The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has requested public comments on its draft “Guidance on risk assessment concerning potential risks arising from applications of nanoscience and nanotechnologies to food and feed.” The comment period closes February 25, 2011. The draft guidance outlines under what circumstances nanomaterials in food and animal feed should be tested for potential health risks and how the risk assessment process should be conducted. According to the guidance, the risk of an engineered nanomaterial “will be determined by its chemical composition, physico-chemical properties, its hazard characterization and potential exposure.” At an initial stage for the proposed use of a nanomaterial in food or feed applications, where internal exposure, a high level of reactivity or mobility, and persistence of the nanomaterial exist, “in-depth testing” would be appropriate. While the guidance recognizes that characterization parameters “will depend on the nature, functionalities, and intended uses of the” engineered nanomaterial, certain…
Category Archives Legislation, Regulations and Standards
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has announced that final approval was given to a settlement reached with a Nestlé S.A. subsidiary over claims that its children’s drink, BOOST Kid Essentials®, conferred specific health benefits, such as reducing the risk of colds and flu and reducing the duration of acute diarrhea. More information about the settlement appears in Issue 356 of this Update. And the summary of a related lawsuit that the National Consumers League filed against the company can be found in Issue 360 of this Update. The FTC said that this case was the agency’s “first one challenging advertising for probiotics.” See FTC News Release, January 18, 2011.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has issued a final rule establishing a voluntary labeling program for “biobased” products made from renewable biological ingredients. Part of the USDA BioPreferred Program, which also administers procurement preferences for federal agencies, the labeling initiative applies to those products certified as containing a prescribed amount of renewable plant, animal, marine, or forestry material. According to a January 19, 2011, press release, “This new label will clearly identify biobased products made from renewable resources, and will promote the increased sale and use of these products in the commercial market and for consumers.” The BioPreferred Program has apparently designated “approximately 5,100 biobased products” in 50 categories, but estimates that “there are 20,000 biobased products currently being manufactured in the United States.” As USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan stated, “Today’s consumers are increasingly interested in making educated purchasing choices for their families. This label will make those…
Three congressional Republicans assert that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has no authority to weigh economic factors in conducting an environmental review for genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Plant Protection Act. In a January 19, 2011, letter submitted to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, they vilify him for including an option that would impose geographic restrictions and isolation distances on the crop. House Agriculture Committee Chair Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) and Senators Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) contend that the option was included in the final environmental impact statement (EIS) solely “to interfere in planting decisions based on the risk of economic harm due to pollen drift.” According to the congressmen, the option “is a poor substitute for existing options available to farmers to amicably resolve the concerns regarding co-existence of agriculture biotechnology, conventional and organic crops.” They also claim that “the implications…
President Barack Obama (D) has signed an executive order establishing principles for agencies to follow in adopting regulations addressing such matters as food safety, toxic chemicals, labor, energy, and the environment. The order also requires a review of existing regulations to eliminate or revise those “that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome.” A memorandum to agency heads accompanying the order affirms the administration’s commitment “to eliminating excessive and unjustified burdens on small businesses, and to ensuring that regulations are designed with careful consideration of their effects, including their cumulative effects.” A second memorandum calls for federal agencies to develop plans to make their regulatory compliance and enforcement activities “accessible, downloadable, and searchable online.” See Office of White House Press Secretary News Release, January 18, 2011.
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has proposed a no significant risk level (NSRL) of 16 micrograms per day for 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI), a chemical commonly present in foods such as wine, soy sauce and Worcestershire sauce after they have been cooked. The food industry was apparently unable to prevent OEHHA from listing the ubiquitous chemical as a carcinogen under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) and may now be considering challenging the NSRL. The proposed threshold will reportedly require Prop. 65 warnings on thousands of products. The chemical is also apparently used in the production of some pharmaceuticals. OEHHA requests comments by February 21, 2011. See Inside Cal/EPA, January 13, 2011.
The U.K. Food Standards Agency’s (FSA) Nanotechnologies and Food Discussion Group has held its first meeting to consider advancing recommendations from a House of Lords Committee on Science and Technology 2010 report. Fifteen stakeholders from consumer organizations, academia, industry, and government departments met on January 13, 2011, to “exchange information between different sectors within the nanotechnologies and food groups,” according to FSA. Established to address concerns that the U.K.’s food and packaging sectors were too secretive about nanotechnology, the group reportedly plans to meet three or four times annually with a review after 18 months. Issues to be discussed include (i) European Union regulations and definitions, (ii) guidance for assessing nanomaterials, (iii) intelligence gathering on nanotechnology research conducted by the food industry, and (iv) a proposal to create a U.K. register of “nanofoods” on the market. See FSA Press Release, January 12, 2011; FoodProductionDaily.com, January 13, 2011.
The European Commission (EC) has reportedly threatened to regulate the animal feed industry after dioxin-tainted eggs from Germany triggered a widespread investigation involving poultry and pork farms across the region. EC spokesperson Frederic Vincent apparently told reporters that a meeting with industry leaders produced “no concrete proposals” to prevent new contamination, although participants have been given one month to suggest voluntary measures in lieu of legislation. “There will not be European compensation because it is not up to the European Union to fix the damage,” Vincent said. Meanwhile, German MEP Peter Liese has called for “the dioxin crisis . . . to be resolved on a European level,” possibly through use of a monitoring system, as well as European Union (EU) compensation for farmers caught up in food scandals. “Although EU directives regulate in principle we need better controls throughout the EU. There is a lot of trade within the…
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced plans to implement a “phased-down withdrawal” of the pesticide sulfuryl fluoride. The fumigant apparently breaks down into fluoride and is used to control insects in stored grains, dried fruits, tree nuts, coffee and cocoa beans, and in food handling and processing facilities. After reevaluating current science on fluoride, EPA concluded that “although sulfuryl fluoride residues in food contribute only a very small portion of total exposure to fluoride, when combined with other fluoride exposure pathways, including drinking water and toothpaste,” its legal residue limits on food no longer satisfy the safety standard under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Proposing to phase out the pesticide over a three-year period, EPA will accept comments for 90 days after publication in the Federal Register. See EPA Press Release, January 10, 2011.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program (NOP) has issued draft guidance “to address the labeling, composition of and use of percentage statements in ‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food groups).’” Under NOP regulations, conventional non-organic ingredients produced without the use of genetically modified organisms, sewage sludge or ionizing radiations, as well as natural and synthetic substances exempted from the NOP’s prohibited ingredients list, may comprise up to 30 percent of a product labeled “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)).” Such labeling may also display the percentage of organic ingredients in the product, but must be accompanied by the appropriate “made with organic” statement. According to NOP, acceptable variations of percentage claim statements include: (i) ‘‘X% Organic,’’ (ii) ‘‘X% Organic Ingredients,’’ (iii) ‘‘Contains X% Organic Ingredients,’’ and (iv) ‘‘Made with X% Organic Ingredients.” Other percentage claims “may be acceptable as long as they are not misleading,”…
