Junk food labels

There was a funny item on the TF1 news the other night.   First, some background:

The French are very particular about their food, and also about it being the genuine article.   You can call pretty much any cheese cheddar in England, regardless of whether it comes from Cheddar or not, as long as it looks and tastes vaguely like cheddar.   They didn't protect their mark.   

This is not so in France.  For example, they stomped down pretty hard a few years ago, against the then-growing tendency to call any fizzy white wine "champagne" even if it didn't come from Champagne.  (Everyone except the Russians knelt before this, but (again according to TF1) the russkies call their own fizz "champagne" and they also call the French champagne fizzy wine, just to rub salt into the wound)  Even the "Methode Champegnoise" description for fizz that indicated that it was made in the same way as champagne, was outlawed and had to be replaced with "Methode traditionelle". 

The idea is that in France, people will easily be able to identify The Real Thing from imitations of lower quality.   They have various categories of protection, AOP is a common one, meaning "Appellation d'Origine Protegée, that is the food you are buying is The Real Thing, from The Actual Place and made to a Recipe that is clearly defined and is Not Allowed to Change.

Moving on, our unelected lords and masters in Brussels have decided that it's a good idea that good, nutritious food be distinguishable from inferior food by means of a "nutri-label", that classes the food from A to E, A being Very Good For You and E being rather less so.  Fine so far.

Roquefort is a cheese that I adore, it's an AOP cheese, made from raw sheeps' milk, made in a fixed way, and innoculated with penicillium, giving it a "blue" aspect.  It's flavourful, has lots of salt and is high fat, and accordingly has a nutri-score of E.   The makers of the cheese are somewhat miffed, since as they point out, they can't change the recipe and still call it Roquefort, but producers of inferior imitations can change the recipe of whatever they produce that mimicks Roquefort in taste, appearance and creaminess, and thereby get a better nutri-score.

So, The Real Thing is bad for you, but the inferior imitations are good.   I nearly wet myself laughing.   

Thinking farther ahead, what are the odds, do you reckon, that the insects they're trying to persuade us will be good to eat will be classed "A"?