EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition, and Allergies (NDA); Scientific Opinion on establishing Food-Based Dietary Guidelines

This Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition, and Allergies (NDA) provides guidance on the translation of nutrient based dietary advice into guidance, intended for the European population as a whole, on the contribution of different foods or food groups to an overall diet that would help to maintain good health through optimal nutrition (food-based dietary guidelines). The main focus of this Opinion is put on the scientific process of developing food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) for the diverse European populations, following a stepwise approach which should ideally consist of: 1) Identification of diet-health relationships, 2) Identification of country specific diet-related health problems, 3) Identification of nutrients of public health importance, 4) Identification of foods relevant for FBDG, 5) Identification of food consumption patterns, 6) Testing and optimising FBDG and 7) Graphical representations of FBDG. FBDG should focus on the diet-disease relationships of particular relevance to the specific population and should be developed using a multi-disciplinary approach. The early involvement of stakeholders is recommended to promote the acceptance of the outcome. FBDG should be consistent with other public policies that have an impact on food availability and be integrated with other policies related to health promotion. Once established, FBDG should be implemented and their impact monitored and evaluate

Scientific opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to olive oil and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations (ID 1316, 1332), maintenance of normal (fasting) blood concentrations of triglycerides (ID 1316, 1332), maintenance of normal blood HDL-cholesterol concentrations (ID 1316, 1332) and maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations (ID 4244) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a list of health claims pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. This opinion addresses the scientific substantiation of health claims in relation to olive oil and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations, maintenance of normal (fasting) blood concentrations of triglycerides, maintenance of normal blood HDL-cholesterol concentrations and maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations. The scientific substantiation is based on the information provided by the Member States in the consolidated list of Article 13 health claims and references that EFSA has received from Member States or directly from stakeholders. The food that is the subject of the health claims is olive oil. The Panel considers that olive oil is sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect

Scientific opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to maize oil and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations (ID 3086) pursuant to article 13(1) of regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a list of health claims pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. This opinion addresses the scientific substantiation of health claims in relation to maize oil and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations. The scientific substantiation is based on the information provided by the Member States in the consolidated list of Article 13 health claims and references that EFSA has received from Member States or directly from stakeholders. The food that is the subject of the health claim is maize oil. The Panel considers that maize oil is sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effect. The claimed effect is \u201ccorn oil with a guaranteed polyunsaturated fatty acids content (56 % of total fatty acids), supplemented with vitamin E\u201d. The target population is assumed to be the general population. In the context of the proposed wordings, the Panel assumes that the claimed effect refers to maintenance of normal LDL-blood cholesterol concentrations. The Panel considers that maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations is a beneficial physiological effect. No studies that investigated whether maize oil had a cholesterol-lowering effect beyond what could be expected from the fatty acid composition of maize oil have been provided. On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of maize oil and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations beyond what could be expected from the fatty acid composition of maize oil. A claim on the replacement of mixtures of SFAs with cis-MUFAs and/or cis-PUFAs in foods or diets and maintenance of normal blood LDL-cholesterol concentrations has already been assessed with a favourable outcome. A claim on linoleic acid and maintenance of normal blood cholesterol concentrations has also already been assessed with a favourable outcome

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of a health claim related to fermented milk containing Lactobacillus casei DN-114 001 plus yoghurt symbiosis (Actimel\uae), and reduction of Clostridium difficile toxins in the gut of patients receiving antibiotics and reduced risk of acute diarrhoea in patients receiving antibiotics pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following an application from Danone Produits Frais France submitted pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of France, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to a fermented milk drink Actimel\uae containing Lactobacillus casei (Lc) DN-114 001 and reduction of the presence of Clostridium difficile toxins in the gut which reduces the incidence of acute diarrhoea. The Panel considers that the food constituent, Actimel\uae, which is the subject of the health claim, is sufficiently characterised. The Panel considers that reducing the risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhoea by reducing the presence of C. difficile toxins is a beneficial physiological effect. In total the applicant indicated seven publications on human studies, three unpublished human studies, eight published and one unpublished non-human studies to be pertinent for the claimed effect. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that human and animal studies showed partial survival of Lc DN-114 001 during its gastrointestinal passage, that one human intervention study with Actimel\uae which showed a statistically significant risk reduction for CDAD had considerable limitations, that there were only limited data on the effect of Actimel\uae on the reduction C. difficile toxins (the risk factor) in humans, that one study which showed an inhibitory effect of Lc DN-114 001 on the growth of C. difficile in vitro does not predict the occurrence of an effect against C. difficile in humans, that five further human studies do not support the proposed mechanisms by which Actimel\uae could exert the claimed effect, and that the evidence provided from a further two animal and three in vitro studies does not establish that effects of Actimel\uae or Lc DN-114 001 in these model systems related to immune function and infection can predict the occurrence of such effects in humans. The Panel concludes that the evidence provided is insufficient to establish a cause and effect relationship between the consumption of Actimel\uae and a reduction of the risk of C. difficile diarrhoea by reducing the presence of C. difficile toxins

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to iron and formation of red blood cells and haemoglobin (ID 374, 2889), oxygen transport (ID 255), contribution to normal energy-yielding metabolism (ID 255), reduction of tiredness and fatigue (ID 255, 374, 2889), biotransformation of xenobiotic substances (ID 258), and activity of heart, liver and muscles (ID 397) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a list of health claims pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. This opinion addresses the scientific substantiation of health claims in relation to iron and formation of red blood cells and haemoglobin, oxygen transport, contribution to normal energy-yielding metabolism, reduction of tiredness and fatigue, biotransformation of xenobiotic substances and \u201cactivity of heart, liver and muscles\u201d. The scientific substantiation is based on the information provided by the Member States in the consolidated list of Article 13 health claims and references that EFSA has received from Member States or directly from stakeholders. The food constituent that is the subject of the health claims is iron. The Panel considers that iron is sufficiently characterised

Evaluation of receptor and chemical transport models for PM10 source apportionment

In this study, the performance of two types of source apportionment models was evaluated by assessing the results provided by 40 different groups in the framework of an intercomparison organised by FAIRMODE WG3 (Forum for air quality modelling in Europe, Working Group 3). The evaluation was based on two performance indicators: z-scores and the root mean square error weighted by the reference uncertainty (RMSEu), with pre-established acceptability criteria. By involving models based on completely different and independent input data, such as receptor models (RMs) and chemical transport models (CTMs), the intercomparison provided a unique opportunity for their cross-validation. In addition, comparing the CTM chemical profiles with those measured directly at the source contributed to corroborate the consistency of the tested model results. The most commonly used RM was the US EPA- PMF version 5. RMs showed very good performance for the overall dataset (91% of z-scores accepted) while more difficulties were observed with the source contribution time series (72% of RMSEu accepted). Industrial activities proved to be the most difficult sources to be quantified by RMs, with high variability in the estimated contributions. In the CTMs, the sum of computed source contributions was lower than the measured gravimetric PM10 mass concentrations. The performance tests pointed out the differences between the two CTM approaches used for source apportionment in this study: brute force (or emission reduction impact) and tagged species methods. The sources meeting the z-score and RMSEu acceptability criteria tests were 50% and 86%, respectively. The CTM source contributions to PM10 were in the majority of cases lower than the RM averages for the corresponding source. The CTMs and RMs source contributions for the overall dataset were more comparable (83% of the z-scores accepted) than their time series (successful RMSEu in the range 25% - 34%). The comparability between CTMs and RMs varied depending on the source: traffic/exhaust and industry were the source categories with the best results in the RMSEu tests while the most critical ones were soil dust and road dust. The differences between RMs and CTMs source reconstructions confirmed the importance of cross validating the results of these two families of models