Hi All,
I don't interpret this to mean that the drinks are not beneficial, just that the committee disputes the health claims made by the manufacturers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8286646.stm
Tex
EU Team Discredits Claims For Probiotic Drinks And Yogurts
Moderators: Rosie, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
EU Team Discredits Claims For Probiotic Drinks And Yogurts
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Hi Deb,
I thought about you when I posted that. My impression is that they didn't necessarily have a problem with the effectiveness, but rather that they got hung up on the details of the advertising claims. First off, committees are notorious for getting hung up on minor details, and secondly, because these were "scientists" at the European Food Safety Agency, they probably set required standards for the health claims, based on requirements similar to what the FDA would require for the registration of a new drug, (or even more stringent than that), so it's not surprising that they would reach such a conclusion.
It just goes to show the uselessness of such studies. Anyone with half a brain knows that within reasonable standards, at least some of those products should have qualified. Leave it to a group of "scientists", (probably eat up with their own importance), to set unrealistic standards. Note that the EFSA is not near as "official" as the name implies. From their website:
This appears to be another one of those advisory groups that waste a lot of public money, researching irrelevant issues, and publishing self-serving reports, that provide little to no benefit to the public. But I could be wrong.
Tex
I thought about you when I posted that. My impression is that they didn't necessarily have a problem with the effectiveness, but rather that they got hung up on the details of the advertising claims. First off, committees are notorious for getting hung up on minor details, and secondly, because these were "scientists" at the European Food Safety Agency, they probably set required standards for the health claims, based on requirements similar to what the FDA would require for the registration of a new drug, (or even more stringent than that), so it's not surprising that they would reach such a conclusion.
It just goes to show the uselessness of such studies. Anyone with half a brain knows that within reasonable standards, at least some of those products should have qualified. Leave it to a group of "scientists", (probably eat up with their own importance), to set unrealistic standards. Note that the EFSA is not near as "official" as the name implies. From their website:
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/AboutEfs ... oWeAre.htmEFSA is governed by an independent Management Board whose members are appointed to act in the public interest and do not represent any government, organisation or sector.
This appears to be another one of those advisory groups that waste a lot of public money, researching irrelevant issues, and publishing self-serving reports, that provide little to no benefit to the public. But I could be wrong.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.