an early age, and in which there is no industry mediation, “he concludes.