There has been a broad acceptance among Europe’s food manufacturers that EU laws drawn up to specify the health claims companies can and cannot make on labels are necessary – but there remains concerns over how the process of submitting claims is evolving. Philippa Jones reports from Brussels on how key stakeholders in the sector see the health claims regime developing in 2010.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Industry representatives have refused to write off the much-maligned EU food health claims process – but agree that it remains dogged by uncertainties.
Speaking at a conference in Brussels, specialists called for greater clarity, consistency and guidance from EU institutions on the health claims assessment process to help companies have the best chance of ensuring that their claims are accepted.
Patrick O’Quin, director for external relations at Danone, said the French food giant was “convinced that strong regulation [on health claims] is necessary to regain the trust of consumers who are becoming more demanding in terms of safety, quality and health”.
O’Quin said the legislation was “heading in the right direction”, but he admitted the road was still full of pitfalls for applicants. Interestingly, O’Quin said it was not until a meeting in June between the food industry and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that the company had fully understood the assessment criteria. It was then that Danone subsequently decided to “withdraw three applications and to resubmit them in a more appropriate format”.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataDuring the meeting, it also became clear that EFSA would pass “a scientific opinion on scientific evidence”, revealed Catherine Pinchon-Baratier, Actimel brand team director in Danone’s R&D division. Before making any health claim submissions, Danone now ensures that the wording of its claim is scientific, that the claim closely reflects the supporting scientific studies and that the company only submits science and data that directly support the claim, Pinchon-Baratier said.
Patrick Coppens, secretary general for the European Responsible Nutrition Alliance (ERNA), agreed the approvals process had not always been easy for companies to follow. He pointed to the first batch of decisions released by EFSA, where the agency had rejected many claims for lacking sufficient backing from scientific evidence, for instance on probiotics and botanics, while approving others (such as for vitamins) where there was greater scientific consensus on health benefits.
Coppens signalled some concern about the process, saying: “EFSA looked at textbook knowledge; they used a broad and general scope; they did not look at the evidence too deeply,” he said. And there were risks here, he noted. While the assessment system emphasised the need of “demonstrating the effect” of a substance, he insisted that this was often not an easy task. “For example, all claims relating to joint health have been rejected, but it is very difficult to prove that if you take glucosamine joints stay healthy,” he said.
Coppens also used the Nutraingredients Health Claims 2010 conference to urge companies to “carefully monitor” the health claims process at all times, even after a claim has been deemed out of the scope of the legislation or carrying insufficient evidence to be accepted. In those cases, it was the responsibility of member states to submit an argument in defence of the claim by the end of the year. If this does not happen or the argument fails to convince, the health claim will “be removed from the list” and banned from use, he warned.
Coppens also drew attention to the public’s right to comment after an EFSA consultation is published and insisted that there have been changes to the agency’s decisions because of information submitted via this route. He urged companies to “take advantage of this opportunity”.
“It is not a good solution that companies have to defend their position after rather than before an opinion, but it can make a difference,” Coppens said.
Whatever the final outcome, food manufacturers will have to make significant changes to their labels over the next couple of years. Owen Warnock, partner at law firm Eversheds, agreed that food makers would face a difficult task turning the long-winded turgid information demanded by the EU into eye-catching packaging that would appeal to the consumer.
He explained that a health claims label will have to carry “the [scientific] claim that has been approved” and depending on the claim “may need further information and extra wording including a statement indicating the importance of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle, the quantity and pattern of consumption, the persons who should avoid it and whether it may be harmful if consumed to excess”.
Warnock gave the example of tomato extract that has been approved in principle by EFSA. The claim submitted was that it “helps to maintain healthy blood flow and benefit circulation”, but EFSA approved the claim that it “helps to maintain normal platelet aggregation”. Warnock said: “We don’t know what wording the Commission will finally agree – we may get something more understandable, but not as broad as the original statement”.
Meanwhile, if a health claim is banned, Warnock said it would be difficult for manufacturers to distinguish their product from the crowd. He suggested that in addition to highlighting the nutrition table, companies could use the media to showcase their product, but said it was not clear what will be allowed and what will be considered by the EU as advertising.
According to Warnock, the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) suggests a magazine can run an article on a product with a health claim as long as the reader cannot see any advertising for the product on the same page, but he added that he was “not sure this is right”. Warnock urged companies to be wary of using more underhand methods of marketing their product, such as setting up offshore websites, in case they attracted unwelcome media attention.
Danone’s O’Quin concluded by asking the Commission to provide a “clear timetable” on the future steps of the regulation so that industry is clear about the path ahead and for them to ensure that neither the health claims legislation or other regulation stymied innovation.
We need “consistency in all EU regulations that have an impact on the food industry”, O’Quin said and pleaded with Brussels “to develop an integrated vision that does not backfire against competitiveness and R&D”.
