Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006
Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, pursuant to Article 13.1 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a health claim related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐prol...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2012-06-01
|
| Series: | EFSA Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2715 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846150777757761536 |
|---|---|
| author | EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) |
| author_facet | EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) |
| author_sort | EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, pursuant to Article 13.1 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a health claim related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure. The food constituent that is the subject of the claim, the tripeptides isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP), is sufficiently characterised. The claimed effect, maintenance of normal blood pressure, is a beneficial physiological effect. The proposed target population is the general population. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that 15 of the human intervention studies provided, of which seven were adequately powered to detect small between‐group differences in systolic blood pressure, did not observe an effect of IPP and VPP on systolic blood pressure or diastolic blood pressure; that interpretation of the results from nine out of the ten studies which reported an effect of IPP and VPP on office systolic blood pressure was limited by methodological weaknesses; that the animal and in vitro/ex vivo studies did not provide additional information on the effect of IPP and VPP on blood pressure in humans; and that there is no convincing evidence for a mechanism by which IPP and VPP could exert the claimed effect in humans at the proposed dose. On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of IPP and VPP and maintenance of normal blood pressure. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-cc607837384d4cbcb065872025e827e7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1831-4732 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2012-06-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | EFSA Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-cc607837384d4cbcb065872025e827e72024-11-28T09:25:50ZengWileyEFSA Journal1831-47322012-06-01106n/an/a10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2715Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA)Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, pursuant to Article 13.1 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to provide a scientific opinion on a health claim related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure. The food constituent that is the subject of the claim, the tripeptides isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP), is sufficiently characterised. The claimed effect, maintenance of normal blood pressure, is a beneficial physiological effect. The proposed target population is the general population. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that 15 of the human intervention studies provided, of which seven were adequately powered to detect small between‐group differences in systolic blood pressure, did not observe an effect of IPP and VPP on systolic blood pressure or diastolic blood pressure; that interpretation of the results from nine out of the ten studies which reported an effect of IPP and VPP on office systolic blood pressure was limited by methodological weaknesses; that the animal and in vitro/ex vivo studies did not provide additional information on the effect of IPP and VPP on blood pressure in humans; and that there is no convincing evidence for a mechanism by which IPP and VPP could exert the claimed effect in humans at the proposed dose. On the basis of the data presented, the Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of IPP and VPP and maintenance of normal blood pressure.https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2715Isoleucine‐proline‐prolineIPPvaline‐proline‐prolineVPPblood pressurehealth claims |
| spellingShingle | EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 EFSA Journal Isoleucine‐proline‐proline IPP valine‐proline‐proline VPP blood pressure health claims |
| title | Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 |
| title_full | Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 |
| title_fullStr | Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 |
| title_full_unstemmed | Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 |
| title_short | Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine‐proline‐proline (IPP) and valine‐proline‐proline (VPP) and maintenance of normal blood pressure (ID 661, 1831, 1832, 2891, further assessment) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 |
| title_sort | scientific opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to isoleucine proline proline ipp and valine proline proline vpp and maintenance of normal blood pressure id 661 1831 1832 2891 further assessment pursuant to article 13 1 of regulation ec no 1924 2006 |
| topic | Isoleucine‐proline‐proline IPP valine‐proline‐proline VPP blood pressure health claims |
| url | https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2715 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT efsapanelondieteticproductsnutritionandallergiesnda scientificopiniononthesubstantiationofhealthclaimsrelatedtoisoleucineprolineprolineippandvalineprolineprolinevppandmaintenanceofnormalbloodpressureid661183118322891furtherassessmentpursuanttoarticle131ofregulationecno19242006 |