FDA Confuses Consumers by Allowing Dubious Health Claims on Foods

[struggle4progress]

<snip> In 2002, the Bush administration reversed a decade-old policy requiring that health claims be based on sound science. Under the new policy, which the food industry helped craft, health claims are generally permitted regardless of the state of scientific evidence as long as companies include a disclaimer such as the scientific evidence supporting a claim is “limited and inconclusive.” For instance, the FDA authorized a label claim that green tea may reduce the risk of breast and prostate cancer, as long as the label also states that the agency believes it is “highly unlikely” green tea has such an effect.

“The new FDA study clearly demonstrates that preliminary health claims lead to deception,” said CSPI director of legal affairs Bruce Silverglade. “The FDA should immediately cease authorizing preliminary health claims and withdraw approval for those that it has allowed.”

Those claims are permitted so long as they are qualified by terms like “scientific evidence suggests but does not prove,” or state that the claim is based on “supportive but not conclusive research.” The FDA study found that those qualifying statements don’t “reliably convey the intended level of scientific support for a health claim,” and that people in the study “attributed more certainty to claims with disclaimers than those without disclaimers.”

Among the preliminary health claims sanctioned under the policy are claims that nuts, olive oil, and foods containing omega-3 fatty acids can reduce the risk of heart disease. Under consideration are claims that whey protein in infant formula may reduce the risk of food allergies in infants, lycopene may reduce the risk of cancer, and that lutein may reduce the risk of cataracts and macular degeneration. <snip>

http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/FDA_Confuses_Consumers_by_Allowing_Dubious_Health_Claims_on_Foods.shtml