How to design nutritional intervention trials to slow cognitive decline in apparently healthy populations and apply for efficacy claims: a statement from the International Academy on Nutrition and Aging Task Force.

Interventions are crucial as they offer simple and inexpensive public health solutions that will be useful over the long term use. A Task Force on designing trials of nutritional interventions to slow cognitive decline in older adults was held in Toulouse in September 2012. The aim of the Task Force was to bring together leading experts from academia, the food industry and regulatory agencies to determine the best trial designs that would enable us to reach our goal of maintaining or improving cognitive function in apparently healthy aging people. An associated challenge for this Task Force was to determine the type of trials required by the Public Food Agencies for assessing the impact of nutritional compounds in comparison to well established requirements for drug trials. Although the required quality of the study design, rationale and statistical analysis remains the same, the studies designed to show reduction of cognitive decline require a long duration and the objectives of this task force was to determine best design for these trials. Two specific needs were identified to support trials of nutritional interventions: 1- Risk- reduction strategies are needed to tackle the growing burden of cognitive decline that may lead to dementia, 2- Innovative study designs are needed to improve the quality of these studies.

Health claims assessment in the field of joint and cartilage: a consensus viewpoint of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science.

INTRODUCTION: In 2006, the European Parliament and Council issued a regulation (No. 1924/2006) for the nutrition and health claims made on foods, including food supplements. According to the regulation, the use of nutrition and health claims shall only be permitted if the substance in respect of which the claim is made has been shown to have a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. In the field of joint and cartilage health, there is no clear scientific-based definition of the nature of such a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. The objective of this paper is to scientifically define the possible content of health claims related to joint and cartilage health and to provide scientific guidelines for the design of clinical studies which need to be adopted to substantiate such health claims. METHODS: Literature review up to September 2011 followed by a consensus expert discussion organized by the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES). RESULTS: In line with the general principles of the PASSCLAIM and the Codex recommendations, the GREES identified four acceptable health claims related to joint and cartilage health based on the effects on discomfort, joint and cartilage structural integrity or risk factors for joint and cartilage diseases. The GREES considers that randomized controlled trials on a relevant outcome is the best design to assess health claims. Moreover, animal studies could also be of interest to substantiate some health claims, to assess the clinical relevance of endpoints used in human studies or to extrapolate data obtained in patients to the target (apparently) healthy population. CONCLUSION: According to the methodology and biomarkers used in the study and whether or not additional animal studies are provided to support the claim, various health claims can be acceptable in the field of joint and cartilage health.

[Soil fluoride: low digestive absorption in sheep]. / Fluor du sol: faible absorption digestive chez les ovins.

The percentages of digestive absorption of fluoride contained in various soils were assessed by the balance technique in groups of 4 ewes given soil enriched concentrated feed. Four soils collected in an area close to a source of fluoride and 3 samples from non polluted sites were used. The levels of extractable fluoride were significantly higher in the polluted soils. The various soils have little influence on the amounts of fluoride excreted in urine; these amounts are not correlated with the amounts of fluoride absorbed in the digestive tract. The percentages of digestive absorption of soil fluoride ranged between 4.5 and 23%, with 4 values close to 20%. The values are correlated with the soil total fluoride concentration and not with the soil extractable fluoride concentration.