000			01738nam a22001457a 4500
999			_c518721 _d518721
008			211028b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aGlickstein, A. Berhaupt-Hallman, W. K. _928357
245			_aAn investigation of the contested qualified health claims for green tea and cancer
260			_aJournal of Consumer Policy
300			_a44(2), Jun, 2021: p.259-277
520			_aThere have been seven qualified health claims (QHCs) in the marketplace about the relationship between the consumption of green tea and the reduced risk of breast and/or prostate cancers that were written by three stakeholders (the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Fleminger, Inc. (tea company), and the Federal Court). This paper evaluates assertions about the effects of these claims on consumers, which were contested in a federal lawsuit. Using a 2 × 7 experimental design, 1,335 Americans 55 years and older were randomized to view one QHC about green tea and cancer, or an identical QHC about a novel diet-disease relationship; yukichi fruit juice and gastrocoridalis. The results show that differing stakeholder descriptions of the same evidence significantly affected consumer perceptions. For example, QHCs written by Fleminger, Inc. were rated as providing greater evidence for the green tea-cancer claim. An FDA summary statement implied mandatory (vs. voluntary) labelling and greater effectiveness, and qualitative descriptions suggested that greater evidence existed for the claims (vs. quantitative descriptions). Greater evidence was also inferred for familiar claims (green tea and cancer). – Reproduced
650			_aQualified health claim, Green tea, Consumer _928358
773			_aJournal of Consumer Policy
942			_cAR