Transparency
At BetterBite, we believe you deserve to understand exactly how our assessments work. This page explains our methodology, data sources, and the principles that guide our analysis. We are committed to transparency, scientific rigor, and continuous improvement.
Important Notice
BetterBite is an informational platform designed to help consumers make more informed choices. Our transparency scores and analyses are not medical advice and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with qualified healthcare professionals, registered dietitians, or physicians. Individual dietary needs, health conditions, and nutritional requirements vary significantly.
A Transparency Score is our composite assessment of a product's nutritional profile, ingredient composition, and processing level. It is not a medical rating or a definitive health judgment — it is an informational tool designed to make complex nutritional data more accessible.
Score Scale
Our scoring algorithm considers multiple dimensions of a product's composition:
Each ingredient is individually assessed based on regulatory status, published research, and known nutritional properties.
Macronutrient balance including sugar, sodium, saturated fat, fiber, and protein content per 100g serving.
NOVA classification (Monteiro et al.) indicating the degree of industrial processing (1 = unprocessed, 4 = ultra-processed), derived from the product's ingredient list.
Fat, saturated fat, sugars, and salt are rated low / moderate / high against published FSA/WHO per-100g thresholds — computed from the label's own declared values.
Whether ingredients are permitted, restricted, or banned across regulatory bodies (FSSAI, FDA, EFSA).
Number and nature of food additives, preservatives, colorings, and flavor enhancers present in the product.
How each metric is derived
Health Score (0–10) & Transparency Grade (A–E)
Every product first receives a Health Score from 0.0 to 10.0, assessed from its own declared label values and ingredient list across five pillars: processing level (NOVA), additive density, added sugar, sodium, and saturated fat. Factors that lower the score include added sugars and syrups, refined flour, hydrogenated oils and trans fats, high sodium, low fiber, artificial colours and flavours, and a high count of additives. Factors that raise it include whole grains, legumes, nuts and seeds, real fruit content, high fiber and protein, and short, minimally processed ingredient lists. An incomplete or unreadable ingredient list lowers the score — uncertainty is never scored in a product's favour.
| Health Score | Grade | Reads as |
|---|---|---|
| 8.5 – 10.0 | A | Excellent — nutrient-dense, minimally processed |
| 6.5 – 8.4 | B | Good — mostly positive profile |
| 4.0 – 6.4 | C | Moderate — some processing or additives |
| 2.0 – 3.9 | D | Concern — high processing or notable additives |
| 0.0 – 1.9 | E | High concern — highly processed, additive-heavy |
The Concern Index shown beside the grade is the same assessment expressed as a review level (A → minimal … E → severe) — it is not a separate calculation. The grade is our editorial assessment of transparency and nutritional profile: not a government rating, not medical advice, and not affiliated with any front-of-pack labelling scheme.
Processing Level (NOVA 1–4)
Assigned from the ingredient list using the published NOVA criteria (Monteiro et al., University of São Paulo): markers of ultra-processing include additives such as flavourings, colours, emulsifiers, and sweeteners, and industrial ingredients not used in home kitchens.
Nutrient Levels (low / moderate / high)
Computed from the label's declared per-100g values against the UK FSA / WHO front-of-pack thresholds. Where only sodium is declared, salt is estimated as sodium × 2.5.
| Per 100g | Low ≤ | Moderate | High > |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fat | 3 g | 3–17.5 g | 17.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.5 g | 1.5–5 g | 5 g |
| Sugars | 5 g | 5–22.5 g | 22.5 g |
| Salt | 0.3 g | 0.3–1.5 g | 1.5 g |
What your body actually gets (Nutrient absorption)
The label states how much of a nutrient is present; your body only takes up a fraction of it. This estimates the absorbed range — never a single number — and explains why.
Start from the label: We take the declared amount of each nutrient, reconciled to its standard unit (e.g. sodium in mg).
Apply a published absorption range: Each nutrient is multiplied by an evidence-based absorbed fraction — for example carbohydrates ~90–98%, added sugars ~95–100%, iron from plant/fortified foods ~5–15%, calcium ~25–35%. Ranges come from ICMR-NIN 2020, WHO/FAO and EFSA reference values (with Hurrell & Egli for iron, Weaver for calcium).
Adjust for what it's eaten with: Vitamin C raises iron absorption; tea, coffee and cocoa (tannins), whole grains and legumes (phytates), and calcium lower it; fat-soluble vitamins (A, D, E, K) need some fat in the food to absorb. A vegetarian/vegan profile shifts iron and zinc toward the lower end.
Show a range, never a point: Fractions are clamped to 0–100%, so a stacked effect can never report absorbing more than the label contains.
This is an estimate, not a lab measurement — absorption varies by person and preparation, so it is shown as a range. All calculations are deterministic (no AI at runtime) and are not medical advice.
Energy budget, calories out and activity
Every number on the energy card is a published reference equation applied to your profile — an estimate for context, never a measurement. One estimator drives both the daily budget and “calories out” so the two can never disagree.
Resting energy (BMR): Mifflin–St Jeor: 10 × weight (kg) + 6.25 × height (cm) − 5 × age + 5 (male) / − 161 (female). Age group stands in for age (adult 35, senior 68). Without a height we use ~22 kcal per kg.
Maintenance & budget: BMR × an activity multiplier (sedentary 1.2 · moderate 1.45 · active 1.7). A fat-loss goal subtracts 500 kcal, a muscle goal adds 10 %; the result is clamped to 1200–4000 kcal. A custom calorie target you set wins outright.
Calories out today: BMR × 1.2 (baseline living) plus NET active energy, best source first: your wearable's active energy; else steps × 0.00043 kcal per kg (walking above resting); else the activity multiplier alone. Resting energy is counted exactly once.
Workouts: Net MET: (MET − 1) × body weight × hours, using Compendium of Physical Activities (2011) values per type and intensity. A kcal figure from your device or your own entry always replaces the estimate.
Daily nutrient targets: WHO population goals and ICMR-NIN 2020 RDAs, personalised by published rules (protein 1.0–1.5 g/kg by goal, 55 % carbs / 30 % fat / 10 % saturated fat / 10 % total sugars / 5 % added sugars of the budget, 14 g fibre per 1000 kcal; iron 19 mg ♂ / 29 mg menstruating ♀ / 19 mg senior ♀; condition rules only tighten).
BMI & goal weight: BMI uses WHO bands with the Asian-population action points (23 / 27.5) noted. A goal-weight ETA extrapolates your own last 28 days of check-ins and is capped at two years.
Predictive equations are typically within ±10–20 % for an individual. Portions without a pack or serving weight on the label are assumed at 100 g and flagged. None of this is medical advice.
Product facts come from one place: the manufacturer's own declared label, transcribed from the physical pack and verified against a batch code and date. Ingredient research and regulatory context come from the authoritative public bodies below. We do not fabricate or invent claims.
See every standard we use, with a direct source link →Product packaging (primary source)
Nutrition tables, ingredient lists, and barcodes are transcribed from the physical pack — the manufacturer's own published declaration. Each verified product records the batch number and verification date of the pack we read.
World Health Organization (WHO)
Global health guidelines on sugar, sodium, and nutritional recommendations
FSSAI (India)
Food Safety and Standards Authority of India — regulatory standards and additive approvals
FDA (USA)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration — GRAS status, additive regulations, nutritional guidelines
EFSA (Europe)
European Food Safety Authority — scientific opinions on food additives and nutritional claims
PubMed / Published Literature
Peer-reviewed scientific research on ingredient safety, nutritional science, and dietary epidemiology
To maintain scientific integrity and legal compliance, BetterBite adheres to strict content principles:
We do NOT provide medical advice, diagnoses, or treatment recommendations
We do NOT claim that any product causes or cures specific diseases
We do NOT use language like "dangerous", "toxic", or "unsafe" to describe food products
We do NOT make absolute health claims — all assessments are informational and evidence-based
We do NOT replace the guidance of qualified healthcare professionals or registered dietitians
We do NOT guarantee the accuracy of manufacturer-declared product data
We believe in being transparent about the limitations of our platform:
Product formulations may change without notice — always verify against current packaging
Nutritional data may have regional variations that we cannot always capture
Our AI analysis is based on pattern recognition and published data — it has inherent limitations
Some ingredient research is still evolving — scientific consensus may change over time
Individual health responses to ingredients vary significantly based on genetics, allergies, and medical conditions
Our database may not include every product available in every market
Every claim is grounded in published research and regulatory data
We educate and inform — we never use fear or sensationalism
We actively update our data and methodology as science evolves
This methodology document is periodically updated to reflect improvements in our scoring algorithm and new data sources. Last updated: July 2026.