This page covers the EU framework governing what health or nutritional benefits may be claimed on the labelling and in the marketing of algae and algal products. The regulation is one of the most frequently encountered compliance barriers for the algae sector, because many marketing narratives naturally associated with algae — “rich in omega-3”, “supports the immune system”, “a source of complete protein” — are regulated claims that may only be used if specific conditions are met.

Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods, OJ L 404, 30.12.2006, p. 9. EUR-Lex

Relevance to algae: This regulation directly governs what claims about nutritional composition or health effects may be made for any food product marketed or labelled in the EU, including algae and algal products. It distinguishes two categories:

• Nutrition claims (Annex) — statements or implied statements that a food has particular beneficial nutritional properties (e.g. “high in protein”, “low in fat”, “source of omega-3 fatty acids”). These claims may only be made when the food meets precisely specified compositional thresholds set out in the Annex to the Regulation. For example, “source of omega-3 fatty acids” requires at least 300 mg of omega-3 per 100 g or per 100 kcal; “high in protein” requires that protein provides at least 20% of the energy value of the food.
• Health claims (Arts. 13–14) — any statement or implied statement that a relationship exists between a food category, a food or one of its constituents and health. Health claims may only be made if they appear on the EU register of authorised health claims (see below). Unauthorised health claims are prohibited, regardless of their scientific plausibility.

Only health claims that have been evaluated by EFSA and authorised by the Commission may be used. The two categories of authorised health claims are:

• Article 13.1 claims (“general function” claims, referring to the role of a nutrient or other substance in growth, development and normal functions of the body, or psychological and behavioural functions): these are authorised through a Commission Regulation consolidating claims that have been positively evaluated by EFSA. Commission Regulation (EU) No 432/2012 of 16 May 2012 establishing a list of permitted health claims made on foods, other than those referring to the reduction of disease risk and to children's development and health, OJ L 136, 25.5.2012, p. 1, is the key implementing regulation. It is subject to ongoing additions and amendments.
• Article 14 claims (claims referring to reduction of a disease risk or claims related to children's development and health): these require a full authorisation procedure, including a specific EFSA opinion.

EFSA has rejected a substantial proportion of health claims submitted for evaluation, and an adverse EFSA opinion has in practice almost always resulted in a claim being placed on the “on hold” or rejected list rather than being authorised. The register of both authorised and rejected/on-hold claims is searchable via the EU Register of Nutrition and Health Claims Made on Foods at: DG SANTE.

Several microalgae — notably Limnospira platensis (Spirulina) and Chlorella species — have high protein content per gram of dry biomass. “Source of protein” (≥12% of energy from protein) and “high in protein” (≥20% of energy from protein) nutrition claims may be usable for these products if the compositional threshold is met. However, the bioavailability of algal protein may differ from that of conventional protein sources; EFSA requires that only protein of specified digestibility be counted. Producers should verify that their product's protein content — on a digestibility-adjusted basis where relevant — meets the Annex threshold.

Microalgae are commercially significant sources of EPA and DHA, the long-chain omega-3 fatty acids associated with cardiovascular and cognitive health claims. Several authorised Article 13.1 health claims in Commission Regulation (EU) No 432/2012 relate to EPA and DHA, including:

• “DHA contributes to the maintenance of normal brain function” (minimum: 250 mg DHA per day)
• “DHA and EPA contribute to the normal function of the heart” (minimum: 250 mg EPA + DHA per day)

These are among the better-supported authorised health claims and are commercially significant for producers of algal DHA/EPA oils from heterotrophic production (Schizochytrium sp., Thraustochytrid sp.). To use them, the daily serving of the product must provide at least the stated minimum amount, and the claim must be accompanied by the information that the beneficial effect is obtained with a daily intake of that amount.

Brown seaweeds are typically very high in iodine, and iodine has authorised health claims related to normal thyroid function, cognitive function, energy metabolism and nervous system function. These claims may be made on seaweed products that meet the “source of iodine” threshold (15% of the Reference Intake, or 22.5 µg iodine per 100 g or per serving). However, producers must be mindful that very high iodine content — common in kelps — also creates a food safety concern and may require safety warnings (see Food Quality and Safety), potentially in direct tension with the use of an iodine health claim for the same product.

Claims such as “antioxidant” or “contains antioxidants” are not automatically permitted; the antioxidant in question must be specifically authorised. Astaxanthin from Haematococcus pluvialis has been the subject of EFSA evaluations, and producers should check the current register status before making antioxidant claims about astaxanthin-containing products.

Numerous claims commonly associated with Spirulina in consumer marketing (“boosts energy”, “supports detoxification”, “strengthens immunity”) are not on the authorised list and therefore may not legally be used on labelling or in advertising. This is one of the most common compliance failures in the algae supplement market and has been the subject of enforcement action by several national food safety authorities.

The Regulation covers not only statements on labels but also commercial communications, advertising, and point-of-sale material (Art. 1(2)). A health claim communicated in social media posts, promotional videos, sales brochures or a company website promoting a food product is legally as regulated as the same statement on the packaging itself. This broad scope is frequently underestimated by algae companies, particularly smaller producers unfamiliar with food law.

The Regulation also applies to business-to-business communications where those communications are made to final consumers or are likely to be passed on to them; generic promotional language in trade materials describing a product as “health-promoting” should be reviewed with the Regulation in mind.

A specific complication arises for algae marketed as “botanicals” with traditional health associations. Article 13(3) of the Regulation envisaged that claims based on traditional use or botanical knowledge not requiring strong mechanistic evidence might be authorised through a separate procedure. However, the Commission has long deferred finalising the botanical claims framework, and these claims remain “on hold” — neither authorised nor definitively rejected. Algae marketed with traditional health claims that fall into this botanical category occupy a regulatory grey area: they may be tolerated by some national authorities but are technically not authorised EU-wide. This uncertainty has persisted for over a decade and producers should not assume the on-hold status will be regularised in their favour.

• Do not use any health claim unless it appears in the EU authorised list — check the register before finalising any label, website or marketing material.
• Nutrition claims are safer but still threshold-bound — verify compositional data before using any claim in the Annex (high protein, source of omega-3, source of iodine, etc.).
• Review all marketing communications, not just the product label — the Regulation applies to all commercial communications addressed to the consumer.
• Do not rely on botanical/traditional use claims as if they were authorised — their on-hold status is not a green light.
• The interaction with food supplement labelling (see Food Supplements) is important: for supplement products the regulation requires that the claim relate to a specific daily intake of the relevant substance, and the recommended daily dose shown on the label must be sufficient to deliver that intake.
• Product-specific legal advice is strongly recommended before commercial launch of any product with health or nutrition claim aspirations, given the complexity and the severity of potential enforcement consequences.

See also: Food | Food Supplements | Food Labelling | Food Quality and Safety | Food Additives

Last reviewed: June 2026.