Before you start writing a claim on your packaging, you need to understand what EFSA will consider credible and what it will reject. Research on omega-3 and telomeres, the effect of vitamin B12 on muscle recovery, whether biological age can actually be measured — all of this has its place in the regulations, but not where you might think.
Why Biological Age Is Not the Same as Age Claims
Regulation 1924/2006 explicitly prohibits claims that a product "slows ageing" or "reduces biological age". This is not a matter of dishonesty — it is simply too broad a formulation. Biological age is a scientific construct based on epigenetics, telomere shortening and mitochondrial markers. But for food law, what counts are specific, measurable effects on specific bodily functions.
The 2026 studies, particularly those concerning omega-3 and telomere length, show correlations that are scientifically interesting. The problem? EFSA will require not just correlation but causality. This means you must demonstrate not only that omega-3 affects telomere length, but that this effect actually translates into a measurable change in biological function — such as faster muscle recovery or improved aerobic capacity.
- Claim "supports the natural recovery process" — likely to pass
- Claim "reduces biological age" — will not pass
- Claim "supports muscle function through effects on mitochondria" — may pass, if you have the research
- Claim "slows ageing" — will never pass
Expert Tip: In practice, manufacturers often confuse "ageing biomarkers" with "biological function". EFSA will not accept a claim based solely on changes in telomeres or gene expression. You must show that the change in a biomarker actually affects something the patient or athlete can feel and measure — faster recovery, better performance, reduced fatigue.
Omega-3 and Athletic Performance: What the Regulations Say
Omega-3 (EPA and DHA) already have approved claims in the European Commission register. They can support heart function, influence blood pressure and support brain function. But can they support athletic performance? This is where it gets interesting.
The 2026 research shows that EPA and DHA may influence post-exercise muscle inflammation (DOMS — Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness) and accelerate recovery. This is not a new claim, but new studies may strengthen the evidence for already approved claims. The problem: you must use exactly the same study conditions (dose, duration, population) that EFSA previously approved.
If your study uses a different EPA/DHA dose or a different group (e.g. endurance athletes rather than strength athletes), the new claim will be treated as a separate one and will require its own authorisation. This means that even if you have excellent data, you cannot automatically extend an existing claim to a new population.
- Approved: omega-3 supports heart function and blood pressure
- Approved: omega-3 supports brain function
- Not approved: omega-3 improves athletic performance
- Possible (with new research): omega-3 supports muscle recovery after exercise — but requires a separate application to EFSA
Vitamin B12 in Athletes: Recovery vs. Performance
B12 has one approved claim: it supports energy-yielding metabolism and reduces tiredness and fatigue. This is a straightforward claim, but food supplement manufacturers targeting athletes make a common mistake — they begin to assert that B12 "improves performance" or "increases energy for training".
The distinction is subtle but legally significant. Reducing fatigue is an effect on general bodily function. Improving performance is a claim related to physical capacity, which requires specific evidence. Sanitary inspection authorities distinguish between these categories and may issue a decision to withdraw a product if the manufacturer has exceeded the approved framework.
The 2026 research may demonstrate that B12 influences muscle recovery by supporting protein synthesis or mitochondrial function. This is promising, but again: you must demonstrate causality, not merely correlation. If you want a new claim, be prepared for a lengthy EFSA authorisation process — a minimum of 18–24 months.
- B12 supports energy-yielding metabolism — approved
- B12 reduces tiredness and fatigue — approved
- B12 improves athletic performance — not approved
- B12 supports muscle recovery — requires new authorisation
Expert Tip: Athletes with a B12 deficiency will genuinely experience improved performance after supplementation. But this does not mean you can communicate this as a claim. A claim must be credible for the entire target population, not only for those with a deficiency. This is a key distinction that the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) examines very carefully.
The New Claim Authorisation Procedure: Practical Steps
If you have new 2026 research and wish to have a new claim authorised, the procedure is as follows. First, you must prepare an application to the European Commission containing complete scientific documentation — all studies, meta-analyses and a risk of bias assessment.
- Step 1: Prepare a complete scientific documentation file (minimum 50–100 pages for a serious claim)
- Step 2: Submit the application to the European Commission (NDIN form — Notification of a Claim)
- Step 3: The Commission forwards the application to EFSA (usually within 30 days)
- Step 4: EFSA assesses the application (6–12 months for standard claims, up to 24 for complex ones)
- Step 5: EFSA issues a Scientific Opinion
- Step 6: The European Commission issues a Regulation (it may approve, reject or request additional studies)
- Step 7: The claim is published in the register (if approved) — you may then use it across the EU
The entire process takes 18–36 months. Costs? Preparing the documentation with specialists: PLN 20,000–50,000; administrative fees: a further PLN 5,000–15,000. If EFSA rejects your Scientific Opinion, you may appeal, but this adds a further 6–12 months and additional costs.
Experience shows that manufacturers often do not prepare sufficiently for this process. They take one or two studies and assume that is enough. EFSA will look for gaps in the evidence, conflicts of interest (is the research funded by the manufacturer?) and consistency of results across different studies.
The Most Common Mistakes with Health Claims for Athletes
- Mistake 1: Confusing biomarkers with biological function. A change in telomeres ≠ a change in performance
- Mistake 2: Extending an approved claim to a new population (e.g. from the general public to athletes) without new authorisation
- Mistake 3: Using words such as "improves", "increases", "enhances" instead of "supports" or "aids" — this can change the category of the claim
- Mistake 4: Relying on a single study. EFSA wants a minimum of 2–3 high-quality studies, preferably from different research teams
- Mistake 5: Ignoring conflicts of interest. If the manufacturer funds the study, EFSA will be more sceptical
- Mistake 6: Writing the claim too broadly ("supports health") rather than specifically ("supports muscle function")
- Mistake 7: Failing to check first whether a similar claim already exists in the register — you may simply be able to use it without new authorisation
The Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) regularly inspects the labelling of food supplements for athletes and frequently finds claims that exceed the approved framework. Sanctions? Reopening of administrative proceedings, fines of up to PLN 100,000, an order to change the packaging and, in some cases, withdrawal of the product from the market.
How to Prepare Documentation for a New Claim Authorisation
If you genuinely wish to have a new claim authorised based on 2026 research, you need to know what EFSA will be examining. It is not simply a matter of a study showing an effect. What matters is how that study was conducted and whether the results are credible.
- Risk of Bias assessment: Was the study blinded? Was there a placebo control? Were the analyses pre-specified?
- Sample size: A small group (n<30) will be viewed with suspicion. EFSA wants a minimum of 50–100 participants for athletic performance studies
- Duration: A study lasting 2 weeks will be less credible than one lasting 12 weeks
- Measurements: Did you actually measure what you want to claim? (e.g. VO2max performance, not merely perceived fatigue)
- Replication: Are the results replicated in other studies? Have other research teams obtained similar results?
- Mechanism: Can you explain HOW the substance affects the function? (e.g. EPA influences inflammation → faster recovery)
When preparing your documentation, begin with a systematic review of the literature. This is not optional — EFSA requires it for every serious claim. The review must be conducted in accordance with PRISMA standards and must be published or available as a report.
Expert Tip: Manufacturers often think it is sufficient to send copies of studies to EFSA. It is not. You must prepare a detailed analysis of each study — how it was conducted, what the results were and whether they can be generalised to the entire target population. This requires the work of experts — biochemists, statisticians and research methodology specialists. If you try to cut corners at this stage, your application will be rejected.
The Register of Approved Claims: What You Can Already Use
Before you begin preparing an application for a new claim, check the EU Register of Nutrition and Health Claims. There you will find all claims approved for EPA, DHA, B12 and many other substances. If your claim is already listed there, you can use it without additional authorisation — you simply need to meet the conditions (e.g. minimum substance content per serving).
For omega-3 (EPA + DHA), approved claims include: "supports heart function", "supports brain function" and "supports normal blood pressure". For B12: "supports energy-yielding metabolism", "reduces tiredness and fatigue" and "supports normal nervous system function". For many substances there are also "children's" claims — specific ones for child development.
Important: claims in the register may be used throughout the EU, but you must meet all conditions. If the label states "supports brain function thanks to DHA" but your product contains only 50 mg of DHA (instead of the required minimum), the claim is unlawful. The Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) will check this.
- Check the EU Register: https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/labelling_nutrition/claims/register/public/ (informational link)
- Find the substances in your product
- Read the claim conditions carefully (minimum content, target population, conditions of use)
- Check whether your product meets all conditions
- If it does — you may use the claim
- If it does not — either reformulate the product or do not use the claim