scholarly journals Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

2016 ◽  
Vol 70 (8) ◽  
pp. 741-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J Portier ◽  
Bruce K Armstrong ◽  
Bruce C Baguley ◽  
Xaver Baur ◽  
Igor Belyaev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
International Agency

scholarly journals What counts as expertise? The case of glyphosate and Jasanoff’s ‘three-body problem’

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-182
Author(s):  
Caer Smyth
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Body Problem ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Agency ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Three Body Problem ◽  
Expert Advisory ◽  
Three Body

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organisation published a monograph stating that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, Monsanto’s leading herbicide, was ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’. Shortly after this, the European Food Safety Authority re-assessed glyphosate’s licence for use in the European Union, and deemed it to be safe for human use. Both of these expert advisory bodies faced condemnation and accusations of political bias as a result of these assessments. Employing Jasanoff’s ‘three-body problem’, this article examines the conflicting conclusions of the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the European Food Safety Authority, exploring what the contested assessments of glyphosate reveal about the entangled relationship between scientific expertise and law-making.

scholarly journals Sterigmatocistin – prekursor aflatoksina B1 u hrani i hrani za životinje

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
Tina Lešić ◽  
Ivana Kmetič ◽  
Jelka Pleadin ◽  
Teuta Murati ◽  
Manuela Zadravec ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
International Agency

Sterigmatocistin je mikotoksin kojeg sintetiziraju uglavnom plijesni iz roda Aspergillus te u manjoj mjeri iz rodova Emericella, Chaetomium, Humicola i Botryotrichum. Ovaj mikotoksin je prekursor u biosintezi aflatoksina, njemu slične kemijske strukture, pa su tako i toksični učinci sterigmatocistina slični onima aflatoksina B1. Sterigmatocistin pokazuje brojne toksične učinke u organizmu, uključujući karcinogeno i mutageno djelovanje, te je i Međunarodna agencija za istraživanje raka (engl. International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC) sterigmatocistin uključila u skupinu 2B potencijalnih karcinogena za ljude. Podaci o prisutnosti sterigmatocistina u hrani i hrani za životinje su ograničeni, te je od strane Europske agencije za sigurnost hrane (eng. European Food Safety Authority, EFSA), s ciljem procjene rizika izloženosti ljudi ovom mikotoksinu, dana preporuka za prikupljanje podataka o njegovoj pojavnosti uz primjenu visokoosjetljivih analitičkih metoda. Sterigmatocistin je do sada pronađen u hrani za životinje, žitaricama, kruhu, orašastim plodovima, zrnima kave, začinima, pivu te siru. Kako bi se spriječila kontaminacija namirnica te negativni učinci sterigmatocistina na zdravlje ljudi i životinja, jedan od ključnih čimbenika predstavlja prevencija rasta toksikotvornih plijesni.

scholarly journals Caffeine Health Claims on Sports Supplement Labeling. Analytical Assessment According to EFSA Scientific Opinion and International Evidence and Criteria

Molecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (7) ◽  
pp. 2095
Author(s):  
Pedro Estevan Navarro ◽  
Isabel Sospedra ◽  
Alejandro Perales ◽  
Cristina González-Díaz ◽  
Rubén Jiménez-Alfageme ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Endurance Performance ◽  
Food Supplement ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Strength Performance ◽  
Scientific Opinion ◽  
Term Performance

Caffeine is a food supplement widely consumed by athletes, but it has not been established. So far, the veracity of their labeling in terms of the dosage and cause/effect relationship aimed at the consumer. The aim is to analyze the health claims and the dosage presented on the labeling of caffeine supplements and to evaluate if they follow the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and international criteria. A descriptive cross-sectional study of a sample of caffeine supplements was carried out. The search was done through the Amazon and Google Shopping web portals. In order to assess the adequacy of the health claims, the guidelines of reference established by European Food Safety Authority were compared to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, International Olympic Committee, and Australian Institute of Sport guidelines; in addition, recent systematic reviews were addressed. A review of labels of 42 caffeine supplements showed that, in less than 3% of the products were the health claims supported by the recommendations and by the labeled quantity of caffeine. The claims that fully complied the recommendations were, “improves or increases endurance performance”, “improves strength performance”, or “improves short-term performance”. In most cases, the recommended dosage was 200 mg/day for these products, which is the minimum for the caffeine effects to be declared. The rest of the health claims were not adequate or need to be modified. Most of the health claims identified indicated an unproven cause and effect, which constitutes consumer fraud, and so must be modified or eliminated.

Why the European Food Safety Authority was right to reject health claims for probiotics

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.B. Katan
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Medical Claims ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Legal Fiction ◽  
Health And Well Being

Probiotics are microbes that are claimed to promote health and well-being when added to foods. However, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has so far advised negatively about health claims for probiotics. Companies and scientists have protested against these rejections, sometimes in vigorous language. I argue that EFSA could not have acted differently, given EU regulations and the lack of convincing evidence for some of the claimed effects of probiotics on human health and well-being. One EU regulation that makes it hard to demonstrate the benefits of probiotics is the prohibition of medical claims, i.e. claims that a food prevents or cures a disease. If this prohibition did not exist, manufacturers of nutritional treatments might circumvent the costly procedures required for drugs, and market their products to ill people without thorough proof that they are effective and safe. However, the prohibition is also a legal fiction, because promotion of health and prevention of disease is largely the same thing. EFSA has recently indicated that it will allow health claims based on the ability of probiotics to reduce infections. To a certain extent, this abolishes the distinction between health claims and medical claims. It remains to be seen if probiotics producers can convince EFSA that their products prevent or cure infections and other diseases in humans.

scholarly journals Inventory of microbial species with a rationale: a comparison of the IDF/EFFCA inventory of microbial food cultures with the EFSA Biohazard Panel qualified presumption of safety

2019 ◽  
Vol 366 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i83-i88
Author(s):  
F Bourdichon ◽  
S Laulund ◽  
P Tenning
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Food Safety ◽  
Food Chain ◽  
European Food Safety Authority ◽  
Human Consumption ◽  
Microbial Species ◽  
Food Cultures ◽  
Food And Feed ◽  
Microbial Strains ◽  
International Dairy Federation

ABSTRACT In order to provide a harmonised preassessment to support risk assessment performed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the Biohazard Panel in 2007 published guidelines for evaluation of the safety of a strain included in the food chain, the Qualified Presumption of Safety (QPS). Since 2008, the Biohazard Panel has published on a regular basis an update of the microbial strains submitted for approval and extends the list of species which have been granted QPS status. The International Dairy Federation (IDF) and the European Food and Feed Cultures Association (EFFCA) have, since 2002, been conducting a project on the safety demonstration of microbial food cultures (MFCs). Following the publication of IDF Bulletin 377–2002, an inventory of MFCs was published in IDF Bulletin 455–2012 and updated most recently in IDF Bulletin 495–2018. These two lists developed by EFSA (QPS) and IDF/EFFCA both propose as an outcome an inventory of microbial species that are safe for human consumption. To avoid confusion when these two inventories are compared, this review attempts to explain the rationale that was used to develop them and explain how the two lists should be understood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document