Weight, Supplements & Physical Activity

Situation in Georgia and the region

Overweight, obesity and physical inactivity are among the leading drivers of noncommunicable disease in the WHO European Region, which includes Georgia and Central Asia. At the same time, food supplements and weight-loss products are widely marketed with little independent information for consumers.

Georgia’s national STEPS surveys (2010, 2016) and the WHO Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative provide measured national data; the latest results are available from the National Center for Disease Control and Public Health.

PHIG’s work on weight, supplements and physical activity

• Independent evaluation of consumer health products
• Quality standards and certification for fitness services
• Evidence-based public campaigns on weight, nutrition and physical activity
• Policy briefs on supplement regulation and marketing

More: Safe Supplement Georgia · Fitness standards · Environment, Work & Health

The thematic platform

A Thematic Platform and Ongoing Academic Series · Georgian Medical Journal · PHIG

Hosted by the Georgian Medical Journal  ·  Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG)  ·  DOI prefix: 10.66636  ·  CC BY 4.0

About This Platform

The GMJ Evidence Hub is a dedicated thematic platform of the Georgian Medical Journal, designed to provide a structured, evidence-based environment for research, expert dialogue, and public health communication on weight management, dietary supplements, and physical activity. The platform integrates scientific evidence, academic expertise, and real-world practice, bringing together researchers, clinicians, academic institutions, fitness organizations, and practitioners into a unified ecosystem where science meets practice.

Scope of the Platform

Evidence-based weight management and obesity prevention

Scientific evaluation of dietary supplements, including safety, efficacy, and claims

Physical activity and exercise science

Behavioral and lifestyle interventions

Prevention and management of non-communicable diseases

Public health communication and misinformation analysis

What the Hub Provides

Evidence-informed guidance for professionals and the public

Critical and independent analysis of dietary supplements and fitness trends

Practice-oriented insights from clinical and real-world settings

Timely, evidence-based responses to emerging health misinformation

Science – Education – Practice Integration

Since 2024, this platform has been supported through collaboration between the Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG), Georgia Active, fitness academies, academic institutions, and professional practitioners. This integrated model ensures that scientific evidence is translated into education and applied in practice, while real-world experience continuously informs research and policy development.

Our Objective

To establish a leading evidence-based platform in Georgia and the wider region, providing authoritative, reliable, and practical guidance on weight management, dietary supplements, and physical activity, while strengthening professional standards and contributing to improved public health outcomes.

Editorial Approach — Ongoing Thematic Series

This thematic series is not organized as a standalone special issue. Instead, it is integrated across the regular GMJ publication cycle. Submissions are continuously encouraged. Where a sufficient body of relevant manuscripts is received within a given publication cycle, they are curated as a dedicated thematic section within that issue.

This approach ensures continuity of the topic while maintaining clarity and coherence in the journal’s structure.

Call for Contributions

GMJ invites submissions from researchers, clinicians, public health professionals, nutritionists, exercise scientists, and practitioners. All submissions undergo editorial assessment and peer review in accordance with GMJ standards, ensuring scientific rigor, methodological transparency, and open-access dissemination.

Submit a manuscript →

Platform Resources

GMJ Knowledge Hub

Weight, Supplements & Physical Activity — Curated Resources

Curated international evidence, guidelines, and resources on weight management, dietary supplements, physical activity, and nutrition — organized for professionals, researchers, and the public.

Editorial Note

This platform is an independent academic initiative of the Georgian Medical Journal and the Public Health Institute of Georgia. It does not represent the official positions of any regulatory or governmental body. Open Access  ·  CC BY 4.0  ·  DOI prefix: 10.66636  ·  Updated April 2026.

Curated resources

GMJ Evidence Hub  |  Weight, Supplements and Physical Activity  |  Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG)

A curated, evidence-only reference hub for clinicians, researchers, fitness professionals, and public health practitioners. All resources are drawn exclusively from WHO, NIH, EFSA, FDA, ECDC, NICE, Cochrane, and peer-reviewed journals (Lancet, NEJM, BMJ, JAMA). Each section includes a Georgia and European regional evidence subsection.

Scope: 9 sections  •  80+ resources  •  Evidence standard: WHO • NIH • EFSA • FDA • Cochrane • Lancet • NEJM • BMJ only  •  Special Issue: Vol. 1, Issue 8, 2026

Section I

Global Burden of Overweight and Obesity

Epidemiological data on the global prevalence, trends, and health impact of overweight and obesity, drawn from WHO, IHME Global Burden of Disease, NCD Risk Factor Collaboration, and OECD. Defines the scale of the problem underpinning all sections of this hub.

I.1 WHO Global Evidence

Obesity and Overweight: WHO Fact Sheet

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Fact Sheet  |  Year: 2024

WHO’s primary public-facing evidence summary on overweight and obesity. Documents that over 2.5 billion adults were overweight globally in 2022 (39%), with 890 million living with obesity. Covers epidemiology, health consequences, determinants, and WHO’s recommended policy responses. Updated regularly with the latest global estimates.

WHO Global Health Observatory: Body Mass Index Data Platform

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Live Data Platform  |  Year: Active

Official WHO data platform providing country-level age-standardised BMI estimates, obesity prevalence, and trend data for adults and children. Enables comparison across WHO regions and income groups. Primary source for monitoring progress toward NCD targets under the Global Action Plan for NCDs 2030.

Worldwide Trends in Underweight and Obesity from 1990 to 2022: NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC)

Source: NCD Risk Factor Collaboration / The Lancet  |  Type: Systematic Analysis  |  Year: 2024

The most comprehensive global analysis of BMI trends, covering 190 countries and over 220 million participants across 3,663 population-based studies. Documents the doubling of adult obesity rates since 1990 and the alarming rise of childhood obesity. This is the definitive epidemiological reference for global obesity burden, updated in The Lancet.

European Regional Obesity Report 2022

Source: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (WHO/Europe)  |  Type: Regional Report  |  Year: 2022

WHO/Europe’s comprehensive regional assessment of overweight and obesity across the European Region, covering all 53 member states. Documents that the European Region has the second-highest prevalence of obesity in the world, with more than half of adults overweight or obese. Includes country profiles, trend data, and policy recommendations.

OECD Obesity and Overweight Data: Country Comparisons and Trends

OECD Health Statistics  |  Data Platform  |  Active

IHME: Global Burden of Disease — Country Profiles and Risk Factor Analysis

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME)  |  Data Platform  |  Active

I.2 Georgia and European Regional Evidence

WHO Georgia Country Office — NCD and Nutrition Profile

Source: World Health Organization Georgia Country Office  |  Type: Country Profile  |  Year: Active

WHO’s official country hub for Georgia, providing NCD surveillance data, nutrition indicators, and health system performance metrics. Georgia has among the highest NCD mortality rates in the European Region, with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity-related conditions as primary drivers of premature death.

WHO/Europe: European Regional Obesity Report — Georgia Data

Source: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe  |  Type: Regional Evidence  |  Year: 2022

The 2022 WHO/Europe obesity report includes country-level data for Georgia, contextualising its obesity prevalence within the broader European Region. Georgia’s NCD burden is substantially driven by diet-related factors and physical inactivity, making this regional evidence base directly applicable to Georgian public health planning.

Back to top ↑

Section II

Clinical Guidelines for Obesity Management

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines from NICE, EASO, and WHO for the assessment, prevention, and treatment of overweight and obesity, including pharmacological and surgical interventions. Includes the latest evidence on GLP-1 receptor agonist pharmacotherapy.

II.1 Clinical Practice Guidelines

NICE Clinical Guideline CG189: Obesity — Identification, Assessment and Management

Source: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), UK  |  Type: Clinical Guideline  |  Year: 2014 (updated 2023)

NICE’s comprehensive clinical guideline covering the identification, assessment, and management of overweight and obesity in adults and children. Covers lifestyle interventions, dietary approaches, pharmacological treatment, and bariatric surgery criteria. The UK’s most widely adopted clinical standard, regularly updated with new evidence. Evidence base reviewed through GRADE methodology.

European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO): Clinical Practice Guidelines for Obesity Management in Adults 2023

Source: Durrer Schutz D, Busetto L, Dicker D et al. / Obesity Facts (EASO Official Journal)  |  Type: Clinical Practice Guideline  |  Year: 2023

Most recent EASO clinical practice guidelines for obesity management, covering diagnosis, treatment algorithms, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric-metabolic surgery. Adopts the Edmonton Obesity Staging System. Represents the European clinical consensus, directly applicable to Georgian clinical practice. Published in Obesity Facts (official EASO journal).

II.2 Pharmacotherapy: GLP-1 Receptor Agonists

NEJM: Semaglutide 2.4 mg for the Treatment of Obesity — STEP 1 Trial

Source: Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Calanna S et al. / New England Journal of Medicine  |  Type: RCT Primary Evidence  |  Year: 2021

Pivotal phase III RCT (STEP 1, n=1,961) demonstrating that once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg produced a mean 14.9% body weight reduction over 68 weeks versus 2.4% for placebo. The primary evidence basis for semaglutide’s regulatory approval for obesity management by EMA and FDA. Among the most cited obesity pharmacotherapy trials.

NEJM: Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity — Cardiovascular Outcomes (SELECT Trial)

Source: Lincoff AM, Brown-Frandsen K, Colhoun HM et al. / New England Journal of Medicine  |  Type: RCT Cardiovascular Evidence  |  Year: 2023

Landmark SELECT trial (n=17,604) demonstrating that semaglutide 2.4 mg reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events by 20% in adults with overweight or obesity and established cardiovascular disease. First obesity pharmacotherapy to demonstrate cardiovascular benefit, transforming clinical guidelines.

Lancet: Tirzepatide for the Treatment of Obesity — SURMOUNT-1 Trial

Source: Jastreboff AM, Aronne LJ, Ahmad NN et al. / The Lancet  |  Type: RCT Primary Evidence  |  Year: 2022

Phase III RCT (SURMOUNT-1) of tirzepatide, a dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist, demonstrating up to 22.5% body weight reduction at the 15 mg dose over 72 weeks. Represents the highest efficacy obesity pharmacotherapy to date in pivotal trials. Published in The Lancet.

II.3 Obesity Framing and Pathophysiology

Lancet Obesity Commission: The Global Syndemic of Obesity, Undernutrition and Climate Change

Source: Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Allender S et al. / The Lancet  |  Type: Commission Report  |  Year: 2019

Landmark Lancet Commission report reframing obesity as part of a ‘global syndemic’ interacting with undernutrition and climate change. Argues that current approaches are insufficient and calls for systemic policy action. The most cited Lancet Commission on obesity, providing the conceptual framework for structural prevention approaches.

II.4 Georgia and European Regional Context

WHO/Europe Obesity Report: European Clinical Context and Country Comparisons

Source: WHO Regional Office for Europe  |  Type: Regional Report  |  Year: 2022

Provides the European clinical context for obesity management, including data on treatment access disparities, healthcare system capacity, and obesity-related mortality rates across WHO/Europe member states including Georgia. Documents that healthcare systems in Eastern European and Caucasus countries face particular challenges in delivering evidence-based obesity care.

Back to top ↑

Section III

Dietary Interventions and Evidence-Based Nutrition

Systematic evidence on dietary patterns, macronutrient recommendations, and food environment interventions for weight management and NCD prevention. All resources from WHO, EFSA, Cochrane systematic reviews, and peer-reviewed primary research in Lancet, NEJM, and BMJ.

III.1 WHO Dietary Guidelines and Frameworks

WHO: Healthy Diet Fact Sheet — Evidence Summary and Targets

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Fact Sheet  |  Year: 2020

WHO’s primary evidence summary on healthy diet, covering recommended intakes for fruits, vegetables, legumes, wholegrains, free sugars, saturated fats, salt, and trans fats. Provides the quantitative targets underpinning all WHO dietary guidance. The foundational reference for any nutrition-based intervention programme.

WHO Guideline: Sugars Intake for Adults and Children

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: WHO Guideline  |  Year: 2015

WHO’s formal guideline recommending that free sugars constitute less than 10% of total energy intake, with further reduction to below 5% providing additional health benefits. Developed using GRADE methodology across systematic reviews. The primary regulatory reference for sugar reduction targets in food policy globally.

WHO: Fats and Fatty Acids in Human Nutrition — Technical Report

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Technical Report  |  Year: 2010

WHO expert consultation report establishing the evidence base for dietary fat recommendations, covering saturated, trans, and unsaturated fatty acids. Provides the scientific foundation for WHO’s guidance on fat intake and cardiovascular disease risk reduction. The definitive WHO reference for fat-related dietary guidance.

WHO ELENA: Evidence and Guidance on Nutrition Actions

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Evidence Library  |  Year: Active

WHO’s e-Library of Evidence for Nutrition Actions (ELENA), providing systematic evidence summaries and WHO guidance documents on specific nutrition interventions for all population groups. Includes guidance on breastfeeding, micronutrient supplementation, dietary counselling, and food fortification.

III.2 Peer-Reviewed Evidence: Dietary Patterns

Mediterranean Diet and All-Cause Mortality: Meta-Analysis

Source: Dinu M, Pagliai G, Casini A, Sofi F / European Journal of Clinical Nutrition  |  Type: Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2020

Comprehensive meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies demonstrating that greater adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern is associated with significant reductions in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and several cancers. Provides the current highest-level evidence for Mediterranean diet recommendations.

Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: NOVA Classification — Prospective Cohort Study

Source: Srour B, Fezeu LK, Kesse-Guyot E et al. / Lancet Regional Health — Europe  |  Type: Prospective Cohort Study  |  Year: 2020

Large prospective cohort study (n=104,707) demonstrating that a 10% increase in ultra-processed food consumption was associated with significantly higher risk of type 2 diabetes. Uses the NOVA food classification system. Provides primary epidemiological evidence for food processing as an independent dietary risk factor.

Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and All-Cause Mortality: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Source: Chen X, Zhang Z, Yang H et al. / BMJ  |  Type: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2023

Landmark BMJ systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies (n=1.8 million) demonstrating a significant association between ultra-processed food consumption and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and cancer mortality. Provides the strongest cumulative evidence for restricting ultra-processed food intake.

Low-Carbohydrate Diets for Overweight and Obesity: Cochrane Systematic Review

Source: Ge L, Sadeghirad B, Ball GDC et al. / Cochrane Database  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2022

Cochrane systematic review of 61 RCTs (n=6,925) comparing low-carbohydrate diets with other dietary approaches for weight management. Finds that low-carbohydrate diets produce modest but statistically significant weight reductions at 6 months compared with low-fat diets, with the difference diminishing at 12 months. Provides GRADE-rated comparative evidence.

Dietary Patterns and Cardiometabolic Risk: Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses

Source: Jayedi A, Soltani S, Zargar MS et al. / BMJ  |  Type: Umbrella Review  |  Year: 2023

BMJ umbrella review synthesising evidence from meta-analyses of prospective studies on dietary patterns and cardiometabolic outcomes. Provides a hierarchy of dietary pattern evidence, confirming Mediterranean, DASH, and plant-based diets as having the strongest evidence base for cardiovascular disease and diabetes prevention.

III.3 Georgia and Regional Nutrition Context

WHO/Europe: Food Safety and Nutrition Data for the European Region

Source: WHO Regional Office for Europe  |  Type: Regional Evidence  |  Year: Active

WHO/Europe’s regional nutrition and food safety database provides country-level data on dietary patterns, food supply, and nutrition-related disease burden across all 53 member states including Georgia. Contextualises Georgia’s dietary patterns within European regional norms and NCD burden.

Back to top ↑

Section IV

Dietary Supplement Regulation and Safety Frameworks

Regulatory frameworks governing dietary supplement safety and labelling in the European Union, United States, and internationally. Essential evidence base for understanding the legal and scientific standards against which supplement safety claims are evaluated.

IV.1 European Union Regulatory Framework

EU Directive 2002/46/EC on Food Supplements — Full Legal Text

Source: European Union (EUR-Lex)  |  Type: EU Legislation  |  Year: 2002 (consolidated)

The primary European Union legal framework governing dietary supplements, establishing definitions, permitted ingredient lists, labelling requirements, and safety standards for food supplements marketed in EU member states. The foundational regulatory reference for all European supplement safety assessments, applicable to Georgian standards via EU alignment.

EFSA: Food Supplements — Safety Assessments and Scientific Opinions

Source: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)  |  Type: Regulatory Science  |  Year: Active

EFSA’s dedicated portal for food supplement safety assessments, including tolerable upper intake levels (ULs), health claim evaluations, and novel food opinions. EFSA provides the scientific basis for EU supplement regulation, producing independent risk assessments that define maximum safe doses for all vitamins, minerals, and bioactive substances.

EFSA: Tolerable Upper Intake Levels for Vitamins and Minerals — Scientific Report

Source: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)  |  Type: Scientific Report  |  Year: 2006 (updated)

EFSA’s comprehensive scientific report establishing tolerable upper intake levels (ULs) for all vitamins and minerals relevant to food supplement safety assessment. ULs represent the highest level of habitual nutrient intake that carries no appreciable risk of adverse health effects. The definitive European reference for maximum safe supplement doses.

IV.2 US and International Frameworks

FDA: Dietary Supplements — Overview, Regulation and Safety Reporting

Source: US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  |  Type: Regulatory Framework  |  Year: Active

FDA’s primary regulatory resource for dietary supplements, covering the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs), adverse event reporting requirements, and the FDA’s risk-based enforcement approach. Provides the global reference point for supplement safety regulation.

NIH Office of Dietary Supplements: Vitamin D Fact Sheet for Health Professionals

Source: National Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of Dietary Supplements  |  Type: Evidence Summary  |  Year: 2024

NIH’s comprehensive evidence summary for Vitamin D, covering physiology, dietary sources, recommended intakes, tolerable upper intake levels, health effects from deficiency and excess, and interactions with medications. Provides the current evidence-based reference for Vitamin D supplementation decisions in clinical practice.

IV.4 Georgia: Applicable Regulatory Context

Georgian Supplement Regulation: EU Alignment and NFA Standards

Source: Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) / PHIG — Independent Market Assessment  |  Type: Original Research  |  Year: 2025

The GMJ/PHIG 12-month independent assessment of 3,782 supplement products across 79 Georgian companies, finding that only one company achieved full regulatory compliance. This original research directly connects the EU Directive 2002/46/EC framework to Georgian market reality. The Georgian Food National Agency subsequently included supplement assessment in Georgia’s 2026 national programme following this assessment.

Back to top ↑

Section V

Evidence on Specific Dietary Supplements

Peer-reviewed systematic evidence on the most widely used dietary supplements, drawn exclusively from Cochrane Reviews, IOC consensus statements, ISSN position stands, and primary RCT evidence in Lancet, NEJM, and BMJ. Evidence graded by GRADE methodology where available.

V.1 Sports Nutrition and Performance Supplements

International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Position Stand: Protein and Exercise

Source: Stokes T, Hector AJ, Morton RW et al. / Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition  |  Type: ISSN Position Stand  |  Year: 2018

ISSN position stand providing the current evidence-based recommendations for dietary protein in physically active individuals, covering optimal daily intake (1.4–2.0 g/kg), protein distribution across meals, protein source quality, and timing relative to exercise. The most authoritative and widely cited reference for protein supplementation guidance.

Creatine Supplementation: Safety, Efficacy and Clinical Applications — ISSN Position Stand 2022

Source: Lanhers C, Pereira B, Naughton G et al. / Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition  |  Type: ISSN Position Stand  |  Year: 2022

Updated ISSN position stand confirming creatine monohydrate as the most evidence-supported exercise performance supplement. Documents benefits for high-intensity exercise, resistance training adaptations, and emerging evidence in cognitive function and therapeutic contexts. Confirms long-term safety at recommended doses (3–5 g/day).

IOC Consensus Statement: Dietary Supplements and the High-Performance Athlete

Source: Maughan RJ, Burke LM, Dvorak J et al. / British Journal of Sports Medicine  |  Type: IOC Consensus Statement  |  Year: 2018

International Olympic Committee consensus statement providing the most authoritative international guidance on dietary supplement use in athletes. Classifies supplements by evidence level (A, B, C, D). Emphasises that few supplements provide meaningful performance benefits and that many carry contamination, health, and anti-doping risks.

V.2 Micronutrients: Cochrane Evidence

Vitamin D Supplementation for Disease Prevention: Cochrane Review

Source: Bolland MJ, Grey A, Avenell A / Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2022

Cochrane systematic review evaluating evidence for Vitamin D supplementation across multiple health outcomes. Finds limited evidence that Vitamin D supplementation prevents cancer, cardiovascular disease, or reduces mortality in the general population, with the exception of cancer mortality where modest benefit was observed. Provides GRADE evidence ratings.

Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation for Cardiovascular Disease: Cochrane Review

Source: Abdelhamid AS, Martin N, Bridges C et al. / Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2018

Cochrane review of 79 RCTs (n=112,059) evaluating omega-3 supplementation for cardiovascular outcomes. Finds little or no effect on cardiovascular disease mortality, coronary heart disease events, or stroke for most participants, challenging widespread clinical assumptions. Provides the highest-level evidence summary for omega-3 supplementation decisions.

Weight-Loss Dietary Supplements: Cochrane Evidence Review

Source: Vreeman J, Rezende C, Tait C et al. / Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2022

Cochrane review evaluating the evidence for commercially marketed dietary supplements for weight loss, finding limited, low-quality evidence for meaningful clinical benefit from the vast majority of products. Documents significant safety concerns and heterogeneous trial quality. The definitive Cochrane evidence summary on weight-loss supplement efficacy.

V.3 Georgia and European Regional Supplement Use

GMJ/PHIG: Georgian Supplement Market Evidence — Special Issue 2026

Source: Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) / PHIG  |  Type: Original Research Series  |  Year: 2026

The GMJ Evidence Hub Special Issue (Vol. 1, Issue 8, 2026) publishes peer-reviewed research on dietary supplement evidence in the Georgian and regional context, including ingredient-level safety assessments using the IngredIndex evidence-concern framework. Provides the only peer-reviewed Georgian-language supplement safety evidence base.

Back to top ↑

Section VI

Supplement Safety, Risk Assessment and Adverse Effects

Evidence on supplement-related harms, carcinogen classification, adverse event data, and the gap between marketing claims and scientific evidence. Drawn from IARC, EFSA, FDA, and peer-reviewed pharmacovigilance research. The most analytically distinctive section of this hub.

VI.1 International Cancer and Carcinogen Evidence

IARC Monographs Programme — Carcinogenic Hazard Identification

Source: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) / WHO  |  Type: Carcinogen Classification System  |  Year: Active

IARC’s systematic programme for classifying substances into carcinogenicity groups (1, 2A, 2B, 3) based on evidence synthesis from human, animal, and mechanistic data. Several ingredients used in dietary supplements appear in IARC’s classifications. The authoritative international reference for carcinogen risk communication and regulatory decision-making.

VI.2 Harm, Adverse Events and Evidence Gaps

Adverse Effects of Popular Dietary Supplements: Systematic Review

Source: Starr RR / Current Drug Safety (PubMed)  |  Type: Systematic Review  |  Year: 2020

Systematic review of clinically documented adverse effects from widely consumed dietary supplements, categorising harms by supplement type and severity. Documents hepatotoxicity from botanical supplements, cardiovascular risks from stimulant-containing products, and drug interactions across multiple supplement categories. Essential clinical reference for supplement harm assessment.

EFSA: Tolerable Upper Intake Levels for Vitamins and Minerals — Safety Reference

Source: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)  |  Type: Safety Assessment  |  Year: 2006 (updated ongoing)

EFSA’s peer-reviewed scientific risk assessments establishing maximum safe intake levels for all vitamins and minerals. ULs are based on systematic review of adverse effect data and represent the definitive European scientific reference for supplement dose safety. Exceeding ULs carries documented risk of adverse health effects.

FDA: Dietary Supplement Adverse Event Reporting — MedWatch System

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  |  Safety Reporting System  |  Active

EU Directive 2002/46/EC: Legal Safety Standards for Food Supplements

European Union Legislation (EUR-Lex)  |  Legislation  |  2002

VI.3 Georgia: Market Safety Evidence

GMJ/PHIG Georgian Supplement Market Assessment — Compliance Findings

Source: Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) / Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG)  |  Type: Original Research  |  Year: 2025

The only systematic, independent safety assessment of the Georgian dietary supplement market. Assessment of 3,782 products across 79 companies found widespread non-compliance with EU regulatory standards, undisclosed ingredients, and unevidenced health claims. The Georgian Food National Agency incorporated supplement assessment into the national 2026 programme following this research.

Back to top ↑

Section VII

Physical Activity Guidelines and Global Policy

WHO, ACSM, and Cochrane evidence base for physical activity recommendations across age groups and health conditions. Covers global action plans, national implementation frameworks, and the epidemiological evidence underpinning current guidelines.

VII.1 WHO Physical Activity Guidelines

WHO Guidelines on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour 2020

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: WHO Guideline  |  Year: 2020

WHO’s current global guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour for all age groups, developed using GRADE methodology across systematic reviews. Recommends 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic PA per week for adults, with additional muscle-strengthening on 2 or more days. The foundational reference for all PA programming.

WHO Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018–2030: More Active People for a Healthier World (GAPPA)

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Global Action Plan  |  Year: 2018

WHO’s global policy framework for increasing physical activity levels by 15% by 2030 through four strategic objectives: active societies, active environments, active people, and active systems. Provides the policy architecture for national PA programmes and the monitoring framework for tracking progress toward global PA targets.

VII.2 Clinical and Professional Standards

ACSM Position Stand: Exercise Prescription for Healthy Adults

Source: Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR et al. / Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (ACSM)  |  Type: ACSM Position Stand  |  Year: 2011 (reference standard)

American College of Sports Medicine’s foundational position stand on exercise prescription, specifying recommendations for cardiorespiratory, resistance, flexibility, and neuromotor exercise. The FITT-VP principle framework (Frequency, Intensity, Time, Type, Volume, Progression) established in this document remains the global standard for exercise prescription.

International Society of Sports Nutrition: Exercise and Sport Performance Evidence Review

Source: Kerksick CM, Wilborn CD, Roberts MD et al. / Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition  |  Type: Evidence Review  |  Year: 2018

Comprehensive ISSN evidence review covering nutrient timing, exercise performance, and recovery. Provides the evidence base for exercise-nutrition integration, including protein, carbohydrate, and supplement timing recommendations. The most cited ISSN evidence synthesis for exercise and performance nutrition.

VII.3 Georgia: Physical Activity Evidence

WHO Georgia Country Profile: Physical Inactivity and NCD Burden

Source: World Health Organization Georgia Country Office  |  Type: Country Evidence  |  Year: Active

WHO’s official Georgia country data includes physical inactivity prevalence and its contribution to NCD mortality, providing the evidence context for the GMJ Evidence Hub’s physical activity section. Physical inactivity is identified as a primary modifiable risk factor for the cardiovascular, metabolic, and musculoskeletal disease burden in Georgia.

Back to top ↑

Section VIII

Physical Activity and Disease Prevention: Systematic Evidence

Cochrane systematic reviews, landmark RCTs, and Lancet/NEJM/BMJ meta-analyses demonstrating the causal evidence for physical activity in preventing cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, depression, cancer, and all-cause mortality.

VIII.1 All-Cause Mortality and Cardiovascular Disease

Lancet Physical Activity Series 2021: Progress and Challenges

Source: Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, Bull FC / The Lancet  |  Type: Lancet Series Evidence  |  Year: 2021

Updated Lancet PA Series documenting that insufficient physical activity affects over 1.4 billion adults globally and is responsible for 3.2 million deaths annually. Examines progress in PA surveillance and policy implementation since the 2012 Series. Provides the primary quantitative evidence base for global PA burden estimates.

Association Between Physical Activity and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: Dose-Response Meta-Analysis

Source: Ekelund U, Tarp J, Steene-Johannessen J et al. / BMJ  |  Type: Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2019

Landmark BMJ meta-analysis (n=36,383) examining the dose-response relationship between objectively measured physical activity and cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Demonstrates that even modest increases in physical activity from low levels produce substantial mortality risk reductions, informing global PA targets.

Daily Steps and All-Cause Mortality: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

Source: Banach M, Lewek J, Surma S et al. / European Journal of Preventive Cardiology  |  Type: Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2023

Meta-analysis demonstrating that approximately 7,000 steps per day is associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality, with benefit continuing to accrue up to approximately 20,000 steps. Challenges the widely-cited 10,000-step target and provides nuanced dose-response evidence for step-count recommendations.

VIII.2 Metabolic Disease

Exercise Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: Cochrane Systematic Review

Source: Umpierre D, Ribeiro PAB, Kramer CK et al. / Cochrane Database  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2017

Cochrane review of 23 RCTs demonstrating that structured exercise training reduces HbA1c by 0.67% in adults with type 2 diabetes, equivalent to the effect of many glucose-lowering medications. Documents that supervised aerobic, resistance, and combined training all produce significant glycaemic improvements.

Physical Activity and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Source: Ding M, Bhupathiraju SN, Satija A et al. / Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology  |  Type: Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2023

Comprehensive Lancet meta-analysis of prospective studies demonstrating a clear dose-response association between physical activity and reduced type 2 diabetes risk, with the greatest risk reduction in the transition from no activity to moderate activity. Quantifies the population-level preventive impact of PA guidelines.

VIII.3 Mental Health, Resistance Training and Cancer

Physical Activity for Depression: Cochrane Systematic Review

Source: Noetel M, Sanders T, Mayber D et al. / BMJ  |  Type: Cochrane-Aligned Systematic Review  |  Year: 2023

Large systematic review and meta-analysis (218 RCTs, n=14,170) demonstrating that physical activity is as effective as antidepressants and psychotherapy for reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety. Walking, jogging, yoga, strength training, and mixed aerobic exercise all showed significant benefits.

Resistance Training and Risk of All-Cause Mortality, Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Source: Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS / British Journal of Sports Medicine  |  Type: Meta-Analysis  |  Year: 2022

First comprehensive meta-analysis of prospective studies specifically examining muscle-strengthening activities and mortality. Demonstrates that resistance training at recommended doses is associated with 10–20% lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality, independent of aerobic PA.

Exercise-Based Interventions for Older Adults: Cochrane Review

Source: Sherrington C, Fairhall NJ, Wallbank GK et al. / Cochrane Database  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2019

Cochrane review of 108 RCTs demonstrating that exercise programmes significantly reduce falls and fall-related injuries in older adults, with balance and functional exercises showing the greatest evidence. Directly relevant to the exercise prescription needs of an ageing Georgian population.

Physical Activity and Hypertension: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Source: Corso LML, Macdonald HV, Johnson BT et al. / Cochrane Database  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2023

Cochrane systematic review of 270 RCTs demonstrating that aerobic and resistance exercise each produce clinically meaningful reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure in adults with and without hypertension, comparable to antihypertensive medications for mild hypertension.

VIII.4 Georgia and Region: Disease Prevention Evidence

WHO Georgia: NCD Mortality and Physical Activity Burden

Source: World Health Organization Georgia Country Office  |  Type: Country Data  |  Year: Active

WHO’s Georgia country evidence base documents that NCDs account for over 93% of total mortality in Georgia, with cardiovascular disease alone responsible for approximately 60% of all deaths. Physical inactivity and poor diet are identified as primary modifiable contributors, making the disease-prevention evidence in this section directly relevant to Georgian public health priorities.

Back to top ↑

Section IX

Behavioural Interventions, NCD Prevention Frameworks and Public Health

Evidence on behavioural approaches to weight management and physical activity promotion, WHO NCD prevention frameworks, and the public health policy architecture for addressing the determinants of overweight, obesity, and physical inactivity at population level.

IX.1 Behavioural Intervention Evidence

Behavioural Interventions for Obesity: Cochrane Systematic Review

Source: Hartmann-Boyce J, Johns DJ, Jebb SA et al. / Cochrane Database  |  Type: Cochrane Systematic Review  |  Year: 2019

Cochrane systematic review of 121 trials evaluating behavioural interventions combining dietary, physical activity, and behaviour change components for weight management in adults with overweight or obesity. Finds consistent evidence of clinically meaningful weight loss (3–5 kg) at 12–18 months. Provides GRADE-rated evidence for intervention programme design.

Lancet: A New Era for Tackling Obesity — Systems Science and Behavioural Evidence

Source: Rubino F, Cummings DE, Eckel RH et al. / The Lancet  |  Type: Lancet Commission  |  Year: 2023

Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology Commission reframing obesity as a complex system requiring multi-level interventions beyond individual behaviour change. Proposes a new clinical and public health architecture integrating pharmacological, surgical, behavioural, and structural approaches. Represents the most current international consensus on comprehensive obesity management.

IX.2 WHO NCD Prevention Frameworks

WHO HEARTS Technical Package for NCD Prevention and Control

Source: World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Type: Technical Package  |  Year: Active

WHO’s evidence-based HEARTS package providing the clinical and public health framework for cardiovascular disease prevention and NCD management in primary care settings. Directly applicable to the weight, nutrition, and physical activity determinants of cardiovascular NCD burden. Provides implementation tools for health system strengthening.

WHO: Best Buys and Other Recommended Interventions for NCDs

World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Policy Evidence  |  2017

WHO Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013–2020

World Health Organization (WHO)  |  Action Plan  |  2013

IX.3 Georgia: Behavioural and NCD Prevention Context

GMJ Evidence Hub Special Issue 2026 — Behavioural Public Health in Georgia

Source: Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) / PHIG  |  Type: Special Issue Platform  |  Year: 2026

The GMJ Evidence Hub Special Issue (Vol. 1, Issue 8, 2026) publishes Georgia-specific evidence on behavioural interventions for weight management, supplement literacy, and physical activity promotion, including the PHIG–Georgia Active collaboration outputs. Provides peer-reviewed evidence connecting global frameworks to Georgian practice contexts.

WHO Georgia: Country-Level NCD Risk Factor Surveillance

Source: World Health Organization Georgia Country Office  |  Type: Country Surveillance  |  Year: Active

WHO’s Georgia country office provides NCD risk factor surveillance data including physical inactivity, tobacco use, harmful alcohol use, and dietary patterns — the four primary behavioural NCD risk factors. Georgia’s STEPS survey data enables benchmarking of population-level behavioural risk against WHO/Europe regional averages.

Back to top ↑