Cargando…

Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups

EFSA is re‐evaluating the safety of food additives already permitted in the Union before 20 January 2009 and issuing scientific opinions on their safety in line with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Acacia gum (E 414) was re‐evaluated in 2017 by the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sour...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Younes, Maged, Aquilina, Gabriele, Castle, Laurence, Engel, Karl‐Heinz, Fowler, Paul, Frutos Fernandez, Maria Jose, Fürst, Peter, Gürtler, Rainer, Husøy, Trine, Mennes, Wim, Moldeus, Peter, Oskarsson, Agneta, Shah, Romina, Waalkens‐Berendsen, Ine, Wölfle, Detlef, Dusemund, Birgit, Mortensen, Alicja, Turck, Dominique, Barmaz, Stefania, Smeraldi, Camilla, Tard, Alexandra, Gundert‐Remy, Ursula
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7008789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32626209
http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5922
_version_ 1783495531408916480
author Younes, Maged
Aquilina, Gabriele
Castle, Laurence
Engel, Karl‐Heinz
Fowler, Paul
Frutos Fernandez, Maria Jose
Fürst, Peter
Gürtler, Rainer
Husøy, Trine
Mennes, Wim
Moldeus, Peter
Oskarsson, Agneta
Shah, Romina
Waalkens‐Berendsen, Ine
Wölfle, Detlef
Dusemund, Birgit
Mortensen, Alicja
Turck, Dominique
Barmaz, Stefania
Smeraldi, Camilla
Tard, Alexandra
Gundert‐Remy, Ursula
author_facet Younes, Maged
Aquilina, Gabriele
Castle, Laurence
Engel, Karl‐Heinz
Fowler, Paul
Frutos Fernandez, Maria Jose
Fürst, Peter
Gürtler, Rainer
Husøy, Trine
Mennes, Wim
Moldeus, Peter
Oskarsson, Agneta
Shah, Romina
Waalkens‐Berendsen, Ine
Wölfle, Detlef
Dusemund, Birgit
Mortensen, Alicja
Turck, Dominique
Barmaz, Stefania
Smeraldi, Camilla
Tard, Alexandra
Gundert‐Remy, Ursula
collection PubMed
description EFSA is re‐evaluating the safety of food additives already permitted in the Union before 20 January 2009 and issuing scientific opinions on their safety in line with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Acacia gum (E 414) was re‐evaluated in 2017 by the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS). As follow‐up to this assessment, the Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to assess the safety of acacia gum (E 414) as carry‐over in food for infants below 16 weeks of age belonging to food categories 13.1.1 (Infant formulae) and 13.1.5.1 (Dietary foods for infants for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants) and to address the issues already identified during the re‐evaluation of the food additive when used in food for the general population. The process involved the publication of a call for data to allow the interested parties to provide the requested information to complete the risk assessment. Based on the analytical data submitted in response to this call, the Panel recommended to lower the limits in the specifications for toxic elements and identified the need for further specifications for aluminium, microbiological criteria and protein residues. The Panel noted that information was not provided for oxidising enzymes and recommended that oxidases and peroxidases should be inactivated during the manufacturing process. The interested parties did not submit toxicological, clinical and post‐marketing surveillance data specific for the assessment of the safety of acacia gum (E 414) in infants below 16 weeks of age. However, taking the highest doses tested without adverse effects from the subchronic studies available from the previous re‐evaluation and comparing them with the estimated exposure in infants, the margins of safety were large indicating that there is no reason for health concern.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7008789
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70087892020-07-02 Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups Younes, Maged Aquilina, Gabriele Castle, Laurence Engel, Karl‐Heinz Fowler, Paul Frutos Fernandez, Maria Jose Fürst, Peter Gürtler, Rainer Husøy, Trine Mennes, Wim Moldeus, Peter Oskarsson, Agneta Shah, Romina Waalkens‐Berendsen, Ine Wölfle, Detlef Dusemund, Birgit Mortensen, Alicja Turck, Dominique Barmaz, Stefania Smeraldi, Camilla Tard, Alexandra Gundert‐Remy, Ursula EFSA J Scientific Opinion EFSA is re‐evaluating the safety of food additives already permitted in the Union before 20 January 2009 and issuing scientific opinions on their safety in line with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Acacia gum (E 414) was re‐evaluated in 2017 by the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS). As follow‐up to this assessment, the Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to assess the safety of acacia gum (E 414) as carry‐over in food for infants below 16 weeks of age belonging to food categories 13.1.1 (Infant formulae) and 13.1.5.1 (Dietary foods for infants for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants) and to address the issues already identified during the re‐evaluation of the food additive when used in food for the general population. The process involved the publication of a call for data to allow the interested parties to provide the requested information to complete the risk assessment. Based on the analytical data submitted in response to this call, the Panel recommended to lower the limits in the specifications for toxic elements and identified the need for further specifications for aluminium, microbiological criteria and protein residues. The Panel noted that information was not provided for oxidising enzymes and recommended that oxidases and peroxidases should be inactivated during the manufacturing process. The interested parties did not submit toxicological, clinical and post‐marketing surveillance data specific for the assessment of the safety of acacia gum (E 414) in infants below 16 weeks of age. However, taking the highest doses tested without adverse effects from the subchronic studies available from the previous re‐evaluation and comparing them with the estimated exposure in infants, the margins of safety were large indicating that there is no reason for health concern. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7008789/ /pubmed/32626209 http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5922 Text en © 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Scientific Opinion
Younes, Maged
Aquilina, Gabriele
Castle, Laurence
Engel, Karl‐Heinz
Fowler, Paul
Frutos Fernandez, Maria Jose
Fürst, Peter
Gürtler, Rainer
Husøy, Trine
Mennes, Wim
Moldeus, Peter
Oskarsson, Agneta
Shah, Romina
Waalkens‐Berendsen, Ine
Wölfle, Detlef
Dusemund, Birgit
Mortensen, Alicja
Turck, Dominique
Barmaz, Stefania
Smeraldi, Camilla
Tard, Alexandra
Gundert‐Remy, Ursula
Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title_full Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title_fullStr Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title_full_unstemmed Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title_short Opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
title_sort opinion on the re‐evaluation of acacia gum (e 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow‐up of its re‐evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups
topic Scientific Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7008789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32626209
http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5922
work_keys_str_mv AT opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT younesmaged opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT aquilinagabriele opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT castlelaurence opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT engelkarlheinz opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT fowlerpaul opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT frutosfernandezmariajose opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT furstpeter opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT gurtlerrainer opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT husøytrine opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT menneswim opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT moldeuspeter opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT oskarssonagneta opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT shahromina opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT waalkensberendsenine opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT wolfledetlef opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT dusemundbirgit opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT mortensenalicja opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT turckdominique opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT barmazstefania opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT smeraldicamilla opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT tardalexandra opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups
AT gundertremyursula opiniononthereevaluationofacaciagume414asafoodadditiveinfoodsforinfantsbelow16weeksofageandthefollowupofitsreevaluationasafoodadditiveforusesinfoodsforallpopulationgroups