WASHINGTON — Food companies and consumer groups are battling anew over food labels, on both sides of the Atlantic. In Europe, the companies want the appropriate authorities to grant them more discretion about health claims featured on their product labels, while consumer advocates insist that unproven assertions be prohibited.
The outcome of this fight ought to be a no-brainer, but it is far from resolved and more complex than it appears at first glance.
Last week, in a first draft reading, 458 members of the European Parliament voted to modify proposed regulations on nutrition and health claims on food labels. Another 116 members voted against, with 15 abstentions. If the draft rules go through, food companies will not need to obtain authorization for their claims, nor submit their products for nutrient profiling.
When the proposed modifications are examined, it is easy to see why manufacturers are worried about going through the ropes: Each food producer would have to submit its claims for approval by European food safety authorities in each of the European community's 20 languages.
That is why, despite determination by consumer groups to force nutrient profiling, an amendment was written into the draft regulations that deleted the notification requirement. It was adopted by 303 votes in favor and 286 against, with 10 abstentions.
Now, if the rules go through, food manufacturers will only need to inform EU authorities when they plan to begin selling a product about which they are making health claims. Then the European Commission will have three months to consider whether those claims pass muster or whether any product should be referred to the European Food Safety Authority.
Consumer groups are livid. Jim Murray, director of the European Consumers Association, was quoted as saying the new European Parliament had "failed its first big consumer test."
Murray said he is hopeful the decision will be overturned at the next stage of the legislative process.
"The position of the Council and the Commission are more enlightened and we turn to them to save the day for consumers," he said. "We will continue to fight to make sure that parents across the European Union are no longer misled by health claims made on foods too high in fat, sugar or salt."
Back in the United States, Florida is the site of a disagreement that figures to end up more to the liking of the consumer side. After 10 weeks of testing food-product labels for accuracy in disclosing trans-fat content, Charles H. Bronson, the state's agriculture and consumer services commissioner, said last week: "Consumers must be able to rely on the accuracy of food labels. Inaccurate labels can endanger people's health."
Also, Food and Drug Administration regulations will require food labels to list the amount of trans-fat content from January 1, with maximum fines of $5,000 for inaccuracy -- though probably not for a first offense.
Trans fats constitute only one of the ingredients labels must make clear, because they can lead to high levels of cholesterol and coronary artery disease. Food manufacturers like trans fats, because they increase the shelf lives of products and stabilize flavor.
These days, however, it has become highly marketable to announce a product is trans-fat free.
Accurate labeling is critical for anyone suffering from diabetes, heart disease or obesity, but if the European legislation goes through, products from EU manufacturers may enjoy a three-month run of health claims before the watchdogs check them for truth in advertising.
That is a long time for anyone who needs to know exactly what they are eating.
|
To
send us your comments, questions, and suggestions click
here |