Relevant shellfish consumption data for dietary exposure assessment among high shellfish consumers, Western Brittany, France.

Shellfish consumption can be a major pathway of exposure to pollutants for humans. It is fundamental to know if people eat enough shellfish to cause health problems, firstly in high consumers as recreational shellfish harvesters. The objectives of this study were to investigate the types of shellfish eaten, number of meals, portion size, sources of shellfish and shellfish consumption rates among French recreational shellfish harvesters; to determine factors affecting consumption patterns and to examine the reliability of the two methods used: a Food Frequency Questionnaire and a one-month food diary. The mean consumption rates were 11.63 and 26.21 g/person/day for shellfish derived from a self-harvested source only and from all sources, respectively. Harvester consumption rates were between 6- and 15-fold higher than the general French population. The comparison between the FFQ and the food diary showed that results were reliable. Thereby, our results are relevant to assess risk due to shellfish consumption.

Risk assessment of consumption of methylchavicol and tarragon: the genotoxic potential in vivo and in vitro.

Methylchavicol (or estragole), a natural flavouring substance present in tarragon, was confirmed as a genotoxic chemical in the in vitro UDS test in cultured rat hepatocytes and in the in vivo UDS test in hepatocytes of exposed rats. Deep-frozen tarragon was clearly less genotoxic than methylchavicol at equivalent dose levels, and desiccated tarragon was negative. Both forms of tarragon tested in vitro have the ability to decrease significantly the genotoxicity of methylchavicol added to the culture medium at concentrations

Prevalidation of the rat CFU-GM assay for in vitro toxicology applications.

In vitro haematotoxicity assays are thought to have the potential to significantly reduce and refine the use of animals for haematotoxicity testing. These assays are used successfully in all types of studies - however, their use is not so common in human toxicology studies in the preclinical setting, as they are not required for regulatory testing in this case. Furthermore, these assays could play a key role in bridging the gap between preclinical toxicology studies in animal models and clinical investigations. In previous studies, the Colony Forming Unit-Granulocyte Macrophage (CFU-GM) assay has been validated for testing drug haematotoxicity (with both mouse bone-marrow and human cord blood) and for predicting the in vivo human maximal tolerated dose (MTD) by adjusting in vivo data on mouse toxicity. Recently, a Colony Forming Unit-Megakaryocyte (CFU-MK) assay has also been prevalidated for testing drug toxicity toward megakaryocytes. The rat CFU-GM assay has been used by many researchers for its ability to evaluate in vitro haematotoxicity. Although it is not yet available, a standardised procedure for data comparison could be very important, since the rat is the most widely-used species for the in vivo testing of toxicants. This report presents the results of the prevalidation study developed to analyse the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory variability of a standardised operating procedure for this assay and its performance for the in vitro determination of the inhibitory concentration (IC) values of drugs on rat myeloid progenitors (CFU-GM). The results demonstrate that the CFU-GM assay can be performed with cryopreserved rat bone-marrow cells (rBMC). The assay represents a useful tool for evaluating the toxicity of a compound, in terms of both relative toxicity (when different molecules are compared) and the prediction of the degree of in vivo toxicity. The use of this assay could greatly reduce the number of rats used in experimental procedures, and could also contribute to the accumulation of more toxicity data on compounds to be registered according to the criteria established by the European Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) programme.

Combined hazard assessment of mycotoxins and their modified forms applying relative potency factors: Zearalenone and T2/HT2 toxin.

This paper describes a methodology for hazard assessment of groups of related substances for which toxicity data are insufficient, and which utilises, next to conventional toxicological assessments and mechanistic information, the derivation of relative toxicity potency factors (RPFs). Zearalenone (ZEN) and T-2 toxin (T2) and HT-2 toxin (HT2) and their modified forms have been used as examples. A tolerable daily intake (TDI) for ZEN of 0.25 µg/kg bw was established. In vitro and in vivo studies suggested that modified forms of ZEN act via the same mode of action as ZEN (oestrogenicity). Results from in vivo uterotrophic assays were used to establish RPFs, allowing inclusion the different modified forms in a group TDI with ZEN. A TDI for the sum of T2/HT2 of 0.02 µg/kg bw per day and an acute reference dose (ARfD) of 0.3 µg/kg bw for the sum of T2/HT2 was established. In vitro studies show that phase I metabolites of T2/HT2 act via a similar mode of action as their parent compounds, namely protein synthesis inhibition with immune- and haematotoxicity. The phase I metabolites as well as conjugates of T2/HT2 and their phase I metabolites can be included in a group TDI with T2/HT2 applying RPFs.

Re-evaluation of silicon dioxide (E 551) as a food additive.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of silicon dioxide (E 551) when used as a food additive. The forms of synthetic amorphous silica (SAS) used as E 551 include fumed silica and hydrated silica (precipitated silica, silica gel and hydrous silica). The Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) established a group acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified' for silicon dioxide and silicates. SAS materials used in the available biological and toxicological studies were different in their physicochemical properties; their characteristics were not always described in sufficient detail. Silicon dioxide appears to be poorly absorbed. However, silicon-containing material (in some cases presumed to be silicon dioxide) was found in some tissues. Despite the limitations in the subchronic, reproductive and developmental toxicological studies, including studies with nano silicon dioxide, there was no indication of adverse effects. E 551 does not raise a concern with respect to genotoxicity. In the absence of a long-term study with nano silicon dioxide, the Panel could not extrapolate the results from the available chronic study with a material, which does not cover the full-size range of the nanoparticles that could be present in the food additive E 551, to a material complying with the current specifications for E 551. These specifications do not exclude the presence of nanoparticles. The highest exposure estimates were at least one order of magnitude lower than the no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) identified (the highest doses tested). The Panel concluded that the EU specifications are insufficient to adequately characterise the food additive E 551. Clear characterisation of particle size distribution is required. Based on the available database, there was no indication for toxicity of E 551 at the reported uses and use levels. Because of the limitations in the available database, the Panel was unable to confirm the current ADI 'not specified'. The Panel recommended some modifications of the EU specifications for E 551.

Re-evaluation of oxidised soya bean oil interacted with mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (E 479b) as a food additive.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of thermally oxidised soya bean oil interacted with mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (TOSOM) (E 479b) when used as a food additive. The Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) derived an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 25 and 30 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, respectively. There was no reliable information regarding the absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion (ADME) for TOSOM. No adverse effects have been detected in a limited subchronic toxicity study in pigs. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 5,400, the highest dose tested, from a chronic and carcinogenicity study in rats. No genotoxicity data were available. No reliable studies for reproductive or developmental toxicity were available. From the chronic and carcinogenicity study, no lesions in reproductive organs were described and the lack of carcinogenic effect alleviated the concern for genotoxicity at the first site of contact. The Panel concluded that the available toxicological data were insufficient to support the current ADI, in particular, due to the lack of ADME data and absence of developmental toxicity studies TOSOM (E 479b) is only authorised in one food category and only one reported use level that equals the maximum permitted level was submitted. The estimated high (P95) exposure reached an upper value of 10.1 mg/kg bw per day for toddlers. When comparing the highest estimated exposure of 10 mg/kg bw per day in toddlers with the NOAEL of 5,400 mg/kg bw per day (the highest dose tested), the margin of safety (MoS) would be 540. Therefore, the Panel considered the use of TOSOM (E 479b) to be of no safety concern, in particular when considering the limited current use of this food additive. The Panel also recommended some modifications of the EU specifications for E 479b.

Appropriateness to set a group health-based guidance value for fumonisins and their modified forms.

The EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) established a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for fumonisin B1 (FB 1) of 1.0 µg/kg body weight (bw) per day based on increased incidence of megalocytic hepatocytes found in a chronic study with mice. The CONTAM Panel considered the limited data available on toxicity and mode of action and structural similarities of FB 2-6 and found it appropriate to include FB 2, FB 3 and FB 4 in a group TDI with FB 1. Modified forms of FBs are phase I and phase II metabolites formed in fungi, infested plants or farm animals. Modified forms also arise from food or feed processing, and include covalent adducts with matrix constituents. Non-covalently bound forms are not considered as modified forms. Modified forms of FBs identified are hydrolysed FB 1-4 (HFB 1-4), partially hydrolysed FB 1-2 (pHFB 1-2), N-(carboxymethyl)-FB 1-3 (NCM-FB 1-3), N-(1-deoxy-d-fructos-1-yl)-FB 1 (NDF-FB 1), O-fatty acyl FB 1, N-fatty acyl FB 1 and N-palmitoyl-HFB 1. HFB 1, pHFB 1, NCM-FB 1 and NDF-FB 1 show a similar toxicological profile but are less potent than FB 1. Although in vitro data shows that N-fatty acyl FBs are more toxic in vitro than FB 1, no in vivo data were available for N-fatty acyl FBs and O-fatty acyl FBs. The CONTAM Panel concluded that it was not appropriate to include modified FBs in the group TDI for FB 1-4. The uncertainty associated with the present assessment is high, but could be reduced provided more data are made available on occurrence, toxicokinetics and toxicity of FB 2-6 and modified forms of FB 1-4.

Re-evaluation of sodium, potassium and calcium salts of fatty acids (E 470a) and magnesium salts of fatty acids (E 470b) as food additives.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of sodium, potassium and calcium salts of fatty acids (E 470a) and magnesium salts of fatty acids (E 470b) when used as food additives. In 1991, the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) established a group acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified' for the fatty acids (myristic-, stearic-, palmitic- and oleic acid) and their salts. The sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts of fatty acids are expected to dissociate in the gastrointestinal tract to fatty acid carboxylates and their corresponding cations. There were no data on subchronic toxicity, chronic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity of the salts of fatty acids. There was no concern for mutagenicity of calcium caprylate, potassium oleate and magnesium stearate. From a carcinogenicity study with sodium oleate, a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) could not be identified but the substance was considered not to present a carcinogenic potential. Palmitic- and stearic acid which are the main fatty acids in E 470a and E 470b were already considered of no safety concern in the re-evaluation of the food additive E 570. The fatty acid moieties of E 470a and E 470b contributed maximally for 5% to the overall intake of saturated fatty acids from all dietary sources. Overall, the Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical ADI and that the food additives sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts of fatty acids (E 470a and E 470b) were of no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels.

Re-evaluation of propane-1,2-diol (E 1520) as a food additive.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of propane-1,2-diol (E 1520) when used as a food additive. In 1996, the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 25 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for propane-1,2-diol. Propane-1,2-diol is readily absorbed from the gastrointestinal and is expected to be widely distributed to organs and tissues. The major route of metabolism is oxidation to lactic acid and pyruvic acid. At high concentrations, free propane-1,2-diol is excreted in the urine. No treatment-related effects were observed in subchronic toxicity studies. The available data did not raise concern with respect to genotoxicity. Haematological changes suggestive of an increased red blood cell destruction with a compensatory increased rate of haematopoiesis were observed at the highest dose level (5,000 mg/kg bw per day) in a 2-year study in dogs. No adverse effects were reported in a 2-year chronic study in rats with propane-1,2-diol (up to 2,500 mg/kg bw per day). The SCF used this study to derive the ADI. No adverse effects were observed in the available reproductive and developmental toxicity studies. Propane-1,2-diol (E 1520) is authorised according to Annex III in some food additives, food flavourings, enzymes and nutrients and it is then carried over to the final food. Dietary exposure to E 1520 was assessed based on the use levels and analytical data. The Panel considered that for the food categories for which information was available, the exposure was likely to be overestimated. Considering the toxicity database, the Panel concluded that there was no reason to revise the current ADI of 25 mg/kg bw per day. The Panel also concluded that the mean and the high exposure levels (P95) of the brand-loyal refined exposure scenario did not exceed the ADI in any of the population groups from the use of propane-1,2-diol (E 1520) at the reported use levels and analytical results.

Re-evaluation of calcium silicate (E 552), magnesium silicate (E 553a(i)), magnesium trisilicate (E 553a(ii)) and talc (E 553b) as food additives.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of calcium silicate (E 552), magnesium silicate (E 553a) and talc (E 553b) when used as food additives. In 1991, the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) established a group acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified' for silicon dioxide and silicates. The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) recently provided a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of silicon dioxide (E 551) when used as a food additive. The Panel noted that the absorption of silicates and talc was very low; there was no indication for genotoxicity or developmental toxicity for calcium and magnesium silicate and talc; and no confirmed cases of kidney effects have been found in the EudraVigilance database despite the wide and long-term use of high doses of magnesium trisilicate up to 4 g/person per day over decades. However, the Panel considered that accumulation of silicon from calcium silicate in the kidney and liver was reported in rats, and reliable data on subchronic and chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity of silicates and talc were lacking. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the safety of calcium silicate (E 552), magnesium silicate (E 553a(i)), magnesium trisilicate (E 553a(ii)) and talc (E 553b) when used as food additives cannot be assessed. The Panel considered that there is no mechanistic rationale for a group ADI for silicates and silicon dioxide and the group ADI established by the SCF is obsolete. Based on the food supplement scenario considered as the most representative for risk characterisation, exposure to silicates (E 552-553) for all population groups was below the maximum daily dose of magnesium trisilicate used as an antacid (4 g/person per day). The Panel noted that there were a number of approaches, which could decrease the uncertainties in the current toxicological database. These approaches include - but are not limited to - toxicological studies as recommended for a Tier 1 approach as described in the EFSA Guidance for the submission of food additives and conducted with an adequately characterised material. Some recommendations for the revision of the EU specifications were proposed by the Panel.

Risks to human and animal health related to the presence of moniliformin in food and feed.

Moniliformin (MON) is a mycotoxin with low molecular weight primarily produced by Fusarium fungi and occurring predominantly in cereal grains. Following a request of the European Commission, the CONTAM Panel assessed the risk of MON to human and animal health related to its presence in food and feed. The limited information available on toxicity and on toxicokinetics in experimental and farm animals indicated haematotoxicity and cardiotoxicity as major adverse health effects of MON. MON causes chromosome aberrations in vitro but no in vivo genotoxicity data and no carcinogenicity data were identified. Due to the limitations in the available toxicity data, human acute or chronic health-based guidance values (HBGV) could not be established. The margin of exposure (MOE) between the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of 6.0 mg/kg body weight (bw) for cardiotoxicity from a subacute study in rats and the acute upper bound (UB) dietary exposure estimates ranged between 4,000 and 73,000. The MOE between the lowest benchmark dose lower confidence limit (for a 5% response - BMDL05) of 0.20 mg MON/kg bw per day for haematological hazards from a 28-day study in pigs and the chronic dietary human exposure estimates ranged between 370 and 5,000,000 for chronic dietary exposures. These MOEs indicate a low risk for human health but were associated with high uncertainty. The toxicity data available for poultry, pigs, and mink indicated a low or even negligible risk for these animals from exposure to MON in feed at the estimated exposure levels under current feeding practices. Assuming similar or lower sensitivity as for pigs, the CONTAM Panel considered a low or even negligible risk for the other animal species for which no toxicity data suitable for hazard characterisation were identified. Additional toxicity studies are needed and depending on their outcome, the collection of more occurrence data on MON in food and feed is recommended to enable a comprehensive human risk assessment.

Risk to human and animal health related to the presence of 4,15-diacetoxyscirpenol in food and feed.

4,15-Diacetoxyscirpenol (DAS) is a mycotoxin primarily produced by Fusarium fungi and occurring predominantly in cereal grains. As requested by the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) assessed the risk of DAS to human and animal health related to its presence in food and feed. Very limited information was available on toxicity and on toxicokinetics in experimental and farm animals. Due to the limitations in the available data set, human acute and chronic health-based guidance values (HBGV) were established based on data obtained in clinical trials of DAS as an anticancer agent (anguidine) after intravenous administration to cancer patients. The CONTAM Panel considered these data as informative for the hazard characterisation of DAS after oral exposure. The main adverse effects after acute and repeated exposure were emesis, with a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of 32 µg DAS/kg body weight (bw), and haematotoxicity, with a NOAEL of 65 µg DAS/kg bw, respectively. An acute reference dose (ARfD) of 3.2 µg DAS/kg bw and a tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 0.65 µg DAS/kg bw were established. Based on over 15,000 occurrence data, the highest acute and chronic dietary exposures were estimated to be 0.8 and 0.49 µg DAS/kg bw per day, respectively, and were not of health concern for humans. The limited information for poultry, pigs and dogs indicated a low risk for these animals at the estimated DAS exposure levels under current feeding practices, with the possible exception of fattening chicken. Assuming similar or lower sensitivity than for poultry, the risk was considered overall low for other farm and companion animal species for which no toxicity data were available. In consideration of the similarities of several trichothecenes and the likelihood of co-exposure via food and feed, it could be appropriate to perform a cumulative risk assessment for this group of substances.

Re-evaluation of locust bean gum (E 410) as a food additive.

Following a request from European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of locust bean gum (E 410) as a food additive. Locust bean gum (E 410) is an authorised food additive in the EU. Locust bean gum (E 410) as specified in the Commission Regulation (EU) No 231/2012 is derived from the ground endosperm of the seeds of the strains of carob tree, Ceratonia siliqua (L.) Taub. (Family Leguminosae). An acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified' was allocated by the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1981. Although not evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF), it was accepted by the SCF in 1991 for use in weaning food, and in 1994, in infant formulae for special medical purposes. Locust bean gum is practically undigested, not absorbed intact, but significantly fermented by enteric bacteria in humans. No adverse effects were reported in 90-day toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents at the highest doses tested and there was no concern with respect to the genotoxicity and to reproductive and developmental toxicity of locust bean gum (E 410). The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for locust bean gum (E 410), and that there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment for its reported uses as a food additive. However, infants and young children consuming foods for special medical purposes may show a higher susceptibility to gastrointestinal effects of locust bean gum due to their underlying medical condition. The Panel concluded that the available data do not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of locust bean gum (E 410) in these foods for infants and young children.

Appropriateness to set a group health based guidance value for T2 and HT2 toxin and its modified forms.

The EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) established a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for T2 and HT2 of 0.02 µg/kg body weight (bw) per day based on a new in vivo subchronic toxicity study in rats that confirmed that immune- and haematotoxicity are the critical effects of T2 and using a reduction in total leucocyte count as the critical endpoint. An acute reference dose (ARfD) of 0.3 µg for T2 and HT2/kg bw was established based on acute emetic events in mink. Modified forms of T2 and HT2 identified are phase I metabolites mainly formed through hydrolytic cleavage of one or more of the three ester groups of T2. Less prominent hydroxylation reactions occur predominantly at the side chain. Phase II metabolism involves conjugation with glucose, modified glucose, sulfate, feruloyl and acetyl groups. The few data on occurrence of modified forms indicate that grain products are their main source. The CONTAM Panel found it appropriate to establish a group TDI and a group ARfD for T2 and HT2 and its modified forms. Potency factors relative to T2 for the modified forms were used to account for differences in acute and chronic toxic potencies. It was assumed that conjugates (phase II metabolites of T2, HT2 and their phase I metabolites), which are not toxic per se, would be cleaved releasing their aglycones. These metabolites were assigned the relative potency factors (RPFs) of their respective aglycones. The RPFs assigned to the modified forms were all either 1 or less than 1. The uncertainties associated with the present assessment are considered as high. Using the established group, ARfD and TDI would overestimate any risk of modified T2 and HT2.

Re-evaluation of oxidised starch (E 1404), monostarch phosphate (E 1410), distarch phosphate (E 1412), phosphated distarch phosphate (E 1413), acetylated distarch phosphate (E 1414), acetylated starch (E 1420), acetylated distarch adipate (E 1422), hydroxypropyl starch (E 1440), hydroxypropyl distarch phosphate (E 1442), starch sodium octenyl succinate (E 1450), acetylated oxidised starch (E 1451) and starch aluminium octenyl succinate (E 1452) as food additives.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the re-evaluation of 12 modified starches (E 1404, E 1410, E 1412, E 1413, E 1414, E 1420, E 1422, E 1440, E 1442, E 1450, E 1451 and E 1452) authorised as food additives in the EU in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 and previously evaluated by JECFA and the SCF. Both committees allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified'. In humans, modified starches are not absorbed intact but significantly hydrolysed by intestinal enzymes and then fermented by the intestinal microbiota. Using the read-across approach, the Panel considered that adequate data on short- and long-term toxicity and carcinogenicity, and reproductive toxicity are available. Based on in silico analyses, modified starches are considered not to be of genotoxic concern. No treatment-related effects relevant for human risk assessment were observed in rats fed very high levels of modified starches (up to 31,000 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day). Modified starches (e.g. E 1450) were well tolerated in humans up to a single dose of 25,000 mg/person. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for the use of modified starches as food additives at the reported uses and use levels for the general population and that there is no need for a numerical ADI. The combined exposure to E 1404-E 1451 at the 95th percentile of the refined (brand-loyal) exposure assessment scenario for the general population was up to 3,053 mg/kg bw per day. Exposure to E 1452 for food supplement consumers only at the 95th percentile was up to 22.1 mg/kg bw per day.

Approach followed for the refined exposure assessment as part of the safety assessment of food additives under re-evaluation.

This statement describes the approach followed by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) for performing refined exposure assessment in the framework of the re-evaluation of already permitted food additives. Estimation of exposure is obtained through combination of different type of data originating from different sources: food additive concentration is obtained from information provided to EFSA on use levels and/or information obtained by means of analytical measurements. In recent years, the use of market research data has also been used. The statement provides also a description of the three different scenarios used for the exposure assessment of food additives under re-evaluation, from the more conservative regulatory maximum level exposure assessment scenario to more refined ones. Lastly, a description is provided on the approach used for the uncertainty analysis which accompanies the exposure assessment.

Re-evaluation of polyglycerol esters of fatty acids (E 475) as a food additive.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of polyglycerol esters of fatty acids (PEFA) (E 475) when used as a food additive. In 1978, the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) endorsed an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 25 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day previously established by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Absorption of intact PEFA in the gastrointestinal tract was extremely low. PEFA was rapidly and almost fully hydrolysed to polyglycerols and fatty acids in the gastrointestinal tract. The safety of polyglycerols and specific fatty acids has recently been assessed and no adverse effects were identified in the available studies. No adverse effects of PEFA at any dose have been observed in short-term, subchronic or chronic toxicity studies. A no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 9,000 mg/kg bw per day was identified from subchronic studies and of 2,500 mg/kg bw per day from chronic studies, the highest doses tested. No genotoxic potential of PEFA was identified from the limited information available. The reproductive toxicity studies showed no adverse effects of PEFA but had major limitations. Clinical chemistry and urinalysis, from a clinical study with limited information, did not reveal any adverse effects in volunteers receiving up to 300 mg/kg bw per day for 3 weeks. The highest exposure to PEFA used as a food additive was 2.6 and 6.4 mg/kg bw per day in children at the mean and the 95th percentile, respectively, for the non-brand loyal scenario. Considering all the above, the Panel concluded that the food additive PEFA (E 475) was not of safety concern at the reported uses and use levels and that there was no need for a numerical ADI. The Panel recommended some modifications of the EU specifications for E 475.

Re-evaluation of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive.

The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. In the EU, guar gum was evaluated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1970, 1974 and 1975, who allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified'. Guar gum has been also evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) in 1977 who endorsed the ADI 'not specified' allocated by JECFA. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re-evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Guar gum is practically undigested, not absorbed intact, but significantly fermented by enteric bacteria in humans. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested; no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral intake of guar gum was well tolerated in adults. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for guar gum (E 412), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. The Panel considered that for uses of guar gum in foods intended for infants and young children the occurrence of abdominal discomfort should be monitored and if this effect is observed doses should be identified as a basis for further risk assessment. The Panel considered that no adequate specific studies addressing the safety of use of guar gum (E 412) in food categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2 were available. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the available data do not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of guar gum (E 412) in infants and young children consuming these foods for special medical purposes.

Re-evaluation of glycerol (E 422) as a food additive.

The ANS Panel provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of glycerol (E 422) used as a food additive. In 1981, the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) endorsed the conclusion from the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1976 of 'acceptable daily intake (ADI) for man not specified'. The Panel concluded that glycerol has low acute toxicity and that local irritating effects of glycerol in the gastrointestinal tract reported in some gavage studies was likely due to hygroscopic and osmotic effects of glycerol. Glycerol did not raise concern with respect to genotoxicity and was of no concern with regard to carcinogenicity. Reproductive and prenatal developmental studies were limited to conclude on reproductive toxicity but no dose-related adverse effects were reported. None of the animal studies available identified an adverse effect for glycerol. The Panel conservatively estimated the lowest oral dose of glycerol required for therapeutic effect to be 125 mg/kg bw per hour and noted that infants and toddlers can be exposed to that dose by drinking less than the volume of one can (330 mL) of a flavoured drink. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI and no safety concern regarding the use of glycerol (E 422) as a food additive at the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses. The Panel also concluded that the manufacturing process of glycerol should not allow the production of a food additive, which contains genotoxic and carcinogenic residuals at a level which would result in a margin of exposure below 10,000. The Panel recommended modification of the EU specifications for E 422. The Panel also recommended that more information on uses and use levels and analytical data should be made available to the Panel.

Re-evaluation of soybean hemicellulose (E 426) as a food additive.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the re-evaluation of soybean hemicellulose (E 426) as a food additive. Soybean hemicellulose is not absorbed intact, but is extensively fermented by the intestinal microflora in animals and humans. No adverse effects were reported in a 90-day dietary toxicity study in rats at the highest doses tested of 2,430 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for males and 2,910 mg/kg bw per day for females. Furthermore, soybean hemicellulose is not of genotoxic concern. The highest exposure estimates calculated based on the maximum permitted levels were up to 191 mg/kg bw per day for children (95th percentile). Given the limited uses, if any, reported, the Panel considered it probable that the actual dietary exposure to soybean hemicellulose (E 426) would be negligible. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives, the Panel concluded that it is very unlikely that there is a safety concern from the current use of soybean hemicellulose (E 426) as a food additive, and that there is no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake (ADI). The Panel recommended that the amount of residual proteins in E 426 should be reduced as much as possible, and that consumers should be informed of the presence of potentially allergenic proteins in the food additive.