March 10, 2009: 05:44 AM EST
“Antioxidant” is becoming a sure-fire way to sell a product to consumers increasingly aware that the compounds are good for them, even if they don’t know why or how. The problem is that it’s also difficult for manufacturers to be specific about their claims. Andrew Shao, PhD, vice president of scientific & regulatory affairs for the trade association Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), says that it is “difficult to quantify the benefits of such products, in terms of a ‘hard’ endpoint like reduction of disease risk or modification of a risk factor or surrogate endpoint (like lipid levels)”, so “antioxidant” is a safe catch-all claim to make. Alex Schauss, PhD, from AIBMR, says that claims related to antioxidant capacity “must be backed by in vivo experimental research” if antioxidant products are to retain their credibility, particularly in the face of recent cases where companies have been forced to back down on some of their claims. Daniel Fabricant, PhD, vice president of scientific & regulatory affairs for the Natural Products Association (NPA), another trade association, agrees. In the near future, manufacturers will have to be able to ensure “that terms like antioxidant have meaning is some type of biological activity/ standardization associated with the term”. Many companies are developing assays that will prove the level and effectiveness of antioxidant in a product.
Stephen Daniells, "The growth of brand 'antioxidant'", Nutra Ingredients USA, March 10, 2009, © Decision News Media
|
Domains
HEALTH & WELLNESS
Body
Immunity
Geographies
Worldwide
North America
EMEA
United States of America
Europe
Greece
|