Efanews.eu website informed that the Italian antitrust authority (AGCM) drew attention in particular to the attribution of positive health properties to products when they are marked with the highest Nutri Score grades.
The AGCM announced the launch of five investigations related to the use of Nutri Score system markings on the packaging front by companies : GS, Carrefour Italia, Pescanova Italia, Valsoia, and also French companies: Regime Dukan, Diet Lab, English company Weetabix and a German company specializing in the production of sweets. Proceedings were also initiated against the French owner of the Yuka app. available in Google and Apple stores. whose aim is health assessment of nutritional products based on Nutri Score. The application presents alternative nutritional products for those that have received D and E ratings as part of the Nutri Score.
In the Nutri Score labelling system, according to AGCM, food products are divided into five categories. The system is based on a score calculated using a complex algorithm that subtracts “unfavourable” elements from the total value (energy, saturated fatty acids, simple sugars, sodium/salt) of “beneficial” (percentage of fruit, vegetables, legumes and oilseeds, fiber and protein). Foods with very low scores, and therefore with a predominance of beneficial elements, are assigned to category A (green) , and those with the highest scores are assigned to category E (red).
The office emphasizes that there is a concern that the Nutri Score label as well as the results of the assessment provided by the application, in absence of appropriate warnings, are mistakenly perceived as absolute assessments of the health of a given product. They do not take into account the general needs of the individual (diet and lifestyle), the amount and frequency of consumption within a varied and balanced diet. The consumer, therefore, may be induced to attribute to products health properties that have received a positive rating according to the Nutri Score label or Yuca app. rating and may result in unfounded praise of the health effects of his choice.
Finally, in the case of Yuka application, according to AGCM, the criteria on the basis of which alternatives to consumption are proposed are not clear.