American journal of public health, March 2018, Vol.108(3), pp.318-320
Based on the content of the food per 100 grams, its underlying nutrient profiling system includes both unfavorable nutrients (i.e., energy, saturated fat, sugars, and sodium) and favorable elements (i.e., fiber, protein, and percentage of fruit, vegetables, legumes, and nuts) to yield a summary score, represented in a five-category color-coded scale. Products with higher nutritional quality are rated as A (dark green), and products with a lower nutritional quality are rated as E (dark orange).2 The underlying algorithm for the Nutri-Score was adapted from the 2005 Food Standards Agency nutrient profiling system, and its graphical format was defined according to the available scientific literature on front-of-pack nutrition labeling.3 HEAVILY LOBBIED BY AGRO-INDUSTRY The selection of the NutriScore by the government in France followed a process in which every regulatory step was heavily lobbied by agro-industry, which used strategies that belong in the Big Tobacco playbook: shaping the evidence base, political and economic pressures, destabilizing scientific opponents, delaying the decision, and offering substitutions to the proposed policy.4 In France, indeed, nearly four years separate the first occurrence of the proposed label- in January 2014-and the actual signature of the decree for the Nutri-Score. BECOMING GLOBAL Similarities between Big Food and Big Tobacco lobbying strategies have been highlighted on numerous occasions,7 and examples of intense lobbying in the field of food taxation (particularly for the sugar-sweetened beverage industry) have shown the extent to which the food industry may fight back against public health policies.
Food Industry ; Global Health ; Health Policy ; Nutrition Policy ; Food Labeling -- Standards
View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed