Healthy Food?
C. All this has attracted the attention of regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. They are concerned that some of these health claims may be misleading or unsupported by evidence, and are tightening the rules. On October 20th America’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said it would overhaul the rules for nutritional claims on food labels and issue new standards early next year. It has already rebuked General Mills, the maker of Cheerios, a popular breakfast cereal, for claiming that it is “clinically proven to lower cholesterol”. The European Food Safety Authority is also cracking down, requiring companies to back up health and nutrition claims with scientific studies. Hundreds of applications submitted to its scientific panel have just been turned down. The panel has decided that there is not enough evidence to claim that, for instance, heather helps you sleep, dried cocoa extract helps you lose weight, quinoa makes your hair grow and Jerusalem artichokes make your gut healthy.
D. Many in the industry are howling that these rules are heavy-handed, given that most of their products are perfectly safe and that some health claims go back decades or more. Demanding expensive studies to justify such claims will stifle innovation, they argue, and tilt the playing field against smaller firms, which will be unable to afford them. Surely, they say, firms that find profit in adding iron, iodine, zinc and vitamins to their products, or cutting levels of high-fructose corn syrup or saturated fat, ought to be applauded, not denounced. Many food brands started off as a means of reassuring customers that products were trustworthy. The desire to defend their brands gives food firms a strong incentive to ensure that their products are safe.
E. The situation now however is that food companies are claiming their products provide specific benefits-not merely that they are safe to eat. Ordinary folk cannot tell whether health claims made by food marketers are scientifically valid, so there is a case for regulatory scrutiny of such claims. What’s more, even though it is difficult to imagine someone being harmed by eating too much breakfast cereal or yogurt, say, there is a risk of harm if health claims made about functional foods encourage people to see them as substitutes for drugs or lifestyle changes they may need. A few helpings of vegetables will do more good than any probiotic yogurt.
F. A lesson from the drugs industry is that industry-funded studies have a clear tendency to produce results that please their sponsors. So food companies should have to register all studies and publish even those with unfavourable results. Clear guidelines on labelling are also important. To its credit, the FDA recently proposed rules that would force food companies to publish all the important components of their products on the front of their packages, rather than picking out the healthy ones and keeping quiet about the fat, salt and sugar.
G. The industry’s claim that greater scrutiny will kill innovation is off the mark. Those firms making misleading claims will suffer; those prepared to invest in proper scientific studies to back up their supposed breakthroughs will benefit. And in pharmaceuticals, smaller firms seem to be more innovative than bigger ones. If food companies wish to make the sorts of claims about their products that pharmaceutical companies do, they must be prepared to submit to similar scrutiny. Extraordinary claims, after all, require extraordinary evidence.
For many people it is now difficult to the information given by food producers is true or not.
New FDA legislation forces companies to put both healthy and unhealthy on the front of their products.
The food industry must accept the same level of as the pharmaceutical industry if it wishes to make similar claims.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Question Focus: Synonym match - the summary talks about difficulty knowing if information is true, and the passage uses the phrase 'tell whether'.
Correct Answer: tell whether
Why this is correct: The passage clearly says that ordinary folk cannot tell whether health claims are valid. The summary paraphrases this idea as difficulty knowing if information is true, so tell whether fits perfectly.
Passage Reference: eat. Ordinary folk cannot tell whether health claims made by food marketers are scientifically
Common Mistake: Students often write know if or decide whether, but these words are not in the passage. You must copy the exact words from the text. This is a synonym trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'cannot tell whether health claims are scientifically valid' = Summary: 'difficult to ___ the information given by food producers is true or not'
Tips: When a gap follows 'to', check that your answer is a verb or verb phrase taken exactly from the passage.
Key Vocabulary:
- ordinary folk = normal people
- scientifically valid = proven by science
Question Focus: Exact word match - the summary shortens a longer sentence from the passage.
Correct Answer: components
Passage Reference: tant. To its credit, the FDA recently proposed rules that would force food companies to publish all the important components of their products on the front of their pa
Why this is correct: The passage explains that companies must publish all the important components of their products on the front. The summary shortens this to healthy and unhealthy components, using the same key word.
Common Mistake: Students often write ingredients or information, but those words do not appear in this sentence. You must copy components from the passage. This is a synonym trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'publish all the important components of their products' = Summary: 'put both healthy and unhealthy ___ on the front of their products'
Tips: If you think of a good synonym, stop and check. IELTS wants the exact word from the passage, not your own word.
Key Vocabulary:
- component = part
- publish = make public
Question Focus: Synonym match - the summary rephrases 'similar scrutiny' as 'the same level of scrutiny'.
Correct Answer: scrutiny
Passage Reference: ones. If food companies wish to make the sorts of claims about their products that pharmaceutical companies do, they must be prepared to submit to similar scrutiny.
Why this is correct: The passage states that food companies must submit to similar scrutiny as pharmaceutical companies. The summary paraphrases this as the same level of scrutiny, so the key word is scrutiny.
Common Mistake: Some students write rules or regulation, but the passage is specifically about scrutiny. Changing the word changes the meaning. This is a paraphrase trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'submit to similar scrutiny' = Summary: 'accept the same level of ___ as the pharmaceutical industry'
Tips: Look for strong nouns near the end of opinion paragraphs. They are often tested in summaries.
Key Vocabulary:
- scrutiny = close examination
- claims = statements
General Tips:
- Summary completion questions follow passage order. Find the first answer, then keep reading forward.
- Always copy the exact word or words from the passage. Do not use your own synonyms.
- Check grammar clues like 'to', 'a', or 'level of' to know if you need a verb or a noun.
- Keep the word limit in mind. Even one extra word makes the answer wrong.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation