1766.pdf

Oryginał 
Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to whole grain (ID 831, 832, 833, 1126, 1268, 1269, 1270, 1271, 1431) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006[sup]1[/sup] EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA)2, 3 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
Słowa kluczowe: Whole grain   health claims  
ID:    833      1126      1431      1268      832      1271      831      1270      1269  
Produkty: Produkty pełnoziarniste  

1. Charakterystyka żywności / składnika

The food constituents that are the subject of this opinion are “whole grain”, “whole grain flour”, “whole grain foods”, and “diets rich in whole grain”, related to the following claimed effects: “gut health”/“bowel function”, “weight control”, “blood glucose”/“insulin levels”, “weight management”, “blood cholesterol”, “satiety”, “glycaemic index”, “digestive function” and “cardiovascular health”.
Whole grain has been defined as grains of the Gramineae family that “consist of the intact, ground, cracked or flaked caryopsis, whose principal anatomical components - the starchy endosperm, germ and bran - are present in the same relative proportions as they exist in the intact caryopsis” (AACC,1999). Since then, several definitions of whole grains have been proposed, and no consensus has been reached at the European level. The same concept applies to diets rich in whole grain.
Whole grain foods (including whole grain flour) are defined differently across countries, also within the EU. In the UK (JHCI, 2002) and the USA (FDA, 1999) whole grain foods must contain ≥51 % whole grain ingredients by wet weight, whereas in Sweden and Denmark the requirement is ≥50 % whole grain ingredients on a dry matter basis (SNF, 2004; Mejborn et al., 2008). In Germany, whole grain bread must be 90 % whole grain (Deutsches Lebensmittelbuch, 1993).
Among the references submitted, five references reported on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in humans addressing the effects of whole grain intake on body weight (Katcher et al., 2008; Saltzman et al., 2001; Melanson et al., 2006; Pereira et al., 2002; Jang et al., 2001). In the study by Katcher et al. (2008), a grain product was identified as “whole grain” if whole grain was listed as the first ingredient on the food label; Saltzman et al. (2001) used oatmeal as the intervention; in the study by Melanson et al. (2006), subjects in the whole grain group were asked to consume the fibre-rich whole grain cereals provided by the investigators, containing an average of 7.7 g, 6.7 g, and 1.0 g per serving of total, insoluble, and soluble fibre, respectively; in the study by Pereira et al. (2002) the whole grain multigrain group was advised to consume commercially available whole grain items containing bran, germ, and fibre, most of which were ground to flour; the intervention in the study by Jang et al. (2001) consisted of whole grains and legume powder containing 66.6 % whole grains, 22.2 % legumes, 5.6 % seeds, and 5.6 % vegetables, composed of brown rice (22.2 %), glutinous brown rice (11.1 %), barley (22.2 %), black beans (22.2 %), sesame (5.6 %), and Job's tears (11.1 %). The Panel notes that each intervention study used a different definition of (and therefore a different intervention with) whole grain foods. On the other hand, several of the epidemiological studies provided have defined whole grain foods as those products with 25 % or more of whole grain or bran weight (Jacobs et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2000; Fung et al., 2002; McKeown et al., 2002).
Other references submitted in relation to these claims are general reviews and consensus opinions as well as observational and intervention studies on the effects of dietary fibre in general, of different types of dietary fibre (e.g. rye bran, wheat bran, oat bran, oat gum), or of whole grain using various definitions (e.g. 25 % or more of whole grain or bran by weight; whole grain derived from dark breads and high-fibre cooked cereals, etc.) on different health outcomes (e.g. faecal bulk, incidence of metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease).
The Panel therefore considers that the food constituent, whole grain, which is the subject of this opinion is not sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effects considered in this opinion.
The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship cannot be established between the consumption of whole grain and the claimed effects considered in this opinion.

Wnioski

On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that:
The food constituent, whole grain, that is the subject of this opinion is not sufficiently characterised in relation to the claimed effects considered in this opinion.
A cause and effect relationship cannot be established between the consumption of whole grain and the claimed effects considered in this opinion.