The European Chemicals Agency (EHCA) has announced that in January 2010 its Member State Committee will add acrylamide to the European Union’s Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC). The chemical by-product of high-temperature cooking processes has been linked to cancer in laboratory rats. According to ECHA, the Candidate List represents the first step in the authorization procedure to include SVCHs in Annex XIV of the REACH Regulation, after which time “they cannot be placed on the market or used after a date to be set (the so-called ‘sunset date’) unless the company is granted an authorization.” In addition to 14 other substances, the agency has proposed listing acrylamide as a category two carcinogen and a category two mutagen, but “decisions on the need to subject these substances to authorization will be taken later.”
Category Archives Legislation, Regulations and Standards
The National Consumers League has sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urging the agency to issue industry guidance in a renewed effort “to prevent consumers from being misled by the deceptive labeling of tomato products remanufactured from concentrate.” According to the league, it initiated efforts in 1990 that led the government to define the term “fresh” and require manufacturers to differentiate products prepared directly from fresh ingredients and those made from concentrate. The organization contends that “the marketplace once again is littered with false and misleading labels for tomato products claiming to be packed or made directly from fresh tomatoes.” The letter claims that food companies are misleading consumers by using phrases such as “packed full of premium vine-ripened tomatoes,” “packed from 100 percent California tomatoes” and “picks the freshest tomatoes,” to describe products “made from industrial tomato concentrate.” Citing FDA regulations requiring “from concentrate” or…
The Investor Environmental Health Network (IEHN) has requested that the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) include in its 2010 2015 strategic plan the development of guidance for public companies requiring narrative disclosures in their annual financial reports about emerging risks such as nanotechnology. Attached to the IEHN November 15, 2009, letter is a report titled Bridging the Credibility Gap: Eight Corporate Liability Accounting Loopholes that Regulators Must Close that focuses on asbestos and nanomaterials “to assess the effectiveness of the existing financial disclosure regulations, and to develop recommendations for improvements.” According to IEHN, the report “found some companies heavily investing in nanomaterials today that appear to be engaging in inadequate or misleading disclosures related to potential hazards and the resultant financial implications. In particular, some of the materials being developed by nanomaterials companies have already been found to bear significant hazard similarities to asbestos, but this information is not contained in any…
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently announced the availability of its semiannual regulatory agenda, which includes plans to conduct a peer review of the health effects and risks associated with diacetyl in the workplace. According to DOL, “emerging hazards such as food flavorings containing diacetyl and airborne infectious diseases place American workers at risk of serious disease and death.” Although DOL opted not to grant an emergency temporary standard petition filed by two workers’ unions in 2006, the department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has noted that “evidence from NIOSH [the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health] and other sources indicated that employee exposure to diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacetyl is associated with bronchilitis obliterans, a debilitating and potentially fatal disease of the small airways in the lung.” As part of its intent to develop diacetyl regulations, OSHA in July 2009 completed a panel report on a draft standard in accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published a notice seeking public comment on a proposed experimental study that would examine consumer reaction to possible modifications in the nutrition facts labeling format. The study results will reportedly help the agency understand whether label modifications “could help consumers to make informed food choices.” FDA intends to randomly select 3,600 people to review nutrition facts labels from a selection of different formats, foods and nutrition information, and then judge their reactions as to the foods’ “nutritional attributes and overall healthfulness” and whether the labels help “calculate calories and estimate serving sizes to meet objectives.” FDA invites comments on (i) whether the information collected “will have practical utility”; (ii) the “validity of the methodology and assumptions used”; (iii) “ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected”; and (iv) “ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information.”…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a proposed rule that would amend the agency’s animal-food regulations by requiring manufacturers to list the common or usual names of FDA-certified color additives on animal food labels, including animal feeds and pet foods. The amendment would make the regulations consistent with those that apply to human food and suggests how color additives not certified by FDA should be declared on the ingredient list of animal foods. According to FDA, the proposal responds to the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990, which modified the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by requiring food labels to list the common or usual names of all FDA-certified color additives. The 1990 amendments apply both to human and animal foods, but apparently regulations pertaining to animal foods have yet to be issued. Written comments will be accepted until February 22, 2010. See Federal Register, November…
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has introduced legislation (S.B. 2819) “to require that food producers take responsibility for keeping food free from harmful pathogens,” according to a November 30, 2009, press release. The Processed Food Safety Act would amend the Poultry Products Inspection Act, Federal Meat Inspection Act and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to “prohibit the sale of any processed poultry, meat and FDA-regulated food that has not either undergone a pathogen reduction treatment, or been certified to contain no verifiable traces of pathogens.” The Act also includes provisions to (i) require that “labels on ground beef, or any other ground meat product, specifically name every cut of meat that is contained in the product,” and (ii) close loopholes “in current laws that allow for producers to add coloring, synthetic flavorings and spices to their products without informing the consumer.” In announcing the bill, Feinstein highlighted a recent…
Plaintiffs’ lawyer William Marler has apparently filed a second lawsuit against New York-based Fairbank Farms for injury allegedly caused by consumption of E. coli-tainted ground beef. According to Marler, the suit has been filed in a Maine state court on behalf of a woman who was hospitalized for six days after consuming meat produced by Fairbank Farms. Her cultures allegedly tested positive for the same E. coli strain found in the company’s recalled meat. See Food Poison Journal, November 17, 2009. Meanwhile, Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) has called on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General to investigate the method that meat processors and the agency use to verify that ground beef is free of the bacterium. In her November 12 letter, DeLauro discusses the Fairbank Farms outbreak and notes that the company’s facility sampled its products every 10 to 20 minutes. She states, “However, despite these precautions, it…
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is requesting written comments on two proposals. One would establish a “no significant risk level” for fumonisin B1, a chemical present in many corn-based food products, at a value that is apparently significantly lower than safe levels set by other regulators and could expose many companies to the risk of litigation under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65). Comments are due by November 23, 2009. According to an industry spokesperson, the proposed level of 1.5 micrograms per day is “very, very low,” particularly when compared with Food and Drug Administration standards and the standards of international regulatory bodies. A snack food company requested in 2008 that OEHHA establish a “safe use determination” for fumonisin B1, which would mean that products containing this naturally occurring chemical do not pose a health risk. The request is still pending. See Inside Cal/EPA, November 13, 2009. Meanwhile, OEHHA…
The Canadian House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Health (HESA) recently heard testimony from Nestlé S.A. and Kellogg Co. representatives about dietary salt reduction. The representatives reportedly backed recent efforts to reduce salt levels in popular products, noting that breakfast cereals account for only 3 percent of the salt in the Canadian diets. Nestlé Director of Corporate Affairs Catherine O’Brien also stated that the company currently complies with the Heart and Stroke Foundation’s Health Check™ program, which has worked to remove 500,000 kilograms of salt from the food supply in the past 4 years. “We must balance the push of science with the pull of the market—consumers will simply not compromise on taste, therefore it must be a priority alongside improved health,” O’Brien was quoted as saying. According to media sources, some HESA members have expressed frustration with forthcoming federal salt reduction targets because they are not mandatory. “I frankly don’t…
