 |
| Photo credit: Twitter |
It was based on Nestle’s 4.5 star rating on their serving suggestions of three teaspoons of Milo with glass skim milk, in which public health experts and consumer group Choice countered with their own rating 1.5 star rating instead. This counter rating grounds that consumers don’t consume Milo that way.
Katinka Day head of campaigns and policy of Choice stated that
“To claim a health star rating by adding nutritionally superior ingredients of another product is not helpful, especially for people who eat their Milo with full cream milk, or even straight out of the can or on ice-cream”
“It’s a move that smacks of marketing trickery rather than a genuine attempt to help consumers make an informed choice.”
Although Choice is against Nestle’s phony ratings, they still acknowledge Nestle’s decision to change the current rating.
“While we welcome Nestle’s decision to ditch its dishonest star rating, it doesn’t go far enough. Milo needs to display a 1.5 star rating which reflects the product’s actual ingredients,” Day stated.
On the other hand, Margaret Stuart, the spokeswoman of Nestle stated that only Milo powder would receive the drop, all other products will still retain 4.5 ratings.
And despite the controversy, Nestle sees this incident in a positive light.
“It’s encouraging to see a growing body of evidence showing that the HSR is delivering on its key objectives,” said Stuart.
Turning the tables around, Nestle envisions that this incident provide a “broader improvement across the food industry.”
Yet they retained their stand on being a reliable brand,
“The system, which was developed with the input of many stakeholders, is fundamentally sound, scientifically robust and compares well with front of pack labelling systems in other countries,” said the spokeswoman.
Source: news.com.au
