As Norway excels in its first World Cup appearance since 1998, false claims about what the team is eating are also grabbing attention online.

The allegations focus on the quality of American food — more specifically, that the Norwegians distrust it so much that they brought food from home to avoid eating it. Norway’s team is based in Greensboro, North Carolina, for the duration of the 2026 tournament, which is being co-hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

It’s true that the team shipped certain products from Norway for the World Cup, but the reason has nothing to do with concerns about quality.

Here’s a closer look at the facts.

CLAIM: The Norwegian men’s national soccer team brought its own food to the 2026 World Cup because it doesn’t trust the quality of food in the U.S.

THE FACTS: This is false. The team brought some products from Norway to maintain consistency in players’ diets and provide a taste of home, according to its head chef Aron Espeland. Other ingredients have been sourced locally. Nutrition experts say that such a practice is common among elite athletes who play internationally.

“When athletes are competing at the highest level, consistency is important,” Espeland said. “The players are used to certain products and flavors, and familiar foods can contribute both to nutrition and overall well-being during a demanding competition.”

He continued: “Overall, the experience of cooking for the team in the U.S. has been excellent. We have had access to high-quality local ingredients, and our approach has been to combine those with a selection of Norwegian products that help create continuity and a sense of home for the players during the tournament.”

Many of the claims spreading online say the team brought in 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of food from Norway for the World Cup. Espeland confirmed that the amount is actually about 580 kilograms (1,276 pounds). That consists of 300 kilograms (660 pounds) of Norwegian salmon and trout, 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of halibut, 80 kilograms (176 pounds) of Norwegian brown cheese, and 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of Jarlsberg cheese.

The team, whose support staff includes three chefs, did not bring oranges from Norway, despite social media posts claiming otherwise. Espeland said that players are served freshly squeezed orange juice every morning, made from oranges sourced locally in the U.S.

Plenty of other teams travel with their own chef and have taken their own food to past World Cups. For example, Argentina and Uruguay each brought thousands of pounds of meat to Qatar in 2022. The U.S. squad traveled to Brazil in 2014 with oatmeal, Cheerios, peanut butter and A1 Steak Sauce.

Such practices are not unusual for elite athletes who compete in different countries, according to experts. The reasons include maintaining routine and consistency, reducing risk of adverse reactions, providing cultural familiarity and accommodating personal preferences.

“Interpreting this practice as a lack of trust in the host nation’s food system misunderstands the purpose of high-performance nutrition,” said Rafaela G. Feresin, an associate professor of nutrition at Georgia State University. “The goal is not to evaluate local food quality; it is to eliminate unnecessary variability during competition. Bringing a chef and familiar ingredients to a major tournament is standard, performance-driven logistics.”

Amy Goodson, a sports dietitian who has worked with professional teams including the Dallas Cowboys and the Texas Rangers, explained that bringing food to international competitions is more about “control, consistency, and performance” rather than distrust.

“Nutrition is a performance variable at the World Cup level,” she said. “These athletes train, travel, and compete with elite intensity, often multiple times in a short window, while managing weather and time zone changes. What they eat directly impacts energy availability, hydration status, recovery, immune function, and even decision-making on the field. When margins are razor thin, fueling consistency becomes critical.” ___

Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

Progressive candidate Iván Cepeda on Wednesday conceded Colombia’s presidential election to conservative outsider Abelardo de la Espriella, who was endorsed by President Donald Trump.

The concession came days after Cepeda initially refused to acknowledge defeat following preliminary results that showed de la Espriella as the apparent winner. 

“At this stage of the vote count, I have decided to accept the result emerging from that process, which indicates that Abelardo de la Espriella is the new President of the Republic,” Cepeda said in an address to the nation. 

“I do so as an act of democratic responsibility.”

TRUMP SAYS COLOMBIA’S ‘EL TIGRE’ WILL BE A ‘GREAT PRESIDENT’ AS SOCIALIST OPPONENT LAUNCHES LEGAL CHALLENGE

De la Espriella, a businessman and lawyer who had never previously run for office, known to his supporters as “El Tigre,” defeated Senate member Iván Cepeda by one percentage point in a remarkably close election, according to officials. 

“The vote count shows an extraordinarily narrow margin between the two options vying for the trust of the Colombian people,” he said. “Less than 1% of the vote separates the candidacies that participated in this contest.”

Despite his concession, Cepeda made serious allegations that de la Espriella’s victory was influenced by “foreign interference” by the United States and the use of artificial intelligence to manipulate voters. 

“During this process, we denounced the open and improper foreign interference in Colombia’s internal affairs—particularly the interventions by the United States government, and specifically the interventions by President Donald Trump in support of Abelardo de la Espriella’s candidacy,” he said. 

He further accused the opposing campaign of widespread vote-buying and unethical tactics that he said undermined the legitimacy of the election results.

ANTI-CARTEL HARDLINER CHANNELS TRUMP IN BID TO END COLOMBIA’S LEFTIST ERA IN PIVOTAL ELECTION

President-elect de la Espriella will begin his four-year term in August.

“Starting August 7, we will work with determination to consolidate a common agenda that strengthens the security, freedom, and prosperity of our nations,” de la Espriella in a post on X. 

The result will effectively end outgoing President Gustavo Petro’s leftist influence on the state and the policies Cepeda had pledged to continue if he won the election.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

A core pillar of Petro’s signature agenda was his “total peace” strategy, aimed at opening negotiations with remaining guerrilla forces, drug cartels, and armed paramilitary groups in an effort to end Colombia’s decades long internal conflict. 

In contrast, de la Espriella has pledged a more hardline approach, including a militarized crackdown on criminal organizations, proposals to build mega-prisons, expand fossil fuel fracking, and revive the controversial practice of aerial glyphosate spraying to eradicate coca crops.

The president-elect, who holds dual Colombian and U.S. citizenship, has also said he plans to add Colombia to the Trump-dubbed “Shield of the Americas,” a proposed coalition aimed at coordinating efforts against criminal groups in Latin America. 

Published on
24/06/2026 – 20:30 GMT+2

Ten years after the UK voted to exit the European Union, the debate over Brexit’s legacy is far from over. MEPs Barry Andrews (Renew Europe) and Sander Smit (European Conservatives & Reformists) go head-to-head on whether Brexit has strengthened or weakened Europe—and whether Britain could or should one day return to the bloc.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

For Irish MEP Barry Andrews, the answer is clear. He argues that leaving the EU was a mistake and a “total disaster” for the UK, pointing to years of political instability and economic challenges since the referendum. He also contends that Brexit has ultimately strengthened support for the European project, stating that “there is nobody looking to leave the European Union anymore.”

Dutch MEP Sander Smit takes a different view, saying the EU still misses “the UK’s crucial voice for fiscal and financial discipline” and warning against a more centralised Europe. “Our future lies in a stronger partnership,” he says. “Let the UK and EU countries move beyond the past and work together as natural, sovereign allies.”

The Ring is hosted by Méabh Mc Mahon, produced by Luis Albertos Altarejos and Amaia Echevarria, and edited by Vassilis Glynos.

You can contact us at: thering@euronews.com