Gum, bottled water and pizza bagels want to be called "healthy" | Health

NEW YORK – Pizza bagels, chewing gum and bottled water want to play a new role in our diet: foods that can be called health.

The US Food and Drug Administration is revising its definition of "healthy" to reflect our changing understanding of the science of nutrition. The push feeds the debate on eating habits and what the new standard should say.

Frozen food manufacturers are looking for special rules for "mini-meals," citing small bagels and pizza balls as examples. Manufacturers of chewing gum and bottled water say they should no longer be excluded from the term simply because their products do not provide nutrients. Advocacy groups and health professionals are also involved, raising concerns about ingredients such as sugar.

Some say that the word health is inherently misleading when it is applied to a single product rather than to an overall diet.

"The problem is that health is relative," said Bruce Y. Lee, professor of international health at Johns Hopkins. To undergo only broccoli, for example, would not be healthy.

Federal standards for the use of the word "health" on labels were established in 1994 and set limits for fats and cholesterol.

Susan Mayne, who heads the FDA's food labeling division, said the definition reflected a decades-old understanding of nutrition and needed to be updated.

With the redesign, she says that people will be able to trust the word "healthy" that is based on science, unlike many other terms on packages.

"This is a project that federal agencies will be holding," she said.

The government's dusty definition of "healthy" was discussed in late 2015, when the FDA warned Kind that its snacks were too fat to be able to use that term. Kind repulsed, saying that the fat came from the nuts.

Since the rule was established more than two decades ago, nutrition experts have made a clearer distinction between "good fats" such as those found in nuts and "bad fats" such as trans fatty acids in foods. partially hydrogenated oils, an industrial process that gives food a longer shelf life.

The link between dietary cholesterol and heart disease is no longer elucidated.

The separate American dietary guidelines, updated every five years, no longer set limits for lipids or total cholesterol. They always recommend avoiding trans fats and limiting saturated fats, such as those found in meat and milk. But even the link between saturated fat and heart disease is now being questioned.

Now sugar has become a concern, with some health experts saying that our fear of fat in the past has led people to swallow low-fat, high-sugar products.

Changing perspectives reflect the pitfalls of nutrition science. Most food studies are based on links between what people say they eat and their health, leaving the door open to erroneous conclusions. Pinning cause-and-effect relationships is more difficult.

This is why the effort to redefine "healthy" invites such a debate. Following the launch of this campaign in late 2016, the FDA has received more than 1,140 public comments on the subject.

The next step is for the FDA to propose a new definition, which would be subject to a new round of public comment. The agency will not say when it expects to establish a final rule with the new definition.

"Healthy" was once a generic term of marketing, as "healthy" or "as mom did," said Xaq Frohlich, a professor of food history at the University of Toronto. ;Auburn.

After a proliferation of products carrying health and disease claims, the FDA has laid down ground rules for the word.

"The reason" healthy "is attracting attention is because so much of the American public really wants its food to be healthy," Frohlich said.

But beyond the regulatory definition, what people consider healthy varies. Today's notable food tribes include Paleo, gluten-free, organic and vegan members. Some of their views are reflected in the comments to the FDA last year.

The Sierra Club wants "healthy" to exclude foods based on genetically modified and artificial ingredients. The National Pasta Association wants to be able to call gluten-free pasta healthy. At the present time, it is said that some gluten-free pasta does not meet the nutrient requirements.

In addition to limiting fats and cholesterol, the current standard requires the presence of a nutrient such as calcium, fiber, iron or vitamin C. This is partly the reason why water companies bottle and sugar-free gums are unfairly excluded from the use of this term.

Richard Mann, a lawyer at the International Chewing Gum Association, said the sugar-free gum does not contain any of the nutrients that people are supposed to limit.

"He does not have fat. He does not have sugar. It contains virtually no calories, "he said.

Some wonder if an updated definition will make a difference. The American Academy of Pediatrics said companies would probably only reformulate the snacks to make them comply with the new rules.

Companies may have an additional interest in doing so: the FDA is also considering a symbol that would make it easier to identify products that meet the new definition. – (AP)