Food Scores database makes its debut

by Keith Nunes
Share This:
Search for similar articles by keyword: [Nutrition Labeling], [G.M.A.]
The Food Scores database contains information on nutritional content and whether foods contain additives.

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Working Group (EWG) published a searchable database on Oct. 27 that rates food and beverage products sold at retail on such criteria as nutrition, ingredients of concern and degree of processing. The Food Scores system is designed to “guide people to greener, healthier and cleaner food choices,” according to the EWG.

Product profiles in the database include information on how products compare in terms of nutritional content and whether they contain what the group calls “questionable additives.” Ingredients listed as questionable include nitrites, potassium bromate among others. The database also lists meat and dairy products that are likely produced with antibiotics and hormones, and it lists fruits and vegetables likely to be contaminated with pesticide residues.

“When you think about healthy food, you have to think beyond the Nutrition Facts Panel,” said Renee Sharp, the EWG’s director of research. “It doesn’t always tell the whole story. EWG’s Food Scores shows that certain foods that we think are good for us may actually be much less so because they contain questionable food additives or toxic contaminants.”

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) called the Food Score database “severely flawed.”

“The methodology employed by EWG to develop their new food ratings is void of the scientific rigor and objectivity that should be devoted to any effort to provide consumers with reliable nutrition and food safety information,” the GMA said in a statement. “Their ratings are based almost entirely on assumptions they made about the amount, value and safety of ingredients in the products they rate. Adding insult to injury, EWG conducted no tests to confirm the validity of any of their assumptions.

“Not only will the EWG ratings provide consumers with inaccurate and misleading information, they will also falsely alarm and confuse consumers about their product choices. Embedded in the ratings are EWG’s extreme and scientifically unfounded views on everything from low-calorie sweeteners to the nutritional value of organic foods.”

Comment on this Article
We welcome your thoughtful comments. Please comply with our Community rules.

 

 


The views expressed in the comments section of Meat and Poultry News do not reflect those of Meat and Poultry News or its parent company, Sosland Publishing Co., Kansas City, Mo. Concern regarding a specific comment may be registered with the Editor by clicking the Report Abuse link.