Yes, but the SEO methods and Google’s ranking methods have been evolving together over time. Meaning SEO used in content from some time ago may have less impact on the results you see today. Of course, this is just a hypothesis based on a thing I read a few months ago that I can’t even tell you the name of lol
I agree that it’s nonsense, and thanks for pointing out that I can look up European nutrition facts – i’m gonna start doing that. I wish we’d do the per 100g thing, but we don’t which makes it easier for companies to game the system. My point was that nutrition facts don’t always tell the whole story, especially if your country’s regulatory bodies have been lobbied into submission by the companies they are supposed to be regulating, so finding out if your tea has added sugars may not be as simple as looking on the box.
Tic Tacs say 0g sugar in the nutrition facts, even though they’re mostly sugar. They can do this because they aren’t required to report quantities of sugar below 0.5g, but the serving size is 1 tic tac or, conveniently, 0.49g.
But it does mean that the reviews you based your decisions on are for old models (that may have sense been upgraded or changed) or discontinued products.