Staff Reporter
First Posted: Jun 11, 2024 04:02 AM EDT
Portugal’s Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, José Manuel Fernandes, has announced that his country will revoke the implementation of Nutri-Score. Quoted in Público magazine, the minister stated that the “last-minute” order from the previous administration that proposed the implementation of Nutri-Score food label was “illegal” as it was published without prior knowledge of the appropriate state entities in charge of applying EU-related policies.
The minister’s justification for the sudden move will cause many to prick up their ears. In fact, Fernandes rejected the order to implement Nutri-Score on the grounds that it runs “contrary to positions taken by Portugal, which has always defended harmonisation with the adoption of a system at European level.” As yet, there is no harmonised food labelling system in the EU, although it is a stated goal of the Farm to Fork strategy. The wrangling over which front-of-package (FOP) label should be the one to rule them all has been ongoing for years, but it is becoming increasingly clear that Nutri-Score will not be the one. Portugal’s move and Fernandes’ position on it, therefore, hits the nail on the head.
Growing doubt in European capitals
Much of the reasons why Nutri-Score is not reaching the acceptance levels that its French creators hoped for is the fact scientific opinion has been rather critical of it from the beginning in terms of its scientific basis, its function, and its effectiveness. Critics of Nutri-Score have highlighted the issue with its fixed reference amount of 100 grams or milliliters. For example, olive oil, which is composed entirely of fat, can only obtain a C score despite the fact that it is typically used in small quantities.
Although the problem is evident, the issue has been routinely dismissed by Nutri-Score’s advocates until the pressure became too great. In late 2023, the algorithm underpinning Nutri-Score was updated to improve its alignment with general nutrition recommendations. Even so, the damage may already have been done: a landmark study published in April 2024 in the European Review of Agricultural Economics revealed “that food producers are changing their products to secure higher ratings from the front-of-pack food labeling system.” In other words, the nutritional composition was changed for the sake of a better rating from an algorithm that is widely considered flawed.
Persistent issues like these are the reason behind ever more countries’ decisions to drop the Nutri-Score entirely. In Italy, the Competition Authority (AGCM) banned Nutri-Score, arguing that it did not adequately inform consumers. Similarly, in Romania, the use of Nutriscore has been banned since May 2024 by the National Authority for Consumer Protection, which has called the label “misleading and not authorized by the authorities.” In Portugal once again, a 2021 study by the National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge (INSA) showed that most products rated highly with Nutri-Score A or B did not meet the reference values or the sugar and salt limits set by the Integrated Strategy for the Promotion of Healthy Eating (EIPAS).
Add to this the hard-hitting allegations that the system’s developers have reportedly tried to block critical scientific papers during the peer-review process. If these claims are valid, they pose a serious threat to academic freedom and the integrity of scientific discussion surrounding Nutri-Score and are casting doubt on the narratives promoted by Nutri-Score’s supporters regarding its effectiveness as a public health tool.
The Germans’ frustration
But even in countries where the Nutri-Score is still being used on a voluntary basis, opposition is growing in the face of the absurdities of some Nutri-Score evaluations, especially of staple foods. Consider Germany, where there has been significant pushback from the food industry and some regional governments, arguing that the scoring system is unfairly penalising local products and does not always align with national dietary guidelinesâ.
Particularly glaring is the rather negative C-rating of a suite of breads, especially since the updated algorithm was rolled out. Many breads have slipped into a worse category from the end of December, with a yellow C being the norm for the most commonly consumed types of bread, whereas wheat bread has sometimes been bit with an even lower rating. With the quality and nutritional value of traditional breads being a point of pride for many Germans, the frustration with Nutri-Score is considerable.
Equally frustrating is the fact that if a product contains red meat, it can, at best, reach level C. The reason for this is the classification by the World Health Organization of red meat as “probably carcinogenic,” a very political and controversial classification in its own right. In any case, it is slowly becoming evident that German consumers are developing fatigue over being told what and how to eat as frustration with the (as yet) still ruling ‘traffic light coalition’ of SPD, Liberals, Democrats, and Greens is sinking lower and lower in the polls.
The European Elections may lead to renewed FOP label debates when a new Commission takes shape. What this debate will look like remains unclear, but it seems likely that Nutri-Score will appear in a much worse light than before. Considering that FOP labels will probably be a low-priority agenda item, given the many problems the EU needs to address, it will take a while until a harmonised European FOP system is being decided on.
See Now:
NASA’s Juno Spacecraft’s Rendezvous With Jupiter’s Mammoth Cyclone
©2017 ScienceWorldReport.com All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission. The window to the world of science news.
* This is a contributed article and this content does not necessarily represent the views of scienceworldreport.com
Copyright © 2024 SCIENCE WORLD REPORT All rights reserved.
Source link : https://www.scienceworldreport.com/amp/articles/62097/20240611/with-portugals-no-nutri-score-keeps-slipping-across-europe.htm
Author :
Publish date : 2024-06-11 04:02:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.