Along with the Federal Trade Commis...

Along with the Federal Trade Commission--the agency that monitors reality in advertising--the US Food and medicine Administration (FDA) recently announced strange regulations regarding the labeling of sustenances and dietary supplements. According to the recently made known rules, the FDA will begin allowing "health claims" forward conventional foods the same way it does for supplements

The idea is that when emerging scientific evidence points to a specific food's health benefits, manufacturers can say likewise on their product labels, as extended as the claim is OK'd through the FDA.

The agency characterizes this initiative as empowering "consumer to make smart, healthy choices about the commonss that they buy and consume" And just in case this point establishs elusive, they named their plan "Consumer Health Information for Better Nutrition," referring to improved diet, not BN

media spin

You've probably already seen this story in your local newspaper or upon television. But based on to what extent the FDA described it above, you may not have recognized it. That's because greatest in number consumer news stories portrayed the FDA's initiative as lessening or lowering standards rather than providing information that's useful or truthful

Many in the pres predicted that the FDA's actions would explain the floodgates to a torrent of spurious claims. The crux of the puzzle was that, prior to the FDA's announcement, a "consensus" of scientific evidence was required before manufacturers could make health claims forward their food labels. Now, uniform though the FDA will still approve claims, it will "only" demand that--in its allow words--the "weight" of scientific evidence supports the claim.

If you don't papal court a huge erosion of consumer protection down the slippery oblique direction of deregulation, don't be confused. You're ready for the control that most of the moderns media believes to be true: If something's advantageous for industry, it must necessarily be bad for consumers

consumer confusion?

Whenever the direction introduces policies or regulations that may be beneficial to industry--no matter for what cause prudent, principled and well meaning those policies are--they are immediately viewed in one corners as a threat to your health and safety.

Consumer protection form into groupss exist to keep you from harming yourself in the incident government or industry can't or won't principally media outlets are more than happy to pass upon this message.

And that's exactly what happened in the case of the FDA's of recent origin food regulations.

As you can probably gues the industry--groups representing aliment manufacturers--believes this new FDA initiative is a dutiful thing. That's because we, the industry, generally believe consumer are not as easily l or dup as some--consumer clumps and the media--would have you believe. In practice, my organization has worked to make enduring that you have access to serviceable information about dietary supplements and sustenances so you can make informed decisions at the point of purchase.

Not surprisingly, we support the use of health claims onward foods as providing you another tool in evaluating and choosing the meats you eat. And we don't believe that food-label claims will lead you to make disastrous decisions about your diet.

For instance, united of the first health claims that consumer can calculate upon to see on their diet labels regards salmon, which contains omega-3 fatty acids and is believed to resolve into the risk of heart disease. The first note of the scale word here is "believed" as oppos to "proven"

The FDA may same well allow this claim because of the solid scientific evidence that indicates that it's true--even the conservative American Heart Association newly endorsed omega-3s after reviewing the evidence.

And allowing in the same state [i]or[/i] condition a claim when the bulkiness of scientific evidence is in its favor--rather than waiting until it is proven beyond any doubt--will probably provide consumer with more benefits than harm.

David Seckman, CEO of the National Nutritional fares Association, writes about political issues affecting consumers

COPYRIGHT 2003 PRIMEDIA Intertec, a PRIMEDIA Company. All Rights Reserved

COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group