The impact of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label on purchasing intentions of unprocessed and processed foods: post-hoc analyses from three randomized controlled trials

The influence of front-of-pack labelling on consumer decision-making: a comprehensive study using electroencephalography and FaceReader

Front-of-pack labels (FOPL) can influence consumer behaviour in a variety of ways, and companies that prioritise accurate and transparent nutrition labels can see benefits in increased sales and brand loyalty. However, there are several types of FOPL on the market that differ in visual appeal and consumer clarity. The aim of the study was to reveal the impact of the nutrition label Nutri-Score as well as other factors on consumer decision-making when choosing healthier alternatives for selected food types. In addition to traditional research methods such as questionnaires, in-depth interviews, also emerging methods such as eye tracking, FaceReader and electroencephalography were used to collect implicit feedback. Research suggests that there are significant differences between implicit and explicit feedback when examining the impact of Nutri-Score on the decision-making process. Last but not least, the study presents ideas for future research in real-world settings using emerging methods.

Impact of Five Types of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels on Consumer Behavior among Young Adults: A Systematic Review

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that governments promote and implement front-of-package (FoP) nutrition labels to prevent noncommunicable diseases. Recently, additional research has focused on various views on FoP label creation. However, few review studies have examined how different FoP labels affect young consumer behavior. Therefore, this study thoroughly analyzed the evidence on how FoP labels in five categories affect young consumer purchasing intention and behavior. We searched for keywords in the Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO databases and screened study samples according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Fourteen studies that matched the criteria were included in this review. We discovered that numerous studies support the efficacy of the "graded indicators" category labels, with the "color-coded" and "positive logos" categories trailing closely behind. The effectiveness of the "warning" FoP label category is mixed on consumers' healthy purchasing behavior and intention. The numerical FoP labels were most commonly used to indicate ineffectiveness. Future studies should investigate the effects of FoP labels on various subpopulations and conduct thorough evaluations of the design elements of FoP labels. Also, they should offer evidence-based recommendations, supported by both quantitative and qualitative data, for regions that have not yet implemented FoP labeling systems.

The Potential Effectiveness of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labeling for Improving Population Diets

Nutrition labeling on the front of food packages can support more healthful purchase decisions and encourage favorable reformulation. This systematic literature review applied Cochrane methods to synthesize and appraise the evidence on the effectiveness of front-of-pack labeling (FOPL) on diet-related outcomes and food reformulation to inform policy recommendations. The search was conducted on 11 academic and gray literature databases, from inception to July 2022. Evidence was synthesized using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation), vote counting, and meta-analyses, where appropriate. Overall, 221 articles were included in the review. The randomized controlled trial evidence suggested that, compared with when no FOPL was present, FOPL likely improved consumer understanding of the nutritional quality/content of foods (moderate certainty of evidence), and the healthfulness of food choices (moderate certainty) and purchases (moderate certainty). Interpretive FOPL had a greater effect on these outcomes compared with noninterpretive systems (moderate certainty). There was inconsistency in the best-performing interpretive FOPL system.

Investigation of the 1-week effect of traffic light nutrition labeling on diet selection among Japanese university students: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The method of displaying nutrition information labels on the front of food packaging (FOP: Front of Pack) has been implemented worldwide to prevent lifestyle-related diseases. This study aimed to investigate whether the use of the UK's Traffic Light Food (TLF) label, known as the FOP label, influences the dietary choices of Japanese youth and promotes healthy dietary choices.

METHODS

Diet selection was performed for one week each during the baseline and intervention periods. During the intervention period, TLF labels were displayed on meal images of the intervention group. Participants chose what they would like to have for dinner of the day from 15 images. Each meal was scored based on the color of the nutrition label, and a comparison between groups was made to determine whether TLF labeling influenced meal selection for dinner. The psychological stress caused by the presence or absence of nutrition labels and nutritional components when choosing meals was also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 69 participants were randomly assigned to two groups. Dietary choice scores indicated that the TLF-labeled group made significantly healthier dietary choices than the unlabeled group. Additionally, the TLF-labeled group showed a significant increase in the percentage of people conscious of nutritional components when choosing meals. Furthermore, a significant increase in the number of people conscious of protein, a nutritional ingredient not indicated on the TLF label, was observed. During the test period, no difference in psychological stress caused by the presence and absence of the TLF labels was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of TLF labels also encouraged healthy dietary choices among Japanese university students. The use of FOP nutrition labels should be considered in Japan to prevent lifestyle-related diseases through healthy dietary choices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry Number: UMIN000047268. Registered March 23, 2022.

Effects of 4 Interpretive Front-of-Package Labeling Systems on Hypothetical Beverage and Snack Selections: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Policymakers and researchers have proposed a variety of interpretative front-of-package food labeling systems, but it remains unclear which is most effective at encouraging people to choose healthier foods and beverages, including among people with less education.

Objective

To test the effects of 4 interpretative front-of-package food labeling systems on the healthfulness of beverage and snack selections, overall and by education level.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial of a national sample of US adults 18 years and older was conducted online from November 16 to December 3, 2022.

Intervention

Participants were randomized to view products with 1 of 5 food labeling systems, including control (calorie labels only) or 1 of 4 interpretative labeling systems: green ("choose often") labels added to healthy foods; single traffic light labels added to healthy, moderately healthy, and unhealthy foods; physical activity calorie equivalent labels added to all products; and nutrient warning labels added to products high in calories, sugar, saturated fat, or sodium. All conditions had calorie labels on all products.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants selected 1 of 16 beverages and 1 of 16 snacks that they wanted to hypothetically purchase. The primary outcomes were calories selected from beverages and from snacks. Secondary outcomes included label reactions and perceptions.

Results

A total of 7945 participants completed the experiment and were included in analyses (4078 [51%] female, 3779 [48%] male, and 88 [1%] nonbinary or another gender; mean [SD] age, 47.5 [17.9 years]). Compared with the control arm, exposure to the green (average differential effect [ADE], -34.2; 95% CI, -42.2 to -26.1), traffic light (ADE, -31.5; 95% CI, -39.5 to -23.4), physical activity (ADE, -39.0; 95% CI, -47.0 to -31.1), or nutrient warning labels (ADE, -28.2; 95% CI, -36.2 to -20.2) led participants to select fewer calories from beverages (all P < .001). Similarly, compared with the control label, exposure to the green (ADE, -12.7; 95% CI, -17.3 to -8.2), traffic light (ADE, -13.7; 95% CI, -18.2 to -9.1), physical activity (ADE, -18.5; 95% CI, -23.1 to -13.9), or nutrient warning labels (ADE, -14.2; 95% CI, -18.8 to -9.6) led participants to select fewer calories from snacks (all P < .001). These effects did not differ by education level. The green labels were rated as less stigmatizing than the other interpretative systems but otherwise generally received the least favorable label reactions and perceptions (eg, elicited less attention, were perceived as less trustworthy), while the nutrient warnings and physical activity labels received the most favorable ratings.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of front-of-package food labeling systems, all 4 interpretative labeling systems reduced calories selected from beverages and from snacks compared with calorie labels, with no differences by education level.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05432271.

A Little Bird Told Me… Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society

Within the Farm to Fork Strategy, the European Commission ask for a unified Front Of Pack nutritional label for food to be used at the European level. The scientific debate identified the Nutri-Score (NS) as the most promising candidate, but within the political discussion, some Member States brought to attention several issues related to its introduction. This misalignment led to a postponement of the final decision. With the aim to shed some light on the current stances and contribute to the forthcoming debate, the objective of the present work is to understand to what extent scientific research addresses the issues raised by the general public. We applied a structural topic model to tweets from four European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain) and to abstracts of scientific papers, all dealing with the NS topic. Different aspects of the NS debate are discussed in different countries, but scientific research, while addressing some of them (e.g., the comparison between NS and other labels), disregards others (e.g., relations between NS and traditional products). It is advisable, therefore, to widen the scope of NS research to properly address the concerns of European society and to provide policymakers with robust evidence to support their decisions.

Dose-response meta-analysis of ultra-processed food with the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality: evidence from prospective cohort studies

Background: Previous meta-analyses included abundant cross-sectional studies, and/or only assessed high versus low categories of UPF consumption. We conducted this meta-analysis based on prospective cohort studies to estimate the dose-response associations of UPF consumption with the risk of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and all-cause mortality among general adults. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for relevant articles published up to August 17, 2021, and newly published articles between August 17, 2021 and July 21, 2022 were re-searched. Random-effects models were used to estimate the summary relative risks (RRs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Generalized least squares regression was used to estimate the linear dose-response associations of each additional serving of UPF. Restricted cubic splines were used to model the possible nonlinear trends. Results: Eleven eligible papers (17 analyses) were finally identified. The pooled effect size for the highest versus lowest category of UPF consumption showed positive associations with the risk of CVEs (RR = 1.35, 95% CI, 1.18-1.54) and all-cause mortality (RR = 1.21, 95% CI, 1.15-1.27). For each additional daily serving of UPF, the risk increased by 4% (RR = 1.04, 95% CI, 1.02-1.06) for CVEs and 2% (RR = 1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.03) for all-cause mortality. With increasing UPF intake, the risk of CVEs reflected a linear upward trend (P_nonlinearity = 0.095), while all-cause mortality reflected a nonlinear upward trend (P_nonlinearity = 0.039). Conclusion: Our findings based on prospective cohorts suggested that any increased level of UPF consumption was linked to higher CVEs and mortality risk. Thus, the recommendation is to control the intake of UPF in daily diet.

A Diet Profiling Algorithm (DPA) to Rank Diet Quality Suitable to Implement in Digital Tools—A Test Study in a Cohort of Lactating Women

Although nutrient profiling systems can empower consumers towards healthier food choices, there is still a need to assess diet quality to obtain an overall perspective. The purpose of this study was to develop a diet profiling algorithm (DPA) to evaluate nutritional diet quality, which gives a final score from 1 to 3 with an associated color (green-yellow-orange). It ranks the total carbohydrate/total fiber ratio, and energy from saturated fats and sodium as potentially negative inputs, while fiber and protein are assumed as positive items. Then, the total fat/total carbohydrate ratio is calculated to evaluate the macronutrient distribution, as well as a food group analysis. To test the DPA performance, diets of a lactating women cohort were analyzed, and a correlation analysis between DPA and breast milk leptin levels was performed. Diets classified as low quality showed a higher intake of negative inputs, along with higher energy and fat intakes. This was reflected in body mass index (BMI) and food groups, indicating that women with the worst scores tended to choose tastier and less satiating foods. In conclusion, the DPA was developed and tested in a sample population. This tool can be easily implemented in digital nutrition platforms, contributing to real-time dietary follow-up of patients and progress monitoring, leading to further dietary adjustment.

Nutri-Score: Its Benefits and Limitations in Children's Feeding

Reducing the burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is one of the top priorities of public health policies worldwide. One of the recognized means of achieving this objective is to improve the diet quality. The Nutri-Score (N-S) is a [five-color-A, B, C, D, E letters] front-of-pack labeling logo intended to help consumers quickly identify the healthier prepackaged foods within a food category. Available studies have shown that the N-S is an efficient tool to achieve this aim in terms of consumers' awareness, perception, understanding, and purchasing and that its use may help to reduce the prevalence of NCDs. The N-S is currently implemented on a voluntary basis in 7 European countries and a discussion is underway within the European Commission to achieve a harmonized mandatory label. However, no study on the putative impact of the N-S on children's dietary patterns and health is available. The N-S is not applicable to infants' and young children's formulas and to specific baby foods, the compositions of which are already laid down in European Union regulations. The N-S does not replace age-appropriate dietary guidelines. As children consume an increasing number of adult type and processed foods, the relevance of the N-S for children should be evaluated considering the children's high specific requirements, especially in younger children. This is especially necessary for fitting fat and iron requirements, whereas protein-rich foods should be better framed. Moreover, efforts should be made to inform on how to use the N-S and in education on healthy diets.

The ability of five different front-of-pack labels to assist Australian consumers to identify healthy versus unhealthy foods

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the relative ability of different interpretive front-of-pack food labels to alert consumers to both healthier and unhealthier options to inform their food choices.

METHODS

One thousand Australians completed an online experiment where they rated the nutritional quality of sets of fictional products pre- and post-randomisation to one of five front-of-pack labels: Health Star Rating, Multiple Traffic Lights, Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes and Warning Label. Two sample z-tests were used to assess the ability of each label to facilitate the correct identification of the least and most healthy product options.

RESULTS

The Nutri-Score was superior in assisting respondents to identify both the healthiest and unhealthiest options. The Health Star Rating ranked second for both outcomes, followed by the Multiple Traffic Lights.

CONCLUSIONS

Results reinforce the role of interpretive front-of-pack labels in assisting consumers to understand the nutritional quality of food products and suggest spectrum labels may provide superior utility in assisting consumers to identify both the most and least nutritious products from among available product options.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

The strongest performance of a highly interpretive front-of-pack label (Nutri-Score) featuring colour in a summary indicator suggests potential strategies for enhancing the performance of the Health Star Rating.

Mapping the nutritional value of diets across Europe according to the Nutri-Score front-of-pack label

Background

Front-of-pack labels, such as Nutri-Score, aim to offer clear information on the overall nutritional quality of foods and beverages to consumers, allowing them to make healthier food choices. Using the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database, the present study aims to map out European food consumption patterns by applying the Nutri-Score as a benchmark for nutritional value.

Methods

Country-specific food consumption data, collected by multiple 24-h dietary recalls or food records available from EFSA, were linked to the Dutch Food Composition Database (NEVO). Foods and beverages consumed by adolescents (10-17 years), adults (18-64 years), and the elderly (65-74 years) were graded following the modified Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS) and classified according to Nutri-Score grading, from A to E. Subsequently, a dietary index score (FSAm-NPS-DI) was calculated for each country-specific diet by age-groups and sex as an energy-weighted mean of the FSAm-NPS score of all foods and beverages consumed, with lower scores for a diet of greater overall nutritional quality.

Results

On average, the daily energy intake of adults across the European countries studied is distributed in 27.6% of A-, 12.9% of B-, 17% of C-, 30.0% of D-, and 12.5% of E-classified foods and beverages. This energy distribution, according to the Nutri-Score, corresponded to a median FSAm-NPS-DI score of 6.34 (interquartile range: 5.92, 7.19). For both adult males and females, Estonia reported the highest energy share from A-classified products, scoring the lowest on the FSAm-NPS-DI. On the other hand, Latvia reported the highest energy share from E-classified products, along with the highest FSAm-NPS-DI. Females and the elderly group reported, in general, a greater energy share from A- and a lower share from E-classified products, and had the lowest FSAm-NPS-DI scores. No sex-related difference was observed for adolescents whose share of energy was predominantly from A- and D-classified products, such as for adults and the elderly.

Conclusion

Our analyses leveraging the secondary use of country-specific databases on dietary intakes found considerable variation in the nutritional value of European diets, with an overall agreement across all countries on a modestly healthier dietary profile for the elderly and among females.

Are Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels Influencing Food Choices and Purchases, Diet Quality, and Modeled Health Outcomes? A Narrative Review of Four Systems

Front-of-Pack Nutrition labels (FOPNLs) aim to improve consumers' food purchases and prompt product reformulation by the food and beverage industry. Despite their widespread use, the effectiveness of FOPNL in achieving these goals is still a matter of debate. This review has gathered 65 original studies exploring the performances of four widely used FOPNLs (Multiple Traffic Light, Warning signs, Nutri-Score and Health Star Rating). Although FOPNLs have been associated with healthier food purchases, the magnitude of improvements was small and dependent on study settings. Any associated health effects were modeled rather than observed. None of the four FOPNLs clearly outperformed the other ones on any outcome. Few studies dealt with the impact of FOPNL on product reformulation. Some of those studies, but not all, found small reductions in energy, sodium, sugar and saturated fat content of foods in some food categories. Although global trends point to a small favorable effect of FOPNL, this conclusion is subject to caution since the evidence is inconsistent and comes from a wide variety of contexts and study designs. There remain numerous research gaps, notably with regard to the optimal characteristics of FOPNLs, the durability of FOPNL effects on consumer behaviors, and any possible unexpected consequences.

Impact of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label on purchasing intentions of individuals with chronic diseases: results of a randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

To our knowledge, the effect of front-of-pack nutrition labels such as the Nutri-Score on food purchases has never been assessed among individuals suffering from nutrition-related chronic diseases specifically, while dietary modifications are generally part of their care. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the nutritional quality of purchasing intentions among adults suffering from a cardiometabolic disease, compared with no label and the Reference Intakes (RIs), a label already implemented by some food manufacturers in France.

SETTING

Secondary prevention-mainland France.

PARTICIPANTS

2431 eligible participants were randomly assigned and 1180 participants (65.5% women, mean age 65.0±7.1 years) completed the shopping task and were included in the analyses.

INTERVENTION

A three-arm randomised controlled trial using an experimental online supermarket was conducted in 2017. Participants with cardiometabolic diseases were invited to simulate food purchases with the Nutri-Score, the RIs or no label.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the nutritional quality of the shopping cart, estimated using the French-modified Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS), and secondary outcomes included the nutrient content of purchases.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) FSAm-NPS score was significantly lower in the Nutri-Score arm (1.29 (3.61) points), reflecting a higher overall nutritional quality of purchasing intentions, compared with the RIs (1.86 (3.23) points) and no label (1.92 (2.90) points) arms (p=0.01). Moreover, the Nutri-Score led to significantly lower content in calories and saturated fatty acids compared with the two other arms. These differences resulted from participants avoiding some packaged products (sweets, dairy and starches) and purchasing larger amounts of fresh fruit and meat.

CONCLUSIONS

The Nutri-Score exhibited a significant higher nutritional quality of purchasing intentions, encouraging healthier food choices among individuals suffering from cardiometabolic chronic diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02769455.

An Evaluation of the Nutri-Score System along the Reasoning for Scientific Substantiation of Health Claims in the EU-A Narrative Review

In this narrative review, the scientific evidence in support of the front-of-pack label (FOPL) Nutri-Score system is evaluated along with the reasoning for scientific substantiation of health claims in the EU. A health claim could be phrased as ‘Nutri-Score as an FOPL system results in an increased purchase of healthier foods by consumers’. Peer-reviewed scientific literature as found in Pubmed under search terms ”NutriScore” and “Nutri-Score” that investigate the effects of the Nutri-Score on food purchases were evaluated. In total, eight papers were identified. Only three studies were conducted in real-life settings, and five were on online purchases. In the EU, health claims are evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Considering the three basic questions that EFSA uses to evaluate scientific substantiation of health claims, it appears that the (i) food/constituent (the Nutri-Score system) is sufficiently defined/characterised, and (ii) the evidence is sufficient to appraise the system as ‘beneficial to human health’. However, the scientific evidence for a (iii) cause-and-effect relationship is contradictory and limited. In conclusion, based on the EFSA approach for substantiation of health claims, there is insufficient evidence to support a health claim based on the Nutri-Score system, since a cause-and-effect relationship could not be established.

Nutritional Quality and Degree of Processing of Children's Foods Assessment on the French Market

Food packaging marketing techniques which appeal to children (such as cartoon characters and brand mascots) affect children's choices, preferences, and eating habits. Several studies have assessed the nutritional quality of food intended to children in various countries and concluded that most were high in fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS) and ultra-processed foods. The aim of this study is to analyse products intended for children over the age of 3 (foods and beverages with relevant marketing elements on the packaging) available on the French market as regards: (1) nutritional quality, based on the Nutri-Score labelling system, (2) compliance with expected nutritional profile suitable for children, according to the criteria of the WHO Europe Nutrient Profile Model, and (3) degree of processing, as defined by the NOVA classification, from packaging collected in 20 stores (hyper/supermarkets, hard-discount retail chains, and organic food stores). The marketing strategies most often used on children's products are cartoons (97.22%; n = 1120) and mascots (77.78%; n = 896). A total of 1155 products were included in the study, most of which were sugary foods: almost a quarter of the products in the sample (23.81%; n = 275) list a sweetener as the first ingredient, and most of them (89.52%; n = 1034) contain free sugars according to the WHO definition. All the products included in our study feature marketing elements targeting on the packaging, yet 94.88% do not meet the criteria of the WHO Europe Nutrient Profile Model. Most (58.68%; n = 676) belong to Nutri-Score groups D and E, with the highest proportion in group D (39.32%; n = 453) and are ultra-processed (87.97%; n = 1016), especially through the use of flavourings and ultra-processed sugars. Using the Nutri-Score, the WHO Europe Nutrient Profile Model, and the NOVA classification, this study suggests that a significant share of pre-packaged foods marketed to children do not have an adequate nutritional profile. As such, measures are needed to regulate what marketing elements aimed at children can be included on packaging, based on these criteria.

Online Consumer Survey Comparing Different Front-of-Pack Labels in Greece

According to the WHO, front-of-pack nutrition labeling provides simplified nutrition information in the form of symbols, colors or words that can help consumers understand the nutritional quality of food, thus leading them to healthier food choices. It is considered of the utmost importance to explore the knowledge and understanding of consumers about this form of nutrition labeling. The aim of this study was to investigate the understanding and perceptions of Greek consumers in response to five different front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs): the Multiple Traffic Lights, Health Star Rating System, Guideline Daily Amounts, Warning Symbols and Nutri-Score. From April 2021 to June 2021, 1278 participants from Greece took part in an online survey where they were asked to rank three products according to their nutritional quality. The classification process was performed first without FoPLs and then with FoPLs. The ability to classify products according to their nutritional quality was evaluated with multinomial logistic regression models, and the Nutri-Score label presented greater improvements when compared to the GDA label for Greek consumers. The Nutri-Score seemed to better help the Greek consumers rank foods according to their nutritional value.

Impact of the Front-of-Pack Label Nutri-Score on the Nutritional Quality of Food Choices in a Quasi-Experimental Trial in Catering

The front-of-pack labelling Nutri-Score has recently been implemented as a policy measure to improve the healthiness of food choices. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the Nutri-Score label in catering. A quasi-experimental trial was conducted in France between 16 December 2019 and 13 March 2020 in two staff restaurants (one intervention and one control site) from the same company. After a control period of seven weeks, the Nutri-Score label was affixed on all proposed products in the intervention site. Overall effects of the intervention were investigated using a difference in difference approach with generalised linear models. Over the 13 weeks of the study, 2063 participants who frequented the restaurant cafeteria at least once were included (1268 and 795 in the intervention and control site, respectively), representing 36,114 meals. Overall, the intervention led to a significant improvement in the nutritional quality of meals (p = 0.008) and a significant reduction in the intake of calories, sugars and saturated fat (p < 0.0001). Mixed effects models showed a qualitative improvement of food choices initially, and an adaptation of the quantities consumed over time, suggesting for the first time longer-term effects of the label on dietary behaviour.

The Nutri-Score nutrition label

Nutri-Score is a front-of-pack nutrition label with summary graded colour-coding, which aims to inform consumers, in a simple and understandable way, of the overall nutritional value of foods, in order to help them to make healthier choices at the point of purchase and to encourage manufacturers to improve the nutritional quality of their products. It is based on a five-colour scale (from dark green to dark orange) associated with letters, from A to E, to optimize logo accessibility and understanding by the consumer. Nutri-Score does not merely characterize foods as "healthy" or "unhealthy". Rather, the graded logo provides semi-quantitative information, depending on the colour/ letter, of the relative overall nutritional composition of a food product compared to other similar products as to whether it is more or less favourable to health. Nutri-Score is the only proposed labelling scheme that adheres entirely to the concepts and processes that were published by the World Health Organisation (WHO) Europe concerning the validation studies that are required to select and evaluate a front-of-pack nutrition label. The aim of the present paper is to present the scientific basis for the design of the Nutri-Score and to summarize the various studies to validate its calculation method and its graphic format. We explore its effectiveness and superiority compared to other labelling schemes that have been implemented in other countries or supported by pressure groups. The necessity for objective, impartial consideration of how best to use Nutri-Score and avoid misunderstandings is highlighted.