Colorants in Cheese Manufacture: Production, Chemistry, Interactions, and Regulation

Colored Cheddar cheeses are prepared by adding an aqueous annatto extract (norbixin) to cheese milk; however, a considerable proportion (∼20%) of such colorant is transferred to whey, which can limit the end use applications of whey products. Different geographical regions have adopted various strategies for handling whey derived from colored cheeses production. For example, in the United States, whey products are treated with oxidizing agents such as hydrogen peroxide and benzoyl peroxide to obtain white and colorless spray‐dried products; however, chemical bleaching of whey is prohibited in Europe and China. Fundamental studies have focused on understanding the interactions between colorants molecules and various components of cheese. In addition, the selective delivery of colorants to the cheese curd through approaches such as encapsulated norbixin and microcapsules of bixin or use of alternative colorants, including fat‐soluble/emulsified versions of annatto or beta‐carotene, has been studied. This review provides a critical analysis of pertinent scientific and patent literature pertaining to colorant delivery in cheese and various types of colorant products on the market for cheese manufacture, and also considers interactions between colorant molecules and cheese components; various strategies for elimination of color transfer to whey during cheese manufacture are also discussed

Scientific and Legal Perspectives on Science Generated for Regulatory Activities

This article originated from a conference that asked “Should scientific work conducted for purposes of advocacy before regulatory agencies or courts be judged by the same standards as science conducted for other purposes?” In the article, which focuses on the regulatory advocacy context, we argue that it can be and should be. First, we describe a set of standards and practices currently being used to judge the quality of scientific research and testing and explain how these standards and practices assist in judging the quality of research and testing regardless of why the work was conducted. These standards and practices include the federal Information Quality Act, federal Good Laboratory Practice standards, peer review, disclosure of funding sources, and transparency in research policies. The more that scientific information meets these standards and practices, the more likely it is to be of high quality, reliable, reproducible, and credible. We then explore legal issues that may be implicated in any effort to create special rules for science conducted specifically for a regulatory proceeding. Federal administrative law does not provide a basis for treating information in a given proceeding differently depending on its source or the reason for which it was generated. To the contrary, this law positively assures that interested persons have the right to offer their technical expertise toward the solution of regulatory problems. Any proposal to subject scientific information generated for the purpose of a regulatory proceeding to more demanding standards than other scientific information considered in that proceeding would clash with this law and would face significant administrative complexities. In a closely related example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considered but abandoned a program to implement standards aimed at “external” information

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study of Dietary Bisphenol A in Sprague-Dawley Rats

This study was conducted to determine the potential of bisphenol A (BPA) to induce functional and/or morphological effects to the nervous system of F1 offspring from dietary exposure during gestation and lactation according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for the study of developmental neurotoxicity. BPA was offered to female Sprague-Dawley Crl:CD (SD) rats (24 per dose group) and their litters at dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 0.15, 1.5, 75, 750, and 2250 ppm daily from gestation day 0 through lactation day 21. F1 offspring were evaluated using the following tests: detailed clinical observations (postnatal days [PNDs] 4, 11, 21, 35, 45, and 60), auditory startle (PNDs 20 and 60), motor activity (PNDs 13, 17, 21, and 61), learning and memory using the Biel water maze (PNDs 22 and 62), and brain and nervous system neuropathology and brain morphometry (PNDs 21 and 72). For F1 offspring, there were no treatment-related neurobehavioral effects, nor was there evidence of neuropathology or effects on brain morphometry. Based on maternal and offspring body weight reductions, the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) for systemic toxicity was 75 ppm (5.85 and 13.1 mg/kg/day during gestation and lactation, respectively), with no treatment-related effects at lower doses or nonmonotonic dose responses observed for any parameter. There was no evidence that BPA is a developmental neurotoxicant in rats, and the NOAEL for developmental neurotoxicity was 2250 ppm, the highest dose tested (164 and 410 mg/kg/day during gestation and lactation, respectively)

Cross-Sector Review of Drivers and Available 3Rs Approaches for Acute Systemic Toxicity Testing

Acute systemic toxicity studies are carried out in many sectors in which synthetic chemicals are manufactured or used and are among the most criticized of all toxicology tests on both scientific and ethical grounds. A review of the drivers for acute toxicity testing within the pharmaceutical industry led to a paradigm shift whereby in vivo acute toxicity data are no longer routinely required in advance of human clinical trials. Based on this experience, the following review was undertaken to identify (1) regulatory and scientific drivers for acute toxicity testing in other industrial sectors, (2) activities aimed at replacing, reducing, or refining the use of animals, and (3) recommendations for future work in this area

Use of varenicline for smoking cessation treatment in UK primary care: an association rule mining analysis

BACKGROUND: Varenicline is probably the most effective smoking cessation pharmacotherapy, but is less widely used than nicotine replacement therapy. We therefore set out to identify the characteristics of numerically important groups of patients who typically do, or do not, receive varenicline in the UK. METHODS: We used association rule mining to analyse data on prescribing of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy in relation to age, sex, comorbidity and other variables from 477,620 people aged 16 years and over, registered as patients throughout 2011 with one of 559 UK general practices in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, and recorded to be current smokers. RESULTS: 46,685 participants (9.8% of all current smokers) were prescribed any smoking cessation treatment during 2011, and 19,316 of these (4% of current smokers, 41% of those who received any therapy) were prescribed varenicline. Prescription of varenicline was most common among heavy smokers aged 31–60, and in those with a diagnosis of COPD. Varenicline was rarely used among smokers who were otherwise in good health, or were aged over 60, were lighter smokers, or had psychotic disorders or dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline is being underused in healthy smokers, or in older smokers, and in those with psychotic disorders or dementia. Since varenicline is probably the most effective available single cessation therapy, this study identifies under-treatment of substantial public health significance