The EFSA Scientific Committee is seeking comments on a draft scientific opinion that addresses engineered nanomaterials (ENM) used in food and feed applications. Acknowledging the limitations of currently available methods, the draft concludes that “established international approaches” are “a suitable starting point for case-by-case risk assessment of ENMs,” but warns against extrapolating scientific data derived from conventional chemical use. “Possible risks arise because ENM have particular characteristics, due in part to their small size and high surface areas,” the committee stated in an October 17, 2008, press release. “There is limited information on absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion, as well as the toxicity of ENM.” Comments will be accepted through the EFSA website until December 1, 2008. See GMA Biotechnology Digest, October 20, 2008.
Category Archives Legislation, Regulations and Standards
The Canadian government has reportedly declared that bisphenol A (or BPA) is a hazardous substance, and Health Canada will begin drafting regulations to prohibit the importation, sale and promotion of baby bottles made with the chemical. The agency’s scientists apparently contend that the primary exposure for newborns and infants is through the use of such baby bottles, particularly when they are heated, and from the chemical’s migration into infant formula from cans lined with the substance. While the levels of exposure are evidently below those posing a health risk, the government decided to take the action as a precaution, citing research showing that “low-level exposure to BPA, particularly at sensitive life cycle stages, may lead to permanent alterations in hormonal, developmental or reproductive capacity.” Health Canada will also apparently work with industry to reduce bisphenol A in the linings of infant formula cans. Responding to the regulatory initiative, the Grocery…
NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program (NTP) have published a request for information, seeking “input on a number of key research areas that have been identified in recent evaluations of bisphenol A (BPA).” Submissions should be made online by December 1, 2008. Among the research needs identified are (i) “Studies of the concentrations of BPA and metabolites in human blood, urine, breast milk, amniotic fluid, placenta and other tissues, particularly in infants and young children”; (ii) “More complete assessment of sources of human exposure to BPA”; (iii) “The potential for effects on the immune system”; (iv) “The potential for metabolic disruptions leading to obesity, diabetes, or other metabolic disease”; and (v) “The potential for disruptions to the male reproductive tract including effects on sperm quantity and quality.” The information collected will apparently be used to develop future research and testing programs and may appear in future reports. See Federal Register, October…
The FTC has appointed Acting Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell to oversee the antitrust hearing in the commission’s case against the 2007 merger of Whole Foods Market, Inc. and Wild Oats Markets, Inc. The administrative hearing is scheduled to begin February 17, 2009. FTC Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch presided over the scheduling conference in September 2008, and a news source indicated that Whole Foods objected to the possibility that he would be appointed to hear the matter. In its October 20 order, FTC notes that the FTC chair and commissioners, including Rosch, “are committed, subject to the bounds of reasonableness and fairness, to a just and expeditious resolution of any potential appeal from an Initial Decision filed by the Administrative Law Judge in this matter that may be taken to the full Commission.” The administrative proceedings are separate from collateral proceedings pursued in federal court. Further details about…
Japanese health officials have reportedly warned consumers that particular lots of frozen green beans imported from China are tainted with the organophosphate insecticide dichlorvos, resulting in the illness of at least three people. Residents of Kashiwa in the Chiba Prefecture experienced mouth numbness, vomiting and other symptoms after eating adulterated beans manufactured by Shandong-based Yantai Beihai Foodstuff Co. and sold in Japan under the Ingen brand. Japanese regulators stated that the beans contained 6,900 parts per million of the pesticide, or approximately 34,000 times the legal limit. At this level, a 132- pound person would feel acute symptoms if she consumed just 0.07 gram of the product, according to officials. Quarantine authorities have since halted all food imports originating with the company, urging retailers to pull 265 tons of the frozen beans from shelves pending an investigation. The ministry also noted that it was willing to work with Beijing to resolve…
The UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) recently convened a board meeting to discuss reducing the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) testing requirement for cattle. The Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) “recognized an increase in the age at which cattle intended for human consumption are BSE tested would represent a ‘minimal to negligible increase in the risk to human health,’” according to an October 15, 2008, press release. FSA has consequently agreed to “support a move to increase the age at which UK cattle are BSE tested from 30 months to 48 months, subject to a review of current and continued BSE surveillance.” FSA Chief Scientist Andrew Wadge also emphasized that other BSE controls offer sufficient consumer protection. “Prevention of exposure to BSE rests primarily with SRM [specified risk material] controls and not BSE testing,” he was quoted as saying. See FSA Press Release, October 15, 2008.
USDA has announced the first meeting of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee to formulate an agenda for its review of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Slated for October 30, 2008, the meeting also includes presentations on the history of the Dietary Guidelines published every five years by USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services. USDA has encouraged the public to submit written comments before October 24, 2008, to ensure prior transmission to the committee, but will accept comments throughout the committee’s deliberations.
USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is seeking comments on policies that regulate whether processors can use animal raising claims in labeling for meat and poultry products. “[R]ecent experience with labeling claims related to the raising of poultry have led FSIS to initiate a review of its evaluation and approval process for labels of meat and poultry products that contain animal raising claims,” stated the agency in a recent Federal Register notice. Animal raising claims include language that describes a product as “raised without antibiotics”; “not fed animal by-products”; “free range”; “vegetarian fed diet”; and “raised with added hormones.” FSIS currently evaluates such claims “by reviewing testimonials, affidavits, animal product protocols, and other relevant documentation provided by animal producers.” The agency is soliciting public input on this approval process, which also allows meat and poultry establishments to submit certification from outside organizations or entities in support of animal raising claims.…
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine’s (PCRM) Cancer Project has filed a petition with the USDA asking the agency to prohibit processed meats from school cafeteria menus. The initiative follows an advertising campaign warning about the purported cancer risks of processed meat consumption. Further details about the campaign appear in issue 277 of this Update. PCRM advocates a vegetarian diet and opposes animal research. See PCRM Press Release, October 9, 2008; meatingplace.com, October 13, 2008.
The Cornucopia Institute has reportedly filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the USDA and the California Almond Board seeking documents on which the government agencies relied in adopting a rule requiring the pasteurization of raw almonds grown in California. The Wisconsin-based organization has apparently been unable to obtain information and scientific studies supporting the agencies’ position on the effectiveness of pasteurization and “the comparative nutrition, quality, and safety of pasteurized almonds and raw untreated almonds.” According to the Institute’s research director, “We have taken this step because we have been frustrated by the Almond Board and the USDA’s unwillingness to share the science behind the rule, the science that purports to show that treatment with either a toxic fumigant or steam heat is safe and does not affect the almond’s taste and nutritional qualities.” The Institute claims that the rule may have been adopted before scientific studies were complete…
