Nutri-Rating Does Not Penalize Conventional Meals Specialties, Survey Finds

A sur­vey of meals spe­cialty sam­ples con­ducted by the French con­sumer asso­ci­a­tion, UFC-Que Choisir, discovered Nutri-Rating labels don’t penal­ize tra­di­tional prod­ucts with professional­tected sta­tus from the European Union.

The asso­ci­a­tion ana­lyzed 588 meals sam­ples derived from 310 tra­di­tional prod­ucts, lots of that are cer­ti­fied with Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) or Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) sta­tus from the E.U.

UFC-Que Choisir wrote in a press launch that no less than two-thirds of these sam­ples ​“acquired good grades” from Nutri-Rating.

See Additionally:French Draft Invoice to Exclude PDO and PGI Merchandise From Nutri-Rating

Nutri-Rating grades meals based mostly on the con­tents resembling fats, sugar, salt and calo­ries in 100 grams or mil­li­liters of the meals. It then charges the meals with a shade/letter code embla­zoned on the pack­ages, from the well being­i­est ​“Inexperienced A” all the way down to the ​“Crimson E.”

Within the sur­vey, 62 per­cent of the examined meals prod­ucts got here out with a Nutri-Rating grade of A, B or C. Consumption of such meals ​“is commonly encour­aged due to their supe­rior nutri­tional qual­i­ties,” UFC-Que Choisir wrote.

“There are 121 meals prod­ucts clas­si­fied as A and B, with olive oil clas­si­fied as C, which is to be pre­ferred to different kinds of fats,” they added.

Within the press launch, UFC-Que Choisir excessive­lighted a few examination­ples of famend spe­cial­ties, ​“tra­di­tional meals which present to be very effectively bal­anced, such because the Flemish hochepot, the Auvergne scorching­pot or the well-known Castelnaudary cas­soulet.”

Different examination­ples embody tra­di­tional meat and chilly cuts, fruits and legumes, all receiv­ing the A and B rat­ings. Inside the Nutri-Rating C clas­si­fi­ca­tion, olive oils are within the com­pany of prod­ucts resembling Alsatian spaet­zle pasta or pars­ley ham from Burgundy.

The rat­ings present that Nutri-Rating doesn’t stig­ma­tize native spe­cial­ties, accord­ing to the asso­ci­a­tion.

Within the launch, UFC Que-Choisir empha­sized that meals prod­ucts receiv­ing a D or E from Nutri-Rating ​“usually are not meant to den­i­grate them or professional­hibit their con­sump­tion, however solely imply it’s rec­om­mended to con­sume them in mod­er­ate quantities and at rea­son­in a position fre­quen­cies.”

The asso­ci­a­tion added that D or E‑rated prod­ucts may need their place in a bal­anced weight-reduction plan.

Nutri-Rating inven­tor Serge Hercberg instructed Olive Oil Occasions in a July 2020 inter­view that Nutri-Rating rat­ings are supposed to present con­sumers the perfect avail­in a position selection of meals inside a given meals cat­e­gory.

For examination­ple, Nutri-Rating con­sid­ers olive oils the only option within the fat cat­e­gory with its C, attribut­ing a D to different fat resembling however­ter.

The asso­ci­a­tion’s sur­vey got here on the heels of the ongo­ing heated debate between Nutri-Rating’s professional­mot­ers and meals professional­duc­ers which is inten­si­fy­ing because the European Fee’s self-imposed useless­line of December to decide on a European-wide front-of-pack label approaches.

Not too long ago, sev­eral professional­duc­ers’ asso­ci­a­tions of iconic European cheeses, includ­ing the French Roquefort PDO or the Italian Parmigiano Reggiano PDO asso­ci­a­tions have voiced their oppo­si­tion to the Nutri-Rating.

They argued the French-born label­ing sys­tem doesn’t con­sider the nutri­tional qual­i­ties of these prod­ucts and doesn’t price the meals in quan­ti­ties that may possible be con­sumed as a each day serv­ing.

Olive oil asso­ci­a­tions and professional­duc­ers in Spain, Italy and Greece have additionally argued that Nutri-Rating’s grade doesn’t accu­rately por­tray the well being ben­e­suits of cer­tain grades of olive oil by grad­ing all of them with a ​“C.”

Just like the cheese professional­duc­ers, olive oil professional­duc­ers have additionally confused how the 100 mil­li­liters sam­ple esti­mates usually are not actual­is­tic com­pared to the precise con­sump­tion.

The oppo­si­tion to Nutri-Rating’s pos­si­ble intro­duc­tion in Europe has been develop­ing because the label­ing sys­tem was adopted by sev­eral coun­tries, includ­ing France and Germany.

Italy, lead­ing the oppo­si­tion to Nutri-Rating, has additionally pre­sented a com­pet­ing label named Nutrinform Battery, which the European Fee is cur­rently eval­u­at­ing together with sev­eral different label­ing sys­tems.

In line with UFC-Que Choisir, Nutri-Rating is the perfect device avail­in a position to permit con­sumers to make a fast and knowledgeable selection when purchase­ing meals prod­ucts.

For that rea­son, the asso­ci­a­tion has con­firmed that the sur­vey outcomes have been despatched to the European Fee. The asso­ci­a­tion con­cluded that it ​“warns meals man­u­fac­tur­ers of their respon­si­bil­ity in a rear­guard combat to principal­tain opac­ity on unbal­anced meals.”

---

---