Some Nutrition scores and Food Quality Contributors don't make sense
in progress
Ifti Hossain
Love the nutrition score feature, I've been logging food for just a few days and already it's helping me improve my eating habits. I was taking a close look at the scores of some of the foods I was logging however and it doesn't always make sense.
For example, a shot of espresso scores a 100/100 for Added Sugars, but there are are no sugars added to it. When I logged a tbsp of Honey, it scored a 1/100 for Added Sugars, and 62/100 for Sodium, even though in the nutrition label it showed 17g of Added Sugars and 0.8mg of Sodium. I'm noticing other cases where Sodium and Added Sugars may possibly getting mixed up? But not completely sure.
Also the Nutrition Score doesnt make sense for some items. A shot of whiskey has a 100/100 Nutrition Score but I would hardly think that alcohol should score so high. Honey similarly has a Nutrition Score of 2/100.
Amanda
in progress
Randell
Merged in a post:
Most of the foods I scan are way out calories carbs etc
Dale Broadley
If you implemented an option to be able to manually update the macros whilst the databases are sorted that would be amazing until that point I will continue to use nutracheck as for uk users that is the gold standard
R
Rob
Are you interpreting the scores the wrong way round? A high nutrition score is good, so honey, as you say being pretty much pure sugar, which is bad, gets a low score. Espresso gets a high score because, from a sugar / GI point of view, is good… Obviously this is from a sugar / GI point of view - espresso isn’t very nutritious and too much is bad, so it would be good to be more transparent about how all the foods eaten in a day add up to an overall score.
Randell
Hi Dale Broadley, Thanks for the feedback! This is something we're actively working to improve. We also have a planned update that will allow users to edit or update macros as they log them, I'll go ahead and merge this into the existing ticket.
Grey also responded to a similar post on our subreddit recently, which might give you more insight into what's coming for the Nutrition feature: https://www.reddit.com/r/bevelhealth/comments/1ks4h1i/comment/mtip2r1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
If you don't mind, can you please share a screenshot of which foods you've logged and the details it shows in Bevel?
Randell
Merged in a post:
Scanned food with 14000 mcg Vitamin D
l
lord_lorien
Is there a separate place to report incorrect food nutrition facts?
Simple Nature Coconut Clusters are showing 14000 mcg Vitamin D. Bag facts say 0mcg.
Randell
Hi lord_lorien, Can you please send a screenshot of this food that you've logged? and yes, let me merge this ticket to an existing one for you.
l
lord_lorien
Randell
Amanda
planned (soon)
Randell
Merged in a post:
Bacon is apparently healthy
A
Andrew Murray
Bacon and Proscuitto both get scores of 100
Randell
Merged in a post:
Nutrition Value of Alcohol
Terry Franklin
I'm loving the idea of the Nutrition feature, but I'm not at all understanding why Bourbon shows as an "optimal" food quality of 100 when clearly it is not optimal.
Randell
Merged in a post:
Incorrect “Added Sugars” Score for Plain Espresso
Radoslav Oleksak
Hello,
I noticed an issue with the food quality scoring for plain espresso in the Bevel app. I logged a shot of high-quality espresso (without any sugar, milk, or other additions), but the app shows an “Added Sugars” score of 100/100.
Espresso, when consumed plain, does not contain added sugars. Its natural sugar content is negligible and comes from the coffee beans themselves. This seems to be a misclassification or a bug in the app’s database.
Attached is a screenshot showing the incorrect score. Could you please look into this and correct it?
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Best regards,
Load More
→