Cheese manufacturers may want to look away now. The Food Standards Agency was, until this week, coy about the details of a February workshop it hosted for 30 nutrition and academic experts to look at possible changes to its notorious Nutrient Profiling Model. Now the cat is out the bag, in many quarters, the recommendations will not make for happy reading.

Despite calls from cheese manufacturers, and from The Grocer's Weigh it Up! campaign, for the FSA to review the 100g measure on which it decides whether a food is healthy or not, last month the workshop recommended to the Review Panel, which is set to decide the fate of NPM this summer, that it is scientifically sound and requires little or no change . So, when the FSA finally publishes the results of its NPM review, it now looks highly unlikely there will be a reprieve for cheese, Marmite, Greek yoghurt, olive oil, raisins and countless other perfectly healthy products that are penalised because they are typically eaten in small amounts.

The group declared itself "content with the way the model categorised foods" and while it recognised that some foods were served in portions well below 100g, raised concerns about "the practical difficulties in defining portion sizes", the logical alternative to a 100g base measure.

The decision will be a blow to many parts of the industry that had been calling for the model to be modified to individually categorise dairy products, breakfast cereals and dried fruit. According to the panel, there was "no justifiable nutritional argument to include additional categories". Industry executives disagree. "We're disappointed the group did not consider redeveloping the model with a separate category for cheese," says Dairy UK director general Jim Begg. "Continuing the ban will restrict the industry's ability to promote cheese to children in the future."

For cereal manufacturers, however, the review appears to offer a glimmer of hope after the FSA said it would give consideration to eliminating or raising the threshold of the protein cap, which would allow more cereals to be advertised to children on television (see p4).

Under the current NPM system, a food's protein value cannot be taken into account if it scores 11 points or more based on its energy, saturated fat, total sugar and sodium content - referred to in the model as its 'A' score - unless it also contains more than 80% fruit, veg or nuts. Many children's cereals score well for their protein and fibre content but are penalised because their A score is 11 or higher. Raising the A score threshold - also called the protein cap - by just a few points, however, would enable many more cereals to fall into the healthy bracket.

"Modification of the protein cap would allow more children's breakfast cereals to be advertised and act as an incentive for the reformulation of others," the workshop said.

Cereal manufacturers say this represents some progress in thinking but the FSA's failure to take into account portion sizes means many leading brands will still be classified as unhealthy. "Tinkering around the edges of the model will not have a beneficial effect on cereal products," says Chris Wermann, Kellogg's communications director. "About 75% of ready-to-eat cereal products can't be marketed on television. If Ofcom has been given a remit to proportionately advertise to kids then the cereal category has been disproportionately impacted by the model."

Raising the protein cap would have no effect on the ability of cheeses to secure healthy status, despite being an obvious source of protein. Even if a cheese product was to achieve maximum points for protein, it would still fail the model because of its saturated fat and salt content. The FSA is keen to stress that conclusions from the workshop are purely recommendations that will feed into the review board's discussions at its next meeting, but there is already a feeling that the NPM will remain unchanged because of a failure to come up with a viable alternative.

One professor of nutrition, at the workshop, says it is too early to judge whether the model is an effective tool and that "some issues of concern" over the 100g base remain. "We don't have a De Beers diamond on day one," he says. "At the moment we have a rough cut, which will take time to develop, but we have no real alternative."

This does not sound promising. And while the FSA insists stakeholders still have the opportunity to contribute to the review process, cereal manufacturers, in particular, need to keep up the momentum to ensure the horse doesn't bolt. n

Topics