Leggi l’articolo in italiano

Article published in italian on Il Giornale >>>

The sanctification of Nutri-Score organized by the Belgian Presidency today is nothing but the admission of a political failure by the bureaucracies of some countries, such as Belgium and France, which are accustomed to imposing ethical behaviors on citizens, according to the old Hegelian schema; and by a handful of scientists, mainly French, for whom the outcomes of their scientific research are an absolute truth to be imposed without ever subjecting it to critical scrutiny as it should be according to the experimental method of science.

Moreover, Nutri-Score is a scientific, philosophical, and political aberration. Those who promote Nutri-Score attribute the responsibility for obesity to certain nutrients, essential for our diet, if consumed in a balanced way. The causes of obesity are multiple and very complex, and cannot be solved with a traffic light on the label.

In fact, obesity does not decrease in countries adopting Nutri-Score, but increases. In France, it covers 75% of packaged products. It will be said that it is not enough to reach 100%. Then it will be put in restaurant menus, in advertisements, etc., effectively imposing a totalitarian diet.

Indeed, those who promote Nutri-Score believe that consumers are incapable of choosing. Instead of providing them with education and tools to make informed and therefore free choices, they “suggest” what is good or bad according to the French algorithm. But there are no good or bad foods; it is the dose that makes the good or the bad depending on each individual. Every individual is – this is the richness of Europe and humanity – different, so “one size fits all” diets like Nutri-Score cannot work, but rather end up deceiving the consumer citizen. This is the main unintended consequence ignored by those, like the Queen of Belgium, who promote Nutri-Score: threatening freedom of choice, inhibiting knowledge, denying diversity. Who knows if it is an unintended consequence, or blatantly reflects the deeply rooted idea that the State chooses for citizens in the name of common health.

In annihilating diversity, Nutri-Score favors multinational corporations that, devoid of a culinary tradition, promote global products, legitimately pursuing economies of scale.

In fact, large international groups support these labeling schemes because they allow them to manipulate food formulas to obtain “healthy” food (of which the consumer knows nothing).

Local traditions, such as the Mediterranean Diet, or companies with a local tradition, which produce products that are difficult to reformulate, end up among the bad ones. They either modify their recipes, if they can, denaturing tradition, flavors, and consistency, or risk not selling anymore. This is a consequence that European policy should take into account to avoid food “desertification”. But politics seeks seemingly easy choices that delude the consumer into eating healthily. Is removing sugars and saturated fats mean eating healthily? And lifestyle? DNA? Caloric expenditure? Politics prefers not to deal with it. Educating a citizen is dangerous. It’s better to tell them what to eat. Badly, moreover, while continuing to gain weight. If April 25th is Liberation Day for us Italians, for other Europeans nostalgic for totalitarianism, it is the day of cultural food occupation.