Analysis of health claims regarding creatine monohydrate present in commercial communications for a sample of European sports foods supplements

Health Claims for Sports Drinks-Analytical Assessmentaccording to European Food Safety Authority's Scientific Opinion

In Europe, sports food supplements (SSFs) are subject to specific laws and regulations. Up to 70% of athletes are highly influenced by the information on the label or the advertisement of the SSF, which often does not correspond to the scientific evidence, such as health claims. The aim is to analyze such claims relating to sports drinks (SDs) in commercial messages. To this end, an observational and cross-sectional study was conducted based on the analysis of the content and degree of adequacy of the health claims indicated on the labelling or technical data sheet of the SDs with those established by the European legislation in force according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The SSFs were searched for via Amazon and Google Shopping. A total of 114 health claims were evaluated. No claim fully conformed with the recommendations. A total of 14 claims (n = 13 products) almost conformed to the recommendations; they were "Maintain endurance level in exercises requiring prolonged endurance", "Improve water absorption during physical exercise", and "Improved physical performance during high intensity, high duration physical exercise in trained adults", representing 12.3% of the total (n = 114). The vast majority of the claims identified indicated an unproven cause-effect and should be modified or eliminated, which amounts to food fraud towards the consumer.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Sports Food Consumption Patterns, Experiences, and Perceptions amongst Non-Athletes in Australia

Sports foods are designed for athletes, yet their availability, type, and sales have increased over the past decade, likely driven by non-athlete use. This could lead to detrimental health outcomes via over/misuse or unwanted side effects. The aim of this study was to describe sports food consumption patterns and associated drivers, consumption reasons, perception of risks, and side effects experienced amongst non-athletes in Australia. In 2022, n = 307 non-athlete Australian adults (18-65 years) completed an online cross-sectional survey including closed-ended (consumption patterns, factors, and exercise participation) and open-ended questions (reasons for consumption, risk perception, and side effects experienced). Descriptive statistics (frequency and percent) described the sample. Ordinal logistic regression was used for univariate associations and a multivariate model was used to determine relationships between sports food consumption proxy and significant univariate associations. The themes were analysed via inductive thematic analysis using NVivo 14. Females consumed sports foods most frequently, 65% of participants consumed three or more sports foods, and participants with higher sports food consumption/frequency were less likely to perceive risks or experience side effects. The main reason for consumption was protein intake, digestion/stomach issues were the main perceived risks, and the main side effect was bloating. Despite understanding the risks and side effects, non-athlete consumers continue to use numerous sports foods, which appear to be influenced by sociodemographic factors and packaging labels. Tighter regulation of packaging-label information would ensure safer and more informed consumption.

The Prevalence and Compliance of Health Claims Used in the Labelling and Information for Prepacked Foods within Great Britain

In the EU and Great Britain (GB), all health claims (HCs) on food must be authorised before use and should comply with Regulation 1924/2006. In GB, all HCs, authorised or not, are listed in the Great Britain Nutrition and Health Claims Register. This study reviews the prevalence and compliance of HCs on prepacked foods sold within three GB supermarkets and via their grocery shopping websites. In June 2023, food labels and online product information of 440 products were evaluated across three food categories-dairy and dairy alternatives; fruit juices, fruit juice drinks and fruit smoothies; and teas and infusions. In store, 26.3% of products carried an HC and 28.3% online. The prevalence of HCs was higher when compared with data from 2016. Overall compliance was high, in store (94.3%) and online (90.0%), with no statistically significant difference in overall HC compliance between in store and online products (p = 0.724). The HC violations observed in the present study were due to non-compliant wording of HCs or use of non-authorised HCs. This study demonstrates changes in the HC landscape and the need for continued monitoring of the prevalence and compliance of HCs as consumer trends alter.

Sports foods are not all they shake up to be. An audit of formulated supplementary sports food products and packaging in Australian retail environments

Objective

To determine store availability, total number of products, and types of Formulated Supplementary Sports Foods in Australia, along with their stated nutrition content, sweeteners added, total number, and type of claims displayed on the packaging.

Design

A cross-sectional, visual product audit of mainstream retailers.

Setting

Supermarkets, pharmacies, health food stores, and gym/fitness centres.

Results

A total of 558 products were captured in the audit, 275 of which displayed the correct mandatory packaging attributes. Three categories of products were identified, based on the dominant nutrient. Only 184 products appeared to display the correct energy value based on the listed macronutrient content (protein, fat, carbohydrate, dietary fibre). The stated nutrient content was highly variable across all product subcategories. Nineteen different sweeteners were identified, with most foods containing only one (38.2%) or two (34.9%) types. The predominant sweetener was stevia glycosides. Packages displayed multiple claims, with a maximum of 67 and minimum of 2 claims. Nutrition content claims were most frequently displayed (on 98.5% of products). Claims included regulated, minimally regulated and marketing statements.

Conclusion

Sports food consumers should be provided with accurate and detailed on pack nutrition information, to ensure informed choices are made. However, this audit showed multiple products which did not conform to current standards, appeared to provide inaccurate nutrition information, contained multiple sweeteners, and displayed an overwhelming number of on-pack claims. The increase in sales, availability, and products available in mainstream retail environments, could be impacting both intended consumers (athletes), and general non-athlete population. The results indicate underperformance in manufacturing practices which preference marketing over quality and stronger regulatory approaches are needed to protect consumer health and safety, and to prevent misleading consumers.

Caffeine Health Claims on Sports Supplement Labeling. Analytical Assessment According to EFSA Scientific Opinion and International Evidence and Criteria

Caffeine is a food supplement widely consumed by athletes, but it has not been established. So far, the veracity of their labeling in terms of the dosage and cause/effect relationship aimed at the consumer. The aim is to analyze the health claims and the dosage presented on the labeling of caffeine supplements and to evaluate if they follow the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and international criteria. A descriptive cross-sectional study of a sample of caffeine supplements was carried out. The search was done through the Amazon and Google Shopping web portals. In order to assess the adequacy of the health claims, the guidelines of reference established by European Food Safety Authority were compared to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, International Olympic Committee, and Australian Institute of Sport guidelines; in addition, recent systematic reviews were addressed. A review of labels of 42 caffeine supplements showed that, in less than 3% of the products were the health claims supported by the recommendations and by the labeled quantity of caffeine. The claims that fully complied the recommendations were, "improves or increases endurance performance", "improves strength performance", or "improves short-term performance". In most cases, the recommended dosage was 200 mg/day for these products, which is the minimum for the caffeine effects to be declared. The rest of the health claims were not adequate or need to be modified. Most of the health claims identified indicated an unproven cause and effect, which constitutes consumer fraud, and so must be modified or eliminated.