IADSA on health claims
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Relying solely on human intervention studies to substantiate health claims is impractical and the Codex Alimentarius recommendations for the scientific basis of health claims should take into account the totality of evidence, the International Alliance of Dietary/Food Supplement Associations says. The draft of the recommendations states human trials are the prime source of evidence to back health claims and "makes no reference to evidence based on traditional knowledge and history of use," IADSA says. While human trials are important, they are only one source of information and "all sources of scientific data have inherent limitations, hence the need to focus on the totality of the available data and weighing of the evidence," says David Richardson, scientific adviser to the U.K. Council for Responsible Nutrition and IADSA. CRN and other members of the supplement and nutrition industry have long protested the pharmaceutical model of testing nutrients (1"The Tan Sheet" May 7, 2007, p. 12)...
You may also be interested in...
Supplement firms must adapt clinical research methods to accommodate the industry's unique challenges and gain acceptance from mainstream medicine, Council for Responsible Nutrition President and CEO Steve Mister said during the trade group's Day of Science workshop May 3
The US Medicare agency has released a quick-start guide for laboratory certification.
Washington State Ecology Mulls ‘Safer’ Definition While Exploring Phthalate Alternatives In Fragrances
Marissa Smith, senior regulatory toxicologist in the Washington Department of Ecology’s Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction program, discusses what’s next for the state’s inaugural Safer Products go-round. “How we define ‘safer’ is really going to be the lynchpin of this whole process,” she says.