Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:50:47.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional foods and health claims: a public health policy perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1998

Mark Lawrence  and
Mike Rayner
Mark Lawrence*
Affiliation:
Visiting Research Fellow British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Division of public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Mike Rayner
Affiliation:
Head British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Division of public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
*
*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To propose a policy framework for the regulation of functional foods and health claims within a public health context.

Design:

This article reviews the empirical evidence and public health principles associated with functional foods and health claims to analyse the issues, challenge the assumptions that have emerged and explore options for moving forward.

Setting:

Functional foods and health claims are among the more controversial and complex issues being debated by food regulators internationally. Proponents of functional foods and health claims state that functional foods may reduce health care expenditure and health claims are a legitimate nutrition education tool that will help them inform consumers of the health benefits of certain food products. Conversely, opponents of these developments respond that it is the total diet that is important for health, not so-called ‘magic bullets’. Moreover, they argue that health claims will enable manufacturers to indulge in marketing hyperbole and essentially blur the distinction between food and drugs. This topic provides a valuable case study of public policy in relation to food and health.

Conclusion:

The need to maintain a general prohibition on health claims while accommodating specific exemptions supported by scientific substantiation is recommended. Nutrition education and monitoring and evaluation are integral to the proposed regulatory framework. The intention of this policy position is to encourage research and development of innovative food products while avoiding an inappropriate medicalization of the general food supply.

Keywords

Food regulationHealth claimsFunctional foodsPublic health policy
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 75 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © CABI Publishing 1998

References

1National Food Authority. Discussion Paper on Functional Foods. Canberra: AGPS, 1994.Google Scholar
2American Dietetic Association. Position Statement of the American Dietetic Association: Phytochemicals and Functional Foods. American Dietetic Association, 1994.Google Scholar
3Committee on Opportunities in the Nutrition and Food Sciences, Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine. In Thomas, PR, Earl, R, eds Opportunities in the Nutrition and Food Sciences, Research Challenges and the Next Generation of Investigators. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1994.Google Scholar
4Codex Alimentarius Commission. Appendix 1: Draft Guide-lines for use of Health and Nutrition Claims. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Health Organization, CL 1995/26-FL, 1995.Google Scholar
5Codex Alimentarius Commission. Report of the 24th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, Ottawa, Canada, 14–17 May 1996. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Health Organization, ALINORM 97/22, 1996.Google Scholar
6Codex Alimentarius Commission. Executive Committee Report, June 1997. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Health Organization, 1997.Google Scholar
7US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, Final Rules to Amend the Food Labeling Regulations. Federal Register 1993; 58 2533–620.Google Scholar
8US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Final Rules to Ament the Food Labeling Regulations, Federal Register 1993; 58: 2927–41.Google Scholar
9Levy, AS. Summary report on health claims focus groups. In: Final Report of the Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Food, Nutrition and Health. Colorado and Washington DC: Keystone Center, 1996.Google Scholar
10Levy, AS, Derby, BM, Roe, BE. Consumer Impacts of Health Claims: an Experimental Study US Food and Drug Administration. Center for food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 1997.Google Scholar
11Kneale, C, Truswell, AS. Health Claims: an Exploration of the Current Debate in Australia. The University of Sydney Nutrition Research Foundation, 1997.Google Scholar
12Bradbury, J, Lobstein, T, Lund, V. Functional Foods Examined London: The Food Commission, 1996.Google Scholar
13Public Health Association (Australia). Submission to P153–the Review of Health and Related Claims. The Australia/New Zealand Food Authority, 1997.Google Scholar
14Australian Consumers Association. Submission to P153–the Review of Health and Related Claims. The Australia/New Zealand Food Authority, 1997.Google Scholar
15Blane, D, Brunner, E, Wilkinson, RG, eds. Health and Social Organization: Towards a Health Policy for the 21st Century. London: Routledge, 1996.Google Scholar
16World Health Organization, Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Geneva: WHO, 1986.Google Scholar
17National Food Authority. Review of the Food Standards Code: Concept Paper on Health and Related Claims. Canberra: AGPS, 1996.Google Scholar
18Anderson, JW, Zettwoch, N, Feldman, T, Tietyen-Clark, J, Oeltgen, P, Bishop, CW. Cholesterol-lowering effects of psyllium hydrophilic mucilloid for hypercholesterolemic men. Arch. Intern. Med. 1988; 148: 292–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Greenberg, ER, Baron, JA, Tosteson, TD, et al. A clinical trial of antioxidant vitamins to prevent colo-rectal adenoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 1994; 331: 141–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Kellogg supplement comments target psyllium health claim. Food Labeling News 1993; 12 23; 20–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21Roberts, DCK, Truswell, AS, Bencke, A, Dewar, HM, Farmakalidis, E. The cholesterol lowering effect of a breakfast cereal containing psyllium fibre. Med. J. Australia 1994; 161: 660–4.Google Scholar
22Hallberg, L, Rossander-Hulten, L, Brune, M, Gleerup, A. Inhibition of haem-iron absorption in man by calcium. Br. J. Nutr. 1992; 69: 533–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Ink, SL, Shinnick, FL. Scientific data requirements for supporting health claims. In: Tillotson, JE, ed. America's Food Health Messages and Claims. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1993.Google Scholar
24US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration. Food Labeling; health claims and label statements; folate and neural tube defects, and food standards: amendments of standards of identity for enriched grain products to require addition of folic acid, Final Rules. Federal Register 1996; 61: 8749–807.Google Scholar
25Lawrence, M. Highlight interview. Food Australia 1997; 49: 3.Google Scholar
26Rayner, M. Systematic review as a method for assessing the validity of health claims. J. Roy. Soc. Chem. in press.Google Scholar
27Keystone Center. Final Report of the Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Food, Nutrition and Health. Colorado and Washington DC: Keystone Center, 1996.Google Scholar
28NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness. CRD Guidelines for Those Carrying out or Commissioning Reviews. York: CRD, 1996.Google Scholar
29Susser, M. Judgement and causal inference: criteria in epidemiologic studies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1977; 105: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Bradford, Hill A. The environment and disease: association or causation? J. Roy. Soc. Med. 1965; 58: 295–300.Google Scholar
31Tones, K. Editoroal. Beyond the randomized controlled trial: a case for judicial review Health Educ. Res. 1997; 12: i–iv.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32Kulakow, N, Baggett, W, McNeal, G. Putting the E into NLEA!. Nutr. Today 1997; September/October: 37–40.Google Scholar
33Lawrence, M, Cumming, F. Editorial. Aust. J. Nutr. Dietet. 1997; 54: 1, 3.Google Scholar