Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 health claims made on foods are prohibited unless they are authorised by the Commission in accordance with that Regulation and included in a list of permitted claims.

Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 also provides that applications for authorisations of health claims may be submitted by food business operators to the national competent authority of a Member State. The national competent authority is to forward valid applications to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), hereinafter referred to as ‘the Authority’.

Following receipt of an application the Authority is to inform without delay the other Member States and the Commission thereof, and to deliver an opinion on the health claim concerned.

The Commission is to decide on the authorisation of health claims taking into account the opinion delivered by the Authority.

The three opinions referred to in this Regulation are related to applications for reduction of disease risk claims, as referred to in Article 14(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006.

On the basis of the data presented, the Authority concluded in its opinion received by the Commission and the Member States on 1 October 2010 that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of sugar-free chewing gum and the claimed effect. Accordingly, a health claim reflecting this conclusion should be considered as complying with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, and it should be included in the Union list of permitted claims.

On the basis of the data presented, the Authority concluded in its opinion received by the Commission and the Member States on 1 October 2010 that a cause and effect relationship has been established between the consumption of sugar-free chewing gum and the claimed effect. Accordingly, a health claim reflecting this conclusion should be considered as complying with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, and it should be included in the Union list of permitted claims.

Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 provides that an opinion in favour of authorising a health claim should include certain particulars. Accordingly, those particulars should be set out in Annex I to this Regulation as regards the authorised claims and include, as the case may be, the revised wording of the claims, specific conditions of use of the claims, and, where applicable, conditions or restrictions of use of the food and/or an additional statement or warning, in accordance with the rules laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 and in line with the opinions of the Authority.

One of the objectives of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 is to ensure that health claims are truthful, clear and reliable and useful to the consumer, and that wording and presentation are taken into account in that respect. Therefore, where the wording of claims has the same meaning for consumers as that of an authorised health claim, because they demonstrate the same relationship that exists between a food category, a food or one of its constituents and health, they should be subject to the same conditions of use, as indicated in Annex I.

On the basis of the data presented, the Authority concluded in its opinion received by the Commission and the Member States on 7 September 2010 that a cause and effect relationship had not been established between the consumption of OPC Plus and the claimed effect. Accordingly, as the claim does not comply with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, it should not be authorised.

The comments from the applicants and the members of the public received by the Commission pursuant to Article 16(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 have been considered when setting the measures provided for in this Regulation.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and neither the European Parliament nor the Council have opposed them,