ARCHIVED - Health Canada's Action Plan in Response to Stakeholder Feedback from Consultations on Modernizing Canada's Framework for Health Claims on Food

Table of Contents

Introduction:

A number of pressures and influences have prompted Health Canada to initiate a review of the current system for the management of health claims.  In early 2008, the Food Directorate of Health Canada's Health Products and Food Branch (HPFB) undertook consultations in order to solicit stakeholders' opinions with respect to their policy preferences in the area of health claims for food. The process included an online publication of a discussion paper entitled Managing Health Claims for Foods in Canada: Towards a Modernized Framework November, 2007; six face-to-face sessions with 286 stakeholders in 6 cities across Canada; and the solicitation of written feedback using a questionnaire.  The Report on Stakeholder Feedback on Modernizing Canada's Framework for Health Claims on Food and the Report of Regional Workshops on Modernizing Canada's Framework for Health Claims on Food provide a summary and analysis of the stakeholder opinions received by Health Canada in early 2008.

Government Response and Action Plan:

This Response and Action Plan summarizes stakeholder opinion very briefly and communicates to stakeholders the government's progress and intended future activities.  Health Canada has developed a five year Action Plan of ongoing and planned activities which is already being implemented.  Stakeholders' recommendations have been reviewed and some suggestions have already been implemented. Health Canada is committed to continuing to work with its partners and stakeholders in order to determine what additional activities can be undertaken to address the identified issues.  The following is an outline of the action plan.

1. Improving the Efficiency and Transparency of Processes:

Overall, stakeholders agreed with Health Canada's proposed improvements in processes identified in the Discussion Paper, such as implementing standard operating procedures for the Health Canada review of submissions, developing an abbreviated process for review of claims recently approved by internationally recognized scientific bodies or competent national authorities, and dedicating additional resources to the review of health claims as well as to regulatory drafting and legal services. 

A small group of consumers and health/disease organizations believed that only a finite number of health claims should be permitted and that these claims should be managed as a standardized system by government.

Stakeholders generally supported improved transparency; however, industry did have concerns about the dissemination of any proprietary information.  All groups strongly supported the publication of Health Canada's decisions for approved health claims with a majority believing that only a summary of the evidence submitted and Health Canada's scientific evaluation needs to be published.

Actions in progress or completed:

Actions planned

2. Supporting Good Quality Submissions:

Most stakeholders favoured Health Canada's proposals to improve quality of submissions through clearer submission requirements, but believed that Health Canada should not expend significant resources in assisting industry with submissions and that this role can be undertaken by non-government organizations such as private consultants or academia.

Actions in progress or completed:

3. Increasing Industry's Capacity to Make Function Claims:

Most stakeholders believed that the same standards of evidence should be applied to all claim types, e.g. disease risk reduction claims, function claims and general health claims. However, others supported a tiered approach and believed that only disease risk reduction claims should be based on a high level of scientific certainty.  Generally, stakeholders supported regulatory measures to manage function claims and believed that Health Canada should have the authority to require pre-market assessment or at least justification of information for foods carrying function claims when concerns have been identified.  Industry, however, was less supportive of this approach and believed that a mandatory pre-submission review process should only apply to disease risk reduction claims.

Actions in progress or completed:

4. Enhancing Consumer Confidence in the Regulations of Health Claims

Stakeholders in general would like to see information communicated in simple clear language that would enhance confidence in the regulatory system. They also believe that academia, industry and non-government agencies could play a role in delivering this information. Stakeholders mostly supported the idea of post-market surveillance to determine the market impact of health claims and they generally agreed that "disclaimers" on products with health claims (such as the "qualified" health claims in the United States) should not be permitted.

Actions in progress or completed:

Actions planned:

5. Clarifying the Overlap at the Food-Natural Health Product Interface

On the subject of addition of bioactive substances to foods, responses were divided; industry stakeholders generally supported the addition of bioactive substances to foods, indicating that both the potential associated risks and the types of claims for the products vary and the standard of evidence should vary accordingly; also, proper labelling could be used to help control risk.  On the other hand, the focus of non industry stakeholders was more on educating the public and providing clearer messaging on healthy eating.

Actions in progress or completed:

Actions planned:

6. Increased Standardization of Front of Package Claims, Logos and Symbols

On the issue of Front of Package (FOP) labelling and implied claims, there was some support for Health Canada's proposals to undertake consumer research on the interpretation of FOP labelling in concert with the Nutrition Facts table and to examine the standardization of the nutritional criteria underlying FOP symbols and claims.  However, on the issues related to setting core nutritional criteria before health claims would be permitted, stakeholders in general felt they were unable, at this stage, to offer informed points of views.

Actions in progress or completed:

Actions planned:

Page details

Date modified: