Nutri-Score originator supports EU-wide adoption of the nutritional ranking system

24 Jan 2024 --- The Belgian ongoing Presidency of the EU Council is placing the debate on the EU-wide adoption of the Nutri-Score back on the table. The five-color nutritional ranking system was developed by the French public health agency and first adopted by the country’s government in 2017. Nutrition Insight discusses the benefits and concerns of a region wide use of the label with Serge Hercberg, professor of nutrition at the faculty of medicine at Sorbonne Paris North University, whose work forms the basis of the Nutri-Score.

“Science should guide policy decision-making in public health, so the choice of the single harmonized front-of-pack nutrition label for Europe must meet this requirement and not the interests of economic operators or states that defend them. It is clear that there are strong arguments in favor of choosing the Nutri-Score,” Hercberg asserts.

The EU Council is organizing a scientific symposium to reach a consensus and improve mutual understanding of countries’ experiences where voluntary front-of-pack labeling systems are already in place. 

“This is an excellent initiative essential to relaunch the process of adopting a unique and mandatory nutritional label for Europe, which is currently on standby at the European level,” he comments. 

EU-wide adoption 
The EU Commission announced the adoption of mandatory nutritional labeling of food across the whole bloc by the end of 2022 in its flagship food policy strategy, Farm to Fork. Still, the promise is yet to come to fruition. 

“This delay is regrettable because, in Europe, we have to face major public health issues in which nutritional factors are involved: obesity, cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, among others. Nutri-Score is an effective tool to help consumers adopt healthier eating habits to reduce the risk of chronic diseases,” Hercberg states. 

“Unfortunately, so far, due to a specific European regulation on the provision of food information to consumers voted a few years ago — and drafted in a context of very strong pressures from powerful lobbies — member states cannot make a front-of-pack nutrition label such as Nutri-Score compulsory in their country,” he explains. “However, to be effective, Nutri-Score must be displayed on all food packaging, so the European Commission (EC) has to change its current regulation related to consumer information and make it mandatory.” 

Belgium, which has taken advantage of its Presidency of the Council to reignite the idea of EU-wide adoption, is part of the international coalition for the adoption of Nutri-Score, alongside member states France, Germany, Spain, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Spain, as well as Switzerland. 

Meanwhile,Italy is pushing for the adoption of its own Nutrinform Battery system, and leads an opposition to the adoption, with the governments of Czechia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia and Romania. 

The EU Council is organizing a scientific symposium exploring the experience of countries where voluntary front-of-pack labeling systems are already in place.Addressing the opposition’s concerns regarding the compatibility of Nutri-Score with different national dietary guidelines, Hercberg argues: “Since 2022, the International Scientific Committee composed of independent European experts has been making recommendations on how to improve the system.” 

“The revision of the algorithm underlying Nutri-Score permits improvement of certain identified limits of the Nutri-Score and reaches a better alignment of the Nutri-Score with public health nutritional recommendations of European countries.”

Public health benefits 
Hercberg outlines four specific benefits of the adoption of the Nutri-Score system across all 27 EU countries — scientific studies conducted across different nations reveal it helps consumers make healthier choices, the simple color-coded system is comprehensible for people of various backgrounds, there appears to be public support for the adoption and seven European countries have already adopted it. 

“Numerous scientific studies performed over many years in some 20 countries validate the algorithm underlying the Nutri-Score calculation — including cohort studies involving more than 500,000 subjects with long-term follow-up — and its effectiveness to help consumers make healthier food choices. These have included studies in virtual supermarkets, experimental stores and real supermarkets.”

“More than 130 studies have been published since 2014 in international peer-reviewed journals demonstrating its effectiveness and superiority over other labels, particularly in disadvantaged populations,” he further states, alluding to the argument that part of the system’s appeal is that it is easy to comprehend by various populations.

“The conclusions of the recent report of the EC Joint Research Center published in September 2022 highlighting that consumers, including consumers with lower income, appear to prefer simple, colorful and evaluative summary front-of-pack labels, which are more easily understood, than more complex, non-evaluative, monochrome labels,” he adds. 

Hercberg argues that EU-wide adoption of the Nutri-Score system will improve public health outcomes.A public consultation launched by the EC in 2021 suggests overall support for the adoption among consumer associations, citizens, NGOs, research and educational structures and public authorities. 

Alternative nutritional scoring systems 
One significant hurdle to the bloc-wide adoption is that there are several alternatives to the Nutri-Score system already rolled out across different member states. A Keyhole system is used in Denmark, Iceland, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden. Finland uses its own Heart Symbol system and Italy is campaigning for the EU-wide adoption of its Nutrinform Battery system. 

“Nutri-Score has faced the violent opposition of the Italian government, which defends the commercial interests of some of its agri-food industry sectors, and the protection of ‘Made in Italy’ products,” says Hercberg. 

“The Nutrinform Battery system is more complex and difficult to understand as the quantities of nutrients refer to a portion, the percentages are related to the reference daily intakes for an adult (2000 kcal) and it also includes the caloric intake per 100 g of food,” he argues. “It is counter-intuitive, representing the nutrient content through the icon traditionally used to monitor the charge of a telephone, but curiously used in the opposite direction — the more the battery is ‘discharged,’ the better the nutritional quality of the food.” 

Nutriform Battery and the Italian Ministry of Agricultural Food and Forestry Policies, which is staunchly opposed to the adoption of Nutri-Score, did not respond to Nutrition Insight’s request for comment. 

“Two studies involving 1,034 Italian and 1,064 Spanish consumers comparing their understanding of Nutri-Score and Nutrinform Battery reveal the effectiveness of Nutri-Score that appears as a relevant tool to inform consumers on the nutritional quality of food products,” Hercberg points out. 

“These results are consistent with the conclusions of the EC Joint Research Center report published in 2022, which concludes on the superiority of interpretive coloring systems compared to informational monochrome systems.” 

By Milana Nikolova