A ranking method of chemical substances in foods for prioritisation of monitoring, based on health risk and knowledge gaps

Chemical contaminants are present in all foods. Data on the occurrence of contaminants in foods that are often consumed or contain high contaminant concentrations are critical for the estimation of exposure and evaluation of potential negative health effects. Due to limited resources for the monitoring of contaminants and other chemical substances in foods, methods for prioritisation are needed. We have developed a straightforward semi-quantitative method to rank chemical substances in foods for monitoring as part of a risk-based food control. The method is based on considerations of toxicity, level of exposure including both occurrence in food and dietary intake, vulnerability of one or more population groups due to high exposure because of special food habits or resulting from specific genetic variants, diseases, drug use or age/life stages, and the adequacy of both toxicity and exposure data. The chemical substances ranked for monitoring were contaminants occurring naturally, unintentionally or incidentally in foods or formed during food processing, and the inclusion criteria were high toxicity, high exposure and/or lack of toxicity or exposure data. In principle, this method can be used for all classes of chemical substances that occur in foods, both unintended contaminants and deliberately added chemical substances. Foods considered relevant for monitoring of the different chemical substances were also identified. The outcomes of ranking exercises using the new method including considerations of vulnerable groups and adequacy of data and a shortened version based on risk considerations only were compared. The results showed that the resolution between the contaminants was notably increased with the extended method, which we considered as advantageous for the ranking of chemical substances for monitoring in foods.publishedVersio

Scoping review of research on gastrointestinal effects of selected emulsifiers, stabilisers, and thickeners

publishedVersio

Risk assessment of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT). Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

publishedVersio

Risk-benefit assessment of sunscreen - Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

VKM has performed a risk-benefit assessment of sunscreen use and six UV filters. This task was undertaken on the initiative of a VKM Panel in response to the apparent paradox between the need for protective measures, such as use of sunscreens, to reduce Norway’s high incidence and mortality of skin cancer and a consumer concern for the safety of sunscreens. Concerns include safety of ingredients and sunscreens’ effect on vitamin D synthesis. Sunscreen products are legally regulated as cosmetic products in the EU, and only approved UV filters up to a maximum determined concentration are allowed in the ready-foruse preparation. VKM used a systematic approach to assess risks and benefits of sunscreen use and risks of six selected UV filters: bis-ethyl-hexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine (BEMT), butyl methoxydibenzoyl methane (BMDBM), 2-ethylhexyl salicylate (EHS), ethylhexyl triazone (EHT), octocrylene (OC), and titanium dioxide in nanoform (NP-TiO2). These UV filters are among the most frequently used in sunscreens on the Norwegian market. Sunscreen sprays and lip products were not included. Scientific publications and reports up to 2020 were retrieved to assess adverse and protective effects of sunscreen and adverse effects of UV filters. We assessed risk of bias in the studies and evidence for health outcomes with the aid of validity tools, and estimated exposure to each UV filter using probabilistic methods. The evidence showed that sunscreens were beneficial in protecting against certain skin cancers. Insufficient evidence precluded determination of the hazard associated with sunscreen use. The UV filters occurred in concentrations similar to or below the limits set in the EU cosmetics regulative. VKM considered that little to no hazard was associated with use of the six evaluated UV filters. VKM concludes that the risks related to use of the six evaluated UV filters are negligible since the real-life use of these UV filters is several-fold lower than the amounts that may cause any adverse health effect. The evidence for harmful health effects of sunscreens is insufficient to determine risk. Sunscreen use protects against certain skin cancers and is beneficial for the general Norwegian population.Risk-benefit assessment of sunscreen - Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and EnvironmentpublishedVersio

Risk-benefit assessment of sunscreen: Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

publishedVersio

Risk assessment of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT). Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

publishedVersio

Risk-benefit assessment of sunscreen: Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

publishedVersio

Risk assessment of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT). Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food, and Cosmetics of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment

publishedVersio