Two of the formats relied on specific wording and word order and used language similar to what FDA permits for preliminary health claims. The other two used report card grades to portray the strength of the science. According to the study, text sentences using adjectives “do not correctly convey...the intended strength of science.”
Although the report card format did convey the strength of the science, it had unintended consequences. Those reviewing the formats attributed more certainty to claims with disclaimers than those without them. And conveying greater scientific uncertainty did not diminish reviewers’ perception of the product’s health benefits. In some cases, conveying more scientific certainty for a claim led to more negative perceptions of the product’s health benefits.
“The FDA should immediately cease authorizing preliminary health claims and withdraw approval for those it has allowed,” declared Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs for the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which has opposed the preliminary health claims. He noted that FDA initially had turned down a Freedom of Information request to turn over the study and had declined to give it to several members of Congress.
