Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 754
Filtrar
1.
J Nutr ; 149(3): 441-450, 2019 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30805607

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Case reports suggest a link between energy drinks (EDs) and adverse events, including deaths. OBJECTIVES: We examined cardiovascular and metabolic effects of EDs and mixtures providing relevant ingredients of EDs compared to a similarly composed control product (CP) without these components. METHODS: This randomized, crossover trial comprised 38 adults (19 women, mean BMI 23 kg/m2, mean age 22 y). We examined effects of a single administration of a commercial ED, the CP, and the CP supplemented with major ED-ingredients at the same concentrations as in the ED. The study products were administered at 2 volumes, 750 or 1000 mL. RESULTS: Both volumes of the study products were acceptably tolerated with no dose-dependent effects on blood pressure (BP, primary outcome), heart rate, heart rate corrected duration of QT-segment in electrocardiography (QTc interval), and glucose metabolism. After ED consumption, 11% of the participants reported symptoms, in contrast to 0-3% caused by other study products. After 1 h, administration of an ED caused an increase in systolic BP (116.9 ± 10.4 to 120.7 ± 10.7 mmHg, mean ± SD, P < 0.01) and a QTc prolongation (393.3 ± 20.6 to 400.8 ± 24.1 ms, P < 0.01). Also caffeine, but not taurine or glucuronolactone, caused an increase in BP, but no QTc prolongation. The BP effects were most pronounced after 1 h and returned to normal after a few hours. All study products caused a decrease in serum glucose and an increase in insulin concentrations after 1 h compared to baseline values, corresponding to an elevation in the HOMA-IR (ED + 4.0, other products + 1.0-2.8, all P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A single high-volume intake of ED caused adverse changes in BP, QTc, and insulin sensitivity in young, healthy individuals. These effects of EDs cannot be easily attributed to the single components caffeine, taurine, or glucuronolactone. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01421979.


Assuntos
Pressão Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , Bebidas Energéticas/efeitos adversos , Glucose/metabolismo , Frequência Cardíaca/efeitos dos fármacos , Sistema Cardiovascular/efeitos dos fármacos , Estudos Cross-Over , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto Jovem
2.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28516257

RESUMO

Among the various contaminants, the group of natural plant-derived substances in the modern food chain has been generating increasing concern in recent years. The adverse effects encountered may be diverse and pose risks of acute, subchronic or chronic toxicity. The underlying mechanisms of toxicity may be thresholded or be based on interactions with DNA, as for genotoxic carcinogens, for which the existence of a threshold cannot be assumed. This article gives an overview of the major plant-derived contaminants of present concern in the modern food chain and describes their mode of action and adverse effects.


Assuntos
Contaminação de Alimentos/análise , Contaminação de Alimentos/prevenção & controle , Compostos Fitoquímicos/análise , Compostos Fitoquímicos/toxicidade , Medição de Risco , Dronabinol/análise , Dronabinol/toxicidade , Alemanha , Humanos , Ópio/análise , Ópio/toxicidade , Alcaloides de Pirrolizidina/análise , Alcaloides de Pirrolizidina/toxicidade , Tropanos/análise , Tropanos/toxicidade
3.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28058460

RESUMO

Synephrine is a sympathomimetic phenylethylamine derivative that occurs naturally in citrus fruits. It is often added to dietary supplements intended for weight loss and enhancement of sports performance, typically in the form of Citrus aurantium extracts and in many cases in combination with caffeine. The health risks of synephrine were evaluated on the basis of the available toxicological data and in accordance to the EFSA guidance on the safety assessment of botanicals and botanical preparations intended for use in food supplements. In animal studies, orally applied synephrine induced adrenergic effects on the cardiovascular system (increase of blood pressure, ventricular arrhythmias), which were enhanced by the concomitant application of caffeine as well as physical activity. Some human intervention studies investigating the acute effects of synephrine on blood pressure and heart rate of healthy, normotensive test persons indicate that synephrine can induce cardiovascular effects in humans. A series of published case reports of adverse cardiovascular effects (hypertension, cardiac arrhythmia, myocardial infarction) were associated with consumption of synephrine- and caffeine-containing dietary supplements. In conclusion, consumption of high amounts of synephrine, especially in combination with caffeine and physical exercise, is associated with an increased risk of adverse effects on the cardiovascular system. According to the assessment by the BfR (Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung), daily intake of synephrine through dietary supplements should not exceed the median intake from conventional foods.


Assuntos
Fármacos Antiobesidade/efeitos adversos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Substâncias para Melhoria do Desempenho/efeitos adversos , Sinefrina/efeitos adversos , Sinefrina/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Antiobesidade/uso terapêutico , Citrus/química , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos , Substâncias para Melhoria do Desempenho/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Food Chem Toxicol ; 188: 114654, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38608926

RESUMO

In view of a continuous trend in replacing synthetic feed additives and especially flavouring compounds by botanical preparations, different aspects of the safety evaluations of plants and plant-derived preparations and components in feed are discussed. This includes risk assessment approaches developed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for phytotoxins regarding unintentional exposure of target animals and of consumers to animal derived food via carry-over from feed. Relevant regulatory frameworks for feed additives and feed contaminants in the European Union are summarised and the essentials of existing guidelines used in the safety evaluation of botanicals and their preparations and components in feed are outlined. The examples presented illustrate how the safety of the botanicals, their preparations and components present in feed is assessed. An outlook on possible future developments in risk assessment by applying new in vitro and in silico methodologies is given.


Assuntos
Ração Animal , União Europeia , Medição de Risco , Ração Animal/análise , Animais , Humanos , Contaminação de Alimentos/análise , Inocuidade dos Alimentos , Aditivos Alimentares/toxicidade , Aditivos Alimentares/análise
5.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8906, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39086459

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Carum carvi L. (caraway oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel concluded that the use of caraway oil is of no concern up to the following concentrations in complete feed: 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 24 mg/kg for sows, 35 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 11 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, 10 mg/kg for dairy cows, sheep, goats, horses and rabbits, 25 mg/kg for salmonids and dogs. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For cats, ornamental fish and other species, no conclusion can be drawn. The use of caraway oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. The additive under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a respiratory and skin sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to perillaldehyde may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since C. carvi and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

6.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8801, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38764477

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture from the leaves of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. (eucalyptus tincture) when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The product is a ■■■■■ solution, with a dry matter content of ~ 1.86%, which contains on average 0.454% phenolic acids and flavonoids (of which 0.280% was gallic acid), 0.0030% 1,8-cineole and 0.00012% methyleugenol. In the absence of analytical data on the occurrence of mono- or diformylated adducts of acylphloroglucinols with terpenes in the tincture and in the absence of toxicity data, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not conclude on the use of eucalyptus tincture for long-living and reproductive animals. For short-living animals (species for fattening), the additive was considered of no concern at 4 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening, 5 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 6 mg/kg for piglets and rabbits for meat production, 7 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 16 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 14 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep/goats and horses for fattening, and 15 mg/kg for salmonids. These levels were extrapolated to physiologically related minor species. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of eucalyptus tincture up to the levels in feed considered of no concern. Eucalyptus tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. The use of eucalyptus tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the leaves of E. globulus and their preparations were recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

7.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8791, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38756347

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture from the dried flower bud of Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr. & L.M. Perry (clove tincture) when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The product is a ■■■■■) solution, with a dry matter content of ~ 1.66%. The product contains on average 0.511% phenolic acids (of which 0.0344% were flavonoids), 0.039% eugenol, 0.00019% methyleugenol and 0.00008% estragole. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the use of clove tincture is very unlikely to be of safety concern for the target species up to the maximum proposed use level of 50 mg clove tincture/kg complete feed for all animal species, except for horses, for which the proposed use level is 200 mg/kg complete feed. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the use in water for drinking alone or in combination with use in feed should not exceed the daily amount that is considered very unlikely to be of safety concern when consumed via feed alone. No safety concern would arise for the consumer and the environment from the use of clove tincture up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to methyleugenol and estragole may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since the flower buds of S. aromaticum and their preparations were recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

8.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8858, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38993589

RESUMO

EFSA performs dietary exposure assessments for food-producing and non-food-producing animals to deliver risk assessment for mandates on the presence of contaminants in feed. The CONTAM and FEEDAP Panels identified the need to update the animal dietary exposure assessment model used in those assessments in CONTAM Scientific Opinions since 2011 in cases where insufficient occurrence data are available on species specific compound feeds. The Panels proposed in this statement a series of model diets based on groups of feed materials with the possibility to use different feed materials in their formulation. The Panels considered that the currently proposed model diets cover the need of the CONTAM Panel to assess the dietary exposure of animals to contaminants in feed.

9.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8950, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39086458

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of liquid l-lysine base produced with a genetically modified strain of Corynebacterium glutamicum as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. The l-lysine base liquid produced with C. glutamicum NRRL B-67535 and NRRL B-67439 is currently authorised as a nutritional additive for all animal species. The present application is aimed at modifying the current authorisation to include C. glutamicum NRRL B-68248 as a production strain. The new production strain qualifies for the qualified presumption of safety approach when used for production purposes. It was unambiguously identified as C. glutamicum and was shown not to harbour acquired antimicrobial resistance determinants for antibiotics of human and veterinary importance. All the introduced sequences or mutations were considered to be safe, and no viable cells or DNA of the NRRL B-68248 strain was detected in the final product. Therefore, the final product does not pose any safety concern associated with the production strain. l-Lysine base produced using C. glutamicum NRRL B-68248 does not represent a risk for the target species, the consumer or the environment. The additive was considered to be neither irritant to skin or the eyes, nor a dermal sensitiser. l-Lysine base produced with C. glutamicum NRRL B-68248 is considered to be an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-lysine for non-ruminant animal species. For the supplemental l-lysine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it would require protection against degradation in the rumen.

10.
EFSA J ; 22(8): e8951, 2024 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39119057

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-beta-xylanase (produced with Trichoderma reesei MUCL 49755) and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase (produced with T. reesei MUCL 49754) (AveMix® XG 10/AveMix® XG 10 L) for the renewal of its authorisation as zootechnical feed additive for pigs for fattening, minor porcine species for fattening and turkeys for fattening. The applicant declared a change in the carrier material used in AveMix® XG 10 from soybean meal to calcium carbonate + wheat flour or calcium carbonate + sepiolite. The applicant provided evidence that the additive Avemix® XG 10 with calcium carbonate + wheat flour and Avemix® XG 10 L comply with the conditions of the authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) noted that no data were submitted to support compliance of the formulation of Avemix® XG 10 with calcium carbonate + sepiolite with the conditions of the authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that both forms of the additive remain safe for pigs for fattening, minor porcine species for fattening and turkeys for fattening, consumers and the environment. Regarding the safety for the user, Avemix® XG 10 formulated with calcium carbonate + sepiolite and Avemix® XG 10 L are not irritant to skin and eyes. No conclusions on the irritation potential of Avemix® XG 10 formulated with calcium carbonate + wheat flour could be drawn. The additive in all its formulations is considered a respiratory and skin sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

11.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8852, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39010866

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-beta-xylanase (produced with Trichoderma reesei MUCL 49755) and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase (produced with T. reesei MUCL 49754) (AveMix® XG 10/AveMix® XG 10 L) as a zootechnical feed additive for weaned and suckling piglets. The additive is already authorised for use in weaned piglets. This scientific opinion concerns the request for the renewal of the authorisation of the additive for weaned piglets and the extension of use to suckling piglets. The applicant declared a change in the carrier material used in AveMix® XG 10 from soybean meal to calcium carbonate + wheat flour or calcium carbonate + sepiolite. The applicant provided evidence that the additive AveMix® XG 10 with calcium carbonate + wheat flour and AveMix® XG 10 L comply with the conditions of the authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal FEED (FEEDAP) noted that no data were submitted to support compliance of the formulation of AveMix® XG 10 with calcium carbonate + sepiolite with the conditions of the authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that both formulations of the additive (powder and liquid) remain safe for the target species, consumers and the environment, and that the extension of use to suckling piglets would not affect these conclusions. AveMix® XG 10 formulated with calcium carbonate + sepiolite and AveMix® XG 10 L are not irritant to skin and eyes. No conclusions on the irritation potential of AveMix® XG 10 formulated with calcium carbonate + wheat flour could be drawn. The additive in all its formulations is considered a respiratory and skin sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation for weaned piglets. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious in suckling piglets at 4000 XU and 900 BGU/kg complete feed.

12.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8854, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39010864

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-beta-xylanase (produced with Trichoderma reesei MUCL 49755), endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase (produced with T. reesei MUCL 49754) and polygalacturonase (produced with Aspergillus fijiensis CBS 589.94) (AveMix® 02 CS/ AveMix® 02 CS L) as a zootechnical feed additive for weaned and suckling piglets. The additive is already authorised for use with weaned piglets. This scientific opinion concerns the request for the renewal of the authorisation of the additive for weaned piglets and the extension of use to suckling piglets. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of the authorisation. There was no new evidence that would lead the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) to reconsider its previous conclusions that the additive is safe for weaned piglets, the consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. This conclusion applied also to the new target species (suckling piglets) for which a request for an extension of use was made. The additive in both formulations (powder and liquid) is not irritant to skin or eyes but should be considered a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation for weaned piglets. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious in suckling piglets at 2140 XU, 1230 BGU and 46 PGLU/kg complete feed.

13.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8798, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38764478

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of tinctures obtained from the dried leaves of Ginkgo biloba L. (ginkgo tinctures) when used as sensory additives. The tinctures are water/ethanol solutions with a dry matter content of 5.7% (tincture A) and 3.0% (tincture B). The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additives under assessment are safe for the target species at the following concentrations in complete feed: (i) ginkgo tincture A at 240 mg/kg for horses and 750 mg/kg for dogs; (ii) ginkgo tincture B at 600 mg/kg for horses and 50 mg/kg for all other animal species. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of ginkgo tinctures up to the maximum proposed use level in feed for the target species. The tinctures should be considered as irritants to skin and eyes, and as dermal and respiratory sensitisers. The use of ginkgo tinctures at the proposed use levels in feed for the target species is not considered to be a risk to the environment. While the available data indicate that Ginkgo preparations have a distinctive flavour profile, there is no evidence that ginkgo tinctures would impart flavour to a food or feed matrix. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the efficacy of the additives.

14.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8799, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38756350

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the wood of Juniperus deppeana Steud. (cedarwood Texas oil), when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, sheep, goats, horses, dogs, salmonids and ornamental fish. For the other species, the calculated safe concentrations in complete feed were 5 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 8 mg/kg for laying hens, 7 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 10 mg/kg for piglets, 12 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 14 mg/kg for sows and dairy cows, 8.5 mg/kg for rabbits and 4 mg/kg for cats. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive was considered safe at 4 mg/kg complete feed. The use of cedarwood Texas oil in water for drinking was considered safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumers and the environment were identified following the use of the additive up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Since the individual components of cedarwood Texas oil are recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

15.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8795, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38751505

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of ROVABIO® ADVANCE (liquid and solid) which contains endo-1,4-beta-xylanase and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced with Talaromyces versatilis IMI 378536 and DSM 26702 as a zootechnical feed additive for weaned piglets at the recommended use level of 1800 U xylanase and 1250 U glucanase per kg feed. In a previous assessment, three long-term trials in weaned piglets were submitted. Two of them were considered to support the efficacy of the additive while a third trial was not further considered due to the large number of veterinary treatments applied. A new trial was provided to support the efficacy of the additive, but it did not show a significant improvement of the performance parameters at the minimum recommended use level. Due to the lack of sufficient data, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of the additive for the target species.

16.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8797, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38751508

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of the feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-ß-xylanase (produced with Trichoderma reesei CBS 143953), subtilisin (produced with Bacillus subtilis CBS 143946) and α-amylase (produced with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens CBS 143954) (Avizyme® 1505) as a zootechnical feed additive for all poultry species. The additive is authorised in feed for chickens and turkeys for fattening, ducks and laying hens. In 2020, the FEEDAP Panel issued an opinion for the renewal of the authorisation of the additive for the species/categories for which there is an authorisation, a reduction of the minimum recommended level in turkeys for fattening and the extension of use to all poultry species. In that assessment, the Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive due to uncertainties on the characterisation of the production strains and the possible presence of their viable cells and DNA in the final product. Moreover, limitations were identified in the xylanase specifications and xylanase method of analysis. The applicant submitted information to address the limitations previously identified. The Panel concluded that the additive is safe for the target species under the proposed conditions of use. The use of Avizyme® 1505 in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumer and the environment. The additive is a mild irritant to skin and eyes; it is not a dermal sensitiser but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive is efficacious in ducks at 75 U endo-1,4-ß-xylanase, 1000 U subtilisin and 100 U α-amylase/kg of complete feed. In other poultry species for fattening (including turkeys), reared for breeding and reared for laying, the additive is efficacious at 187.5 U endo-1,4-ß-xylanase, 2500 U subtilisin and 250 U α-amylase per kg of complete feed and at 300 U endo-1,4-ß-xylanase, 4000 U subtilisin and 400 U α-amylase per kg of complete feed for all poultry species for laying (except for ducks).

17.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8790, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38784838

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of citronella oil obtained from the leaves of Cymbopogon nardus (L.) Rendle, when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that citronella oil from C. nardus is of low concern for long-living and reproductive animals at the use levels in complete feed of 3.5 mg/kg for laying hens and rabbits, 6 mg/kg for sows and dairy cows, 9.5 mg/kg for sheep/goats and horses, 2.0 mg/kg for cats and 10 mg/kg for dogs. For short-living animals (species for fattening), the additive was considered of no concern at concentrations of 18 mg/kg in chickens for fattening, 24 mg/kg in turkeys for fattening, 20 mg/kg for piglets, pigs for fattening, veal calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, sheep/goats for meat production, horses for meat production and rabbits for meat production, and 30 mg/kg for salmonids. The conclusions were extrapolated to physiologically related minor species. For any other species, the additive is considered of low concern at 2.0 mg/kg complete feed. The use of citronella oil in animal feed is expected to be of no concern for the consumers and for the environment. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to methyleugenol may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since the leaves of C. nardus and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

18.
EFSA J ; 22(7): e8901, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39036774

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of calcium D-pantothenate for the renewal of its authorisation as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. The additive calcium D-pantothenate is already authorised for use in all animal species (3a841). The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of the authorisation and that the production process has not been modified. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment. Calcium D-pantothenate is not irritant to skin and eyes and is not a skin sensitiser. The present application for renewal of the authorisation does not include any modification proposal that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive, and therefore, there is no need for re-assessing the efficacy.

19.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8789, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38720963

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate (Plexomin® L-Fe) for all animal species. The additive has not been previously authorised as a feed additive in the European Union (EU). The safety of the additive for the target species, consumer, user and the environment has already been assessed in previous opinions. However, the efficacy remained inconclusive due to the absence of evidence of the bioavailability of the iron contained in the additive in the trials submitted either with chickens for fattening or with weaned piglets. For the present assessment, the applicant submitted a recalculation of the previous data on weaned piglets, which did not show evidence of bioavailability. Therefore, in the absence of adequate data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate for all animal species.

20.
EFSA J ; 22(5): e8800, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38711807

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of the authorisation of l-cystine as nutritional feed additive. The additive is authorised for use in all animal species (3c391). The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed concluded that the use of the feed additive in animal nutrition remains safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. As regards the safety for the user, l-cystine is not an irritant to skin or eyes and is not a skin sensitiser. Exposure by inhalation of persons handling the additive cannot be excluded. The present application for the renewal of the authorisation does not include any modification proposal that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive and therefore there is no need for reassessing the efficacy.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA