Mathilde Touvier, researcher at Inserm, He co-led a scientific study with Mélanie Deschasaux-Tanguy, which has just been published in an international journal. According to them, diet is responsible for about 30% of deaths from cardiovascular disease. Nutritional prevention policies are therefore a major public health problem for these pathologies, as the study highlights the fact that the consumption of foods poorly classified in the Nutri-score corresponds to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases.
The Nutri Score has evolved, around 30 to 40% of products will see their score changed. Has it become more demanding about processed food?
In France, Nutri-score was introduced in 2017. This logo based on a scale of 5 colors and 5 letters (A, B, C, D, E) is intended to provide information about the nutritional quality of the products we purchase. This year, the elements taken into account in the calculation remain the same, but the scoring rules have been revised to allow consumers to even better compare products according to their nutritional quality. For example, certain products have been downgraded, because they are too salty, sweet or fatty, or because of the presence of sweeteners such as in certain juices, drinking yogurts, etc., which were classified A or B, and are now D or E. Aspartame being classified as a possible carcinogen. Red meat has a degraded score, to the benefit of white meat in particular.
This development has generated quite a bit of controversy in the food industry. Does the latter not play the game?
The battle for health against junk food is uneven, that's for sure. In France, certain manufacturers have chosen to remove the logo from their products, such as Danone and Bjorg. They refuse the new Nutri-score algorithm which degrades the image of the product. There is a strong anti-Score Nutri lobby in France and Europe. Block brands choose the products targeted by the new algorithm, but continue to put their logo on the other products. This lack of transparency is unfair and loses the consumer.
This tool is designed to reduce social health inequalities!
What do we know today about the real utility of the Nutri-score? Do consumers really relate to it?
We tested the impact of the Nutri Score on all population categories combined. What is observed is that this logo proves to be the most effective of all and for everyone, especially for consumers from the most disadvantaged classes. Because the information is direct and simplified. This tool is designed to reduce social health inequalities!
Since 2017, when Nutri-score came out, have food producers become more virtuous?
In France, we see an increase in A-rated products and a decrease in low-rated products. It's a sign. Some manufacturers have reduced sugar, salt and fat. Now we find whole grains in some breakfasts. There is still resistance, but things are progressing. The interest of the logo is demonstrated in 140 scientific publications. The OECD has estimated that 2 million chronic diseases could be avoided by 2050 if the Nutri-score becomes mandatory in Europe. The struggle is exhausting and the power of the lobbies is endless.