Home page Nutrition All Foodaware papers Eating well Membership Contact details The food quiz

Nutrition Claims and Functional Claims CFG12/01 DG SanCo Discussion Paper on Nutrition Claims and Functional Claims: comments by Foodaware, the Consumer Food Group Introduction General considerations Nutrition claims Criteria for making nutrition claims Functional claims Criteria for the use of functional claims Introduction Foodaware represents UK organisations concerned with the consumer interest in food and is continuing the role of Consumers in Europe (CEG)’s food working party.  This paper supplements our comments of 22 July 2001 on the DG SanCo Discussion Paper on Nutrition Claims and Functional Claims (SANCO/1341/2001). Foodaware welcomes the Commission’s paper and its intention to harmonise legislation on the use of nutrition and functional claims.  We are highly concerned about the proliferation of number and type of claims being made about foodstuffs – especially food supplements, fortified foods and so-called ‘functional’ foods – without matching control measures. As the number and range of claims has grown, consumers have been left increasingly confused and without sufficient information to assess these objectively. Current legislation has not been sufficient to avoid the confusing and unacceptable situation that currently prevails.  Moreover, national codes of practice also have proven inadequate.  For example, they are difficult to enforce, do not include effective sanctions, nor have the benefit of being harmonised at the EU level. Much greater control over the use of claims is needed, in the form of legislation and enforcement, together with improved and more widespread nutrition education. As consumers become aware of the benefits of a healthy diet, food claims may have an important impact on peoples' purchasing decisions.  We consider that such messages should be limited to objective, measurable aspects of a food which enable consumers to make up their own minds about the health value of a food.  Nutrition claims should be clearly defined in terms of the quantitative level of the nutrient present, be consistent between products and be meaningful to consumers. In relation to functional claims (and indeed health claims in general), we consider that, ideally, they should not be permitted.  They are hard to justify for individual foods and any potentially useful educational role they might have will be heavily outweighed by their potential to confuse and mislead consumers.  Instead, consumers should be encouraged to achieve dietary change by the provision of clear, accurate, simple and comprehensive nutrition information and education. If, however, these claims are to be permitted, then it should only be under very limited and strict conditions that would include, for example: Full substantiation of any claims made Pre-market approval by an independent committee, such as the SCF Harmonised rules at the EU level to ensure consistency across the single market and to provide a basis for enforcement. CFG regrets that the Commission has restricted the scope of discussion to nutrition and functional claims and has not included the wider issue of all health claims at this stage.   Health related claims have great potential to confuse or even mislead consumers and national initiatives have differed in their interpretation and scope in dealing with this issue to date. Consumers themselves do not distinguish between different types of claims and consumer protection legislation is needed to cover the full range of health claims made. General considerations Paragraph 6 As a central principle, Foodaware believes the purpose of any information accompanying food products, labels or otherwise, should be to enable consumers to make informed choices about the foods they buy.  Food labels should inform and not misinform or mislead consumers.  However, to date, there have been many differing interpretations of what may mislead and a precautionary approach has not been taken in most cases. In the absence of sufficient reliable evidence, about the way consumers process and understand nutritional and functional claims on food labels, we believe that a much more cautious approach should be taken about what is permitted. Paragraph 7 Claims made on specific foodstuffs should never imply that a varied and adequate diet could not provide sufficient quantities of nutrients.  Indeed, we would argue that the label should clearly state this fact in close proximity to the claim. Paragraph 8 All package labelling, advertisements (print, television, video, websites etc), product information sheets and associated publications, product endorsements, logos or other words and images used to state or imply a claim, should all be included in future legislation. Paragraph 9 Foodaware favours allowing claims about a nutrient or substance only if the overall profile of the product is nutritionally “acceptable”.  This approach would assist consumers make sensible food choices in line with public health guidelines. Paragraph 10 We agree that claims should only be allowed if the nutrient or other substance in question is contained in the final product in a form that is bio-available, and in a sufficient quantity to justify the claim during its shelf life. Paragraph 11 Claims should refer to the food in the form it will ultimately be consumed (after any necessary preparation following package instructions). Definition of the term ‘claim’ Paragraphs 12 - 14 Foodaware fully supports the need to find common definitions of the term ‘ claim’ and associated concepts.  The Codex Alimentarius definition of ‘claim’ is a good starting point. Paragraph 15 While there is a definite need to define claims, it should be clear that this is primarily to enable control measures.  Consumers generally perceive all nutrition/functional/health claims as implying that the food is in some way ‘healthier’ than similar alternatives i.e. as health claims.  Thus the priority for consumers is not definitions but to be assured that such claims have been substantiated and are comparable. Nutrition claims Paragraphs 16 -17 The definition of nutrition claims in Council Directive 90/496/EEC provides a good basis but will need updating to take into account claims for substances, such as fibre, antioxidants and lactic bacteria, which have a physiological effect. Paragraphs 18 - 23 Foodaware supports the Codex approach of developing agreed criteria for the use of nutritional claims such as ‘low’, ‘rich’, ‘light’ etc.  These criteria need to be harmonised in order to enable consumers to make meaningful comparisons between products.  Products making ‘comparative’ claims must state what the reference point is in close proximity to the claim. Paragraphs 24 - 25 Foodaware is concerned that consumers can be confused between the different risks associated with dietary and blood cholesterol; there is undoubtedly a need for more and better consumer education in this regard.  Ideally, claims concerning dietary cholesterol should not be made. Criteria for making nutrition claims Paragraph 27 Foodaware agrees that rules on claims should apply to all foods (with the exception of foods for particular nutritional uses that are controlled separately).  So called ‘functional foods’ should not be treated as a separate group. Paragraph 28 Claims such a ‘X% fat free’ or ‘only X% fat’ have the potential to be very misleading to consumers.  Consumers need full nutritional labelling on foods rather than these kinds of confusing claims whose main purpose is marketing. Paragraph 29 Claims in the form of ‘without added’ or ‘no added’ etc. should only be permitted if the nutrient is normally added to similar products.  The reference product should also be identified on the label. Paragraph 30 Foods naturally low or high in a given nutrient should only be permitted to make claims if they meet the generally agreed criteria for all such claims.  There may be some value in expressing these claims in the form suggested, namely, ‘a low (name of nutrient) food’ or ‘a high (name of nutrient) food’.  This should be considered further. Paragraph 31 Foodaware is not convinced of the need to amend the current rule, that vitamins and minerals should be present at a level of at least 15% of Recommended Daily Allowances (RDA) before a claim can be made.  We would certainly not support any lowering of this level.  Consumers should always be able to determine the vitamin and mineral content from nutritional information provided – including as a percentage of RDA. Paragraphs 32-36 Comparative nutrient claims, such as the use of the terms ‘ increased’, ‘reduced’, ‘more’, ‘less’ etc need to be substantiated and controlled by harmonised rules. The Codex Alimentarius guidelines could provide a useful starting point for establishing appropriate criteria. Foodaware supports the general conditions suggested, namely that: the food being compared should be different versions of the same or similar foods; a statement of the amount of difference in energy value or nutrient content should be given; and that the amount of difference and the identity of the comparison food should appear in close proximity to the claim. Functional claims Paragraphs 37 – 39 The Codex Alimentarius definition of a ‘nutrient function claim’ – “a nutrition claim that describes the physiological role of the nutrient in growth, development and normal functions of the body” - would provide a useful basis for defining functional claims in future Community legislation. Criteria for the use of functional claims Paragraphs 40 – 47 Foodaware supports the suggested conditions to be fulfilled for functional claims, in particular: The claim must be stated in the context of the total diet. The food for which the claim is made must be at least a significant source of the nutrient in question (where increased consumption is recommended) or must be low in, reduced in or free of the nutrient where reduced consumption is recommended. The claim must be communicated in such a way as to assist consumer understanding of the basis of the claim and to allow people to make informed and appropriate choices. It must be based on generally accepted scientific evidence that is kept under regular review. All claims must be fully substantiated. Paragraphs 48 - 50 Foodaware also believes that pre-market approval of claims must be required.  There could be considerable value in compiling a list of approved claims for each nutrient or substance including their specific wording. This has the advantage of ensuring greater consistency of claims on the market and consequently is likely to be much less confusing to consumers. The “two-steps” Swedish system for the assessment and approval of claims is an interesting model and should be considered further. September 2001