Nutrition snapshot
The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.
Nutrition score
42
/100
Nutrition interpretation
Moderate signal
The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.
Help improve this record
Structured source data
Energy / 100g
310 kcal
Protein / 100g
17.39 g
Sugar / 100g
4.89 g
Ingredient-level explanation
Grapes, cheddar cheese (pasteurized milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes, annatto vegetable color [if colored]), pepperjack cheese (cultured milk, cream, jalapeno peppers, red bell peppers, salt, sodium phosphate, water, lactic acid, sorbic acid [preservative], enzymes), swiss cheese (pasteurized milk, cheese culture, salt, enzymes), crackers (whole rye, corn bran, contains one or more of the following: sunflower oil and/or safflower oil [with tocopherols (vitamin e) added to preserve freshness], salt and caraway).
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
42
/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
medium
Data confidence
Data confidence 63/100
Medium reliability
Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.
Confidence layer
Category breakdown
The profile is on the weaker side and warrants attention.
Nutrition profile
Weak
42/100
42
Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.
Processing
Highly processed
Highly processed
34
Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.
Environmental signal
Weak
35/100
35
Product-specific environmental signal.
Label quality
Quite good
64/100
64
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 partial. The interpretation is usable but some conclusions may be refined.
Score drivers
Supports the assessment
Declared Eco-Score D supports the environmental indicator.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).
Impact: medium
Pulls the score down
Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
High saturated fat (13.04 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (47 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low
Uncertain area
Record completeness is 56%.
Impact: medium
Image evidence covers about 0% of the key fields.
Impact: low
Fruit, vegetable, legume, and nut share was inferred heuristically.
Impact: low
Related products
Dairies. Ingredients: _lait_ cru de vache, sel, ferments lactiques, présure.. Evidence quality: high. Nutrition score is currently hidden
nutrition score
Score summary
—
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
84/100
high reliability
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Dairies. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
45
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
77/100
high reliability
Dairies. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
49
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
72/100
medium reliability
Dairies. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
65
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while environmental signal needs the most caution.
Data confidence
72/100
medium reliability
Madal kiudainesisaldus ja rafineeritud süsivesikud viitavad toidule, mis toetab nõrgemalt täiskõhutunnet.
Kohe
Võib põhjustada kiiremat glükoosikõikumist ja varasemat näljatunnet.
Pikemas vaates
Sage tarbimine võib halvendada üldist toidukvaliteeti ja seostub ebasoodsama ainevahetusprofiiliga.
Loogika: fiber100g < 1.5 g/100 g või fiber100g < 3 g/100 g koos rafineeritud süsivesikute markeritega.
Signaalid: Kiudained 0.5 g/100 g jäävad alla üldlävendi 3 g/100 g. · Kiudainesisaldus jääb alla tugeva riskisignaali lävendi 1.5 g/100 g.
Riskisignaal sõltub kogu menüü kiudainete tasemest, mitte ainult ühest tootest.
Kõrge küllastunud rasva osakaal on oluline signaal, eriti kui sarnaseid tooteid tarbitakse sageli.
Kohe
Võib muuta toidukorra energiarikkamaks ja tekitada mõnel inimesel raskustunnet.
Pikemas vaates
Sage tarbimine võib tõsta ebasoodsa vere lipiidiprofiili riski.
Loogika: saturatedFat100g > 5 g/100 g.
Signaalid: Küllastunud rasv 13.0 g/100 g ületab lävendi 5 g/100 g.
Riskitõlgendus sõltub kogu rasvaprofiilist ja üldisest menüüst, mitte vaid ühest näitajast.
Madal kiudainesisaldus on lapse vaates oluline, sest see mõjutab nii täiskõhutunnet kui ka seedimise mugavust.
Miks oluline
Rakendus kuvab selle, et aidata vanemal hoida lapse menüüs rohkem täistera, kaunvilju, puu- ja köögivilju.
Kohe
Võimalik on kiirem näljatunde taastumine või raskem seedimine.
Pikemas vaates
Võib vähendada lapse menüü üldist kvaliteeti ja hoida kiudainete tarbimise püsivalt liiga madalal.
Põhineb tugeval rahvusvahelisel juhisel: WHO süsivesikute kvaliteedi ja kiudainete soovitused.
Signaalid: Kiudained 0.5 g/100 g jäävad alla üldlävendi 3 g/100 g. · Kiudainesisaldus jääb alla tugevama alamsignaali lävendi 1.5 g/100 g.
Küllastunud rasva signaal aitab hinnata, kas toode sobib lapse menüüs pigem harvemaks valikuks.
Miks oluline
Rakendus ei anna siin mustvalget hinnangut, vaid lisab rasvaprofiili konteksti sagedaste valikute jaoks.
Kohe
Võib esineda raskustunnet või väiksemat söögi järel mugavust.
Pikemas vaates
Sage tarbimine võib hoida lapse menüü rasvaprofiili ebasoodsamas suunas.
Põhineb WHO rasvajuhistel, kus rõhk on rasva kvaliteedil ja asendusloogikal.
Signaalid: Küllastunud rasv 13.0 g/100 g ületab lävendi 5 g/100 g.
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage