IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v36y2011i5p726-728.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risking public health by approving some health claims? – The case of phosphorus

Author

Listed:
  • Pravst, Igor

Abstract

There is a well-established consensus on the many biological functions of essential nutrients, and related general function health claims will be soon authorised in the European Union. Such claims about the role of nutrients in the body’s growth, development and functioning could provide a powerful marketing tool and significant increase in the consumption of specific food products. Even though these claims are scientifically substantiated, there are both health and ethical concerns about whether such claims should be allowed where the intake of these nutrients easily exceeds the recommendations and a bigger intake might have adverse affects. The case of phosphorus and its role in the maintenance of normal bone is discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Pravst, Igor, 2011. "Risking public health by approving some health claims? – The case of phosphorus," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 726-728.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:36:y:2011:i:5:p:726-728
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.05.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919211000698
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.05.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lähteenmäki, Liisa & Lampila, Piritta & Grunert, Klaus & Boztug, Yasemin & Ueland, Øydis & Aström, Annika & Martinsdóttir, Emilia, 2010. "Impact of health-related claims on the perception of other product attributes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 230-239, June.
    2. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    3. Szajkowska, Anna, 2009. "From mutual recognition to mutual scientific opinion? Constitutional framework for risk analysis in EU food safety law," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 529-538, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Žaklina Stojanović & Radmila Dragutinović-Mitrović & Martine Zaouche-Laniau, 2017. "Products with nutrition and health claims in the Western Balkans: labelling behaviour, regulation and policy implications," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 107-123, February.
    2. Gregor Jereb & Borut Poljšak & Ivan Eržen, 2017. "Contribution of Drinking Water Softeners to Daily Phosphate Intake in Slovenia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-10, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marcin Pigłowski, 2021. "The Intra-European Union Food Trade with the Relation to the Notifications in the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Staudigel, Matthias & Anders, Sven, 2020. "Effects of the FDA's sodium reduction strategy in the U.S. market for chip products," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 216-238.
    3. Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Agnieszka Tekień, 2017. "Free Range, Organic? Polish Consumers Preferences Regarding Information on Farming System and Nutritional Enhancement of Eggs: A Discrete Choice Based Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Wille, Stefan Clemens & Barklage, Britta & Spiller, Achim & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2018. "Challenging factors of farmer-to-consumer direct marketing: An empirical analysis of German livestock owners," DARE Discussion Papers 1807, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    5. Orquin, Jacob L. & Scholderer, Joachim, 2015. "Consumer judgments of explicit and implied health claims on foods: Misguided but not misled," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 144-157.
    6. Ueland, Øydis & Langsrud, Solveig & Veflen, Nina, 2023. "Food risk communication to consumers: The scare of antibiotic resistant bacteria in chicken," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 14(02), June.
    7. Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Iris Vermeir & Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag, 2019. "Consumer Understanding of Food Quality, Healthiness, and Environmental Impact: A Cross-National Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Finardi, Corrado & Pellegrini, Giuseppe & Rowe, Gene, 2012. "Food safety issues: From Enlightened Elitism towards Deliberative Democracy? An overview of EFSA’s “Public Consultation” instrument," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 427-438.
    9. Guan, Lijun & Zhang, Yan & Jin, Shaosheng & Zhou, Lin, 2021. "Understanding the low use rate of food nutrition information in China," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(5), April.
    10. G. C. Barker & C. Bayley & A. Cassidy & S. French & A. Hart & P. K. Malakar & J. Maule & M. Petkov & R. Shepherd, 2010. "Can a Participatory Approach Contribute to Food Chain Risk Analysis?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 766-781, May.
    11. Azzurra Annunziata, 2013. "Il contributo dei modelli di consumo responsabili al perseguimento della sostenibilit? del benessere," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 191-210.
    12. Jackson, Lee Ann & Jansen, Marion, 2009. "Risk assessment in the international food safety policy arena: Can the multilateral institutions encourage unbiased outcomes?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2009-01, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    13. Chrysochou, Polymeros & Grunert, Klaus G., 2014. "Health-related ad information and health motivation effects on product evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(6), pages 1209-1217.
    14. Devaney, Laura, 2016. "Good governance? Perceptions of accountability, transparency and effectiveness in Irish food risk governance," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-10.
    15. Christina M. Neubig & Matthias Staudigel & Jutta Roosen, 2024. "Can health trump taste? Implicit and explicit attitudes toward sugar‐reduction claims and their differentiated impact on purchase intention for cereals," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(3), pages 614-640, July.
    16. Gutkowska Krystyna & Czarnecki Jacek, 2020. "Consumer Attitudes Towards Innovative Food Products Including Functional Products — Implications for Marketing in Terms of Nutrition and Health Claims," Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, Sciendo, vol. 38(4), pages 107-128, December.
    17. Samoggia, Antonella & Arvola, Anne & Bertazzoli, Aldo & Gurinovic, Mirjana & Hendrixson, Vaiva & Rivarolifi, Sergio & Ruggeri, Arianna, 2014. "Offering Low-Cost Healthy Food: an Exploration of Food Manufacturers’ and Retailers’ Perspectives," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1-32, November.
    18. Meise, Jan Niklas & Rudolph, Thomas & Kenning, Peter & Phillips, Diane M., 2014. "Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 510-519.
    19. Ke Qin & Xiujuan Chen & Linhai Wu, 2022. "The effects of psychological capital on citizens’ willingness to participate in food safety social co-governance in China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    20. Kenisha Garnett & David J. Parsons, 2017. "Multi‐Case Review of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in European Union Law and Case Law," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 502-516, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:36:y:2011:i:5:p:726-728. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.