BY PAUL BARTON
Enquirer Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- For the second time in three years, an advisory panel of the Food and Drug Administration has declared Procter & Gamble's fake-fat product olestra to be safe.
The FDA's Food Advisory Committee said it was still "resonably certain of no harm" to consumers from the product, which is used mainly in fat-free potato chips and other salty snacks.
Still, the committee ruled that the informational or warning label on olestra products discussing possible health implications should continue.
The 30-month review was mandated when olestra was approved in January 1996.
"This week Olean had its 30-month check-up and it passed with flying colors," said Sharon J. Mitchell, vice president for research and development of food and beverage products at Cincinnati-based P&G.
Olestra, marketed under the name Olean, is associated with several leading brands of snack chips including Frito-Lay's Wow! products and P&G's fat-free Pringles.
All of the products carry labels that warn of "potential abdominal cramping and loose stools" from the fat substitute.
The labeling will remain in force for now, said Joseph Levitt, director of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition at the Food and Drug Administration.
FDA officials, he said, will have to decide what action to take based on the panel's views.
Many committee members -- food scientists from universities and industry -- agreed with P&G that the label confuses consumers and may overstate potential gastrointestinal side effects.
Mr. Levitt declined to say how quickly the FDA would consider the recommendations for changing the label or how long it would take to arrive at new wording if it decided to change it.
Consumers can take assurance, he said, because the advisory committee concluded that research done since January 1996 has raised no new significant public health concerns about olestra. P&G presented several studies this week that it said showed no difference in gastrointestinal effects between olestra-made products and snacks containing regular fat.
But Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a public health watchdog group that has consistently opposed P&G, called olestra "glop" and said the panel is failing to look out for the health of Americans.
He said he was heartened that the committee wanted the warning label to continue, but argued it needs to be more prominently displayed. Either it should be high on the front of the bag or there should be wording on the front to alert consumers to the warning on the back, he said.
"The label does nothing to protect people who do not see it," Mr. Jacobson said.
P&G officials disagreed.
"People who see the (label) as a warning avoid buying the product, said Keith Treibwasser, director of olestra regulatory and clinical development for P&G.
Nonetheless, P&G officials were encouraged that many committee members said the language needed softening.
"The language is much too strong," said Edward N. Brandt, director of the Center for Health Policy at the University of Oklahoma and chairman of the FDA panel.
Mr. Brandt expressed concern that a consumer experiencing gastrointestinal difficulties might blame it on olestra instead of seeing a doctor.
Katherine L. Clancy of the Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture in Greenbelt, Md., disagreed.
"This is really a very new product," she said. "It is a major experiment."
