Flourish Chilli Prawn Pasta

Name: Flourish Chilli Prawn Pasta
Brand: Sainsbury's

Sainsbury's

00485647

Processing

Processed foods

Group 3 of 4 on the NOVA scale

Additives listed

None we have assessed

Counted from the label, not by quantity

Salt per 100g

0.42g

Medium

UK FSA front of pack threshold

Three separate readings, kept apart on purpose. This is not a score, and none of it says this product is harmful.

Additives

No additives listed in the source data for this product. That can mean it genuinely has none, or that the entry is incomplete. The pack itself is the authority.

Ingredients

Cooked Wholewheat Linguine Pasta (Water, Durum Wholewheat Semolina (Wheat)), Prawn (15%), Onion, Cherry Tomatoes, Tomato, Red Pepper, Tomato Paste, Water, Baby Spinach (2%), Rapeseed Oil, Garlic Purée, Sundried Tomatoes (Water, Sundried Tomatoes, Salt), Sugar, Lemon Juice, Salt, Cornflour, White Wine Vinegar, Oregano, Parsley, I Cracked Black Pepper, Red Chilli Flakes, Rosemary, Garlic Extract, Black Pepper, Basil

As printed on the pack, in the producer's own order: ingredients are listed by weight, so what comes first is most of what is in it. E numbers link to their assessment where we have one.

Processing level

NOVA group 3: Processed foods

Foods made by adding salt, sugar or oil to group 1 or 2, such as tinned fish, cheese or fresh bread. Fine in normal amounts.

Nutrients per 100g

Fat

2.10g

Low

Saturates

0.20g

Low

Sugars

3.40g

Low

Salt

0.42g

Medium

Judged on the UK FSA front of pack thresholds for solid foods. A dash means the source has no figure, which is not the same as a low one.

Where this came from

Product data from Open Food Facts, which is crowd sourced and can be incomplete or out of date. Photograph from the same source, under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike licence. Our copy is from 17 August 2026: Open Food Facts is checked every night, and a product is rewritten only when its record there has changed, so an older date means the source has not moved rather than that we stopped looking. Something wrong? Correcting it at the source fixes it here and everywhere else that uses the same data. If the problem is one of our additive assessments, tell us.

Scan another barcode Search