The Nutri-Score strategy was introduced in Poland through commercial entities that besides manage it. He was never formally accepted in our country and regulated. However, its negative impact is so clear that it requires the intervention of public institutions. Nutri-Score affects consumer purchasing decisions and may mislead them, as confirmed by the IBRIS consumer survey. This situation requires intervention of the UOKiK and the GIS as well as the Ministry of Health.
Why do public institutions not respond erstwhile consumers are confused?
The strategy of marking products on the front of the Nutri-Score packaging, introduced to Poland by global companies and commercial networks, has been operating in our country for respective years without formal legal bases, as a voluntary system. However, even voluntary food information must meet certain requirements: it must not mislead the consumer, it must be unambiguous and it must not confuse the consumer, it must be based on technological evidence. The incompatibility of the first 2 points with reality shows, among others, the IBRIS Consumer survey Report.[1] The deficiency of adequate technological data, including critical voices from the technological community, besides excludes the authorisation of the strategy as voluntary food information.
Public institutions must respond – failure to respond is consent These issues require UOKiK to intervene due to misleading consumers, as well as GIS, due to the unauthorised usage of Nutri-Score as voluntary food information. It should besides be addressed by the Ministry of wellness not only due to the fact that the strategy may affect public health, but besides due to the fact that the Ministry of wellness is liable for supervising the implementation and enforcement of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on nutrition information and food labelling.
– The Nutri-Score system, as a voluntary description on the front of the packaging, can have a long-term impact on consumer purchasing decisions and so on health. Despite its many modifications, it inactive fails to take account of the full nutritional value of the products, which may lead to inadequate classification of them, and as a result, incorrect dietary choices by consumers. besides simplistic nutrition assessment proposed by the Nutri-Score strategy does not take into account individual nutritional needs. It can contribute to the consumer opting out of the analysis of the composition of the product, which in effect can contribute to the incorrect composition of the diet and thus can adversely affect wellness and the hazard of non-communicable diseases. Public institutions should not stay indifferent to these threats. – explains prof. dr hab. n. med. and n. about dr Dariusz Włodarek.
The IBRIS survey exposes Nutri-Score – consumers do not realize the strategy but trust it
The Nutria-Score strategy is recognized by a large proportion of consumers. However, as shown by the IBRIS opinion study[2], Polish consumers have very poor, mostly small cognition of the rules of operation of the system. The visual plan of the Nutri-Score marking itself by its simplification does not aid this, but even encourages schematic thinking. The algorithm of the strategy many products classify in an absurd way, incompatible with the principles of healthy nutrition. Additionally, the strategy supports high-processed products whose composition can be modified to make them better in the Nutri-Score classification. All this leads ignorant consumers towards unhealthy food choices.
These rules confirm data on beliefs, actual cognition and consumer behaviour and concrete examples of product classification. 2 thirds (66 percent) of average Polish consumers were confronted with the graphic marking Nutri-Score. Nearly half of them do not know that the indicator is simply a simplified product labelling system, but 49 percent believe that Nutri-Score provides accurate and correct information on the quality of wellness food. 66% of consumers presume that products marked with A or B (dark and light green background) have a affirmative wellness effect and should be consumed more frequently, while 59% of consumers agree that products marked with D or E (orange or red background) should be reduced due to negative wellness effects. specified perception is contrary to the principles of balanced diet erstwhile the strategy better classifies processed fish sticks (marking B on a light green background) than smoked salmon (marking D on an orange background) or burger rolls with a B letter on a light green background – that is, in consumer reception having a affirmative wellness effect, while Grahamks receive a C mark on a yellow background.
However, the verification of cognition among Nutri-Score graphic recognitions by detailed questions shows a clear gap: 34 percent of the respondents admitted explicitly that they did not know what characteristics the Nutri-Score strategy is based on. Of the remaining 66%, who claimed to know the criteria, until 63% could not correctly identify them. Only 3 percent of respondents showed cognition akin to full cognition – i.e. they correctly recognized most of the actual criteria of the system, while at the same time avoiding indicating errors. As many as 70% of consumers admit that they do not know what quantity the indicator is calculated on. Of those who claimed to know, little than half indicated a correct consequence (100 g / 100 ml), which means that only 14 percent of respondents have real cognition in this respect.
Suggestive graphics alternatively of cognition – the strategy manipulates purchasing decisions Unaware of their ignorance, consumers make purchasing decisions on a simplified, suggestive scale. 45 percent of those who have encountered Nutri-Score graphics erstwhile buying food products pay attention to the presence of this marking on packaging. Consumers have a higher tendency to buy A/B products than D/E products, as indicated by 61percent of respondents. 41% of consumers are discouraged from buying the product erstwhile they see the letter "worse" than B (i.e. C, D or E), and in this part of the Nutri-Score scale, natural and low-processed products are very frequently classified, e.g. oil, salmon, nuts that supply valuable nutritional values. The strategy in its premise suggests to consumers that food with a lower Nutri Score is little beneficial to health. This is the effect of a suggestive, color-based light-signalling Nutri-Score strategy that affects the perception of food as healthy or little healthy. This does not necessarily correspond to the real nutritional value of the product and should not be the basis for composing a balanced diet.
The survey besides shows that 80 percent of Polish consumers are more inclined to choose labelled products than unmarked ones. Most surveyed (62%) like to choose a product containing the Nutri-Score designation alternatively than not containing that designation if they come from the same purchasing category. erstwhile comparing products from different categories, the consequence is 45%, and consumers make specified comparisons, unaware that the strategy only works within 1 category The strategy discriminates in the eyes of consumers food that cannot contain the Nutri-Score designation (e.g. unpackaged vegetables and fruit, unprocessed products, including natural foods), as well as non-reformated foods for the anticipation of a better Nutri-Score result.
– The Nutri-Score strategy is inactive not a well-built tool. In addition, the deficiency of cognition among consumers about the strategy leads to an intuitive explanation of the labelling, which will not always be consistent with the actual state of the place of individual products in the diet, taking into account not only their composition but besides the quantity. As a result, this can lead to a mistaken arrangement of individual rations. Individual groups of food products and even individual products have a circumstantial place in the diet and should be consumed in certain quantities in order to let for a appropriate qualitative composition of the diet. The strategy affects consumer purchasing decisions through suggestive indications, but can origin unconscious, unhealthy choices. Polish consumers live in a false belief about the health-promoting properties of food with Nutri-Score A and B markings and the negative properties of food labelled D and E. This is due to limited cognition of the rules for the award of points under the strategy and the principles for its operation. – This is prof. Włodarek.
Silence against danger – institutions ignore informing signals
Although complaints and questions about the Nutri-Score strategy have been received by public institutions, to this day no of them have intervened effectively. In the fall of 2023, the Council of Patient Organisations acting with the Minister of wellness asked the Minister to remove the Nutri-Score strategy from products traded in Poland. At the same time, a very critical position towards the strategy was taken by the Committee on Human Nutrition of the Polish Academy of Sciences[3]. Letters expressing concern about the effects of the strategy calling for discussion were sent to the Ministry of Health, GIS, UOKiK and NIZP-PZH. Both patient organisations and manufacture associations of doctors spoke in the discussion. In December
2022 Polish Dietetics Society, Polish Diabetological Society, Polish Association of Lifestyle medicine and Public wellness Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences asked the manager of NIZP-PAN to organise a wide debate on labelling of food products on the packaging front (FOPNL) and implementation of the Nutri-Score strategy in Poland. Public institutions do not respond or indicate that Poland is waiting for the European Commission to settle the case (the decision was to be taken in 2022, the work is stalling and we do not know erstwhile they will finish, due to many votes critical of the system. small action has been taken by the UOKiK ordering commercial networks to inform consumers about the Nutri-Score system, which, as the IBRIS survey shows, is not decently implemented. Only the Ministry of Agriculture and agrarian Development, defending Polish natural and low-processed food producers, officially and firmly opposed the Nutri-Score strategy in Poland. Despite a critical look at systems created by another countries and announcements of work on Polish FOPNL, composed by Deputy Minister of wellness Marek Kłos in January 2024.[4]The Ministry of wellness is inactive waiting for the European Commission to decide.
Each consumer has the option to lodge an individual complaint with the UOKiK if they feel misled by the Nutri-Score system. specified a complaint may be sent in writing to the address of the office. The letter should contain the sender's data, including its exact contact details (the Authority does not consider anonymous notifications). Complaints about the operation of the strategy may besides be submitted to institutions competent for the operation of the system, namely the GIS and the Ministry of Health, due to non-compliance with legal provisions. Information on how to file an individual complaint on Nutri-Score can be found at https://nutriscore-facts.pl/how-composite-skarge-on-action-system-nutri-score/.
[2] The survey was conducted utilizing the CAWI method (computer-assisted interview conducted in the net panel) on a group of 1118 respondents. The surveyed group are Poles aged 18-64, who store at least erstwhile a month, not professionally active with food and not on specialized medical diets, who met with Nutri-Score graphics.
