EU NUTRIENT PROFILES

1. EU NUTRIENT PROFILES Agency consultation on proposed EU nutrient profile model 14 November 2008

2. EU NUTRIENT PROFILE Recital 10: “Foods promoted with claims may be perceived as having .. advantages [over other foods]… encourage consumers’ … choices … [that] influence intake of nutrients … counter to scientific advice.” Recital 11: “ … nutrient profiles aim to avoid … claims … [that] mask the overall nutritional status of a food product, that could mislead consumers when trying to make healthy choices in the context of a balanced diet.”

3. EU NUTRIENT PROFILE Purpose: implement Article 4 1924/2006 “.. nutrient profiles … which food or certain categories of food must comply with in order to bear nutrition or health claims …”

4. DEROGATIONS • If a product fails the profile on one nutrient: • no health claim may be made; a nutrition claim may be made, but only if a statement reading “high [name of the nutrient exceeding the profile] content” is made near to and with the same prominence as the claim. For example, if a food is claiming to be low in fat but it is also high in sugars, then the statement “high sugar content” should also be made • If a product fails the profile on two or more nutrients: • no claim may be made • The only exception to this is a “reduced” claim where the nutrient about which the claim is made does not count toward calculating the effect of the nutrient profile. For example, to make a “reduced saturated fat” claim, the food does not need to comply with the threshold set for saturated fat. However, if the product is also high in salt then the statement “high salt content” would need to be made.

5. EFSA OPINION • Nutrient profiles effective at classifying foods • a single generic profile most practical • Need to take account of nutrients of public health importance to European populations • And foods with important roles in diets of European populations link to FBDG • Category based exemptions, and balancing of nutrients within categories • Practical – no to portion reference base • food database for testing

6. COMMISSION PAPER • exemptions from nutrient profiles • food database to inform and test models • per 100g reference base • amended profile within categories (inc generic) • definition of food categories • thresholds in reference to FBDG

7. EXEMPTIONS • Food supplements • chewing gum, mouth fresheners, low energy foods <25kcal • Some PARNUTS foods • Fruit and Vegetables [with nothing added]

8. DEFINITIONS

9. DEFINITIONS

10. THRESHOLDS

11. Threshold values for Testing tool (Table 4 Cion working doc, adapted)

14. EFFECT ON UK FOODS • 120 test foods • 99 pass EC model • 51 outright, 48 with one nutrient warning • 13 sat fat, 22 salt, 13 sugars • 21 fail EC model

15. EFFECT ON UK FOODS • updated data on 71 breakfast cereals and 61 cheese products • Applying current EC thresholds: • 2 BC fail outright; 44 pass outright; 23 pass + sugar; 2 pass + sat fat • 27 cheese fail outright; 20 pass outright; 3 pass + salt; 10 pass + sat fat; 1 pass + sugar

16. WHAT IF? BC sodium 700 > 400 sugar 25 > 20 • 14 BC fail outright; 23 pass outright; 23 pass + sugar; 1 pass + sat fat; 10 pass + salt Cheese sodium 600 > 550 • 32 cheese fail outright; 18 pass outright; 5 pass + salt; 5 pass + sat fat; 1 pass + sugar

17. WHAT IF? Fats and Oils • Sat fat 30>25 sodium @ 300 • In EC model: 63%>33% claim, 37%>54% + warning, 0%>13% fail • UK foods: of 19 products, 12 would fail sodium unsalted butter & oils pass; 4 fail sat fat @ 30g, 6 (+2) fail sat fat @ 25g

18. OVER TO YOU • Any general comments? • Exemptions • Definitions • Thresholds