6 research outputs found

    Re-evaluation of propane-1,2-diol esters of fatty acids (E 477) as a food additive

    Get PDF
    Acknowledgements: The Panel wishes to thank the Working Group on the re-evaluation of food additives other than gums and colours of the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) for the preparatory work on this scientific output, in particular Pasquale Mosesso and Rudolf Antonius Woutersen. The FAF Panel wishes to acknowledge all European competent institutions, Member State bodies and other organisations that provided data for this scientific output.Publisher PD

    Re-evaluation of oxidised soya bean oil interacted with mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (E 479b) as a food additive

    Get PDF
    Acknowledgements: The Panel wishes to thank the Working Group on the re-evaluation of food additives other than gums and colours of the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) for the preparatory work on this scientific output, in particular Pasquale Mosesso and Rudolf Antonius Woutersen. The FAF Panel wishes to acknowledge all European competent institutions, Member State bodies and other organisations that provided data for this scientific output.Publisher PD

    Re‐evaluation of ÎČ‐cyclodextrin (E 459) as a food additive

    No full text
    Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of ÎČ‐cyclodextrin (E 459) as a food additive. ÎČ‐Cyclodextrin is a non‐reducing cyclic oligosaccharide consisting of seven α‐1,4‐linked d‐glucopyranosyl units. The Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day to ÎČ‐cyclodextrin (E 459) in 1996. ÎČ‐Cyclodextrin is poorly absorbed following oral administration in animals and humans. It is hydrolysed to maltose and glucose by the gut microflora and endogenous amylases in the colon; consequently, ÎČ‐cyclodextrin levels in tissues and serum are low (< 1%). ÎČ‐Cyclodextrin has a low acute oral toxicity. Short‐term and subchronic toxicity studies were available in rats and dogs. In rats, the main reported effect was an adaptive enlargement of the caecum, resulting from consumption of poorly digestible carbohydrates. From a 6‐month study in rats, a no observed adverse effect levels (NOAEL) of 600 mg/kg bw per day was identified and from a 52‐week dogs study, the NOAEL was 466 and 476 mg/kg bw per day in males and females, respectively. The Panel considered that there was no indication for genotoxicity of ÎČ‐cyclodextrin. From a chronic toxicity studies in rats, a NOAEL of 654 and 864 mg/kg bw per day in males and females, respectively, was identified. Carcinogenicity studies in mice and rats were available and no evidence for carcinogenicity was found. The Panel concluded that, based on the available toxicological database, there is no reason to revise the current ADI of 5 mg/kg bw per day for ÎČ‐cyclodextrin. Based on the available reported use and use levels, the Panel also concluded that the ADI was exceeded in the refined brand‐loyal scenario (considered the most relevant scenario) in all population groups except for infants at the mean and in all population groups at the 95th percentile

    Re‐evaluation of glutamic acid (E 620), sodium glutamate (E 621), potassium glutamate (E 622), calcium glutamate (E 623), ammonium glutamate (E 624) and magnesium glutamate (E 625) as food additives

    No full text
    Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of glutamic acid–glutamates (E 620–625) when used as food additives. Glutamate is absorbed in the intestine and it is presystemically metabolised in the gut wall. No adverse effects were observed in the available short‐term, subchronic, chronic, reproductive and developmental studies. The only effect observed was increased kidney weight and increased spleen weight; however, the increase in organ weight was not accompanied by adverse histopathological findings and, therefore, the increase in organ weight was not considered as an adverse effect. The Panel considered that glutamic acid–glutamates (E 620–625) did not raise concern with regards to genotoxicity. From a neurodevelopmental toxicity study, a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 3,200 mg monosodium glutamate/kg body weight (bw) per day could be identified. The Panel assessed the suitability of human data to be used for the derivation of a health‐based guidance value. Although effects on humans were identified human data were not suitable due to the lack of dose–response data from which a dose without effect could be identified. Based on the NOAEL of 3,200 mg monosodium glutamate/kg bw per day from the neurodevelopmental toxicity study and applying the default uncertainty factor of 100, the Panel derived a group acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 30 mg/kg bw per day, expressed as glutamic acid, for glutamic acid and glutamates (E 620–625). The Panel noted that the exposure to glutamic acid and glutamates (E 620–625) exceeded not only the proposed ADI, but also doses associated with adverse effects in humans for some population groups
    corecore