• Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.75-80
• /
• 1999

Special nutritional foods are one category of processed foods. In this category, 5 different food standards are defined in the current rule of the Korean Food Code ; that is, infant formulae, complementary foods for infants and young children, foods nutrient supplementation, processed dietary fiber-based foods, and foods for special dietary uses. The major differences between the special dietary uses. The major difference between the special nutritional foods and the other processed foods is that the special nutritional foods are characterized by their dietary uses for specific population groups rather than food ingredients or manufacturing and processing techniques which characterize and distinguish most of other processed foods. Although several countries establish similar standards for this type of foods, they use different legal names such as foods for special dietary uses(U.S.A., CODEX, Japan), foodstuffs intended for particular nutritional uses(EC), or special purpose foods(Australia). In addition, there are some other differences in the definitions for these food types and categorization of food types among countries. The major difference in the definitions is the description of 'special dietary uses' by specifying certain population groups whose nutrient requirements are different from those of ordinary men due to physiological or physical conditions and therefore may not be sufficiently met by consuming ordinary foods. The categorization of this type of foods is based on the type of dietary uses in the other countries, whereas we include foods simply supplemented with nutrients or foods having certain components such as dietary fibers even if these foods types do not have special dietary sues. Recently, a revision of standards for special nutritional food has been proposed. However, the description of 'special dietary uses' is not clearly indicated in the definition, and some food types which should not be categorized into the special nutritional foods still remain in this category. In order to correct these problems, the standard of food labeling in the Food Safety Law needs to be revised along with revision of food standards in the Food Code.

• Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.339-348
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to predict the economic size of foods-for-elderly market, which will be valuable information for establishing related policy and backup system. After setting the scope of related industry, detailed information for current market situation was investigated and a systematic forecast for market changes in the future was performed. Economic growth, changes in consumer expenditure and economic status of the elderly, current subscription of medical insurance and saving for pension were reflected. In addition, a survey toward related firms was completed and changes in aged population and incidence of chronic disease in the elderly were taken into account. Results show that the annual growth rate of the market was predicted to be the minimum 4.54% through the maximum 8.32% from 2010 to 2025 and its market size was forecasted to be the minimum 7,073 ten million won through the maximum 10,976 ten million won. It is expected that the market of foods-for-elderly will grow rapidly with development of foods technology and fast increase of aged population. Especially, growth of health functional foods and foods for special dietary uses for elderly will be distinguished. However, it seems that related firms are on the hedge, watching current trend of the related industry. This may results in insufficient supply against the demand. Therefore, policy for foods-for-elderly should be introduced and systematically administered, including R&D support, standardization and authentication for foods-for-elderly, construction of related database system.

• Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.252-260
• /
• 2020

This study was conducted to improve the standard method for vitamin B₁₂ and biotin contained in foods for special dietary uses to ensure the specificity of the complex matrix properties of foods. For the food code, the test method was improved to determine vitamin B₁₂ and biotin by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-UV using column-switching after concentration using immunoaffinity column. The immunoaffinity columns contain a gel suspension of monoclonal antibody specific to the vitamin of interest so that it can be used to concentrate the vitamin B₁₂ and biotin and remove interferences from the food extracts. Moreover, validation of advanced new methods was carried out to support the suitability of the proposed analytical procedure (specificity, linearity, detection limits (LOD), quantitative limits (LOQ), accuracy, and precision). The improved analytical method is being used to monitor relevant food items on sale. The results of this study showed that the new analytical method is suitable and appropriate for managing food intended for special dietary uses.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.89-93
• /
• 2007

Many countries such as The Republic of Korea have established their own nutritional standards, collectively termed Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs), and they vary due to the science which was reviewed, the purposes for which they are developed, and issues related to nutrition and food policy in the country. The current effort by the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CNFSDU) to update the NRVs that were established following the Helsinki Consultation in 1988 represents an opportunity to develop a set of reference values reflecting current scientific information to be used or adapted by many countries. This paper will focus on possible approaches to selecting or developing reference values which would serve the intended purpose for nutrition labeling to the greatest extent possible. Within the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (U.S. FDA) is currently reviewing regulations on nutrition labeling to better address current health issues, and is expected to enter into a process in the next few months to begin to explore how best to update nutrient Daily Values (DVs), most of which are still based on the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) of the Food and Nutrition Board, U.S. National Academy of Sciences, last reviewed and revised in 1968. In this presentation, I review the current purposes in the U.S. for nutrition labeling as identified in the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as amended, the scientific basis for current nutrition labeling regulations in the United States, and the recommendations made by the recent Committee on Use of Dietary Reference Intakes in Nutrition Labeling of the Institute of Medicine (2003) regarding how to use the DRIs in developing new DVs to be used on the label in the United States and Canada. Based on these reviews, I then provide examples of the issues that arise in comparing one approach to another. Much of the discussion focuses on the appropriate role of nutrient labeling within the Nutrition Facts panel, one of the three major public nutrition education tools in the United States (along with MyPyramid and Dietary Guidelines for Americans).

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.6 no.3
• /
• pp.361-370
• /
• 2001

This survey was conducted to evaluate with 457 health professionals from July, 1999 to September, 1999 the awareness of and satisfaction with the nutrition labeling system in Korea and to determine a desirable labeling system. Professors of food and nutrition and nutrition researchers in the food industry had the hightest scores on awareness of the nutrition labeling system(75.6% and 73.4%, respectively), which was significantly different from each other by occupation(p < 0.01). Frequently checked labeling information were expiration date, production date, price, and company respectively. Special nutrient food producers(56.9%), dietitians(49.3%), nurses(48.1%), researchers(42.3%) answered moderately on satisfaction with nutrition information for products, which was statistically significant(p < 0.01). This suggests that health professionals were unsatisfied with the present nutrition labeling system. In nutrition focusing statements, nutrient content claims, health claims, and working periods were significantly related with nutrition focusing statements and health claims, but not with nutrient content claims : the subject who had been working for more than 10 years and less than 5 years had positive thoughts or those matters while the subjects whose working periods were between 10 and 5 years had the lowest score. The most desirable labeling units were serving size(65.1%). Ninety two percent of the subjects wanted absolute nutrient contents in food and their percentage of the KRDA. Eight nine percent of health professionals agreed that the health claims should be used only with scientific approval by the government or food research institutions. Only 4.4% of subjects were satisfied with current regulations of health claims(p < 0.001). More studies regarding labeling units, their range and nutrient reference values are needed. The opinions of health professionals in nutrition labeling system should discussed to establish a desirable nutrition labeling system.