Supported
The available pack, rule and evidence align with the exact claim.
Independent food-claim evidence
Respect
for food.
Scan the pack. See what it claims, what the label declares and what the evidence can honestly support.
Scan a food barcodeTry the #### consumer conceptSearch evidence receiptsTry the meltdown studyRead the research dossierReview the proposal
UK-first research project · launching carefully
01
Why HonourFood
Food deserves better than suspicion—or a careless score.
Packaging can be technically correct while leaving a very different impression. HonourFood is being designed to examine that gap without turning opinion, popularity or a viral video into an accusation.
Every conclusion will stay tied to the exact pack, market, date, rule and evidence behind it—with room for uncertainty, correction and a responsible-business response.
A calmer way to check a claim
From shelf to evidence.
The barcode begins the search. The photographed pack establishes what was actually sold. Review then separates fact from inference.
- 1
Scan and capture
Barcode, front, back, ingredients, nutrition and visible date or lot.
- 2
Map the claim
Record the exact wording, imagery, qualifications and applicable rule.
- 3
Show the boundary
Publish what is supported, disputed, unresolved or officially established.
No verdict theatre
Plain statuses.
Visible reasons.
The thumbs make the result recognisable. The written status and evidence receipt make it accountable.
Qualified
The claim may be accurate, but important qualifications affect its meaning.
Unresolved
The label alone cannot justify a verdict. More evidence is required.
Not supported
For this exact claim and pack, the evidence reviewed does not substantiate the proposition.
Three answers, never one score
Read the evidence.
Know who decided.
A product claim, HonourFood's checking process and a member reaction answer different questions. They must never share a verdict.
Editorial conclusion
Evidence status
One exact claim, on one dated pack, in one market—shown through the four-thumb key and a written, evidence-linked conclusion.
Review status
Evidence reviewed
The page states which checks were completed and by whom. A reviewer mark describes HonourFood's process, never product approval.
Member opinion
Member view
A separately labelled reaction to the published dossier. This remains gated until manipulation, investigation and appeal controls are tested.
The HonourFood trust charter
What cannot be bought.
Claims and ingredients stay tied to the same physical pack, market and date.
The responsible business can answer and supply evidence without paying.
New evidence creates a dated update; it never silently erases the history.
Payment, advertising and popularity cannot buy a result, ranking or removal.
A real problem, honestly bounded
Evidence without
the panic.
The strongest case for HonourFood comes from official surveillance, not viral claims. The latest FSA programme confirms material pockets of labelling, composition and authenticity concern while warning us not to pretend a targeted sample describes the whole market.
These are targeted-surveillance results, not estimates of failure across all UK food. Denominators and tests differ by category.
Read the FSA 2025/26 surveillance studyOpen source room
Check our
foundations.
HonourFood's own claims should be inspectable too. These are the primary rules and evidence shaping the first public release.
Whole-project review
Pressure-test
the next scale.
Test the shared evidence method, the #### shopper concept, Respectful Shop and HonourFood Professional in one review without providing your identity. We want shopper, food-industry, science, legal, data and commercial perspectives before any pilot grows. Praise is welcome; precise criticism is more useful.
No identity requestedNo bundled marketing consentNo public score createdConsumer + shop + professional views
Respect for food.