The world’s biggest omega-3 source – Peru’s anchovy fishery – is moving toward Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)...
|
Investment for the design and running of clinical trials is a major expense for the industry, but...
|
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has reiterated calls for more to be done to improve nutrition...
|
Daily consumption of probiotics may improve the mental performance of lab animals with diabetes, says a new...
|
There is a direct and causal relationship between vitamin D status, high blood pressure and the risk...
|
RESEARCHER aims to replicate ATTENTION-GRABBING RESULTS
A preliminary study in the US assessing the efficacy of 5-Hour Energy found that the energy shot...
|
Rejected claims
Broad statements of health benefits and impacts on physiology should be supported by well designed scientifically valid studies that prove the claims made. Anecdote and poorly designed studies with improper controls should not be allowed. I doubt that "just add water to probiotic health claims" will change considerations of legitimacy. Manufacturers should design studies that support their claims using the same methods that are used to support efficacy of pharmaceuticals. It would seem to me that this is the only way to verify the veracity of many of the claims that are being made.
Posted by Stephen Newman
18 April 2011 | 22h45