Reevaluating Ultra-Processed Foods: Navigating the Spectrum of Healthiness with Innovative Tools
Distinguishing between genuinely nutritious and detrimental ultra-processed foods (UPF) often involves scrutinizing detailed ingredient lists and nutritional data. However, most consumers lack the time or expertise to perform such meticulous analysis. As a result, an increasing number are turning to digital solutions that simplify this process by combining processing levels with nutritional insights. By simply scanning a product’s barcode with their smartphones, users can now receive an instant rating on a scale from zero to ten, indicating the product’s overall healthfulness.
One such pioneering startup, GoCoCo, aims to demystify the complexities surrounding UPF, providing consumers with clear, accessible guidance to make healthier choices.
Is It Possible for Ultra-Processed Foods to Be Healthy?
Public concern about UPF is well-founded, given its frequent association with adverse health outcomes, including obesity, cardiovascular disease, and increased mortality rates, as highlighted by the World Health Organization (WHO). Yet, the narrative isn’t entirely black and white. Not all UPFs are inherently harmful; for example, packaged bread and breakfast cereals are classified as UPF but tend to be less problematic compared to other highly processed snacks or ready-to-eat meals.
So, how can we objectively evaluate whether a processed food product is beneficial or detrimental? GoCoCo’s algorithm, developed in Spain, employs a multi-layered approach to provide nuanced assessments based on three core filters.
Decoding the GoCoCo Processing and Nutrition Scoring System
Integrating Global Standards for Accurate Classification
GoCoCo’s scoring system is informed by established international frameworks, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation. The process involves three key steps:
- WHO Nutrient Profile Model: This model categorizes foods into 18 groups, setting specific nutrient thresholds for each. It considers factors such as total and added sugars, saturated and total fats, sodium content, caloric value, and the presence of artificial sweeteners. For instance, a snack exceeding 400mg of sodium per 100g would trigger a warning.
- Nova Food Classification: While definitions vary, the Nova system remains the most widely adopted. It segments foods into four groups based on processing levels: unprocessed or minimally processed foods, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods, and ultra-processed foods.
- Composite Scoring and Warning Labels: Each product receives a score derived from the combined insights of the WHO and Nova frameworks. Additional deductions are applied if the product contains ingredients flagged by warning systems used in countries like Chile and Argentina. For example, high sodium or sugar content results in a ‘warning’ label, influencing the overall score.
The final score, ranging from 1 to 10, is color-coded from dark purple (least healthy) to green (most healthy), providing an intuitive visual cue for consumers.
Beyond Additive Analysis: Focusing on the Big Picture
Unlike other barcode scanning apps such as Yuka, which emphasize additive content, GoCoCo’s primary focus is on the broader nutritional and processing context. The co-founder, Bertrand Amaraggi, emphasizes that the goal is to assess the overall health impact rather than just individual ingredients.
Target Audience: Who Should Avoid ‘Unhealthy’ UPF?
GoCoCo primarily targets individuals managing conditions like type 2 diabetes, where diet plays a crucial role. Given the strong links between high consumption of unhealthy UPF and metabolic disorders, this demographic benefits significantly from precise, accessible information. Obesity and related health issues are also key concerns, prompting many to seek smarter food choices.
However, Amaraggi suggests that focusing solely on nutritional content isn’t sufficient. Anecdotal evidence hints that artificial sweeteners, often found in ‘diet’ products, may negatively influence insulin sensitivity. Therefore, simply replacing sugary drinks with artificially sweetened alternatives might not be the optimal solution.
In addition to identifying less healthy options, GoCoCo guides users toward healthier alternatives within the same category. The app features an ‘ultra-processed food tracker,’ allowing users to photograph their meals and receive tailored advice on how to improve their diet-such as incorporating more whole foods, fruits, and vegetables.
Growing Popularity and Global Reach
Since its launch in 2019, GoCoCo has rapidly gained traction, especially in Spain, where over 800,000 users have adopted the app. Its popularity is expanding into France and the United States, with the global user base now approaching one million. The app’s success underscores a rising consumer demand for transparent, science-based food information.
Access to comprehensive product databases is vital for the app’s functionality. Amaraggi explains that by integrating extensive ingredient and nutritional data, GoCoCo’s algorithm can accurately evaluate products across various markets. Consumer awareness about UPF and processing levels remains uneven worldwide; while countries like the UK and US are more familiar with UPF concepts, others such as Spain and France, where traditional Mediterranean diets prevail, are less acquainted with the term.
Why Existing Labels Like Nutri-Score Don’t Fully Address UPF Concerns
In Europe, Nutri-Score is a widely used front-of-pack nutrition label that grades foods from A (healthiest) to E (least healthy). Developed in France in 2017, it offers a simplified overview based on nutrient content but doesn’t explicitly account for processing levels or ingredient quality. This limitation leaves gaps in consumer understanding of UPF-related health risks.
Comparing GoCoCo and Yuka: Different Approaches to Food Evaluation
Yuka, another popular barcode scanner launched in France in 2017, provides ratings based on nutritional quality, additive presence, and organic status. While Yuka has a substantial user base and market share, its scoring system differs significantly from GoCoCo’s. For example, a breakfast cereal with 22% sugar might receive a Yuka score of 72/100, whereas GoCoCo might rate it as 2/10, highlighting the stark differences in evaluation criteria.
Why a New Scoring System Was Necessary
Initially, GoCoCo incorporated Nutri-Score into its platform, but users found multiple ratings confusing. Moreover, Amaraggi notes that Nutri-Score’s algorithm was too easily manipulated-manufacturers could slightly reduce sugar or add fiber to boost their scores artificially. Recognizing these limitations, GoCoCo developed its own more rigorous assessment framework.
The company aims to influence reformulation efforts among food producers, encouraging the creation of healthier UPF options. Amaraggi emphasizes that the ultimate goal isn’t just consumer guidance but also prompting manufacturers to improve their formulations for better ratings.
Maintaining Independence and Integrity
Importantly, GoCoCo operates independently of the food industry. Amaraggi affirms that all revenue is derived solely from consumer subscriptions and usage, with no funding or influence from food manufacturers. This independence ensures that the ratings and recommendations remain unbiased and focused on public health.
As awareness of UPF’s health implications continues to grow, tools like GoCoCo are poised to play a pivotal role in empowering consumers to make informed, healthier choices-ultimately fostering a shift toward more transparent and responsible food production worldwide.
