Safety Assessment of Ginkgo biloba-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 10 Ginkgo biloba-derived ingredients, which are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as skin conditioning agents or antioxidants. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. The Panel was concerned about the presence of ginkgolic acid in cosmetics. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities. The Panel concluded that 5 Ginkgo biloba leaf-derived ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be non-sensitizing; data are insufficient to determine the safety of the remaining 5 ingredients under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations.

Safety Assessment of Hops as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Humulus Lupulus (Hops) Extract (reported functions include antimicrobial agent and hair conditioning agent) and Humulus Lupulus (Hops) Oil (reported function is fragrance). The Panel reviewed the relevant data related to these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. For these ingredients, the Panel was concerned about the presence of 8-prenylnaringenin, ß-myrcene, and quercetin in cosmetics, which could result in estrogenic effects, dermal irritation, and genotoxicity, respectively. Industry should use current good manufacturing practices to limit impurities and constituents of concern. The Panel concluded that Humulus Lupulus (Hops) Extract and Humulus Lupulus (Hops) Oil are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration when formulated to be non-sensitizing.

A botanical reference set illustrating a weight of evidence approach for skin sensitization risk assessment.

Recent years have seen an increase in the use of botanicals and natural substances (BNS) in consumer products such as cosmetics and household care products. Most work conducted to date to assess botanicals for human safety has focused their use as dietary supplements and thus on systemic toxicity. However, the induction of skin sensitization is a possible adverse effect of natural products in particular those that come into skin contact, especially for cosmetics that remain on the skin and are not rinsed off following use. Assessments of BNS ingredients are often challenging for a number of reasons: the BNS are complex mixtures that can be of mostly unknown composition; the composition can be highly variable even within the same plant species and dependent on how processed; the physical form of the BNS raw material can vary from a highly concentrated powdered extract to a liquid extract containing only a small percentage of the BNS; testing of the BNS raw materials in New Approach Methods (NAM) has uncertainty as these methods are often not developed or validated for complex mixtures. In this study, a reference set of 14 selected BNS which span the range of skin sensitization potential was complied. These data were used in a Weight of Evidence (WoE) approach to evaluate their skin sensitization potential with each of the data rich BNS being classified as either having strong evidence of inducing skin sensitization based on human topical use history, animal data, clinical data, composition data and NAM data, or having some but more limited (weak) evidence of inducing skin sensitization, or having strong evidence of no skin sensitization potential. When available data have sufficient potency related information, sensitization potency assessment is also provided based on WoE, classifying these BNS as either strong, moderate, or weak sensitizers, or non-sensitizers. An outline for a BNS skin sensitization risk assessment framework is proposed starting with exposure-based waiving and WoE assessment for higher exposures. In addition to demonstrating the application of the WoE approach, the reference set presented here provides a set of 'data rich' botanicals which cover a range of sensitization potencies that could be used for evaluating existing test methods or aid in the development of new predictive models for skin sensitization.

Amended Safety Assessment of Mentha piperita (Peppermint)-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of M piperita (peppermint)-derived ingredients. The Panel reviewed data relevant to the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituent(s) of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel concluded that M piperita (Peppermint) Oil, Extract, Leaf, and leaf-derived ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration when formulated to be non-sensitizing, and that the available data are insufficient for determining that M piperita (Peppermint) Flower/Leaf/Stem Extract, M piperita (Peppermint) Flower/Leaf/Stem Water, and M piperita (Peppermint) Meristem Cell Culture are safe under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations.

Cottonseed Glyceride and Hydrogenated Cottonseed Glyceride.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety reviewed newly available studies since their original assessment in 2001, along with updated information regarding product types and concentrations of use, and confirmed that Cottonseed Glyceride and Hydrogenated Cottonseed Glyceride are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the practices of use and concentration as described in this report, provided that established and imposed limits on gossypol, heavy metals, and pesticide concentrations are not exceeded.

Dioscorea Villosa (Wild Yam) Root Extract.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety reviewed updated information that has become available since their original assessment from 2004, along with updated information regarding product types, and frequency and concentrations of use, and reaffirmed their original conclusion that Dioscorea Villosa (Wild Yam) Root Extract is safe as a cosmetic ingredient in the practices of use and concentration as described in this report.

Safety Assessment of Centella asiatica-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 9 Centella asiatica-derived ingredients, which reportedly function primarily as skin conditioning agents in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients. The Panel concluded that Centella Asiatica Extract, Centella Asiatica Callus Culture, Centella Asiatica Flower/Leaf/Stem Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Cell Culture Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Water, Centella Asiatica Meristem Cell Culture, Centella Asiatica Meristem Cell Culture Extract, and Centella Asiatica Root Extract are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, as described in this safety assessment, when formulated to be non-sensitizing.

Safety Assessment of Apple-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 26 apple-derived ingredients, which reportedly function mostly as skin conditioning agents in cosmetic products. Because apple-derived ingredients may be obtained from different apple cultivars, the composition of ingredients derived from different cultivars should be similar to that of ingredients reviewed in this safety assessment. Additionally, industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients and concluded that 21 of these ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentrations described in this safety assessment. However, the Panel also determined that the available data are insufficient to determine the safety of Pyrus Malus (Apple) Root Extract, Pyrus Malus (or Malus Domestica) (Apple) Stem Extract, Malus Domestica (Apple) Callus Extract, and Malus Domestica (Apple) Oil.

Dietary Supplements Questioned in the Polish Notification Procedure upon the Basis of Data from the National Register of Functional Foods and the European System of the RASFF.

Dietary supplements (DS) in the countries of the European Union falls within the scope of the food law. DS may, however, contain substances that are simultaneously applied in medicinal products as defined in the pharmaceutical law. The presence of such ingredients may cause problems with the product qualification. The phenomenon of applying such borderline ingredients in dietary supplements may require additional regulations, and ensuring them may be problematic. We conducted an analysis aiming to identify dishonest market practices resorted to by the producers and distributors of non-conforming dietary supplements. We examined mostly questioned DS and compared them with data from the RASFF system and registers of medicinal substances and pharmaceutical entities. The results show that some operators tend to re-notify the same products in response to the initiation of official control procedures. Products in the form of capsules or powders were the most common re-notifications within the 50-100 days. Based on the data obtained, it can be concluded that some entities are obliged to document the safety of the product or its compliance with the regulations, use the imperfection of the notification procedure, and re-notify the questioned product in order to keep it on the market despite potential non-compliance.

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2,4-dimethylbenzyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 62346-96-7.

The MOE is greater than 100. Without adjustment for specific uncertainty factors related to inter-species and intra-species variation, the material exposure by inhalation at 0.0040 mg/day is deemed to be safe under the most conservative consumer exposure scenario.

Safety Assessment of Plant-Derived Proteins and Peptides as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 19 plant-derived proteins and peptides, which function mainly as skin and/or hair conditioning agents in personal care products. The Panel concluded that 18 plant-derived proteins and peptides are safe as used in the present practices of use and concentration as described in this safety assessment, while the data on Hydrolyzed Maple Sycamore Protein are insufficient to determine safety.

[Dangerous herbal preparations being sold by web shops]. / Gevaarlijke kruidenpreparaten te koop via de webshops.

BACKGROUND: A large number of herbal preparations are offered on the internet. Some of these may contain substances not listed on the label. When these are illegal "regular" drugs, this can lead to serious side effects. CASE DESCRIPTION: In January 2021, The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb received 4 reports of side effects after using the herbal preparation Montalin® from Indonesia. Laboratory analysis showed that effective amounts of paracetamol and meloxicam were also present in this herbal preparation. These have been added illegally and are not listed on the packaging. The five web shops that sold this product were ordered to immediately stop trading by order of the Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA). CONCLUSION: Consumers should be careful when purchasing herbal preparations over the internet. It is not always clear what is in it. Certainly if a clear effect is experienced, it may be that (illegally) effective amounts of pharmacologically active substances have been added.

The need for European harmonization of Nutrivigilance in a public health perspective: a comprehensive review.

According to the European Union regulation, some countries have established a pre-market notification system for food supplements while others have not. As this regulation is unfulfilled, a notified and marketed food supplement ingredient in one country may be forbidden in another. Even though food supplements shall not be placed on the market if unsafe, some products may still expose the consumers to risks. The risk is increased by easier access due to worldwide dissemination fostered by the internet and free movement of goods in the European Union. The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed and the Emerging Risks Exchange Network are described. To date, the European Union legislation does not include a provision to establish a dedicated vigilance system for food supplements (Nutrivigilance). Six European Union countries have nevertheless set up national systems, which are presented. The present lack of European Union data collection harmonization, does not allow easy cooperation between countries. This article advocates for creating a coordinated European Nutrivigilance System to detect and scrutinize adverse effects of food supplements. This, to help in directing science-based risk assessments and reinforce the science-based decision of policy makers to improve public health safety.

The Botanical Safety Consortium: A public-private partnership to enhance the botanical safety toolkit.

Botanical dietary supplement use is widespread and growing, therefore, ensuring the safety of botanical products is a public health priority. This commentary describes the mission and objectives of the Botanical Safety Consortium (BSC) - a public-private partnership aimed at enhancing the toolkit for conducting the safety evaluation of botanicals. This partnership is the result of a Memorandum of Understanding between the US FDA, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute. The BSC serves as a global forum for scientists from government, academia, consumer health groups, industry, and non-profit organizations to work collaboratively on adapting and integrating new approach methodologies (NAMs) into routine botanical safety assessments. The objectives of the BSC are to: 1) engage with a group of global stakeholders to leverage scientific safety approaches; 2) establish appropriate levels of chemical characterization for botanicals as complex mixtures; 3) identify pragmatic, fit-for-purpose NAMs to evaluate botanical safety; 4) evaluate the application of these tools via comparison to the currently available safety information on selected botanicals; 5) and integrate these tools into a framework that can facilitate the evaluation of botanicals. Initially, the BSC is focused on oral exposure from dietary supplements, but this scope could be expanded in future phases of work. This commentary provides an overview of the structure, goals, and strategies of this initiative and insights regarding our first objectives, namely the selection and prioritization of botanicals based on putative toxicological properties.

The current use and evolving landscape of nutraceuticals.

The nutraceutical market is currently a high-impact multi-billion-dollar industry, and it is anticipated to grow rapidly over the next decade. Nutraceuticals comprise diverse food-derived product categories that have become widespread due to increased consumer awareness of potential health benefits and the need for improved wellness. This targeted review is designed to identify the current global trends, market opportunities, and regulations that drive the nutraceutical industry. Safety and efficacy concerns are also explored with a view to highlighting areas that necessitate further research and oversight. Key drivers of the nutraceutical market include aging populations, consumer awareness, consumer lifestyle, increasing cost of healthcare, and marketing channels. Although some nutraceuticals hold promising preventive and therapeutic opportunities, there is a lack of a universal definition and regulatory framework among countries. Moreover, there is a lack of adequate evidence for their efficacy, safety, and effectiveness, which was even further highlighted during the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Future prospective epidemiological studies can delineate the health impact of nutraceuticals and help set the scientific basis and rationale foundation for clinical trials, reducing the time and cost of trials themselves. Together, an understanding of the key drivers of the nutraceutical market alongside a consistent and well-defined regulatory framework will provide further opportunities for growth, expansion, and segmentation of nutraceuticals applications.

FEMA GRAS assessment of natural flavor complexes: Eucalyptus oil and other cyclic ether-containing flavoring ingredients.

In 2015, the Expert Panel of the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) initiated a program for the re-evaluation of the safety of over 250 natural flavor complexes (NFCs) used as flavor ingredients. This publication, the sixth in the series, will summarize the re-evaluation of eight NFCs whose constituent profiles are characterized by significant amounts of eucalyptol and/or other cyclic ethers. This re-evaluation was based on a procedure first published in 2005 and subsequently updated in 2018 that evaluates the safety of naturally occurring mixtures for their intended use as flavoring ingredients. The procedure relies on a complete chemical characterization of the NFC intended for commerce and the organization of its chemical constituents into well-defined congeneric groups. The safety of the NFC is evaluated using the well-established and conservative threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept in addition to data on absorption, metabolism and toxicology of the constituents of the congeneric groups and the NFC under evaluation. Eight NFCs derived from the Eucalyptus, Melaleuca, Origanum, Laurus, Rosmarinus and Salvia genera were affirmed as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) under their conditions of intended use as flavor ingredients based on an evaluation of each NFC and the constituents and congeneric groups therein.

FEMA GRAS assessment of natural flavor complexes: Origanum oil, thyme oil and related phenol derivative-containing flavoring ingredients.

In 2015, the Expert Panel of the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) initiated a re-evaluation of the safety of over 250 natural flavor complexes (NFCs) used as flavor ingredients, mostly consisting of a variety of essential oils and botanical extracts. This publication, seventh in the series, re-evaluates NFCs with constituent profiles dominated by phenolic derivatives including carvacrol, thymol and related compounds using a constituent-based procedure first published in 2005 and updated in 2018. The procedure is based on the chemical characterization of each NFC as intended for commerce and the estimated intake of the constituent congeneric groups. The procedure applies the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept and evaluates relevant data on absorption, metabolism, genotoxic potential and toxicology of the constituent congeneric groups and the NFC under evaluation. Herein, the FEMA Expert Panel affirmed the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) status of seven phenolic derivative-based NFCs, Origanum Oil (Extractive) (FEMA 2828), Savory Summer Oil (FEMA 3013), Savory Summer Oleoresin (FEMA 3014), Savory Winter Oil (FEMA 3016), Savory Winter Oleoresin (FEMA 3017), Thyme Oil (FEMA 3064) and Thyme White Oil (FEMA 3065) under their conditions of intended use as flavor ingredients.

Residue behavior, transfer and risk assessment of tolfenpyrad, dinotefuran and its metabolites during tea growing and tea brewing.

BACKGROUND: Tolfenpyrad and dinotefuran are two representative pesticides used for pest control in tea gardens. Their application may bring about a potential risk to the health of consumers. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the residue behavior, transfer and risk assessment of tolfenpyrad, dinotefuran and metabolites from tea garden to teacup. RESULTS: An effective analytical method was established and validated to simultaneously determine tolfenpyrad, dinotefuran and its metabolites (DN and UF) in tea. The average recoveries of tolfenpyrad, dinotefuran, DN and UF were in the range 72.1-106.3%, with relative standard deviations lower than 11.8%. On the basis of the proposed method, the dissipation of tolfenpyrad and dinotefuran in fresh tea leaves followed first-order kinetics models with half-lives of 4.30-7.33 days and 4.65-5.50 days, respectively. With application amounts of 112.5-168.75 g a.i. ha-1 once or twice, the terminal residues of tolfenpyrad and total dinotefuran in green tea were lower than 19.6 and 7.13 mg kg-1 , respectively, and below their corresponding maximum residue limits . The leaching rates of tolfenpyrad and total dinotefuran during the tea brewing were in the ranges 1.4-2.3% and 93.7-98.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Tolfenpyrad and dinotefuran in tea were easily degraded. The RQc and RQa values for tolfenpyrad were 37.6% and 5.4%, which were much higher than for dinotefuran at 24.7% and 0.84%, respectively. The data indicated that there was no significant health risk in tea for consumers at the recommended dosages. The results provide scientific data regarding the reasonable use of tolfenpyrad and dinotefuran aiming to ensure safe tea consuption. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.