U. this reduction shall be higher than 30% (EC, 2007). In Brazil, the changes in the standards regarding the comparative information for total fat are planned to require a reduction of at least 30% in this nutrient content and the reference product is not able to fulfil the requisites for a “low-fat” product (ANVISA, 2011). With the exception of mousses MF (control) and MF–WPC, all other products presented less than 3 g/100 g (Table 3) and could hold the “low-fat” claim according to the Brazilian and the E.U. legislations (Brasil, 1998 and EC, 2007) (Table 7).

In comparison with the U.S. check details legislation and that under planning to be adopted in Brazil (ANVISA, 2011 and US CFR, 2010f), considering the serving portion of ½ cup as 120 g, I, as well as WPC, I–WPC, and MF–I–WPC, achieve less than 3 g fat per serving and could receive this “low-fat” claim (Table 7). For this kind of product, the upper level of fat in 3 g and the serving portion of 120 g made these standards more restrictive for achieving the “low-fat” claim. In terms of comparative information in relation to control MF, mousses I, WPC, I–WPC, and MF–I–WPC filled all requisites

to receive the “reduced” claim for fat content considering the current Brazilian legislation (Brasil, 1998) (Table 6 and Table 7). On the other hand, only modified mousse MF–WPC was not reduced in more than 30% fat (Table 6) and could not be allowed to receive the “reduced-fat” claim according to the E.U. regulatory GSK458 chemical structure standards and that under planning to be adopted in Brazil (Table 7). For the “reduced-fat” claim, the current Brazilian legislation seems to be more restrictive than the new proposal for this kind of product. Moreover, all modified mousses were reduced

in more than 25% fat (Table 6) and could receive the “reduced-fat” claim according to the U.S. legislation (US CFR, 2010f) that showed to be less restrictive, as well as for the Selleck Rucaparib “light” claim for energy (Table 7). Mousses I, WPC, I–WPC and MF–I–WPC could hold the “low saturated fat” claim in E.U. and currently in Brazil (Table 7), once they presented less than 1.5 g of SFA/100 g (Table 4), which, summed to the energy from trans-FA, in case of E.U., contributed for less than 10% of the total energy value ( Table 5) ( Brasil, 1998 and EC, 2007). In Brazil, the reviewed standards for the “low saturated fat” claim are planned to consider less than 1.5 g of sum SFA and trans-FA per serving portion and the conditions that “low saturated fat” products fill the conditions required for a “zero” trans-FA product ( ANVISA, 2011), as commented next, and the maximum energy provided by saturated fat must be 10% of total energy of food. In this case, mousses I, WPC, I–WPC, and MF–I–WPC could still receive the “low saturated fat” claim ( Table 7). The U.S.