Day 055 - 25 Nov 94 - Page 23

     
     1        A.  I am not sure that this is identical to the situation
     2        that was in France.  I know there were restrictions on the
     3        use of children in advertisements, but this rationale here
     4        relates to an extension of existing Rule 39, which states
     5        that children must not be seen or heard in an advertisement
     6        for an alcoholic drink.
     7
     8   Q.   If we move on -- I think we have nearly finished; there are
     9        a couple more pages -- to page 15, generalised claims?
    10        A.  This deals with health and the area of health and
    11        nutrition claims that are used in advertisements.  It
    12        proposes to tighten up on the existing Rule 12 on
    13        generalised health claims.  It proposes that the
    14        generalised health claims for foods are not acceptable.
    15        There is a difference between generalised health claims and
    16        other health claims or nutrition claims.  A generalised
    17        health claim -----
    18
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, I understand that.
    20        A.  Right, OK.  This follows on page 16.  This refers back
         to a recommendation by the Government's Food Advisory
    22        Committee, which recommended that claims should only be
    23        allowed if they refer to measurable and objective
    24        characteristics; and generalised health claims are, by
    25        definition, claims which do not refer to measurable and
    26        objective characteristics.
    27
    28        The Food Advisory Committee picked out some claims,
    29        meaningless descriptions, such as the words "healthy" and
    30        "wholesome" which are recommended should not be used
    31        unless there was further explanation in which case, by
    32        definition, they are not generalised.
    33
    34   MR. MORRIS:  Proposed amendment 3.2:  if they do make a health
    35        claim, it should be backed up by medical -- in fact,
    36        independent medical evidence; is that correct?
    37        A.  This, again, follows the recommendations of the Food
    38        Advisory Committee, which stated that they had strong
    39        reservations about the use of health claims, and
    40        recommended that health claims should only be permitted if
         they can be justified according to any recommendations that
    42        have been made or supported by the Chief Medical Officer.
    43
    44        This, to some extent, is broadly similar to the situation
    45        in the United States where there is now an agreed set of
    46        claims that are permitted to be made if criteria are met,
    47        and others outside that are not permitted to be made.
    48
    49   Q.   Page 17, yes?
    50        A.  This relates to energy claims, and proposes that 
    51        advertisements should not claim or imply that a food is a 
    52        superior, rapid or reinvigorating source of energy. 
    53
    54   Q.   Because?
    55        A.  Because there is insufficient evidence that any
    56        particular food is a superior source of energy than any
    57        other food.
    58
    59   Q.   Meat is often promoted as a source of energy:  can help you
    60        to be strong and climb mountains, or whatever.  Would that