Italian yogurt: rules, varieties and innovation

The Italian yogurt stands out in the European landscape for a unique regulatory rigor: the obligation to guarantee live and active cultures until consumption, excluding heat treatments after fermentation. This note explores the biological peculiarities of our yogurt, the evolution of its varieties - from strained products to protein formulations - and the most recent industrial innovations in sugar reduction. With an analysis of clinical evidence and the different regimes of health claim authorized between the European Union and the United States.

The growth of the Italian market between consumption and potential

Italy is in fourth place in the EU in fermented milk production, with about 265,000 tons (2024), after Germany, France and Spain (CLAL/Eurostat). However, Italian per capita consumption remains around 10 kg per year, well below the averages of the main European countries (e.g. France, over 20 kg): a gap that signals growth margins, more than maturity.

On the consumption front, ultra-fresh products are worth about in mass retail 2.2 billion euros, with purchases increasing by about 5% in value and volume in the last year, driven by yogurt Greek (+23%) and by references protein and functional, while whole milk grows little and skimmed milk declines (Il Sole 24 Ore, 2025). Theexport, mostly intra-EU, remains contained (around 7,000 tons per year; ISTAT/CLAL).

The Italian regulatory rigor on live cultures

The definition of yogurt varies depending on the regulatory contexts:

• the standard of Codex Alimentarius on fermented milks reserves the name ‘yoghurt’ to the symbiotic cultures of Streptococcus thermophilus (which initiates acidification) e Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus (which continues the lactose breakdown). The ‘alternate culture yoghurt’, to be designated with a qualifier (e.g. ‘mild’, ‘tangy’) next to the word ‘yoghurt’, can instead be made with S. thermophilus and any lactobacillus. The standard also allows the addition of other microorganisms besides the starter and separately regulates ‘acidophilus milk’, kefir (Dongo, 2025), and kumys, each with its own culture. The live cultures must be «vital, active and abundant» (10⁷ CFU/g the sum of the starter microorganisms) until the minimum expiration date, unless the product is heat treated after fermentation;

• theEuropean Union only reserves the denomination for dairy products — excluding plant-based analogues (CJEU, C-422/16) — without however setting composition or microbial load requirements (EU reg. 1308/2013, Annex VII, Part III). As a result, some Member States, like Spain (with RD 271/2014), allow pasteurization of the finished product (with consequent inactivation of the cultures);

• theItaly has a stricter regulation, although based on ministerial circulars, that admits only the two symbiotic species and prescribes ferments «alive and vital until the moment of consumption». Heat treatment is therefore provided for milk before inoculation, and is prohibited on yogurt which must be cooled to +4 °C and kept in the cold chain until distribution to the consumer (Ministry of Health circulars no. 2/1972 and no. 9/1986).

From microbiological intuition to modern industrial production

Milk fermentation almost certainly originated by chance, when the nomadic peoples of Central Asia stored milk in bags made from animal skins and stomachs: heat and the microorganisms present transformed it into a sour mass that was more preservable. The term derives from Turkish yoğurmak, ‘to thicken’. Greeks and Romans knew its use, and ancient medicine — from Dioscorides to Galen — praised its effects on the stomach and digestion.

At the beginning of the 20th century microbiology identifies the ferments responsible for coagulation; shortly thereafter immunologist Élie Metchnikoff (Nobel 1908), at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, links the longevity of some populations to the consumption of fermented milks and hypothesizes that lactobacilli can counteract intestinal putrefaction. His 1904 Paris conference sparked an initial ‘trend’ of yogurt in Europe and America, and paved the way, a decade later, for industrial production.

The transformation technology that generates micronutrients

Processing starts from pasteurization of milk (about 85-95 °C), which eliminates pathogens and denatures serum proteins, improving the final structure. Followed byhomogenization, which breaks up fat globules and gives a uniform creaminess, preventing cream separation.

The milk is then cooled to the temperature of incubation (42-43 °C) and inoculated with cultures. During the fermentation — typically 4-8 hours — bacteria metabolize lactose into lactic acid: pH drops, caseins coagulate, and compounds defining aroma and texture form.

It is precisely at this stage that bioactive peptides and vitamins of groups B and K absent or less available in the starting milk (Gao et al., 2025; Mayo et al., 2025).

The strained yogurt segment and concentration techniques

Yogurt Greek (or 'strained') is not derived from a different culture, but from an additional step: the removal of part of the whey (acid whey) after fermentation, which concentrates proteins and solids and gives the characteristic density. Greek legislation sets a content minimum protein of 5.6% for dairy products from cow or goat milk and 8% for sheep milk, making of straining the identifying element of the product (Karastamatis et al., 2022).

Whey separation occurs by centrifugation, by ultrafiltration on membrane or, in the traditional method, by filtration through cloth bags (Karastamatis et al., 2022). The process is costly in terms of yield: from about 100 parts of milk, on average only a third of strained product is obtained, while the remaining two thirds constitute acid whey. To optimize the process some producers therefore concentrate solids without straining, adding milk proteins, thus reaching the typical protein contents (8-10%) without generating acid whey.

From a nutritional point of view, the removal of whey explains why whole Greek yogurt has sugars lower amounts than traditional yogurt (part of the lactose is lost with the whey), with higher protein and fat content.

The nutritional identity card of the different variants

A comparative analysis of food composition tables published by CREA in 2019.

Nutrient (per 100 g)	Whole	Partially skimmed	Skimmed	Fruit-flavored	Whole Greek	Greek 0%
Energy (kcal)	66	43	36	80	115	51
Proteins (g)	3,8	3,4	3,3	3,4	6,4	9,0
Lipids (g)	3,9	1,7	0,9	2,8	9,1	0
Carbohydrates (g)	4,3	3,8	4,0	10,5	2,0	4,0
of which sugars (g)	4,3	3,8	4,0	10,5	2,0	4,0

Table 1. Nutritional profile of the main yogurt types. In non-added versions sugars correspond to residual lactose; in fruit reference they include added sugars. Source: CREA (2019).

The proteins of yogurt have high biological value since they contain all essential amino acids and fermentation, partially hydrolyzing caseins, improves its digestibility.

Micronutrients in significant quantity (per 100 g)

Applying CREA yogurt data from whole milk the Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) of Annex XIII of EU Reg. 1169/2011, the micronutrients present in significant quantity — the legal threshold to declare their presence, equal to 15% of the RNI per 100 g — are, in descending order:

• calcium: 125 mg/100 g, equal to 15,6% of the RNI (800 mg);
• phosphorus: 105 mg/100 g, equal to 15,0% of the RNI (700 mg), exactly on the significant quantity threshold.

Just below, in descending order, are: riboflavin (vitamin B2) 0.19 mg = 13.6% of the RNI (1.4 mg); potassium 170 mg = 8.5% of the RNI (2000 mg); folates 16 µg = 8.0% of the RNI (200 µg).

It is relevant to note that the acidity generated by fermentation increases calcium solubility and promotes its intestinal absorption, an advantage not equally offered by non-fermented milk (Mayo et al., 2025).

The protective and digestive benefits confirmed by research

Type 2 diabetes: the strongest evidence

The meta-analysis of the University of Harvard on three large US cohorts estimated that a daily portion of yogurt is associated with a risk reduction (-18%) incidence of type 2 diabetes, a specific effect not found for other dairy products (Chen et al., 2014). The EPIC-Norfolk study of the University of CambridgeIn a sub-cohort of 4,000 people followed for 11 years with food diaries, it even found a lower risk for the highest yogurt consumers 28% (O’Connor et al., 2014).

The consistency of these data has led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA, USA) recognized, in March 2024, the first qualified health claim dedicated to this food:

• regular consumption of yogurt — at least 2 cups (3 servings) per week — can reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes, albeit based on ‘limited scientific evidence‘ (FDA, 2024; Freitas et al., 2025).

The authorization process for health claim in the European Union is unfortunately much more complex, especially concerning claims about the reduction of a disease risk factor (Regulation EC No. 1924/06, Article 14). Our team of FARE (Food and Agriculture Requirements) is available to industries and their representatives, as well as research consortia interested in exploring such opportunities.

Lactose digestion, the only health claim authorized in the EU

theonly health claim authorized in the European Union which specifically relates to the yogurt food matrix — pursuant to Reg. (EU) 432/2012, following the 2010 EFSA opinion — concerns the live cultures contained therein:

• ‘the live cultures in yogurt or fermented milk improve lactose digestion contained in the product in individuals who have difficulty digesting lactose';
• to bear the claim, yogurt or fermented milk must contain at least 10⁸ colony-forming units of live starter microorganisms (Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus e Streptococcus thermophilus) per gram.

For this purpose, it is appropriate to consider three aspects:

• the claim covers the lactose contained in the product, not lactose in general. Therefore, it is not possible to state or suggest that the consumption of yogurt helps digest other sources of lactose included in the diet;
• the 10⁸ exceeds by one order of magnitude the 10⁷ of Codex and the Italian voluntary standard UNI 10358:2016. Simple compliance of a yogurt with the international standard and Italian practice is therefore not sufficient for using the health claim in question, whose conditions of use are more restrictive;
• people with lactose intolerance must in any case consume only the lactose-free yogurt.

Intestinal microbiota: a promising signal, not yet conclusive

Beyond lactose digestion, yogurt is studied as a possible modulator of the intestinal microbiota. A recent review on fermented dairy products describes the plausible mechanism: the live starter cultures and the metabolites generated by fermentation — short-chain fatty acids, bioactive peptides and exopolysaccharides — would act in synergy to increase microbial diversity, in strengthening the epithelial barrier (via proteins of the tight junction) and in modulating the immune response (Gao et al., 2025).

On the experimental front, the first controlled human studies are encouraging but small scale:

• a randomized trial on healthy adults observed that the intake of at least 250 g of yogurt per day for 42 days increased diversity of the microbiota (Shannon index) and the abundance of Lactobacillus (Gao et al., 2025);
• a second RCT on 47 adults found a significant increase in microbial diversity (Shannon index, observed ASVs, Faith's phylogenetic diversity), with enrichment of beneficial taxa such as Akkermansia in the yogurt group (Choi et al., 2025). Yogurt Greek, due to its high load of live cultures delivered to the intestinal epithelium, has been proposed as a model system for this line of research (Dichter, 2026).

The caution is necessary, as these are small studies, often of short duration, with partly transient and strain-specific effects. The picture is therefore promising — as well as consistent with the biology of fermentation — but not yet sufficient to support a request for authorization of a specific health claim.

Heart and cardiometabolic profile

An umbrella review from 2025, which synthesized 33 meta-analyses, associates yogurt consumption with a cardiovascular reduced risk (RR 0.92), with consistent but relatively moderate effects (Sharifan et al., 2025).

The evidence is stronger for dairy products fermented compared to non-fermented milk, presumably due to the role of probiotics, bioactive peptides, and compounds generated during fermentation.

Satiety and weight control

High density protein and low energy density, yogurt is among the foods that promote satiety. In the Spanish SUN cohort, higher consumption was associated with less weight gain over time (Martínez-González et al., 2014), and in the Québec Family Study with better body composition and more favorable metabolic parameters (Panahi et al., 2018). These are observational associations, not proof of cause-effect, and the benefit disappears in references loaded with added sugars.

Bone health, a debated issue

Some observational studies report positive signals on the correlations between yogurt consumption and bone health:

• in the Irish TUDA cohort the bone mineral density (Bone Mineral Density, BMD) of hip and femoral neck was found to be 3.1-3.9% higher among the women with the highest consumption (Laird et al., 2017);
• the Framingham Offspring linked regular yogurt consumption to higher BMD, although without a reduction in fractures (Sahni et al., 2013).

The meta-analysis most recent — conducted by the European PIMENTO consortium — instead finds no significant association between yogurt and hip fracture risk (HR 1.01) and assesses the effect on BMD as clinically negligible (SMD 0.009), classifying the evidence as ‘neither convincing nor sufficient‘ due to lack of randomized studies (Mayo et al., 2025).

Innovation: probiotics, proteins and sugar reduction

The growth ferment, in a still young market like the Italian one, today is theproduct innovation, which moves along three main directions:

• the first is the addition of probiotics in addition to the starter — typically strains of Lactobacillus e Bifidobacterium — in the ‘functional’ references and kefir, to capture demand related tointestinal balance;

• the second is the protein content: the rise of Greek yogurt and ‘protein’ references (often supplemented with milk proteins) responds to consumers attentive to satiety, sports and body composition;

• the third, more recent, is the sugar reduction without the use of sweeteners, the front on which the greatest attention is focused today.

The Yomo case 'No Added Sugars and No Sweeteners'

An Italian case exemplifies this last direction. Granarolo launched, on May 4th, 2026, the line Yomo No Added Sugar and No Sweeteners, which joins the group’s references dedicated to intestinal balance (Yomo Kefir), protein (Greek Yogurt Delta) and lactose-free (Granarolo, 2026).

The recipe deserves technical attention: in the strawberry flavor the ingredients are: yogurt (whole milk, Streptococcus thermophilus e Lactobacillus bulgaricus) and an 18% fruit preparation composed of strawberry (47%), fiber (oligofructose), corn starch, natural flavors, black carrot juice, lemon juice and pectin (Granarolo, 2026).

The distinctive element is precisely theoligofructose, a fructooligosaccharide (FOS) with a prebiotic that provides body and a natural pleasantness, replacing added sugar and simultaneously nourishing the intestinal flora. The result is a content of sugars of about 4.4 g/100 g — compared to about 9.8 g of the classic strawberry equivalent — achieved without sweeteners (greenMe, 2026).

A formulation solution, more than a nutritional revolution, that however captures a real demand: the reference was awarded as the absolute winner of the ‘New Entry’ contest at the Brands Award 2026 (Gdoweek/Mark Up, March 15, 2026).

In summary

Yogurt is a food solid in the fullest sense: nutritionally dense, source of calcium and phosphorus, with quality proteins and live cultures useful for lactose digestion. The strongest evidence concerns the reduction of the risk of type 2 diabetes, also recognized by the FDA; promising but still preliminary findings on the microbiota; more moderate cardiovascular effects; more subtle — and not to be overstated — bone effects. The conscious choice rewards simple ingredients and innovation, with functional ingredients instead of sugars and sweeteners.

Dario Dongo

References

Scientific studies and insights

Chen, M., Sun, Q., Giovannucci, E., Mozaffarian, D., Manson, J. E., Willett, W. C., & Hu, F. B. (2014). Dairy consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis. BMC Medicine, 12, 215. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0215-1

Choi, J., Takeda, M., & Managi, S. (2025). Dietary and environmental modulation for the gut environment: Yogurt promotes microbial diversity while chloride hot springs improve defecation status in healthy adults. Frontiers in Nutrition, 12, 1609102. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1609102

Dichter, J. (2026). Fermented dairy products as modulators of the gut microbiome: Greek yogurt as a model system. Food Science & Nutrition. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.71872

Dongo, D. (2025, July 3). Kefir, a functional food? FT (Food Times). https://www.foodtimes.eu/it/consumatori-e-salute/kefir-un-alimento-funzionale/

Freitas, M., O’Connor, A., Blechman, A., Cifelli, C. J., & Kapsak, W. R. (2025). Yogurt and reduced risk of type 2 diabetes: Exploring the FDA qualified health claim and potential implications for improving public health. The Journal of Nutrition. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjnut.2025.05.027

Gao, Y., Liu, Y., Ma, T., Liang, Q., Sun, J., Wu, X., Song, Y., Nie, H., Huang, J., & Mu, G. (2025). Fermented dairy products as precision modulators of gut microbiota and host health: Mechanistic insights, clinical evidence, and future directions. Foods, 14(11), 1946. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111946

Karastamatis, S., Zoidou, E., Moatsou, G., & Moschopoulou, E. (2022). Effect of modified manufacturing conditions on the composition of Greek strained yogurt and the quantity and composition of generated acid whey. Foods, 11(24), 3953. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11243953

Laird, E., Molloy, A. M., McNulty, H., Ward, M., McCarroll, K., Hoey, L., Hughes, C. F., Cunningham, C., Strain, J. J., & Casey, M. C. (2017). Greater yogurt consumption is associated with increased bone mineral density and physical function in older adults. Osteoporosis International, 28(8), 2409–2419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4049-5

Martínez-González, M. A., Sayón-Orea, C., Ruiz-Canela, M., de la Fuente, C., Gea, A., & Bes-Rastrollo, M. (2014). Yogurt consumption, weight change and risk of overweight/obesity: The SUN cohort study. Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases, 24(11), 1189–1196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2014.05.015

Mayo, B., Malagón-Rojas, J., Agahi, F., Frias, J., Künili, İ. E., Kütt, M.-L., Mardon, J., Nikolovska Nedelkoska, D., Parada, M. A., Torbica, A., Bulmuş-Tüccar, T., Yilmaz, B., Bär, C., Harsa, H. S., Chassard, C., Praćer, S., Vergères, G., … Tamang, J. P. (2025). Impact of yogurt consumption on bone health markers in adults with or without osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Nutrition, 12, 1660505. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1660505

O’Connor, L. M., Lentjes, M. A. H., Luben, R. N., Khaw, K.-T., Wareham, N. J., & Forouhi, N. G. (2014). Dietary dairy product intake and incident type 2 diabetes: A prospective study using dietary data from a 7-day food diary. Diabetologia, 57(5), 909–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-014-3176-1

Panahi, S., Doyon, C. Y., Després, J.-P., Pérusse, L., Vohl, M.-C., Drapeau, V., & Tremblay, A. (2018). Yogurt consumption, body composition, and metabolic health in the Québec Family Study. European Journal of Nutrition, 57(4), 1591–1603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-017-1444-9

Pannerchelvan, S., Rios-Solis, L., Wasoh, H., Sobri, M. Z. M., Faizal Wong, F. W., Mohamed, M. S., Mohamad, R., & Halim, M. (2024). Functional yogurt: A comprehensive review of its nutritional composition and health benefits. Food & Function, 15(22), 10927–10955. https://doi.org/10.1039/d4fo03671a

Sahni, S., Tucker, K. L., Kiel, D. P., Quach, L., Casey, V. A., & Hannan, M. T. (2013). Milk and yogurt consumption are linked with higher bone mineral density but not with hip fracture: The Framingham Offspring Study. Archives of Osteoporosis, 8, 119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-013-0119-2

Savaiano, D. A., & Hutkins, R. W. (2021). Yogurt, cultured fermented milk, and health: A systematic review. Nutrition Reviews, 79(5), 599–614. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaa013

Sharifan, P., Roustaee, R., Shafiee, M., Longworth, Z. L., Keshavarz, P., Davies, I. G., Webb, R. J., Mazidi, M., & Vatanparast, H. (2025). Dairy consumption and risk of cardiovascular and bone health outcomes in adults: An umbrella review and updated meta-analyses. Nutrients, 17(17), 2723. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17172723

Institutional and regulatory sources

Codex Alimentarius Commission. (2010). Standard for fermented milks (CXS 243-2003). FAO/WHO. https://www.fao.org/input/download/standards/400/CXS_243e.pdf

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. Consolidated text: 20/08/2025. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2012/432/2025-08-20

CREA – Council for agricultural research and economics analysis. (2019). Food composition tables: Yogurt.

Italian Standards Body. (2016). Yogurt with added other food ingredients: Definition, composition and characteristics (UNI 10358:2016).

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies. (2010). Scientific opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to live yoghurt cultures and improved lactose digestion (ID 1143, 2976). EFSA Journal, 8(10), 1763. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1763

Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. Consolidated text: 01/04/2025. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1169/2025-04-01

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. Consolidated text: 13/12/2014. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1924/2014-12-13

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Qualified health claim for yogurt and reduced risk of type 2 diabetes (Docket No. FDA-2019-P-1594) [Letter of enforcement discretion]. https://www.fda.gov/food/hfp-constituent-updates/fda-announces-qualified-health-claim-yogurt-and-reduced-risk-type-2-diabetes

Market and sectoral sources

CLAL. (2026). Italy: fermented milk production; EU-27: yogurt production; yogurt export (ISTAT/Eurostat data). https://www.clal.it

Granarolo. (2026). Yomo No Added Sugar and No Sweeteners [Product Sheet and Press Release]. https://www.granarolo.it/marchi/yomo/yomo-senza-zuccheri-aggiunti

Il Sole 24 Ore. (2025, July 10). Yogurt, purchases increased by 5% in one year driven by Greek, protein, and ‘almost dessert’. https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/yogurt-acquisti-aumento-5percento-un-anno-spinti-greco-proteici-e-quasi-dessert-AH42jWVB