Washington – You’re not alone if you are confused by some of those health claims made on food labels.
Does eating two tablespoons of olive oil a day or 1.5 ounces of nuts reduce the risk of heart disease? Does drinking green tea reduce the risk of prostate cancer? Is there scientific evidence to support the claims?
At issue is a class of labels, approved two years ago, that allows manufacturers to make “qualified health claims,” provided they carry a big caveat – that the claims are not widely accepted among scientists.
A Food and Drug Administration study found that the labels do not accurately convey how much – or how little – science supports the claim.
In the study, which surveyed 1,920 adults at malls in five cities, some of the claims used text descriptions. Others were accompanied by a letter grade.
None performed very satisfactorily, the researchers said.
Critics say the study shows permitting the labels was a mistake.
“Consumers are bewildered and misled by health claims based on preliminary scientific evidence,” said Bruce Silverglade of the consumer-advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest.
His group has fought the FDA’s loosening of the regulations to allow the qualified claims.
Food-industry advocates said the claims just need to be improved.
“It’s a matter of finding the right wording,” said Stephanie Childs of the Grocery Manufacturers Association.
But the claims should not go away, she said Wednesday, because they allow food manufacturers “to get emerging science out there into the public domain.”
The FDA is planning a public hearing on the matter next month.
