In recent years, the packaging of children’s cereals has added a new element to attract the eye. In addition to the traditional flashy colors and the animal mascot, almost all packages include a Nutri-Score. And this is often quite flattering.
However, this was not always the case. Serge Hercberg, nutrition researcher and co-founder of the label, recalls: “When the Nutri-Score was created in 2015, most cereals had a score of D or E since they almost all contained more than 40, or even 50 grams of sugar per 100 grams. Very quickly, manufacturers modified their recipe to obtain better scores. » According to a study by UFC Que-Choisir, between 2015 and 2023, the share of classified breakfast cereals A or B went from 8% to 38%. Still according to this study, in 2023, no less than 97% of cereals displayed their Nutri-Score, compared to 26% of products on average at the supermarket.
An effective marketing argument
The label has demonstrated its impact on purchases, according to a ScanUp x Circana study dating from 2023. All food categories combined, compared to a product without any indication, an A label sees its sales increase by 6.3%. Allow 4.5% for label B. On the contrary, label E sees its sales drop by an average of 6.9%.
“With Covid-19 and the healthy wave, health food has taken on an increasingly important place. The consumer is much more vigilant than ten or fifteen years ago about the quality of products,” estimates Sandrine Doppler, food marketing specialist. The impact on health has become the third criterion of choice when making a purchase, according to an Ifop study in 2023, behind price and taste. Even when it comes to satisfying a kid who just wants his daily sugar fix? “It’s a double-edged sword,” continues the specialist. It is true that some parents seek to please their child above all by focusing on taste, regardless of nutritional quality. But the idea of giving healthy food to your children is still quite widespread and valued. »
Relieving guilt and changing recipes
Clémentine Ugol-Bential, professor and specialist in contemporary food issues at the University of Burgundy, specifically studied the impact of the Nutri-Score of cereals on parents: “It’s a way for them to relieve their guilt by regarding the quality of this purchase. This also allows manufacturers to present strong arguments for parents, for example the use of whole grains or a high fiber content. For example, count 9.3 grams of dietary fiber and 8.7 grams of protein per 100 grams for Kellogg’s Honey Pops. To increase their Nutri-Score, most cereals have increased the quantity of these two elements, which are highly valued in the rating.
“This is one of the virtues of this scale,” continues the professor. Even more than informing the consumer, it pushes manufacturers to adapt their recipes. Many brands regularly ask INRAE (National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and the Environment) how to comply with a positive Nutri-Score, which ingredient to change or reduce…”
Real efforts, but is it enough?
Example with the famous Chocapic, “high in chocolate” and increasingly low in sugar. More precisely, a drop of 47% in twenty years, to arrive at “only” 22 grams of sugars per 100 grams. Also remove 56% of salt, 29% of saturated fatty acids and bam, that’s a Nutri-Score A, obtained in September 2022. The opportunity to promote it, with an advertising spot based solely on this marketing argument .
But 22% sugar is still a lot in a product. And seeing chocolate cereals get the highest rating made more than one health expert cough. “The WHO is very clear on the risks linked to overconsumption of sugar, and the Nutri-Score did not sufficiently reflect this reality,” underlines Lydiane Nabec, researcher at INRAE. Another grievance recognized by Serge Hercberg: “While welcoming the real efforts of the brands, this placed them on the same level of healthy food as mueslis or oatmeal, unprocessed cereals with almost no sugar”. A decision was therefore made at the end of 2023 to re-adjust the Nutri-Score and “to be tougher with regard to high sugar levels. The latter is penalized much more than before in the new scale,” explains Lydiane Nabec.
General demotion
The Chocapic and Nesquik thus tumbled from A to C, the Miel Pops from B to C, and the Lion from C to D. According to a Nutrients study relating to children’s cereals (i.e. excluding oatmeal and natural Special K), the share of A and B grades went from 31% to… 2.2% following the revision of the Nutri-Score. Sandrine Doppler recalls: “This provoked the ire of certain brands. Bjorg or Danone, for example, have decided to no longer display the Nutri-Score after such downgrades. » Bjorg in particular mentioned a lack of transparency on the Nutri-Score scale and non-essential information. “Our consumers already know us as a nutritional brand.”
Bjorg products have replaced the Nutri-Score with the Planet-Score, which is very confusing to the eye. Serge Hercberg defends himself against any excess severity: “Even at C, Chocapic, for example, are rewarded for their efforts and more valued than cereals with more sugar and rated D or E.”
But the final twist: France has not published any decree requiring the Nutri-Score on packaging to be revised. In fact, brands can still highlight the ratings before the revision at the end of 2023, and you can find Chocapic A or Miel-Pops B in your supermarket, even though this rating has been obsolete for more than a year. . In the breakfast wars, bending the rules is still child’s play.
Source: www.20minutes.fr
