Challenging 'dodgy science'

Posted by Andrew Wadge on October 16th 2007 in Science, safety and health

I'm heading off to Belfast shortly for the Agency's open Board meeting, where I'll be presenting my Annual Report as Chief Scientist, but before I do so, I wanted to comment on last week's 'There goes the science bit…' report, exposing the misleading claims made on various products, including some foods.

Calling themselves 'early career researchers', these young scientists have published transcripts of their conversations with manufacturers and customer helplines, where the evidence to back up claims just wasn't available or came from unreliable sources.

Ensuring the information on labels is clear and not misleading is vital for the Food Standards Agency. One of our key aims is to make it easier for people to choose a healthy diet, which is why we're working hard to prevent the mislabelling or misdescription of foods.

Published by the charitable trust Sense about Science, which 'promotes public access to evidence and good science', the straightforward report presents a 'snapshot', as they call it, but it's also a call to action. They want everyone to challenge misinformation. While scientific research goes through rigorous procedures of testing and peer review, some products' labels and adverts make sweeping and unsubstantiated claims. As one chemist in the report says, those of us who can 'recognise mumbo jumbo when we see it need to speak out and set an example to others who just don't know who to believe'.

The report also mentions the removal of certain substances from food in response to 'customer concerns'. The concerns of the public are of paramount importance, but as a nutritionist in the report points out, giving 'a clear message to help consumers make informed choices should be the gold standard' for food companies. This is also the job of the Agency. It is part of our responsibility to ensure the public has the information it needs to make informed decisions and that any concerns the public has are based on accurate information.

This summer saw the introduction of a new European Regulation to help protect consumers from misleading health claims. Previously, the rules on health claims were very general. Now any claims made in relation to the nutrition and health benefits of a food will only be allowed if they have been shown to be based on science. And this science will need to have been verified by the European Food Safety Authority.

This means that foods that carry claims that they are 'good for your heart' or 'help lower cholesterol' will have scientific backing that this is indeed the case. It will take time before the process of checking the science is complete and these changes are seen on products in the shops.

As readers of this blog know, I am passionate about good science and what it can help us achieve. Here's your chance to have your say.

add new comment

Evidence

Posted by Susan McGinty (not verified) on 22/10/2007 - 10:35

Dear Andrew

Thank you for your response and for pointing me to the 1991 COMA report. More up-to-date, you might be interested to see the food pyramid produced by Harvard School of Public Health and the critical review of the 2005 American dietary guidelines.

Nutrition science has advanced somewhat during the last two decades. We now know that adipose tissue acts as an endocrine organ. So again, where is the evidence for the ‘evidence-based’ 2006 NICE guidance that obese people (with metabolic dysregulation (insulin resistance/leptin resistance)) should base their meals on bread, potatoes and pasta?

In relation to the new EU health claims regulation, will the Department of Health 5 a day logo licensing scheme come under Article 10 or will use of the logo be a non-commercial communication?

Thank you for your attention

Evidence

Posted by Andrew Wadge on 19/10/2007 - 13:56

Hello anonymous,

Thanks for your comment. The scientific evidence behind the current dietary guidelines can be found in the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy (COMA), report, Dietary reference Values for Food and Energy for the United Kingdom.

The Agency recommends five portions of fruit and vegetables a day as a minimum, to reduce the risk of chronic disease.

This advice originally came from the World Health Organization which recommended eating 400g of fruit and vegetables per day, with 80g being one portion.

The advice was based upon the fact that many studies show that populations who eat a lot of fruit and vegetables tend to have lower rates of heart disease and some cancers.

In 1994 COMA looked at the link between diet and heart disease. They concluded that eating fruit and vegetables helps to guard against heart disease and that this should be increased to five portions a day.

In 1998 COMA also assessed the impact of nutrition on cancer and came to a similar conclusion. The evidence for this advice can be found in published COMA reports.

I do, however, recognise that most of the evidence is from cross sectional and prospective studies.

The Agency is keen to firm up the evidence on this, so has commissioned a number of randomised controlled studies.

For example, we have a study at Queen’s University Belfast which has looked at the effect of fruit and vegetables on cardiovascular health.

This study examined the effect of consuming one, three or six portions of fruit and vegetables a day for eight weeks on people with mild hypertension. The results of this project are likely to be published early next year.

Turning to the health claims point you raise. Scientific substantiation of health claims for addition to the Community list of authorised claims will be validated by the European Food Safety Authority EFSA).

These claims will be authorised for use in the labelling, presentation and advertising of food in commercial communications.

Non-commercial communications, including government health advice and dietary guidelines will not be subject to this regime.

Nevertheless, the Agency ensures all of its advice has a sound evidence base and is subject to review by the appropriate expert committee.

Evidence

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 16/10/2007 - 10:46

Will the standards for scientific substantiation of claims also now attach to public health guidance? Are you able to publish the scientific evidence underpinning the present dietary guidelines? And in particular how they also apply when starting from a position of obesity (and are now NICE endorsed). And what about the evidence for five portions of indeterminate fruits and vegetables reducing the risk of heart disease and cancer?