Proposal: create a Nova Score corresponding to the Nova Group with a finer granularity

[stephanegigandet]

NOVA has 4 groups:
1 - unprocessed / minimally processed foods
2 - culinary aids (sugar, salt, fat etc.)
3 - processed foods
4 - ultra-processed foods

In order to be able to better distinguish the processing level within the different groups, we could creater a finer NOVA score:

• 10 to 19: unprocessed/minimally processed foods. 10 means 1 ingredient, 19 means 10 or more ingredients
• 20 to 29: culinary aids. 20 means 1 ingredient. 29 means 10 or more ingredients.
• 30 to 39: processed foods: 30 means 1 marker of processing (e.g. salt, sugar, oil etc.)
• 40 to 49: ultra-processed foods: 40 means 1 marker of ultra-processing, 49 means 10 or more markers of ultra-processing.

This would be helpful for sorting products.

Part of

• NOVA groups - Ultra-processed foods (tracker) #5519

[Dwarfex]

Interesting thought. A more granular score would be really helpful!

Is the assumption correct that only by having a complex recipe with lots of natural ingredients (f.e. sauce recipes with lots of different spices) automatically results in a more "negative" NOVA score?

Isn't the intention behind the score having a rating about the "technical trickery"(additives, E Numbers, etc) in Products?

[aleene]

I think that is useful, as it gives an indication of how many bad ingredients there are.

[aleene]

The nova scale is a bit unforgiving. Just one ingredient might make it nova 4. What would it look like if you created a weighted scale with the ingredient percentages as weight.

[stephanegigandet]

Is the assumption correct that only by having a complex recipe with lots of natural ingredients (f.e. sauce recipes with lots of different spices) automatically results in a more "negative" NOVA score?

For minimally processed products, a product with more ingredients would have a worse score. But it would always be a better score than processed products. The 4 initial NOVA groups would still be separate.

Isn't the intention behind the score having a rating about the "technical trickery"(additives, E Numbers, etc) in Products?

That's what NOVA 4 does. But we can still try to distinguish products within the NOVA 1 and NOVA 3 groups. e.g. a fruit salad with chopped fruits is a bit more processed than a single fruit.

[Dwarfex]

@stephanegigandet thanks for the clarification :)

[stephanegigandet]

What would it look like if you created a weighted scale with the ingredient percentages as weight.

A lot of the NOVA markers are additives, used in tiny but unspecified amounts, that's why I'm thinking to use the number of markers. It also makes it possible to have a consistent approach for NOVA 1, 3 and 4. (using the number of ingredients, and the number of 3 and 4 markers)

[aleene]

I think we should stay close to the independent research and not try to invent something new.
However we could count the number of ingredients within a nova group for each product and create thus a nova-spectrum.

[github-actions]

This issue has been open 90 days with no activity. Can you give it a little love by linking it to a parent issue, adding relevant labels and projets, creating a mockup if applicable, adding code pointers from https://github.com/openfoodfacts/openfoodfacts-server/blob/main/.github/labeler.yml, giving it a priority, editing the original issue to have a more comprehensive description… Thank you very much for your contribution to 🍊 Open Food Facts