Anyone looking for dessert at Albert Heijn will now see some sort of energy labels in the refrigerator section. Skinny quark scores an A, double custard a C. Nutri-Score, the logo that shows the healthy choice, was placed on six of AH’s ten thousand own-brand products in a short period of time. The largest supermarket chain in the Netherlands immediately launched a strong campaign, with commercials on television and full-page advertisements in the newspapers. “Choosing healthier just got easier with Nutri-Score.”
Albert Heijn is not alone – Jumbo and Plus are already using Nutri-Score, and it is featured on more and more A-brands. AH is the supermarket that offers the most. You would almost think that the Netherlands has a new quality mark. This is not correct: the food choice logo has not yet been adapted for the Netherlands and is not yet permitted by law. And although the Nutri-Score supermarkets now have a kickstart In doing so, according to others, they endanger the logo. Of the major retailers, only Lidl is waiting for the government to kick off.
That raises questions. Why did Nutri-Score have to be created? What’s in it for the consumer? And can the logo be dropped just before the official introduction?
Not long ago, the Netherlands had the ‘I choose consciously’ tick. Consumers did not understand that logo. And they saw it as an advertisement for the industry: they had to pay to put it on products. When the government decided to abolish the tick in 2016, the originally French Nutri-Score came into the picture as a logical successor. A number of European countries had already opted for this, the industry wanted this rather than a traffic light logo and consumers understood the message of Nutri-Score, according to a poll by the Consumers’ Association.
In November 2018, AH director Marit van Egmond sent a letter with seven pages and ten appendices to then State Secretary Paul Blokhuis (ChistenUnie) of Public Health with the request that Nutri-Score be approved quickly. “Consumers need a logo that makes healthy choices easy.” And: “Support from the government is indispensable.”
The lesson of the tick debacle was: to gain consumer trust, the government had to lead the way with an independent logo. But while Blokhuis tried with various organizations to include Nutri-Score in a broader polder agreement to make the Netherlands healthier, the first critical voices were also heard.
Nutri-Score’s calculation method sometimes led to remarkable results, which has already been seen abroad. Pizza with an A or cola with a B? And then a C for tea and olive oil? Not only confusing for consumers, but also in violation of the science-based dietary guidelines and the Wheel of Five, the government’s means of educating the Dutch about healthy food. Without adjusted criteria for certain product groups, such as bread or fish, you would keep those crazy scores. There was also insufficient evidence that consumers properly understand and use Nutri-Score in real life, in the supermarket. And would it get on all foods, and not just ultra-processed manufactured products?
A fire letter from 175 nutritionists prodded the Ministry of Health. Something was still needed to get everyone in the polder consultation behind Nutri-Score.
In November 2019, State Secretary Blokhuis organized a meeting at which Nutri-Score was officially presented as the “best available logo”. It would be introduced in mid-2021 and the criticism had been listened to: an international scientific committee would take all objections into account and tinker with the calculation method to bring Nutri-Score in line with national dietary guidelines in the participating European countries.
For example, the Blokhuis managed to get the health organizations, nutritionists, consumer clubs, producers and supermarkets all behind the new logo. It was agreed that no one would be ahead of the pack and that the government would launch a national information campaign.
A new logo to make healthier choices: 7 questions about Nutri-Score
And then came corona. The rapids that everyone had hoped for became stagnant water: meetings were postponed, deadlines were not met. The scientific committee, an indispensable link in the process, only started in February 2021. The State Secretary had to come up with a new target date in June: the first half of 2022.
It is now February 2022, six years after the death sentence of the check mark and two secretaries of state. The evaluation of the international scientific committee is still pending, certainly until May. The Health Council and the public health institute RIVM can only start with their advice to the State Secretary once that report is available. In the meantime, the Commodities Act had to be amended to give the logo, which can be seen as a health claim, a legal basis. Once all those hurdles have been overcome, the new State Secretary for Health, Maarten van Ooijen (CU), can officially introduce the logo.
‘Pilots’ with thousands of products
But the genie is out of the bottle. Nutri-Score is popping up everywhere and the ministry can do little about it, according to conversations with those involved. The fact that this could happen has to do with the scope that VWS gave companies for pilots to learn from. These should be small-scale and temporary, but the ministry chose not to “close this down”, according to a spokesperson. For example, supermarkets can provide thousands of products with a Nutri-Score, conduct advertising campaigns and still speak of a pilot. “The suggestion is made that it is already a legally permitted logo,” says an unpublished report of a consultation of VWS with all concerned in January.
Behind the scenes, VWS has reprimanded Albert Heijn, a spokesperson confirms: the supermarket must stop with the advertisements, advertorials and TV spots promoting Nutri-Score products. But there are no sanctions for the time being and the Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority is not taking any action either. In the meantime, AH ignores the call to stop promoting Nutri-Score. For example, the logo is still in the Bonus folder. “Choosing healthier becomes an ABCDE.”
Since the beginning of February, a complaint has been lodged with the Advertising Code Committee from Voedingsjungle, the communication agency of Michelle van Roost, co-initiator of the earlier fire letter. Her point: AH uses a logo that has not yet been introduced as a nutritional claim, thus creating confusion about what healthy food is. “In advertisements you see white custard and semi-skimmed peach yogurt with a green B”, Van Roost gives as an example by telephone. “You eat it ‘for fun’, you should not convince consumers that sugared yogurt is healthy.”
‘Half-baked logo’
The Nutrition Center, which is responsible for public information about healthy food, also believes that supermarkets with a ‘half-baked logo’ provide a false start. Director Gerda Feunekes: “With introductions that go much further than an experiment, the whole thing gets messed up. It is not yet allowed to be used in the Netherlands, retail must adhere to that.”
The New York Times heralded the end of the American Smart Choices logo in 2009, by captioning a photo of Kellogg’s Froot Loops, “For your health.” Annet Roodenburg, professor of nutrition and health at HAS University of Applied Sciences, often uses the example in presentations to make it clear: “You only need one such product to ruin credibility.”
She thinks Nutri-Score is quite a nice instrument, especially if it comes to all food in the supermarket, so that consumers really have something to choose from. “But if the scores are not in line with the nutritional guidelines, it damages trust on both sides: in Nutri-Score and in the Wheel of Five.”
The supermarkets do not dispute that Nutri-Score needs improvement. But they want to continue. “A group of scientists and a handful of products are now holding a system hostage that has already proven itself in France and Belgium,” says Marc Jansen, director of supermarket umbrella organization CBL.
The Consumers’ Association, the first driver of Nutri-Score, also insists on speed and believes that the logo does not have to match completely with the Wheel of Five. “They complement each other.”
But then again: why the impatience? Jansen: “You may find it suspicious, but supermarkets are intrinsically motivated to contribute to a healthier Netherlands.” AH says it already sees a shift in online purchases from C/D to A/B scores. The fact is that supermarkets also have a commercial interest: now that Nutri-Score is already on so many products, and a few supermarkets are campaigning, competitors do not want to miss the boat. Nutri-Score is not just a decision aid for the consumer. It is also a marketing tool that allows supermarkets to promote their own products.
It is clear that other participants in the consultation are unhappy with the speed of the supermarkets. The definition of pilot has been “interpreted very broadly”, according to the report of January 18. And “the turmoil and excitement are not good for a thorough introduction.” In the background, it appears from emails, there is a threat that the State Secretary can pull the plug from Nutri-Score until the last minute.
In the meantime, VWS is working on the large public campaign for Nutri-Score. The first tests have been done. Whether these campaigns will remove the confusion about healthy food remains to be seen.
Until then, the consumer stands in front of the dairy shelf holding two packs of semi-skimmed milk from Zaanse Hoeve: a green A on the two-litre pack and a B on the one-litre pack. And nowhere is it stated why.
A version of this article also appeared in NRC on the morning of February 18, 2022
#Disagreement #NutriScore #supermarkets #extensively #officially #introduced