The proposed European regulation on nutrition and health claims will severely restrict the marketing potential of supplement makers, says the European Health Product Manufacturers Association (EHPM), calling on the European Parliament to make changes to the law.
The EHPM said that article 11 of the regulation, which outlines which foods qualify for specific claims, such as 'high protein', 'high fibre' or 'natural source of vitamins', and how these claims can be worded, stops food and supplement makers from successfully conveying the health benefits of their products.
While the association, which represents 21 national supplement manufacturer associations in Europe, said it supported the need to protect consumers from misleading and unsupported health claims, the current conditions have significantly diminished marketers' ability to differentiate their products.
"Superficially these appear helpful but in practice they prevent food and food supplement producers from explaining the contribution of their products to health. Flexibility is needed so that labels and literature can use language suited to different degrees of understanding, and messages whose terms are already well-accepted by consumers throughout Europe," said Pedro Vicente Azua, EHPM's director of regulatory affairs.
He added: "Our concern is that in its haste to bring into force this long awaited regulation before the new elections next year, the Commission will destroy a vital communication link between the food industry and the consumer."
The EHPM is also fighting to change the prohibition on certain claims, such as behavioural/psychological, slimming and general well being. These claims should be subject to the same approach as the other claims, said the group, protecting the consumer but not restricting innovation and development in the sector.
"The importance of supplementation in future health care management has been recognised by governments and wider terminologies than those specified in the regulation are necessary in order to convey the actions and contributions of food supplements," said Vicente Azua.
The expenses involved in assessing claims is also a matter of concern. Under the proposed regulation, adopted by the European Commission just over a week ago, health claims have to be evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) before they are permitted. Many supplement makers are Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs), who may not be able to afford the procedure required to approve a claim. "An SME impact report has not been carried out for this proposal as should have been the case according to EU law," said Peter van Doorn, chairman of EHPM.
When the draft proposal for regulation of nutrition and health claims was released last year, EHPM commented on several articles, and raised the issue of cost and procedures for approving claims, but not all of its requests have been taken into account.
And while it includes many bigger players who will be able to absorb the extra costs, the food industry also has similar concerns about the regulation, with the Confederation of EU Food & Drink Industry (CIAA) warning that the proposal could stifle innovation in the food sector.
Across the Atlantic, the US supplement industry is also gearing up to try to limit the effects on trade with its European counterparts. Certain members of the industry have asked the US Department of Commerce to examine the harm to trade posed by the regulation. Among their campaign activities is a request for European delegations to speak in Washington during the Natural Products Expo East show in September.
At the same time, others have called Byrne's proposal 'a good first step' and are looking at tighter regulation. "Many before him have 'ducked' this issue as not being necessary to legislate at EU level, but as consumers have become increasingly concerned about what they eat, they have been bombarded by unsubstantiated nutritional claims on foodstuffs. This new regulation will provide much needed consistency to the use of such claims by food manufacturers and is to be welcomed," said Raymond O' Rourke, a food lawyer with Irish solicitors Mason Hayes & Curran.
He also discussed the issue of advertising health benefits, proposing that ad campaigns are monitored by the EFSA. "The actual logos and images used to state or imply a claim and product endorsements by sportsmen for example all play an important role in the way claims are perceived and understood by the final consumer. In the United States the validity of food advertising campaigns are monitored by the Federal Trade Commission and I believe that a similar situation should prevail at EU-level, possibly with the EFSA being permitted to monitor and comment upon particular cases where advertising misleads rather than informs the consumer," said O'Rourke.
The EHPM said it will work with other sectors of the food industry to make its views and solutions known to Parliament when it convenes in the autumn. The proposal must first be passed by Parliament and the European Council before it enters into law, planned for 2005.