Ferré & Consulting Blog (English Version)

The European Parliament’s Environment committee is pushing for a warning label on products containing aspartame stating that they may not be suitable for pregnant women – despite opinions from EFSA and the French food safety ANSES that scientific evidence does not warrant a reconsideration of the sweetener’s safety.

An amendment to the food labelling proposal, currently in second reading, that would require the words “Contains aspartame (a source of phenylalanine; might be unsuitable for pregnant women)” was put forward by French MEP Corinne Lepage.

It follows the publication of a study Danish epidemiological study that saw a statistical association between the consumption of soft drinks containing sweeteners and increased risk of preterm delivery as a result of a medical decision following complications. The authors said the results, whether or not there is a causal link, needs to be confirmed by other studies.

This study, together with another from Italy reporting increased incidence of cancer in male mice fed very high doses of aspartame, has been reviewed by EFSA and by the French food safety agency ANSES, who said that preliminary examination give no grounds for amending the ADI of 40mg.kg.bw, but that further studies would be monitored.

Fair hearing or role-playing?

Moreover, last month an EFSA scientist took part in a hearing at the European Parliament on aspartame, to explain the work the authority has carried out on the sweetener over the years and the review of the latest studies.

After the hearing, however, Corinne Lepage, invoked the precautionary principle and accused industry, as risk managers, and EFSA, as risk assessor, of “role playing”.

She said that no independent evaluation of the studies had taken place, and that there sound be recommendations for pregnant women so pregnant women can be aware there is some uncertainty over aspartame and decide whether or not to expose themselves to it.

EFSA responded with disappointment over the reporting of the meeting’s outcome. It said in a statement: “Unfortunately, when reporting the outcomes of this meeting, the organisers of the hearing continue to repeat errors and misinformation. EFSA reaffirms that any possible risks from aspartame have been considered by scientific bodies worldwide and the current Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) ensures consumers are protected…

“EFSA’s most critical commitment is to provide independent scientific advice of the highest quality and it has put in place a very stringent set of procedures and processes to guarantee the independence of its scientific decision-making – as organisers of this event know very well”

Ignoring EFSA?

It is not yet certain that the warning label on aspartame will be included in the new regulation, as the next stage of the law-making process is a series of trilogues between the Parliament, Council and Commission ahead of a vote in plenary in July.

However the amendment on aspartame is not the first time MEPs have sought a warning label on additives for which the Commission’s risk assessor has found no grounds for altering the ADI.

Following the publication of the controversial ‘Southampton study’ which reported a link between cocktails of certain food colourings plus sodium benzoate with hyperactivity in children, MEPs voted on a mandatory warning label on any products containing them – despite EFSA’s opinion that the Southampton study, in its own right, was no grounds for changing recommendations.

EFSA has since lowered the ADIs of some of the colours in question – but for reasons other than a link with hyperactivity, which has not been substantiated in studies on the individual colours.

More recently, MEPs put forward a motion to prohibit a European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and European Commission (EC)-approved DHA omega-3 eye health claim on breast milk substitute products. The motion was narrowly rejected in a vote.

Source: Food navigator

Food Safety aspartame, EFSA, food labelling, pregnancy

The Comprehensive Database contains data from a total of 32 different dietary surveys from 22 Member States, including those obtained through an EFSA “Article 36”[1] grant focused on children’s food consumption data[2].

Summary statistics from the database enable quick screening for chronic and acute exposure to substances that may be found in the food chain. These statistics will be available to the public on the EFSA web site. In the database, dietary surveys and food consumption data for each country are divided by category; these include: age, from infants to adults aged 75 years or older[3]; food group (nearly 160) and type of consumption, covering both regular and high consumption thus allowing calculations to be tailored to each category of consumer. The statistics on food consumption are reported in grams per day, as well as grams per day per kg of body weight.

The food consumption database will also represent a basis for instance for the work related to the assessment of nutrient intakes of the EU population. In the area of nutrition, the analysis of dietary intake data is essential to help set science-based public health targets and to assess how dietary intakes compare with recommended intake levels, as well as to monitor progress over time.

The work on this new database began in 2008, when Member States started gathering data for EFSA from national dietary surveys in their countries. While this database is useful for EFSA’s risk assessment work, the data in it was derived using different methodologies, therefore making this unsuitable for direct country-to-country comparisons.

The collection of accurate, harmonised and detailed food consumption data at a European level is important for EFSA’s work and in this regard, cooperation with EU Member States is considered a priority. EFSA is working with Member States to develop food consumption surveys which will allow the collection and analysis of comparable data in EU countries. This initiative is known as “What’s on the Menu in Europe?” (EU MENU); several pilot studies under this initiative are due to be completed by 2012.

• The EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database

• Guidance for the use of the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database
• Evaluation of the FoodEx, the food classification system applied to the development of the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database

Food Safety database, EFSA, food consumption

Obesity is on the rise in Europe. According to the World Health Organisation, many European countries have seen obesity rates triple since the 1980s, with spiking levels of childhood obesity being particularly worrying. In some European states, more than 10% of deaths can be at least partly attributed to obesity.

As has been unequivocally stated on many occasions by a wide range of organisations and governments, this thoroughly modern problem has to be tackled by a multi-pronged campaign to encourage healthy eating and daily exercise while warning the public about the dangers of consistently overeating.

But what role can the food packaging industry play in slowing this rising trend? After all, packaging is the average consumer’s first point of reference when looking for nutritional information on a pre-packaged food product. This is the debate that has been flowing back and forth in the European Parliament for much of the last year.

The EU labelling debate

On 7 December last year, after months of work by EU Council Working Groups, MEPs agreed on a new set of food labelling requirements at the Health Council. The most fundamental proposal is a new mandatory requirement to set out clear, legible nutritional information on most pre-packaged foods.

While many details (such as minimum font sizes for the information, although a 3mm minimum has been proposed) are still to be finalised in later readings of the legislation due in the European Parliament later in the year, some facts are clear.

Mandatory information on the amount of certain nutrients is being demanded on most products, with energy, fat, saturated fat, salt and sugars being specifically mentioned. These must be expressed as a percentage of an adult’s guideline daily amount (GDA), based on a 100mg or 100ml portion.

As well as nutritional information, the EU debated for the first time on including country-of-origin on food labels.

It was decided that origin information would be made mandatory for fresh meat products, as well as in cases where not to include the information would actively mislead consumers. Checks on the authenticity of origin claims will also be bolstered, including providing further information on the place of origin.

Traffic light labelling system derailed

One of the most contentious outcomes of the new EU proposals is the rejection of the “traffic light” nutrition labelling scheme, which marks nutritional values in green, amber or red depending on their relative healthiness, in favour of simply stating percentages of GDAs. For the European food industry, this is a welcome move, as many companies have stated that the traffic light system unfairly demonises fatty products that can be eaten as part of a healthy diet. Paul Kelly, director of Irish food industry trade association Food and Drink Industry Ireland, was particularly strong in stating his organisation’s support for GDAs over any other nutrition information scheme.

“GDAs give consumers simple nutrition information on key nutrients such as saturated fat, sugars and salt, based on the portion size of the food being eaten,” he said. “They have been put on packs on a voluntary basis by industry since 2006, but it is important that they now become part of the legislation…The traffic light system of labelling is a subjective assessment of the nutrient content of 100g of a food and does not provide consumers with the information needed to choose a balanced diet based on their individual needs. In addition, ‘traffic lights’ fail to take account of portion sizes, and do not put the food in the context of the daily diet.”

Other groups see the move as a victory of industry lobbying over the interests of consumers. Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), a corporate lobbying watchdog, reported that the Confederation of Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA) had spent more than €1bn to lobby against the traffic light system, including TV adverts, lunch meetings and voting recommendation letters to MEPs.

In an article on its website, CEO stated its (and others’) preference for the stricter traffic light system. “Health and consumer campaigners argue that such labels are less effective because they rely on an arbitrary notion of a portion, and only reflect adult needs, which are not relevant for children – often the target market for snacks and sweets. They favour the traffic-light label which is much easier to understand for a larger audience and the most socially disadvantaged.”

Even with the less intrusive GDA approach, some companies have expressed their discomfort. UK newspaper the Daily Telegraph has reported that Ferrero, the Italian producer of Nutella hazelnut chocolate spread, claims that the new labelling requirements could frighten off potential customers. Even Italy’s Agriculture and Food Minister Giancarlo Galan has criticised the tougher approach, saying: “Sometimes, the strict application of rules…reveals their stupidity.” It seems that as these proposals move forward towards becoming full legislation, they may have found a staunch opponent in Italy.

The long road to legislation

The fact that EU parties have agreed on a framework for legislation does not mean that it will instantly become law; far from it, in fact. According to an interested parties letter from the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) dated 7 January 2011, the proposals will be subjected to another round of debate during their second reading in the spring of this year.

“The Regulation is expected to be finalised and published in early 2012. There will be appropriate transition periods for all businesses with the Council proposing three years for the labelling provisions although the mandatory requirement for nutrition labelling will not apply for five years,” according to Defra’s letter.

This means that although these issues are being brought to the table now, companies could have up until 2017 before the legislation comes into force.

It also leaves plenty of time for hurdles to be thrown in the path of the legislation by industry bodies or opposing national governments.

These new regulations, if pushed through intact over the next two years, will present new challenges for the food and packaging industries to come up with creative ways to inform consumers while keeping their products looking fresh and appealing on store shelves. But any healthy industry should rise to new challenges, and the changes proposed by the EU could have a significant impact on the ever-growing problem of mass obesity across the continent.

Source: Food Navigator

Food Safety, packaging food labelling, nutritional information, regulations

As per October 1 this year FSSC 22000 received acceptation by the European Cooperation for Accreditation (EA).

The formal evaluation of conformity assessment schemes is a new process for the EA. FSSC 22000 is the first GFSI-recognized global food safety scheme that receives such EA acceptance. This means all accreditation bodies in Europe will accept FS22000. In the past all accreditation bodies in Europe evaluated the schemes individually. Also ANAB, SCC and JAS-ANZ are lined up with FS22000. The accreditation process for certification bodies against FSSC 22000, version July 2010, has already started.

FS22000
Where the official name of the scheme still is FSSC 22000, both board members and users of the scheme prefer the shorter indication FS22000 or even FS22. In this press release we will relate to the scheme as FS22000 from this point on.

FS22000 out and rolling
Introduction Fons Schmid, chairman Board of Stakeholders FS22000
In the year 2000 I became the first chairman of the GFSI and I always kept the door wide open for the food A-brands like Danone, Kraft, Nestle, Unilever and others, with their great safety systems. ISO 22000 became the answer and now they have joined the GFSI and ISO 22000 has found a professional home in FSSC 22000. We have decided to maintain the official name but from now we will speak about FS22000: short and powerful! FS22000 will play a crucial role in safeguarding food safety trough the supply chain all over the world! It is a great food safety scheme for safe food manufacturing in all countries and has the support of the GFSI, the industry and many retailers who follow the GFSI founding-mission: Certified once, accepted everywhere. Much is to be done:
Intensified marketing and communication, regional Centres of Excellence, wider support of CB’s, optimize integrity surveillance and, of course, keeping one to one with ISO and GFSI requirements. Our multi-stakeholders Board and excellent staff are ready for it and will perform to the benefit of consumer protection worldwide.

FS22000 certification scheme, July 2010
In view of the EA acceptance some last changes were made in the FS22000 certification scheme. We want to emphasize that these changes do not affect the outline of the scheme but mainly add detail and clarification to the earlier issue. This new version, dated July 2010, has been formalised and placed on www.fssc22000.com. An overview of the most important changes is also published here. Extension of the existing ISO 22000 accreditation to FS22000 shall be against the July issue of the FS22000 scheme.

Accredited certification as of 1 January 2011
Accredited certification is allowed by the associated certification bodies as of 1 January 2011. Until January 1, 2011 unaccredited certification audits can continue. After receiving accreditation the certificates have to be changed into accredited certificates. For an overview of the certified organizations you can visit our website. Certificates shall be registered on the website by the Certification Bodies.

Food Safety FSSC 22000, GFSI, ISO 22000

A new fat replacer derived from kiwifruit can remove up to 90 per cent of fats in pastry and its active vitamin C and E and dietary fibre components add functionality, claims its New Zealand based developer.

Adriana Tong, director of Nekta Nutrition, told  that its new bakery ingredient Nektabake acts as a natural stabilizer, flavour enhancer and texturiser and is produced through a proprietary kiwifruit extraction process that relies on ”enhancing the natural attributes of the fruit” so that the pulp behaves like fat.

“The natural pectin in Nektabake acts in a similar manner to shortening, fats and oils and naturally mimics the volume and moisture of fats,” she said.

She said that the ingredient, which is supplied in a paste form (40-45 brix), ranges in colour from dark green to brown and has a pH of 3.3. “It is very cost affective to use and in most cases it will lower costs by 7 to 30 per cent in bakery products,” continued Tong.

Natural product

The company director said Nektabake is processed using all the fruit and contains no additives, or added sugars, artificial ingredients or preservatives, and thus adheres to manufacturers’ current clean label requirements.

It has been in development for many years, said Tong, but was only trial launched two years ago in New Zealand with selective industry players. This month sees its wider release.

Fat replacement

Pre-release evaluation of Nektabake was based on cakes, muffins, biscuits, bread and pastry products with trials demonstrating its successful incorporation into bread products with all the added fat, milk powders and eggs removed, she continued.

“The colour of the bread was a little darker than the control but the addition of soy flour ensured a whiter colour. The softness of the bread was good and improved after three days,” commented Tong.

In terms of pastry, she reports, a baker can remove up to 90 per cent fats but that the flavour will change at this level and in cakes, muffins and cookies it is possible to remove up to 100 per cent of fats but the manufacturer, said Tong, would then need to add a natural flavour to give the butter notes.

The natural fructose content in Nektabake enhances a product’s humectancy, explained Tong, and this helps to keep the bread product in a moist state. As fruit sugars are a food source for yeast, Nektabake will feed the yeast longer and in turn gives more volume, she added.

“In some cases it is best to add Nektabake to water (1 to 1) to make a more liquid form to get the best distribution in bakery products,” said Tong.

Multi-functionality

The Nekta Nutrition director also said that its multifunctional ingredient can prevent ice crystallization and makes most products microwaveable:

“The ingredient works in a way that is very similar to encapsulation, in that it coats the water particles to prevent the water from freezing. And the high moisture binding capabilities of Nektabake means it can take up to four times its own weight in water, thus helping to control water loss in products during microwaving.”

The company said that trials showed the ingredient can also be used in dairy and meat products.

Source: Bakery and Snacks

Food Safety, Ingredients bakery ingredient, fat replacer, Nekta Nutrition

The European Food Safety Authority has published its final guidance for data required to assess new food flavourings, and is looking to build on experience gained during evaluations to establish a positive list.

EFSA reassessing flavouring substances that are already in use in the EU, numbering around 2800 in all. However it has asked for more tests on some 530 substances, including some that have been assessed by bodies like the FAO/WHO’s JECFA committee. The list of flavouring substances needs to be adopted by the end of 2010, and will be included in the new flavouring regulation 334/2008 was adopted at the end of 2008.

New flavouring substances proposed for foods, however, will have to go through a risk assessment procedure, and petitioners will have to supply data to allow EFSA’s panel to form its opinion.

The draft guidance was published in November 2009 for public consultation, and some meetings have taken place between stakeholders, notably between the European Flavour Association (EFA) and EFSA.

The guidance document, was adopted on 20 May but only published this week.

EFSA said its panel considers it important to build on experience gained during the reassessment, and where possible new flavouring substances will be assigned to one of the existing flavouring group evaluations on the basis of structural and metabolic similarities.

For these groups, scientific principles and a group-based approach have already been drawn up. Data requirements for these chemically-defined substances are included in part A of the guidance.

The guidance will be particularly helpful for data submission on new flavourings that cannot be put into any existing group, however, as it sets out a procedure that will allow for individual evaluation. This is included in part B of the guidance.

Generally speaking, the panel will require data on:

• Identity of source materials
• Manufacturing process
• Specifications
• Assessment of dietary exposure
• Toxicological data

New regulation

EFFA president Heinrich Schaper said the main objectives of the new regulation are promoting the effective functioning of the internal market and giving high level of consumer protection.

One major change is the new and more detailed labelling requirements for natural flavours, and the reclassification of nature identical and artificial flavours as ‘flavouring substances’. These new requirements need to be on labels and in documentation by January 2011, but flavour firms’ regulatory and IT teams have been working on making sure the raw materials are classified for compliance for some time.

Food Safety EFSA, food flavourings, lavouring substances

The perspective of food manufacturers and other stakeholders on the costs and benefits of enforcement provisions for the new EU Regulation on food flavourings is being sought from the UK Food Standards Agency during a three month consultation phase.

The EU flavouring regulation 1334/2008 was adopted at the end of 2008 and is due to fully replace directive 88/388/EEC from 20 January 2011.

Inconsistencies in the regulation of flavourings and food ingredients with flavouring properties in the bloc along with differences regarding the application of maximum levels of certain biologically active principles (BAPs) which may be present in flavourings and food ingredients have created the need for uniform EU controls.

The controls aim to “ensure the free movement of safe and wholesome food, and to take into account the new scientific and technological developments for flavourings,” reports the FSA.

Natural compliance

One major change is the new and more detailed labelling requirements for natural flavours, and the reclassification of nature identical and artificial flavours as ‘flavouring substances’.

These new requirements need to be on labels and in documentation by the January 2011 enforcement date. However flavour firms’ regulatory and IT teams have been working on making sure the raw materials are classified for compliance for some time.

Labelling costs

The UK watchdog said it is now seeking an industry response on the familiarisation, enforcement and relabeling costs associated with the new regulation. “Information on the frequency at which businesses re-label products in this category is limited,” said the FSA.

However, it reports that discussions between it and stakeholders have indicated that a relabelling cycle of three years would be a reasonable assumption, and relabelling costs would tend to fall in the range of £1,500 to £3,000 per product.

There are new controls establishing maximum levels of BAPs in certain foods and the UK food agency comments that “in practice, the food manufacturing industry may well choose to move to the use of liquid flavouring extracts made from herbs and spices because the levels of BAPs will be more easily controlled.”

The FSA said that the deadline for receipt of industry comments on the proposals is 14 October 2010.

EFSA assessment

New flavouring substances proposed for foods, under the regulation, will have to go through a risk assessment procedure, and petitioners will have to supply data to allow the European Food Safety Authority to form an opinion.

EFSA is currently reassessing flavouring substances that are already in use in the EU, numbering around 2,800 in all. A definite list, as part of the new law, needs to be adopted by the end of 2010.

The FSA draft consultation document can be read here .

Food Safety, Ingredients biologically active principles, flavouring regulation, food ingredients, labelling requirements

Chocolate manufacturers may benefit from automated testing for Salmonella, according to Swiss robotics supplier Xiril and Germany’s Biotecon Diagnostics.

Biotecon Diagnostics developed the foodproof RoboPrep+ Series to meet the need of a leading international confectionary manufacturer, who has now introduced the system into several of its factories for automated Salmonella testing.

The system combines Xiril’s liquid handling instrumentation with Biotecon’s magnetic preparation technology to enable automation of sample preparation and PCR setup. The results are generated in about 4.5 hours following the complete process of sample preparation, set up and post PCR steps.

The two companies maintain that the Salmonella testing system eliminates manual handling steps except in the initial loading of samples, reagents and consumables, while samples are traceable by barcode, and instruments are available with hood and UV/Air Cleaner.

A stepwise introduction of the technology for other parameters, such as E.coli or Listeria, is in development.

Chocolate, Food Safety Chocolate manufacturers, RoboPrep+ Series, Salmonella

The article 24 of the regulation (EC) no. 1333/2008, which applies as of 20 July, requires that products containing the disputed “Southampton colours” need to bear a warning label “may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children”.

The confectionery industry especially has to master the challenges linked to the growing consumer demand for more naturally formulated products and the requirements of the regulation (EC) No. 1333/2008 of 16 December 2008 on food additives.

Wild has added seven colouring foodstuffs to its Colors From Nature range in order to meet the growing demand for colours from natural sources. These are natural extracts and concentrates from plants, fruits or vegetables. Each of the ingredients corresponds to the type of fruit for which it is named.

New to the Wild colour portfolio are banana, mango, mandarin, redcurrant, elderberry and lime and allow for clean labelling without E-numbers. The new colouring foodstuffs are especially suited for use in confectionery such as hard candies, dragees, jelly gums and ice cream.

Confectionery, Food Safety, Ingredients confectionery, food additives, Southampton colours

Increasing consumer interest in natural, clean label products and naturally coloured foods has lead CSM United Kingdom, along with its European counterparts, to set a July 2010 deadline for the replacement of synthetic AZO colorants with non-AZO colorants used in their products.

‘CSM’s transition to non-AZO colorants across its product portfolio has been in direct response to the increasing number of large and small bakeries who have for some time been eager to use natural colours in their consumer menu. Now, bakers can use every one of our products in the full confidence that they are adhering to EU regulations and meeting consumers’ health concerns associated with AZO colorants,” explains Ivor McKane, business unit director – artisan and industry, CSM United Kingdom.

CSM’s switch to non-AZO colorants anticipates a new EU regulation stipulating that products containing AZO colorants be labelled with the following heath warning: “May have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children.”

Food Safety, Ingredients AZO Colorants, coloured foods, CSM UK