Nutrition snapshot
The nutrient profile looks comparatively strong based on the available evidence.
Nutrition score
71
/100
Nutrition interpretation
Low signal
The nutrient profile looks comparatively strong based on the available evidence.
Help improve this record
Structured source data
Food score panel
Each dimension stays separate so the product can score well in one area and weakly in another without hiding trade-offs.
Nutrition score
71
/100
Nutrition profile
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Strongest area
Label quality
Weakest area
Processing
Data confidence
high
Data confidence
Data confidence 79/100
High reliability
The data is strong and the assessment carries high confidence.
Confidence layer
Category breakdown
The overall assessment is good, but some areas warrant further review.
Nutrition profile
Quite good
71/100
71
Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.
Processing
Moderately processed
Moderately processed · Limited estimate
67
Processing indicator is available, but part of the classification is inferred.
Environmental signal
Quite good
74/100
74
Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.
Label quality
Strong
93/100
93
Label quality reflects completeness and consistency of the record, not nutrition quality.
How is the score built?
Open the methodology note
Nutrition score measures nutrient profile only. Processing, environment, label quality, and data confidence stay separate so missing data or formulation signals do not silently change nutrition quality.
The data is broad and consistent. The interpretation is likely to remain stable.
Score drivers
Supports the assessment
Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Fiber (4.5 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium
Pulls the score down
No significant negative factors emerged from the available data.
Impact: low
Uncertain area
Record completeness is 89%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low
Fruit, vegetable, legume, and nut share was inferred heuristically.
Impact: low
Related products
Plant-based. Ingredients: Pommes de terre* (57,7%), huile de tournesol * (35%), fécule de pommes de terre*, sel, paprika* (1,7%), tomate*, oignon*, ail*.. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
55
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
91/100
high reliability
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Plant-based. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
73
Nutrition score
environmental signal is the strongest signal right now, while label quality needs the most caution.
Data confidence
72/100
medium reliability
Plant-based. Ingredients: Baies de Goji.. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
45
Nutrition score
processing is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
88/100
high reliability
Plant-based. Ingredients: Baies de canneberge BIO, Jus de canne évaporé BIO, Huile de tournesol BIO (- de 1%). Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
44
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
87/100
high reliability
Energy / 100g
386.36 kcal
Protein / 100g
11.359999318182 g
Sugar / 100g
6.8200002272727005 g
Ingredient-level explanation
Blend of organic whole grain white, red and black quinoa
Kõrge vabade suhkrute sisaldus võib tõsta energiakoormust ilma püsivat täiskõhutunnet pakkumata.
Kohe
Võib tekitada kiire energiakõikumise ning varasema näljatunde või suurema janu.
Pikemas vaates
Sage tarbimine seostub kõrgema riskiga ebasoodsale kehakaalu ja ainevahetuse profiilile.
Loogika: Joogid: sugars100g > 5 g/100 ml. Toidud: sugars100g > 10 g/100 g.
Signaalid: Suhkur 6.8 g/100 g ületab joogile rakendatud lävendi 5 g/100 ml.
See on riskisignaal, mitte diagnoos. Mõju sõltub kogusest, tarbimissagedusest ja kogu toitumismustrist.
Suhkruga joogid on lapse riskimudelis eraldi A-kihi kategooria, sest vedelat suhkrut on lihtne tarbida rohkem kui märkame.
Miks oluline
Rakendus suunab siin tähelepanu eriti selgelt: joogisuhkur ei ole lapse jaoks hea igapäevane valik isegi siis, kui muu menüü on tasakaalus.
Kohe
Võib kaasneda kiire energiamuutus, suurem janu ja varasem uus näljatunne.
Pikemas vaates
Võib toetada magusate jookide harjumust ning nõrgendada lapse üldist joogivaliku kvaliteeti.
Põhineb tugeval rahvusvahelisel juhisel: WHO vabade suhkrute soovitused ning laste joogivaliku institutsionaalsed soovitused.
Signaalid: Joogis on suhkrut 6.8 g/100 ml, mis ületab joogile rakendatud lävendi 5 g/100 ml.
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage