Safety evaluation of the food enzyme pullulanase from genetically modified Bacillus subtilis strain NZYM-AK

Publisher PD

Safety assessment of the process ‘Veroniki Ecogrup SRL’, based on Starlinger Decon technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

Publisher PD

Safety assessment of the process ‘Plastienvase’, based on EREMA Basic technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

Publisher PD

The interplay between societal concerns and the regulatory frame on GM crops in the European Union

Recapitulating how genetic modification technology and its agro-food products aroused strong societal opposition in the European Union, this paper demonstrates how this opposition contributed to shape the European regulatory frame on GM crops. More specifically, it describes how this opposition contributed to a de facto moratorium on the commercialization of new GM crop events in the end of the nineties. From this period onwards, the regulatory frame has been continuously revised in order to slow down further erosion of public and market confidence. Various scientific and technical reforms were made to meet societal concerns relating to the safety of GM crops. In this context, the precautionary principle, environmental post-market monitoring and traceability were adopted as ways to cope with scientific uncertainties. Labeling, traceability, co-existence and public information were installed in an attempt to meet the general public request for more information about GM agro-food products, and the specific demand to respect the consumers' and farmers' freedom of choice. Despite these efforts, today, the explicit role of public participation and/or ethical consultation during authorization procedures is at best minimal. Moreover, no legal room was created to progress to an integral sustainability evaluation during market procedures. It remains to be seen whether the recent policy shift towards greater transparency about value judgments, plural viewpoints and scientific uncertainties will be one step forward in integrating ethical concerns more explicitly in risk analysis. As such, the regulatory frame stands open for further interpretation, reflecting in various degrees a continued interplay with societal concerns relating to GM agro-food products. In this regard, both societal concerns and diversely interpreted regulatory criteria can be inferred as signaling a request – and even a quest – to render more explicit the broader-than-scientific dimension of the actual risk analysis

Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 57, Revision 1 (FGE.57Rev1): consideration of isopulegone and three flavouring substances evaluated by JECFA (55th meeting)

Publisher PD

Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 302 (FGE.302): N-(2-methylcyclohexyl)-2,3,4,5,6-pentafluoro-benzamide from Chemical Group 30

Publisher PD

Risks for public health related to the presence of tetrodotoxin (TTX) and TTX analogues in marine bivalves and gastropods

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Safety assessment of the substance dimethyl carbonate for use in food contact materials

Publisher PD

A Review of Dietary Zinc Recommendations

Background. Large discrepancies exist among the dietary zinc recommendations set by expert groups. Objective. To understand the basis for the differences in the dietary zinc recommendations set by the World Health Organization, the U.S. Institute of Medicine, the International Zinc Nutrition Consultative Group, and the European Food Safety Agency. Methods. We compared the sources of the data, the concepts, and methods used by the four expert groups to set the physiological requirements for absorbed zinc, the dietary zinc requirements (termed estimated and/or average requirements), recommended dietary allowances (or recommended nutrient intakes or population reference intakes), and tolerable upper intake levels for selected age, sex, and life-stage groups. Results. All four expert groups used the factorial approach to estimate the physiological requirements for zinc. These are based on the estimates of absorbed zinc required to offset all obligatory zinc losses plus any additional requirements for absorbed zinc for growth, pregnancy, or lactation. However, discrepancies exist in the reference body weights used, studies selected, approaches to estimate endogenous zinc losses, the adjustments applied to derive dietary zinc requirements that take into account zinc bioavailability in the habitual diets, number of dietary zinc recommendations set, and the nomenclature used to describe them. Conclusions. Estimates for the physiological and dietary requirements varied across the four expert groups. The European Food Safety Agency was the only expert group that set dietary zinc recommendations at four different levels of dietary phytate for adults (but not for children) and as yet no tolerable upper intake level for any life-stage group