Explore the vast range of titles available.

EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of aflatoxins in food. The risk assessment was confined to aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 and AFM1. More than 200,000 analytical results on the occurrence of aflatoxins were used in the evaluation. Grains and grain‐based products made the largest contribution to the mean chronic dietary exposure to AFB1 in all age classes, while ‘liquid milk’ and ‘fermented milk products’ were the main contributors to the AFM1 mean exposure. Aflatoxins are genotoxic and AFB1 can cause hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in humans. The CONTAM Panel selected a benchmark dose lower confidence limit (BMDL) for a benchmark response of 10% of 0.4 μg/kg body weight (bw) per day for the incidence of HCC in male rats following AFB1 exposure to be used in a margin of exposure (MOE) approach. The calculation of a BMDL from the human data was not appropriate; instead, the cancer potencies estimated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives in 2016 were used. For AFM1, a potency factor of 0.1 relative to AFB1 was used. For AFG1, AFB2 and AFG2, the in vivo data are not sufficient to derive potency factors and equal potency to AFB1 was assumed as in previous assessments. MOE values for AFB1 exposure ranged from 5,000 to 29 and for AFM1 from 100,000 to 508. The calculated MOEs are below 10,000 for AFB1 and also for AFM1 where some surveys, particularly for the younger age groups, have an MOE below 10,000. This raises a health concern. The estimated cancer risks in humans following exposure to AFB1 and AFM1 are in‐line with the conclusion drawn from the MOEs. The conclusions also apply to the combined exposure to all five aflatoxins. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Supporting Publications article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1798/full

The European Commission asked EFSA to update their 2006 opinion on ochratoxin A (OTA) in food. OTA is produced by fungi of the genus Aspergillus and Penicillium and found as a contaminant in various foods. OTA causes kidney toxicity in different animal species and kidney tumours in rodents. OTA is genotoxic both in vitro and in vivo; however, the mechanisms of genotoxicity are unclear. Direct and indirect genotoxic and non‐genotoxic modes of action might each contribute to tumour formation. Since recent studies have raised uncertainty regarding the mode of action for kidney carcinogenicity, it is inappropriate to establish a health‐based guidance value (HBGV) and a margin of exposure (MOE) approach was applied. For the characterisation of non‐neoplastic effects, a BMDL10 of 4.73 μg/kg body weight (bw) per day was calculated from kidney lesions observed in pigs. For characterisation of neoplastic effects, a BMDL10 of 14.5 μg/kg bw per day was calculated from kidney tumours seen in rats. The estimation of chronic dietary exposure resulted in mean and 95th percentile levels ranging from 0.6 to 17.8 and from 2.4 to 51.7 ng/kg bw per day, respectively. Median OTA exposures in breastfed infants ranged from 1.7 to 2.6 ng/kg bw per day, 95th percentile exposures from 5.6 to 8.5 ng/kg bw per day in average/high breast milk consuming infants, respectively. Comparison of exposures with the BMDL10 based on the non‐neoplastic endpoint resulted in MOEs of more than 200 in most consumer groups, indicating a low health concern with the exception of MOEs for high consumers in the younger age groups, indicating a possible health concern. When compared with the BMDL10 based on the neoplastic endpoint, MOEs were lower than 10,000 for almost all exposure scenarios, including breastfed infants. This would indicate a possible health concern if genotoxicity is direct. Uncertainty in this assessment is high and risk may be overestimated. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Supporting Publications article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1845/full

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its previous Opinion on nickel in food and drinking water, taking into account new occurrence data, the updated benchmark dose (BMD) Guidance and newly available scientific information. More than 47,000 analytical results on the occurrence of nickel were used for calculating chronic and acute dietary exposure. An increased incidence of post‐implantation loss in rats was identified as the critical effect for the risk characterisation of chronic oral exposure and a BMDL10 of 1.3 mg Ni/kg body weight (bw) per day was selected as the reference point for the establishment of a tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 13 μg/kg bw. Eczematous flare‐up reactions in the skin elicited in nickel‐sensitised humans, a condition known as systemic contact dermatitis, was identified as the critical effect for the risk characterisation of acute oral exposure. A BMDL could not be derived, and therefore, the lowest‐observed‐adverse‐effect‐level of 4.3 μg Ni/kg bw was selected as the reference point. The margin of exposure (MOE) approach was applied and an MOE of 30 or higher was considered as being indicative of a low health concern. The mean lower bound (LB)/upper bound (UB) chronic dietary exposure was below or at the level of the TDI. The 95th percentile LB/UB chronic dietary exposure was below the TDI in adolescents and in all adult age groups, but generally exceeded the TDI in toddlers and in other children, as well as in infants in some surveys. This may raise a health concern in these young age groups. The MOE values for the mean UB acute dietary exposure and for the 95th percentile UB raises a health concern for nickel‐sensitised individuals. The MOE values for an acute scenario regarding consumption of a glass of water on an empty stomach do not raise a health concern. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Supporting Publications article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1940/full

The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific opinion on the risks for animal and human health related to the presence of dioxins (PCDD/Fs) and DL‐PCBs in feed and food. The data from experimental animal and epidemiological studies were reviewed and it was decided to base the human risk assessment on effects observed in humans and to use animal data as supportive evidence. The critical effect was on semen quality, following pre‐ and postnatal exposure. The critical study showed a NOAEL of 7.0 pg WHO2005‐TEQ/g fat in blood sampled at age 9 years based on PCDD/F‐TEQs. No association was observed when including DL‐PCB‐TEQs. Using toxicokinetic modelling and taking into account the exposure from breastfeeding and a twofold higher intake during childhood, it was estimated that daily exposure in adolescents and adults should be below 0.25 pg TEQ/kg bw/day. The CONTAM Panel established a TWI of 2 pg TEQ/kg bw/week. With occurrence and consumption data from European countries, the mean and P95 intake of total TEQ by Adolescents, Adults, Elderly and Very Elderly varied between, respectively, 2.1 to 10.5, and 5.3 to 30.4 pg TEQ/kg bw/week, implying a considerable exceedance of the TWI. Toddlers and Other Children showed a higher exposure than older age groups, but this was accounted for when deriving the TWI. Exposure to PCDD/F‐TEQ only was on average 2.4‐ and 2.7‐fold lower for mean and P95 exposure than for total TEQ. PCDD/Fs and DL‐PCBs are transferred to milk and eggs, and accumulate in fatty tissues and liver. Transfer rates and bioconcentration factors were identified for various species. The CONTAM Panel was not able to identify reference values in most farm and companion animals with the exception of NOAELs for mink, chicken and some fish species. The estimated exposure from feed for these species does not imply a risk. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Supporting Publications articles: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2018.EN-1136/full, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2018.EN-1137/full, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2018.EN-1374/full

High‐pressure processing (HPP) is a non‐thermal treatment in which, for microbial inactivation, foods are subjected to isostatic pressures (P) of 400–600 MPa with common holding times (t) from 1.5 to 6 min. The main factors that influence the efficacy (log10 reduction of vegetative microorganisms) of HPP when applied to foodstuffs are intrinsic (e.g. water activity and pH), extrinsic (P and t) and microorganism‐related (type, taxonomic unit, strain and physiological state). It was concluded that HPP of food will not present any additional microbial or chemical food safety concerns when compared to other routinely applied treatments (e.g. pasteurisation). Pathogen reductions in milk/colostrum caused by the current HPP conditions applied by the industry are lower than those achieved by the legal requirements for thermal pasteurisation. However, HPP minimum requirements (P/t combinations) could be identified to achieve specific log10 reductions of relevant hazards based on performance criteria (PC) proposed by international standard agencies (5–8 log10 reductions). The most stringent HPP conditions used industrially (600 MPa, 6 min) would achieve the above‐mentioned PC, except for Staphylococcus aureus. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP), the endogenous milk enzyme that is widely used to verify adequate thermal pasteurisation of cows’ milk, is relatively pressure resistant and its use would be limited to that of an overprocessing indicator. Current data are not robust enough to support the proposal of an appropriate indicator to verify the efficacy of HPP under the current HPP conditions applied by the industry. Minimum HPP requirements to reduce Listeria monocytogenes levels by specific log10 reductions could be identified when HPP is applied to ready‐to‐eat (RTE) cooked meat products, but not for other types of RTE foods. These identified minimum requirements would result in the inactivation of other relevant pathogens (Salmonella and Escherichia coli) in these RTE foods to a similar or higher extent.

The CONTAM Panel updated the assessment of the risks for human health related to the presence of 3‐monochloropropane diol (3‐MCPD) and its fatty acid esters in food published in 2016 in view of the scientific divergence identified in the establishment of the tolerable daily intake (TDI) in the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (FAO/WHO) report published in 2017. In this update, dose–response analysis was performed following the recent EFSA Scientific Committee guidance on the use of benchmark dose (BMD) approach in risk assessment, and a review of available data on developmental and reproduction toxicity was included. The outcome of this review indicates that in rats short‐term exposure to 3‐MCPD above 1 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day can induce reduced sperm motility associated with reduced male fecundity. Decreased sperm count and histopathological changes in the testis and epididymis were observed following longer treatment periods at higher doses. Regarding increased incidence kidney tubular hyperplasia, BMD analysis using model averaging resulted in a BMDL10 of 0.20 mg/kg bw per day in male rats, which was selected as the new Reference Point (RP) for renal effects. For the effects on male fertility, decreased sperm motility was selected as the most sensitive relevant endpoint and a BMDL05 of 0.44 mg/kg bw per day was calculated. The RP for renal effects was considered to derive an updated group TDI of 2 μg/kg bw per day for 3‐MCPD and its fatty acid esters and was considered protective also for effects on male fertility. The established TDI of 2 μg/kg bw per day is not exceeded in the adult population. A slight exceedance of the TDI was observed in the high consumers of the younger age groups and in particular for the scenarios on infants receiving formula only. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Journal article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4426/full

Background Despite the common use of topical ophthalmic corticosteroids in dogs, detailed reports on systemic and dermatologic adverse effects are limited. Results Nine purpose-bred research Beagles were treated with difluprednate 0.05% ophthalmic emulsion in one or both eyes 2–3 times daily. Some difluprednate treated dogs developed mild to severe alopecia of the periocular region, face, and distal pinna (5/9). The median duration of treatment prior to onset of dermatologic signs for difluprednate treated dogs was 550 days (453–1160 days). Diagnostic testing included complete blood count (CBC) and serum biochemistry, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation testing combined with endogenous ACTH measurement, and skin biopsy. The CBC and chemistry were within normal limits for all dogs. There were varying degrees of suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) axis with difluprednate treatment. Dogs with the most profound alopecic changes had less pronounced HPA axis suppression compared to dogs with no integumentary changes. Skin biopsies demonstrated follicular atrophy and follicular keratosis. When topical difluprednate was reduced to unilateral therapy, the hair regrew on the untreated side of the face. In addition to the affected research dogs, a 7-year old female spayed Chihuahua that was being treated as a clinical patient with long-term difluprednate 0.05% ophthalmic emulsion developed generalized hypotrichosis on the head and body and a potbellied appearance. ACTH stimulation testing revealed suppression of the HPA axis with a mild increase in serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity and a urine specific gravity of 1.016. The combination of clinical signs and laboratory abnormalities was supportive of iatrogenic hyperadrenocorticism. Conclusions In dogs long-term use of difluprednate ophthalmic emulsion results in HPA axis suppression and in some cases iatrogenic hyperadrenocorticism. A novel pattern of localized alopecia is suspected to be related to dermal absorption and local action due to superior potency and penetration compared to other commonly utilized ophthalmic corticosteroids.

In 2018, the EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) adopted a Scientific Opinion on the risks for animal health related to the presence of fumonisins, their modified forms and hidden forms in feed. A no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 1 mg/kg feed was established for pigs. In poultry a NOAEL of 20 mg/kg feed and in horses a reference point for adverse animal health effect of 8.8 mg/kg feed was established, referred to as NOAEL. The European Commission (EC) requested EFSA to review the information regarding the toxicity of fumonisins for pigs, poultry and horses and to revise, if necessary, the established NOAELs. The EFSA CONTAM Panel considered that the term reference point (RP) for adverse animal health effects better reflects the uncertainties in the available studies. New evidence which had become available since the previous opinion allowed to revise an RP for adverse animal health effects for poultry from 20 mg/kg to 1 mg/kg feed (based on a LOAEL of 2.5 mg/kg feed for reduced intestinal crypt depth) and for horses from 8.8 to 1.0 mg/kg feed (based on case studies on equine leukoencephalomalacia (ELEM)). For pigs, the previously established NOAEL was confirmed as no further studies suitable for deriving an RP for adverse animal health effects could be identified. Based on exposure estimates performed in the previous opinion, the risk of adverse health effects of feeds containing FB1–3 was considered a concern for poultry, when taking into account the RP of 1 mg/kg feed for intestinal effects. For horses and other solipeds, the risk is considered low, although a large uncertainty associated with exposure was identified. The same conclusions apply to the sum of FB1–3 and their hidden forms.

Erucic acid is the trivial name of the fatty acid cis‐13‐docosenoic acid and occurs at high concentrations mainly in the seeds of species of the Brassicaceae (e.g. rape seed or mustard seed). The European Commission requested EFSA to deliver a scientific opinion on the risks for animal and human health related to the presence of erucic acid in feed and food. For most humans, the main contributor to dietary exposure to erucic acid was the food group ‘Fine bakery wares’. In ‘Infants’, ‘Food for infants and small children’ was the main contributor to exposure. The heart is the principal target organ for toxic effects after exposure. Myocardial lipidosis was identified as the critical effect for chronic exposure to erucic acid. This effect is reversible and transient during prolonged exposure. A tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 7 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for erucic acid was established, based on a no observed adverse effect level of 0.7 g/kg bw per day for lipidosis in young rats and newborn piglets. Mean chronic exposure of the different groups of the population did not exceed the TDI. The two highest 95th percentile dietary exposure levels were observed for infants (ranging from 1.7 to 7.4 mg/kg bw per day, minimum lower bound (LB) – maximum upper bound (UB)) and other children (ranging from 2.1 to 9.5 mg/kg bw per day, minimum LB – maximum UB), the last max UB estimate being above the TDI. This may indicate a risk for young individuals with high erucic acid exposure. In pigs, levels of erucic acid are unlikely to represent a health concern. However, for poultry, the small margin between the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) and the estimated exposure may indicate a health risk where maximum inclusion rates are applied. Due to the absence of adequate data, the risk for ruminants, horses, fish and rabbits could not be assessed.

In 2016, the EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) published a scientific opinion on the acute health risks related to the presence of cyanogenic glycosides (CNGs) in raw apricot kernels in which an acute reference dose (ARfD) of 20 μg/kg body weight (bw) was established for cyanide (CN). In the present opinion, the CONTAM Panel concluded that this ARfD is applicable for acute effects of CN regardless the dietary source. To account for differences in cyanide bioavailability after ingestion of certain food items, specific factors were used. Estimated mean acute dietary exposures to cyanide from foods containing CNGs did not exceed the ARfD in any age group. At the 95th percentile, the ARfD was exceeded up to about 2.5‐fold in some surveys for children and adolescent age groups. The main contributors to exposures were biscuits, juice or nectar and pastries and cakes that could potentially contain CNGs. Taking into account the conservatism in the exposure assessment and in derivation of the ARfD, it is unlikely that this estimated exceedance would result in adverse effects. The limited data from animal and human studies do not allow the derivation of a chronic health‐based guidance value (HBGV) for cyanide, and thus, chronic risks could not be assessed. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Supporting Publications article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2019.EN-1601/full