Feb 16 2010

European companies’ ongoing struggle for food and supplement health claims

As readers of this blog know, I am not a fan of health claims on food packages or supplements.  I think they are inherently misleading.   It’s hard for me to believe that eating any one food product or supplement will have a significant effect on disease risk.

It is one thing to say that a nutrient is required for good health.  It is quite another to say that products containing that nutrient are going to have the same effect.  We would all be better off eating foods rather than food products.

That’s why health claims are really about marketing, not health.

Food marketers work hard to get approval for health claims.  America is well ahead of Europe in allowing them.  European regulatory agencies are still trying to hold health claims to reasonable scientific standards.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has been turning down requests for health claims right and left, but recently broke down and  approved one for iron, requested by the Association de la Transformation Laitière Française, a trade association of French dairy cooperatives.  Iron, of course, is an essential nutrient.

EFSA said the association could say: “Iron contributes to normal cognitive development of children.” But EFSA said the association could not say: “Iron is necessary for the cognitive development of children.”

I don’t think dairy products should say either, but that’s just me.

As for supplements:  In December, Food Chemical News reported that supplement firms in the European Union are considering filing a case with the World Trade Organization over EFSA’s refusal of so many of their proposed claims.   They consider the rejections a barrier to trade.  The firms are looking for a non-European Union country to make their case.

Never underestimate the self-interest of makers of food products and supplements in the struggles over health claims.

Comments

  • Anthro
  • February 16, 2010
  • 12:05 pm

Don’t people understand that if these claims (supplements and food additives) were valid, their doctor, the surgeon general, and YOU, would be telling them so?

People have been sucked into some very persistent mythology:

1) Conventionally grown food is devoid of nutrients.

2) Big Pharma doesn’t want you to know that you can obtain and maintain health by taking supplements or eating specific foods nutrients.

I support organic agriculture for the same reasons you do, but I also buy plenty of conventionally produced food, depending on my budget, how much gas I want to waste, and seasonal availability. What I don’t buy is anything in the center aisles whether it’s a chain supermarket, Whole Foods, or the Co-op–except packaged beans if they are not available in bulk and a box of salt or baking powder or that sort of thing. I eat a wide variety of vegetables and fruits, beans and other legumes and a bit of grass fed meat now and then–all in appropriate portions for my age and activity level. Of course I have a bit of ice cream now and then, but I regulate this. I don’t take any supplements other than Vit. D (a recent addition) and I haven’t had even a cold for years. I get flu shots the last few years, but didn’t get the flu before I started those.

Marketing is a scourge on the public health of the nation, and, it would appear, the world. No good can come of it but to further line the pockets of the already wealthy. They already have the younger generations believing their rubbish and thinking that boxed cereals (or thinly disguised pastries) are the only thing to eat for breakfast. They already have vast numbers of people who say they hate pills swallowing a dozen a day and swilling them down with fad-of-the-day miracle juices that only increase their caloric intake of sugar.

I urge those of you who think this industry has your health in mind to read Marion’s fine and well-documented book “Food Politics”.

Dear Anthro, thank you for the addition to the post. i put this matter in front of my patients or listeners this way: nutraceutical and pharmaceutical companies, food industry are not in the business of health, they are in the business of selling, they are in the business of making money and if they do not make money they are going bankrupt and out of business they go! they have marketing departments and they doa great job! look at this example: advertisement along I-95 in CT for Turkey Hill icy cream: “it has so much Calcium, vit D and more…”
i wonder, what that is that MORE…..? :( and can i eat it 3 times per day?

we just have to love marketing, what a tool!!

Marion’s and Pollan’s advice still stands: eat food, not “nutrients”.

Mrion, thank you bringing attention to the involvement of WTO. these bodies (WTO, IMF, etc) are the stealth weapons of all that is crazy.

-imtooliberal.com

  • Jennifer
  • February 16, 2010
  • 8:57 pm

I agree, Anthros! If these claims were all true, then people would be getting healthier. Of course, we know that the opposite is very true in this country.

Did anyone catch Jamie Oliver’s TED Award Acceptance speech? He touches on the marketing to children issue and health claims.

I was recently at the FDA and they had a social science researcher commenting on the health claims and front-of-package labeling. What people infer from a single health claim is SHOCKING! (i.e. Zero Trans Fat on the box means people think it’s also low calorie, low total fat, overall healthier…). And people are less likely to look at the nutrition label if there is a health claim. So obviously companies will want to use these claims! They WORK!

  • Anthro
  • February 17, 2010
  • 9:46 am

@Jennifer -

Thanks for the insight from your visit to the FDA. That is fascinating research and the conclusions even worse than I imagined. Reminds me of an incident years ago with my mother who was touting a jar of peanut butter that proclaimed “no cholesterol” on the front label.

@Dr. Veronica -

Keep up the good work, although I have to say, you are the first naturopath I’ve known or heard of who doesn’t recommend supplements.

——-

One of the biggest problems with labeling, though, is serving size. My (overweight) husband is constantly bringing home chips from the Co-op that say “30% less fat” and things like “feel good snacking” It’s an 8 oz. bag and a serving is 17 chips or 1 oz. and 140 calories per serving. Now when is the last time you saw someone eat 17 chips!? The very idea of “snacking” was one of the early things perpetrated onto the population by the marketing folks. When I was a child, snacking was considered something relatively evil; it would “spoil your appetite” which meant that you would not be eating what was actually good for you and, therefore, was not allowed!

  • JE
  • February 18, 2010
  • 10:37 am

Marion Nestle: “It’s hard for me to believe that eating any one food product or supplement will have a significant effect on disease risk.”

What does she think of the possibility of the Defense Dept. giving Omega-3 supplements to U.S. soldiers?

http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Industry/US-military-may-shock-and-awe-omega-3-market

[...] Nestle (rien avoir avec le groupe alimentaire) sur son blog Food Politics du 16 février 2010, « European companies’ ongoing struggle for food and supplement health claims » ou Les sociétés européennes sont en train de se battre pour les allégations de santé [...]

[...] Nestle (rien avoir avec le groupe alimentaire) sur son blog Food Politics du 16 février 2010, « European companies’ ongoing struggle for food and supplement health claims » ou Les sociétés européennes sont en train de se battre pour les allégations de santé [...]

Leave a comment