Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to acacia gum (gum arabic) and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses (ID 842, 1977) and maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations (ID 842, 1977) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006
Carlo Agostoni, Jean-Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather-Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Hannu Korhonen, Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Ambroise Martin, Bevan Moseley, Monika Neuhäuser-Berthold, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Stephan Strobel, Inge Tetens, Daniel Tomé, Hendrik van Loveren, and Hans Verhagen.
Acknowledgment
The Panel wishes to thank for the preparation of this opinion: The members of the Working Group on Claims: Carlo Agostoni, Jean-Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather-Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Marina Heinonen, Hannu Korhonen, Martinus Løvik, Ambroise Martin, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Inge Tetens, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen. The members of the Claims Sub-Working Group on Weight Management/Satiety/Glucose and Insulin Control/Physical Performance: Kees de Graaf, Joanne Harrold, Mette Hansen, Mette Kristensen, Anders Sjödin and Inge Tetens.
Contact
nda@efsa.europa.eu
No abstract available
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 (EC) No 1924/2006. This opinion addresses the scientific substantiation of health claims in relation to acacia gum (gum arabic) and reduction of post-prandial glycaemic response and maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations. 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 acacia gum. The Panel considers that acacia gum is sufficiently characterised.
Reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses
The claimed effect is “blood glucose control”. The target population is assumed to be subjects willing to reduce their post-prandial glycaemic responses. In the context of the proposed wordings, the Panel assumes that the claimed effect refers to the reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses. The Panel considers that the reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses may be a beneficial physiological effect.
In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that no studies were presented which tested the effects of acacia gum on post-prandial blood glucose responses at the proposed conditions of use in the target population and from which scientific conclusions could be drawn for the substantiation of the claimed effect.
On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of acacia gum and the reduction of post-prandial glycaemic responses.
Maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations
The claimed effect is “blood glucose control”. The target population is assumed to be the general population. In the context of the proposed wordings, the Panel assumes that the claimed effect refers to the long-term maintenance or achievement of normal blood glucose concentrations. The Panel considers that long-term maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations is a beneficial physiological effect.
No studies have been provided on the long-term effects of acacia gum on measures of blood glucose control.
On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of acacia gum and long-term maintenance of normal blood glucose concentrations.
Acacia gum, glycaemic response, blood glucose, health claims
