Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to shark cartilage and maintenance of joints (ID 1852, 1853) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

Tabs

Article
Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies
EFSA Journal
EFSA Journal 2009; 7(9):1269 [12 pp.].
doi
10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1269
Panel members at the time of adoption
Jean-Louis Bresson, Albert Flynn, Marina Heinonen, Karin Hulshof, Hannu Korhonen, Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Ambroise Martin, Bevan Moseley, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Stephan Strobel, Inge Tetens, Henk van den Berg, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen
Contact
Type
Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel
On request from
European Commission
Question Number
EFSA-Q-2008-2585
EFSA-Q-2008-2586
Adopted
2 July 2009
Published
1 October 2009
Last Updated
24 November 2009. This version replaces the previous one/s.
Affiliation
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
Note
Download Article (173.47 KB)
Abstract

No abstract available

Summary

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 1924/2006. This opinion addresses the scientific substantiation of health claims in relation to shark cartilage and maintenance of joints. 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 claim is shark cartilage (powder and extract). Shark cartilage powder is usually obtained by lyophilisation and pulverisation of shark cartilage from different locations. No specifications about the composition of shark cartilage powder have been provided. Some shark cartilage extracts have been used in the studies presented, but their compositional characteristics and method of extraction differ. From the conditions of use is not possible to understand the characteristics of the shark cartilage powder, product or extract for which the claim is made. The Panel considers that the food constituent, shark cartilage, which is the subject of the health claim is not sufficiently characterised.

The claimed effect is “joint health”. In the context of the proposed wordings, the Panel notes that the claimed effect relates to the maintenance of normal joints. The Panel considers that the maintenance of normal joints is beneficial to human health.

In weighing the evidence, the Panel has considered that the food constituent that is the subject of the health claim is not sufficiently characterised, that the evidence provided in the animal and in vitro studies submitted does not predict the occurrence of an effect of shark cartilage intake on maintenance of normal joints in humans, and that no studies have been presented investigating the effects of shark cartilage or of shark cartilage derivatives on maintenance of normal joints in humans.

On the basis of the data available, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of shark cartilage and the maintenance of normal joints.

Keywords
Shark cartilage, joints, health claims.
Print on demand
Number of Pages
12