According to the Hartman Group, heart health is the top concern for consumers while grocery shopping. Their research reveals that 55% of U.S. shoppers aim to limit their intake of saturated fats, while nearly 40% prefer healthier fats such as polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats. The reaction from manufacturers and industry groups to the FDA’s proposal to eliminate the health claim regarding soy protein has been mixed. The Soyfoods Association of North America (SANA) expressed its concerns on Monday, advocating for the retention of the existing claim: “25 grams of soy protein a day, as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol, may reduce the risk of heart disease.”
SANA emphasized that numerous scientific studies, both prior to and after the approval of the soy protein health claim in 1999, consistently demonstrate that soy protein lowers LDL cholesterol. They assert that the overall evidence supports the continued endorsement of an unqualified claim. Additionally, they pointed out that the FDA’s decision contradicts the stance of 12 other countries that have recognized health claims linking soy protein to heart health, including Health Canada’s most recent approval in 2015.
The Natural Products Association also expressed concerns regarding this development. CEO Daniel Fabricant described the FDA’s action as “somewhat unexpected,” noting that the agency did not clarify the reasons behind its decision. Given Fabricant’s background, having previously led the FDA’s Division of Dietary Supplement Programs, he has significant insight into federal regulatory processes.
The American Heart Association has supported the revocation of the soy protein health claim, questioning its direct health benefits. According to Reuters, when the FDA reassessed the health evidence in 2008, the association stated, “The direct cardiovascular health benefit of soy protein or isoflavone supplements is minimal at best.” Should the FDA proceed with revoking the unrestricted health claim on soy protein products, it is challenging to predict consumer reactions and whether it will affect their purchasing choices. The association opposes the FDA adopting qualified language for the affected products, arguing that research indicates consumers often misunderstand qualified health claims, which are based on limited and varying levels of evidence.
Once the FDA has initiated the proposed rule to revoke the soy protein health claim, it is unlikely to alter its course unless a substantial number of comments oppose the decision. This feedback may come from companies like DuPont, which produces isolated soy protein, and Gardein, known for its soy-based protein products. Furthermore, the agency is not expected to reevaluate the 11 other approved health claims on food products unless significant pressure is applied. Notably, only one of these claims pertains to soybean protein, which is under review for potential revocation. On a related note, the FDA recently approved the labeling of soybean oil as heart healthy, citing evidence that its consumption can lower the risk of coronary heart disease and reduce LDL cholesterol levels.
In light of these ongoing discussions, it is also important to highlight the relevance of vegan calcium citrate as an alternative source of calcium for those who may be concerned about their heart health. As consumers look for ways to enhance their diets, incorporating vegan calcium citrate can provide essential nutrients without the saturated fats often found in other calcium sources. The emphasis on heart health and the shift towards healthier dietary fats may encourage more individuals to explore options like vegan calcium citrate as they navigate their grocery shopping choices.