[ SAMPLE READOUT · CLAIMS SCREEN · 1 OF 10 CLAIMS ]
One claim, through the panel.
An excerpt from a real screening in the Swedish dairy category, anonymised. Every percentage is computed from Sustainable Brand Index survey data — the personas react, the data decides.
“Eco-smart cap made from renewable material.”
ON-PACK CLAIM · DAIRY · SWEDEN · SCREENED AGAINST 2025–26 DATA, N=2,182
Step 1 — Decomposition
“…cap made from renewable material”
Verifiable factSpecific and checkable. Maps to sustainable packaging — a must-have for 21% of Swedish dairy consumers, though the category is ruled by animal welfare (61%) and locally produced (57%). A safe claim fighting for attention on the #13 concern.
“Eco-smart…”
Generic benefit claimSmart how — compared to what? Generic environmental terms fall under the EmpCo Directive's ban unless proven excellence backs them, and they are judged by what the average consumer understands. Renewable does not automatically mean lower footprint.
Step 2 — The panel reacts
Johan, 46
EGO · PRAGMATIST
23% OF MARKET
“An eco-smart cap? It's a cap.” The claim neither wins nor loses him — but if the new cap pours worse, he'll remember that, not the material.
Anna, 47
MODERATE · MAINSTREAM
33% OF MARKET
“Fine — they're doing something.” Mildly positive, low intensity. “Eco-smart” washes over her as background noise; the renewable fact quietly registers as effort.
Karin, 47
SMART · EXAMINER
16% OF MARKET
“Smart how? Which material? What did it improve?” The risk center. An unquantified “eco-smart” reads to her segment as greenwash — she would accept the fact with a number attached.
Elin, 42
DEDICATED · IDEALIST
4% OF MARKET · SMALL BASE
“Better material, good. Less packaging, better.” The most demanding segment — and the only one that actively rewards packaging moves. She'd still rather see reduction than substitution.
Step 3 — The verdict
Keep the fact. Drop the adjective.
Weighted across all segments, the factual half of the claim is safe and mildly positive: sustainable packaging is a must-have for roughly one in five Swedish dairy consumers, and the screened brand already holds above-average credit in this territory (checked against a category average of 9% — brand lookup redacted in this sample). The exposure sits entirely in one word. “Eco-smart” promises a benefit the average consumer cannot verify and the claim does not substantiate — the exact pattern EU regulators and Nordic courts have already ruled against in this category.
Recommendation: “Cap made from renewable material” — plus the named material or a quantified benefit. The specific claim earns the same goodwill and carries none of the risk.
→ ROUTED TO CLAIMS TEST · FIELDWORK
What does “eco-smart” and “renewable” actually promise to Swedish consumers on a milk cap — do they infer a climate benefit that isn't substantiated? Term-level interpretation is not covered by the survey data, so the panel flags it instead of guessing. That question goes to ~1,000 real consumers: the evidence file for the average-consumer standard.
Silicon screens. Humans substantiate.
The panel finds the risk in 48 hours. Real fieldwork proves the survivors.
Sample based on a real Claims Screen in the Swedish dairy category, 2025–2026 waves, n=2,182; brand and exact wording anonymised (original claim in Swedish). Persona names and quotes are illustrative composites; all percentages are computed from Sustainable Brand Index survey data. SBI Claims Check provides consumer evidence, not legal advice. Silicon Panel output is a screening tool and does not constitute an evidence file under the Empowering Consumers Directive.