Skip to main content
NCBI home page
EFSA Journal logoLink to EFSA Journal
. 2011 Apr 8;9(4):2024. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2024

Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to resistant starch and reduction of post‐prandial glycaemic responses (ID 681), “digestive health benefits” (ID 682) and “favours a normal colon metabolism” (ID 783) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006

EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA)
PMCID: PMC13129663  PMID: 42078732

The content is available as a PDF (280.1 KB).

EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) ; Scientific Opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to resistant starch and reduction of post‐prandial glycaemic responses (ID 681), “digestive health benefits” (ID 682) and “favours a normal colon metabolism” (ID 783) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 2011;9(4):2024 [17 pp.]. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2024.

Panel members: Carlo Agostoni, Jean‐Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather‐Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Hannu Korhonen, Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Ambroise Martin, Bevan Moseley, Monika Neuhäuser‐Berthold, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Stephan Strobel, Inge Tetens, Daniel Tomé, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen.

Correspondence: nda@efsa.europa.eu

Acknowledgement: The Panel wishes to thank for the preparatory work on this scientific opinion: The members of the Working Group on Claims: Carlo Agostoni, Jean‐Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather‐Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Marina Heinonen, Hannu Korhonen, Martinus Løvik, Ambroise Martin, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Inge Tetens, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen. The members of the Claims Sub‐Working Group on Weight Management/Satiety/Glucose and Insulin Control/Physical Performance: Kees de Graaf, Joanne Harrold, Mette Hansen, Mette Kristensen, Anders Sjödin and Inge Tetens.

Adoption date: 12 November 2010

Published date: 8 April 2011

Question number: EFSA‐Q‐2008‐1468, EFSA‐Q‐2008‐1469, EFSA‐Q‐2008‐1570

On request from: European Commission

References

  1. Aggett PJ, Antoine JM, Asp NG, Bellisle F, Contor L, Cummings JH, Howlett J, Muller DJG, Persin C, Pijls LTJ, Rechkemmer G, Tuijtelaars S and Verhagen H, 2005. PASSCLAIM ‐ Consensus on criteria. European Journal of Nutrition, 44, 5–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Behall KM, Scholfield DJ and Canary J, 1988. Effect of Starch Structure on Glucose and Insulin Responses in Adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 47, 428–432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Behall KM, Scholfield DJ, Yuhaniak I and Canary J, 1989. Diets Containing High Amylose Vs Amylopectin Starch ‐ Effects on Metabolic Variables in Human‐Subjects. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 49, 337–344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Behall KM and Howe JC, 1995. Effect of Long‐Term Consumption of Amylose Vs Amylopectin Starch on Metabolic Variables in Human‐Subjects. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61, 334–340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Behall KM and Hallfrisch J, 2002. Plasma glucose and insulin reduction after consumption of breads varying in amylose content. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 56, 913–920. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Behall KM and Scholfield DJ, 2005. Food amylose content affects postprandial glucose and insulin responses. Cereal Chemistry, 82, 654–659. [Google Scholar]
  7. Behall KM, Scholfield DJ and Hallfrisch JG, 2006a. Barley beta‐glucan reduces plasma glucose and insulin responses compared with resistant starch in men. Nutrition Research, 26, 644–650. [Google Scholar]
  8. Behall KM, Scholfield DJ, Hallfrisch JG and Liljeberg‐Elmstahl HGM, 2006b. Consumption of both resistant starch and beta‐glucan improves postprandial plasma glucose and insulin in women. Diabetes Care, 29, 976–981. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Brighenti F, Benini L, Del Rio D, Casiraghi C, Pellegrini N, Scazzina F, Jenkins DJA and Vantini I, 2006. Colonic fermentation of indigestible carbohydrates contributes to the second‐meal effect. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 83, 817–822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. de la Hunty A and Ashwell M, 2008. Article 13 Health Claim: Resistant Starch Type 2 (RS) from high amylose maize and healthy blood glucose/sugar levels. National Starch Food Innovation. [Google Scholar]
  11. Granfeldt Y, Drews A and Bjorck I, 1995. Arepas Made from High Amylose Corn Flour Produce Favorably Low Glucose and Insulin Responses in Healthy Humans. Journal of Nutrition, 125, 459–465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Higgins JA, Higbee DR, Donahoo WT, Brown IL, Bell ML and Bessesen DH, 2004. Resistant starch consumption promotes lipid oxidation. Nutrition and Metabolism, 1, 8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hoebler C, Karinthi A, Chiron H, Champ M and Barry JL, 1999. Bioavailability of starch in bread rich in amylose: metabolic responses in healthy subjects and starch structure. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 53, 360–366. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Jenkins DJ, Vuksan V, Kendall CW, Wursch P, Jeffcoat R, Waring S, Mehling CC, Vidgen E, Augustin LS and Wong E, 1998. Physiological effects of resistant starches on fecal bulk, short chain fatty acids, blood lipids and glycemic index. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 17, 609–616. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. McCleary BV and Monaghan DA, 2002. Measurement of resistant starch. Journal of AOAC International, 85, 665–675. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Muir JG, Lu ZX, Collier GR and O'Dea K, 1994. Research Report to Quality Bakers Australia Ltd: The Acute Effects of High Resistant Starch Bread (Made from Hi‐Maize ‐ A High Amylose Maize Starch) on Glucose and Insulin Responses in Non‐diabetics. Deakin Institute of Human Nutrition, Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, Deakin University. [Google Scholar]
  17. Noakes M, Clifton PM, Nestel PJ, Le Leu R and McIntosh G, 1996. Effect of high‐amylose starch and oat bran on metabolic variables and bowel function in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 64, 944–951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Nugent AP, 2005. Health properties of resistant starch. Nutrition Bulletin, 30, 27–54. [Google Scholar]
  19. Quilez J, Bullo M and Salas‐Salvado J, 2007. Improved postprandial response and feeling of satiety after consumption of low‐calorie muffins with maltitol and high‐amylose corn starch. Journal of Food Science, 72, S407–S411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Reiser S, Powell AS, Scholfield DJ, Panda P, Fields M and Canary JJ, 1989. Day‐Long Glucose, Insulin, and Fructose Responses of Hyperinsulinemic and Nonhyperinsulinemic Men Adapted to Diets Containing Either Fructose or High‐Amylose Cornstarch. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 50, 1008–1014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Venn BJ and Green TJ, 2007. Glycemic index and glycemic load: measurement issues and their effect on diet‐disease relationships. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61 Suppl 1, S122–131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Weickert MO, Mohlig M, Koebnick C, Holst JJ, Namsolleck P, Ristow M, Osterhoff M, Rochlitz H, Rudovich N, Spranger J and Pfeiffer AFH, 2005. Impact of cereal fibre on glucose‐regulating factors. Diabetologia, 48, 2343–2353. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from EFSA Journal are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES