“If you are right on the cusp of 20 percent of the Daily Value for fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, or sodium, and a new RACC puts you over that limit, you may lose the right to make a health claim” for that food, said Bruce Silverglade, a principal at the Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Matz lawfirm, Washington, DC. RACCs for some foods would get smaller. Yogurt, for instance, was sold in 8-oz. single serving containers, but today is more commonly marketed in 6-oz. packages. But when the serving size is decreased, “you may lose the right to make a ‘Good Source’ claim for a vitamin or mineral,” Silverglade said during a presentation at the American Conference Institute’s Advanced Regulatory and Compliance Summit on Food and Beverage Marketing and Advertising meeting in Chicago in July 2014. (A nutrient must have 10 to 19 percent of its Daily Value per RACC in order for it to be labeled a “Good Source,” and 20 percent or more to be labeled a “High, Rich In, or Excellent Source.”)
Bitter Fight Over Sugar
By far, the most contentious of FDA’s proposed changes is the requirement to separately list sugars that are naturally part of the food and sugars that are added. FDA bases this requirement on U.S. consensus reports and recommendations to reduce overall sugar consumption, a citizen’s petition, and public comments. The requirement has numerous supporters, including the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. Unsurprisingly, the sugar industry, including bakers, cereal manufacturers, and many others, strongly disagree.
“Sugar is sugar, regardless of the source,” wrote the Campbell Soup Company, maker of Prego and Pepperidge Farm products, in a letter to the FDA. The Grocery Manufacturers Association commented: “By mandating the separate labeling of added sugars, most GMA members believe that FDA is strongly implying to consumers that added sugars are indeed distinct and different (and less healthful than) inherent sugars, when they are not. Thus, added sugar labeling may convey false and misleading information to consumers.” GMA and the American Beverage Association further noted the FDA’s definition of “added sugars” would allow 100 percent fruit juice not from concentrate to boast 0 grams of “added sugars” on the new label, whereas 100 percent fruit juice from concentrate would have to declare all these sugars as being added because they were isolated and concentrated during manufacturing. (Similar requirements might befall nonfat dry milk, dry whole milk, and certain concentrated whey and dried whey products, the National Dairy Council noted.)
Dietary Fiber and Nutrients
Another disagreement surrounds the proposed definition of “dietary fiber” as only those having FDA-approved health benefits, such as beta-glucan soluble fiber and barley beta-fiber. Bayer Healthcare and the International Dairy Foods Association are among those that disagree, arguing that no other nutrient is required to demonstrate physiological benefit. Listing a nutrient in the Nutrition Facts “does not constitute a claim for anything other than the nutrient’s presence in the product,” Bayer commented. If FDA’s definition stands, manufacturers of approved dietary fibers would gain an unfair competitive advantage because food companies would be forced to reformulate their products, the Calorie Control Council argued.
And if proposed changes in Daily Values are finalized, milk would lose its historical place as an “Excellent Source” of vitamin D. With proposed increases in Daily Values for vitamin D from 10 micrograms (mcg) to 20 mcg, and for potassium from 3,500 milligrams (mg) to 4,700 mg, “milk would no longer qualify as an excellent source of vitamin D or as a good source of potassium,” the International Dairy Foods Association argued. Similarly, some natural cheeses and yogurts could lose their eligibility as being an excellent source of calcium if that Daily Value rises from 1,000 mg to 1,300 mg. The Juice Products Association argues that industry lacks the technical ability to increase the amount of vitamin D and calcium (Daily Value from 1,000 mg to 1,300 mg) in products “without nutrients precipitating out of solution or causing cloudiness in the juice.”
Canada Following Suit
Canada has been following a parallel track in recommending changes to nutrition information presented on food labels. The proposed changes include the format of the Nutrition Facts table, the lists of ingredients and nutrients, and the Daily Values. In the ingredient list, sugars from all sources would be grouped together rather than listed by quantity, and serving sizes would be more consistent among similar products. The Canadian government accepted comments until Sept. 11, 2014 but has not announced when the final rules would be published.
ACCESS THE FULL VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE
To view this article and gain unlimited access to premium content on the FQ&S website, register for your FREE account. Build your profile and create a personalized experience today! Sign up is easy!
GET STARTED
Already have an account? LOGIN