Methodology

Last Updated: March 2026

Version: 1.1.0

How we evaluate and Scores Ingredients

CheckTheLabels.com is an educational reference website. We compile information about ingredients used in foods and personal care products and present it in a structured format. This page explains how we assign Safety Score and Safety Level, how to interpret them, and what they do (and do not) mean.

1) What Our Scores Are (and Are Not)

What the Safety Score is

The Safety Score (0–10) is an informational summary of how an ingredient is generally viewed under regulated/approved use conditions, based on publicly available regulatory and scientific sources.

• A higher score indicates higher confidence in safety at approved conditions of use.
• A lower score indicates more caution, uncertainty, or higher concern signals in the available data of official sources.

What the Safety Score is NOT

The score is not:

• a medical advice
• a diagnosis or prediction of individual health outcomes
• a replacement for regulatory decisions
• a statement that an ingredient is “safe for everyone”
• a guarantee that a product is compliant (compliance depends on category limits, formulation, labeling, and jurisdiction)

2) Safety Score Calculation and Scale

We use a 0–10 scale to keep the system simple and consistent. We use structured official information rather than personal opinion. The safety score is influenced by predefined parameters:

Score Parameters List:

The following parameters are used to define the final score; each ingredient is tested against each parameter before reaching the final score.

Parameter / Weightage	Bifurcation	Reward Value	Sample: Aspartame (6/10)	Lecithin (9/10)
Regulatory approval (40%)	FDA-approved/regulated	1	1	1
	EFSA-approved/regulated	1	1	1
	WHO/JEFCA-approved/regulated	1	1	1
	FSSAI-approved/regulated	1	1	1
Daily Intake limits (10%)	[Numeric ADI defined (mg/kg body weight/day)]  – 1 (“Temporary ADI”, “ADI pending additional data”, “Use permitted on an interim basis”) – 0   OR [Approved under GMP / quantum satis by EFSA or JECFA] (GMP counts ONLY when the regulator explicitly states “quantum satis” or “no ADI required due to low concern.”) – 1 else 0	1	1	1
ADI exceedance risk (10%)	No regulatory statement indicating exposure concern (no “exceedance”, “high exposure concern”, “refined exposure needed due to exceedance risk”)	1	0	0
Sensitivity Group (20%)	No group requires avoidance or restriction (Children/toddlers etc.)	1	1	1
	No Explicit case restriction (PKU, diabetics, pregnancy warning)	1	0	1
Data gaps (10%)	Do EFSA or JECFA explicitly state that existing data are sufficient and no further data are required? (Yes-1, No-0)	1	1	1
Natural / Synthetic origin (10%)	Natural, Natural-identical, Naturally occurring (commercially produced) -1	1	0	1

General Score Interpretation:

Score Number	General interpretation
10	Generally safe within intake limits approved by all major regulators, no specific sensitivity group or data gaps exists.
9
8
7	Generally safe within intake limits approved by all major regulators, Some sensitivity groups/ ADI concerns exists or some data gaps and synthetic origin.
6
5
4	Banned or restricted in some regions, large sensitivity groups / ADI concerns exists, some data gaps and synthetic origin.
3
2
1

Safety Level mapping:

The score is further classified in a safety level scale as shown below

• 1–4 → High Concern (low confidence / higher caution signals for safety)
• 5–7 → Moderate Concern (generally permitted, but context and exposure matter for safety)
• 8–10 → Low Concern (generally safe and stronger confidence under regulated use for safety)

Note:

1. Some ingredients may remain “Moderate” even with approval if there are meaningful exposure considerations (e.g., high consumption scenarios for certain groups) or important data limitations.
2. “Approved” usually means approved under specific conditions, not unlimited use.

3) What We Evaluate

We assign scores by reviewing several evidence areas. Not all ingredients have the same depth of data; when data is limited, we reflect that uncertainty.

A) Regulatory acceptance and conditions of use

We look at whether the ingredient is permitted and how it is regulated across major frameworks (where available), such as:

• Food Safety and standardization Authority of India – FSSAI (India)
• Food and Drug Administration – FDA (USA)
• European Food Safety Authority – EFSA / EU framework
• Codex Alimentarius – International Food Standards
• World Health organization and Joint Expert Committee for Food Additives. – WHO/JECFA
• Other – Established science opinions

B) Published limits and exposure context

Where available, we consider:

• ADI (Acceptable Daily Intake) or similar safety thresholds
• Maximum permitted levels (often category-specific, e.g., mg/kg in certain food groups)
• Any exposure notes (e.g., toddlers/children high consumption scenarios)
• GMP – Good Manufacturing Practice

We reflect that:

• Limits vary by category, country and product type
• Real-world exposure depends on how often and how much a person consumes/uses products containing the ingredient

C) Hazard signals and weight of evidence

We summarize what regulators/scientific assessments indicate regarding:

• genotoxicity, carcinogenicity (as assessed in official opinions)
• reproductive/developmental findings (when discussed in authoritative sources)
• irritation/sensitisation notes (more relevant to cosmetics/skin exposure)

We do not overstate findings. We follow the wording and context of the source.

D) Sensitive populations and practical caution flags

Some ingredients may require additional attention for certain groups due to:

• higher exposure likelihood (e.g., toddlers/children for certain beverages)
• sensitivity or intolerance reports noted in authoritative sources
• use-case context (leave-on cosmetics vs rinse-off; daily use vs occasional)

We capture this in Sensitivity Groups and in the “Health Concerns” summary.

E) Evidence quality and uncertainty (data gaps)

If information in the official sources is :

• outdated
• limited
• inconsistent across jurisdictions
• not clearly covered by primary sources

We reflect that uncertainty in the Safety Score and include notes/references wherever possible.