Introduction

Abstract

Since its passage in 1990, the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA)has become well integrated into federal food policy, although its provisions regarding health claims have generated considerable controversy, and such claims so far are little used. Health claims appear to be a good way of delivering nutritional messages, so it is prudent that we try to resolve differences over the regulation of these claims. Now is the time for constructive dialogue, because the question of whether the health claims provisions of NLEA are good legisla tion probably could be back on the national agenda given the current congressional review of the programs of all regulatory agencies. The Center for Food and Nutrition Policy convened this symposium to initiate constructive dialogue on the health claims provisions of NLEA.Over the past 2 years, we at Georgetown University’s Center for Food and Nutrition Policy have examined the public record on health claims for foods and on national food fortification policy by focusing on the B-vitamin, folate. The basic metabolism of folate is well understood. Moreover, the research needed in this case to establish the “significant scientific agreement” mandated by statute is also less complicated to obtain than other health claims because of the relatively short time between the preventive measure, folate administration in early pregnancy, and the outcome, birth. Compare folate in this regard with the relationship between calcium intake and the development of osteoporosis in the elderly, for example. Thus, assessing folate’s ability to reduce the risk of having infants with neural tube defects (NTDs) should provide a comparatively straightforward case to study in the problems of implementing health claims under NLEA.