RESUMO
The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet, VKM) has on request of The Norwegian Food Safety Authority performed a risk assessment of furan intake in the Norwegian population based on the most recent national food consumption surveys. National occurrence data of furan concentrations in food were preferentially used in the risk assessment. When national data were lacking, VKM has used occurrence data of furan from other countries. The assessment has been performed by the VKM Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food and Cosmetics and the VKM Panel on Contaminants. Furan is a volatile and lipophilic compound formed in a variety of heat-treated commercial foods and contributes to the sensory properties of the product. The substance has been found in a number of foods such as coffee, canned and jarred foods including baby food containing meat and various vegetables. High concentrations of furan have been found in coffee and the presence of furan in jarred baby food and infant formulae has received much attention since such products may be the sole diet for many infants. The occurrence of furan in a variety of foods suggests that there are multiple routes of furan formation rather than a single mechanism. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority has in 2008 and 2009 collected data on furan concentrations in different food products sold on the Norwegian market (Norwegian Food Safety Authority, 2008). In 2011, the Norwegian Food Safety Authority also decided to analyse commercial porridges for infants and children sold on the Norwegian market, to see if furan could be detected in such products. The calculated furan exposures from food and beverages are based on data from the nationally representative food consumption surveys; Spedkost, Småbarnskost, Ungkost and Norkost. The consumption for each relevant food or food category in the dietary surveys were multiplied with the corresponding mean furan concentrations and totalled for each individual. The liver is the main target organ for furan toxicity both in mice and rats, but the rat is the most sensitive species. A dose-dependent increase in hepatocellular adenomas and carcinomas was observed in mice and rats, and an increase in the incidence of cholangiocarcinomas was observed in rat liver. Cholangiocarcinomas in male and female rats were the most sensitive toxicological end point observed in rodents. On the basis of the available data, VKM considers that rat cholangiocarcinomas may be relevant for assessing human risk from furan. Available in vivo data with furan indicate that a reactive metabolite, most likely cis-2-butene1,4-dial (BDA), is formed and that this metabolite can react with DNA and induce mutations. To VKM’s knowledge, no in vivo studies on genotoxicity of BDA have been performed, but BDA was found to be genotoxic in several in vitro tests. VKM therefore considers that a genotoxic mechanism in furan-induced carcinogenesis cannot be excluded and the substance was assessed as a genotoxic carcinogen. VKM used the Margin of Exposure (MOE) approach in this risk assessment. The suitability of different studies on cholangiocarcinomas for dose-response modelling was considered. The 9-month interim evaluation of a 2-year study from NTP (1993) was chosen because it demonstrates a dose-response relationship. From this study, a point of departure of 0.02 mg/kg bw/day was chosen, based on a benchmark dose lower bound (BMDL10) of 0.14 mg furan/kg bw/day and a correction factor of 7 for shorter than full life-time (2 years) study duration. For 6-, 12- and 24-month-old children, the main source of furan exposure is jarred baby food. For 4-, 9- and 13-year-old children, the major food source to the furan exposure is breakfast cereals. In adults, the major contribution to the furan exposure is coffee. The highest furan exposure was calculated for 12-month-old infants and ranged from 0.62-1.51 µg/kg bw/day. In adults the furan exposure ranged from 0.27-0.82 µg/kg bw/day. For mean exposure among infants, children and adolescents, the MOE-values ranged from 29 in 12-month-infants to 2000 in the 13-year-old adolescents. Among high consumers in these groups, the MOE-values ranged from 13 to 400. In adults, the corresponding MOE-values ranged from 59 to 74 for mean furan exposure and from 24 to 26 for high exposure. It should be noted that this risk assessment of furan contains notable uncertainties and limitations. The use of the 9-month interim study in rats including a correction factor of 7 to derive a point of departure, instead of a full life-time study (2-year) study, likely overestimates the hazard of furan. A possible over-diagnosis of the cholangiocarcinomas, due to the similarities in histopathology between cholangiofibrosis and cholangiocarcinomas in rats, may overestimate the hazard. There are also limitations in assessing food consumption and furan content in foods, leading to uncertainties in estimation of furan exposure. VKM considers that the current exposure to furan in all age groups, particularly among infants and children, is of health concern.
RESUMO
The Norwegian Environment Agency (NEA) and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) requested the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet, VKM) for an opinion of potential risks to biodiversity and agriculture in Norway associated with import of seeds for sowing and cultivation of insect-resistant and herbicide tolerant genetically modified maize Bt11 under Directive 2001/18/EC (Notification C/F/96.05.10). The notification is still pending for authorisation in the European Union. VKM is also requested to assess the applicant´s post-market environmental monitoring plan, and the management measures suggested in the draft implementing decision of the European Commission. As the scope of the notification does not cover food and feed uses of maize Bt11, VKM was not asked for a health risk assessment of maize Bt11. However, VKM has decided to update a previous safety evaluation of the food and feed uses of maize Bt11 and derived products (VKM, 2014). VKM appointed a working group consisting of members from the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms, the Panel on Alien Organisms and trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the VKM staff to answer the requests. The Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms assessed and approved the final report. The genetically modified maize Bt11 was developed to provide protection against certain lepidopteran target pests, such as the European corn borer (ECB, Ostrinia nubilalis), and some species belonging to the genus Sesamia . The insect resistence is achieved by the expression of a truncated form of a Cry1Ab protein encoded by a modified cry1Ab gene derived from the soil microorganism Bacillus thuringiensis subsp kurstaki HD-1. Maize Bt11 also expresses the phosphinothricin - N - ace tyltransferase (pat) gene, derived from the soil microorganism Streptomyces viridochromogenes strain Tu494, which encodes the enzyme: phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (PAT). PAT protein confers tolerance to the herbicidal active substance glufosinate-ammonium. The PAT protein expressed in Bt11 was used as a selectable marker to facilitate the selection process of transformed plant cells and is not intended for weed management purposes. Since the scope of the notification C/F/96.05.10 does not cover the use of glufosinate-ammonium-containing herbicides on maize Bt11, potential effects due to the use of such herbicides on maize Bt11 are not considered by VKM. In delivering its scientific opinion, VKM considered relevant peer-reviewed scientific publications and information provided by the applicant in the notification C/F/96.05.10, the renewal application EFSA/GMO/RX/Bt11, and scientific opinions and comments from EFSA and other EU-member states. VKM has evaluated maize Bt11 with reference to its intended uses in the European Economic Area (EEA), and according to the principles described in the Norwegian Food Act, the Norwegian Gene Technology Act and regulations relating to impact assessment pursuant to the Gene Technology Act, Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed. The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety has also decided to take account of the appropriate principles described in the EFSA guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed (EFSA 2011a), the environmental risk assessment of GM plants (EFSA 2010a), selection of comparators for the risk assessment of GM plants (EFSA, 2011b) and for the post-market environmental monitoring of GM plants (EFSA, 2011c). The scientific risk assessment of maize Bt11 includes molecular characterisation of the inserted DNA and expression of novel proteins, comparative assessment of agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, nutritional assessments, toxicology and allergenicity. An evaluation of unintended effects on plant fitness, potential for gene transfer, interactions between the GM plant and target and non-target organisms, effects on biogeochemical processes, the post-market environmental monitoring plan and coexistence measures at the farm level has also been undertaken. It is emphasised that the VKM mandate does not include assessments of contribution to sustainable development, societal utility and ethical considerations, according to the Norwegian Gene Technology Act and Regulations relating to impact assessment pursuant to the Gene Technology Act. These considerations are therefore not part of the risk assessment provided by the VKM. Molecular Characterization: Appropriate analyses of the integration site, inserted DNA sequence, flanking regions, and bioinformatics have been performed. The molecular characterisation reported by the applicant shows that the DNA-fragment containing the cry1Ab and pat genes, is integrated as a single copy at a single locus in the nuclear genome of maize Bt11 and that it is stably inherited as a dominant trait. VKM considers the molecular characterisation of maize Bt11 satisfactory. Comparative Assessment: Comparative analyses of data from field trials located at representative sites and environments in North America and Europe indicates that maize Bt11 is compositionally equivalent to its conventional counterpart, with the exception of the herbicide tolerance and insect resistance traits, conferred by the expression of the PAT and Cry1Ab proteins. However, data on the amino acid tryptophan, is only given in one out of six studies. Based on current knowledge, VKM concludes that maize Bt11 is compositionally equivalent to conventional maize. The data provided by the applicant are not sufficient to show that Bt11 maize is phenotypically and agronomically equivalent to conventional near-isogenic maize lines. The agronomic assessment data are provided from one growing season in the North America and one growing season in France. This is not considered to be sufficient for representative testing of agricultural environments. Food and Feed Risk Assessment: Whole food feeding studies have not indicated any adverse health effects of maize Bt11. These studies further support that maize Bt11 is nutritionally equivalent to conventional maize. The Cry1Ab and PAT proteins do not show sequence resemblance to other known toxins or IgE allergens, nor have they been reported to cause IgE mediated allergic reactions. Some studies have however indicated a potential role of Cry-proteins as adjuvants in allergic reactions. Based on current knowledge, the VKM concludes that maize Bt11 is nutritionally equivalent to conventional maize varieties. It is unlikely that the Cry1Ab and PAT proteins will introduce a toxic or allergenic potential in food or feed based on maize Bt11 compared to conventional maize. Environmental Risk Assessment: Maize is the only representative of the genus Zea in Europe, and there are no cross-compatible wild or weedy relatives outside cultivated maize with which maize can hybridise and form backcross progeny. Vertical gene transfer in maize therefore depends on cross-pollination with other conventional or organic maize varieties. In addition, unintended admixture of genetically modified material in seeds represents a possible way for gene flow between different crop cultivations. The risk of pollen flow from maize volunteers is negligible under Norwegian growing conditions. Since maize Bt11 has no altered agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, except for the specific target insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, the likelihood of unintended environmental effects as a consequence of spread of genes from maize Bt11 is considered to be extremely low. There are no reports of the target lepidopteran species attaining pest status on maize in Norway. Since there are no Bt-based insecticides approved for use in Norway, and lepidopteran pests have not been registered in maize, issues related to resistance evolution in target pests are not relevant at present for Norwegian agriculture. Published scientific studies showed that the likelihood of negative effects of Cry1Ab protein on non-target arthropods that live on or in the vicinity of maize plants is low. In Norway, the maize cultivation is marginal. The total crop area of forage maize is estimated to 2000-2800 decares, equivalent to less than 0.1% of the areas with cereal crops. The area of individual fields is limited by the topography such that the quantity of maize pollen produced under flowering is also limited. The potential exposure of Cry1Ab-containing maize pollen on non-target lepidopteran species in Norway is therefore negligible. Cultivation of maize Bt11 is not considered to represent a threat to the prevalence of red-listed species in Norway. Exposure of nontarget organisms to Cry proteins in aquatic ecosystems is likely to be very low, and potential exposure of Cry proteins to non-target organisms in aquatic ecosystems in Norway is considered to be negligible. VKM concludes that, although the data on the fate of the Cry1Ab protein and its potential interactions in soil are limited, the relevant scientific publications analysing the Cry1Ab protein, together with the relatively broad knowledge about the environmental fate of other Cry1 proteins, do not indicate significant direct effects on the soil environment. Despite limited number of studies, most studies conclude that effects on soil microorganisms and microbial communities are transient and minor compared to effects caused by agronomic and environmental factors. However, data are only available from short-term experiments and predictions of potential long-term effects are difficult to deduce. Coexistence: VKM concludes that separation distances of 200 meters most likely will ensure coexistence between genetically modified maize and conventional and organic maize varieties in Norway. Overall Conclusion: Based on current knowledge, VKM concludes that maize Bt11 is nutritionally equivalent t
RESUMO
The Norwegian Environment Agency (NEA) and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) requested the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet, VKM) for an opinion of potential risks to biodiversity and agriculture in Norway associated with import of seeds for sowing, and cultivation of insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize 1507 under Directive 2001/18/EC (Notification C/ES/01/01). The notification is still pending for authorisation in the European Union. VKM is also requested to assess the applicant´s post-market environmental monitoring plan, and the management measures suggested in the draft implementing decision of the European Commission. As VKM delivered a scientific opinion on this application including cultivation in 2014 (VKM, 2014), VKM is asked to assess whether the previous risk assessment is still valid concerning cultivation, and to update the opinion after current knowledge. The assessment shall specifically consider Norwegian conditions. Furthermore, as the notification does not cover food and feed uses of maize 1507, VKM was not asked for a health risk assessment of maize 1507. However, VKM has decided to update the previous safety evaluation of the food and feed uses of maize 1507 and derived products from 2014. VKM appointed a working group consisting of members from the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms, the Panel on Alien Organisms and trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the VKM staff to answer the requests. The Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms has assessed and approved the final report. The genetically modified maize 1507 was developed to provide protection against certain lepidopteran target pests, such as the European corn borer (ECB, Ostrinia nubilalis), and some species belonging to the genus Sesamia. The insect resistence is achieved by the expression of a synthetic version of the truncated c ry1F gene derived from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. aizawai, a common soil bacterium. Maize 1507 also expresses the phosphinothricin - N - acetyltransferase (pat) gene, derived from the soil bacterium Streptomyces viridochromogenes. PAT protein confers tolerance to the herbicidal active substance glufosinate-ammonium. The PAT protein expressed in maize 1507 was used as a selectable marker to facilitate the selection process of transformed plant cells and is not intended for weed management purposes. Since the scope of the notification C/ES/01/01 does not cover the use of glufosinate-ammonium-containing herbicides on maize 1507, potential effects due to the use of such herbicides on maize 1507 are not considered by VKM. In delivering its scientific opinion, VKM considered relevant peer-reviewed scientific publications and information provided by the applicant in the notifications C/ES/01/01, C/NL/00/10, the applications EFSA/GMO/NL/2004/02 and EFSA/GMO/RX/1507, and scientific opinions and comments from EFSA and other EU member states. VKM has evaluated maize 1507 with reference to its intended uses in the European Economic Area (EEA), and according to the principles described in the Norwegian Food Act, the Norwegian Gene Technology Act and regulations relating to impact assessment pursuant to the Gene Technology Act, Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed. VKM has also decided to take into account, the appropriate principles described in the EFSA guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed (EFSA, 2011a), the environmental risk assessment of GM plants (EFSA, 2010a), selection of comparators for the risk assessment of GM plants (EFSA, 2011b) and for the post-market environmental monitoring of GM plants (EFSA, 2011c). The scientific opinion of maize 1507 include molecular characterisation of the inserted DNA and expression of novel proteins, comparative assessment of agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, nutritional assessments, toxicology and allergenicity. An evaluation of unintended effects on plant fitness, potential for gene transfer, interactions between the GM plant and target and non-target organisms, effects on biogeochemical processes, the postmarket environmental monitoring plan and coexistence measures at the farm level has also been undertaken. It is emphasised that VKM’s mandate does not include assessments of contribution to sustainable development, societal utility and ethical considerations, according to the Norwegian Gene Technology Act and Regulations relating to impact assessment pursuant to the Gene Technology Act. These considerations are therefore not part of the risk assessment provided by VKM. Molecular Characterization: Appropriate analyses of the transgenic DNA insert, its integration site, number of inserts and flanking sequences in the maize genome, have been performed. The results show that one copy only of the insert is present in maize 1507. Homology searches with databases of known toxins and allergens have not indicated any potential production of harmful proteins or polypeptides caused by the genetic modification in maize 1507. Southern blot analyses and segregation studies show that the introduced genes cry1F and pat are stably inherited and expressed over several generations along with the phenotypic characteristics of maize 1507. VKM considers the molecular characterisation of maize 1507 satisfactory. Comparative Assessment: Comparative analyses of maize 1507 to its non-GM conventional counterpart have been performed during multiple field trials located at representative sites and environments in Chile (1998/99), USA (1999) and in Europe (1999, 2000 and 2002). With the exception of small intermittent variations, no biologically significant differences were found between maize 1507 and the conventional maize. Based on the assessment of available data, VKM concludes that maize 1507 is compositionally, agronomically and phenotypically equivalent to its conventional counterpart, except for the introduced characteristics, and that its composition fell within the normal ranges of variation observed among non-GM varieties. The field evaluations support a conclusion of no phenotypic changes indicative of increased plant weed/pest potential of 1507 compared to conventional maize. Food and Feed Safety Assessment: Whole food feeding studies on rats, broilers, pullets, pigs and cattle have not indicated any adverse health effects of maize 1507. These studies further indicate that maize 1507 is nutritionally equivalent to conventional maize. The PAT and Cry1F proteins do not show sequence resemblance to other known toxins or IgE allergens, nor have they been reported to cause IgE mediated allergic reactions. Some studies have however, indicated a potential role of Cry-proteins as adjuvants in allergic reactions. Based on current knowledge, VKM concludes that maize 1507 is nutritionally equivalent to conventional maize varieties. It is unlikely that the PAT and Cry1F proteins will introduce a toxic or allergenic potential in food or feed based on maize 1507 compared to conventional maize. Environmental Risk Assessment: Maize is the only representative of the genus Zea in Europe, and there are no cross-compatible wild or weedy relatives outside cultivated maize with which maize can hybridise and form backcross progeny. Vertical gene transfer in maize therefore depends on cross-pollination with other conventional or organic maize varieties. In addition, unintended admixture of genetically modified material in seeds represents a possible way for gene flow between different crop cultivations. The risk of pollen flow from maize volunteers is negligible under Norwegian growing conditions. Since maize 1507 has no altered agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, except for the specific target insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, the likelihood of unintended environmental effects as a consequence of spread of genes from maize 1507 is considered to be extremely low. There are no reports of the target lepidopteran species attaining pest status on maize in Norway. Since there are no Bt-based insecticides approved for use in Norway, and lepidopteran pests have not been registered in maize, issues related to resistance evolution in target pests are not relevant at present for Norwegian agriculture. There are a limited number of published scientific studies on environmental effects of Cry1F protein. Published scientific studies show that the likelihood of negative effects of Cry1F protein on non-target arthropods that live on or in the vicinity of maize plants is low. In Norway, the maize cultivation is marginal. The total crop area of forage maize is estimated to 2000-2800 decares, equivalent to less than 0.1 % of the areas with cereal crops. The area of individual fields is limited by the topography such that the quantity of maize pollen produced under flowering is also limited. The potential exposure of Cry1F-containing maize pollen on non-target lepidopteran species in Norway is therefore negligible. Cultivation of maize 1507 is not considered to represent a threat to the prevalence of red-listed species in Norway. Exposure of non-target organisms to Cry proteins in aquatic ecosystems is likely to be very low, and potential exposure of Cry proteins to non-target organisms in aquatic ecosystems in Norway is considered to be negligible. VKM concludes that, although the data on the fate of the Cry1F protein and its potential interactions in soil are limited, the relevant scientific publications analysing the Cry1F protein, together with the relatively broad knowledge about the environmental fate of other Cry1 proteins, do not indicate significant direct effects on the soil environment. Despite limited number of studies, most studies conclude that effects on soil microorganisms and microbial communities are transient and minor c
RESUMO
The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet, VKM), Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids, Materials in Contact with Food and Cosmetics, has at the request of the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (Mattilsynet) conducted a risk assessment of the intense sweeteners cyclamate, saccharin, neohesperidine DC, steviol glycosides and neotame in soft drinks, “saft” and nectar. The risk assessment includes exposure assessments and the calculated exposures are compared to the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for the respective sweeteners. VKM was also requested to compare the current calculated intake of saccharin and cyclamate to the calculated intake reported by VKM in 2007 (the VKM report «Impact on health when sugar is replaced with intense sweeteners in soft drinks, “saft” and nectar») when possible (VKM, 2007). Six different intake scenarios with varying concentrations of added sweeteners (either the average concentration or the highest reported concentration for the respective sweetener) and varying consumption of beverages with sweeteners (either the actual reported consumption of beverages added sweetener or the assumption that all reported beverages were added sweeteners) were used for the exposure calculations. • Scenario 1 gives the best estimate of the current situation in the population (average content of sweeteners, actual reported consumption). • Scenario 2 is based on the average content of sweeteners and that all consumed beverages contain sweeteners. • Scenario 3 is based on the highest reported content of sweeteners and the actual reported consumption. • Scenario 4 is based on the highest reported content of sweeteners and that all consumed beverages contain sweeteners. Scenarios 5 and 6 are based on the maximum allowed amounts of sweeteners within a category in accordance with the Regulation on food additives, within the categories soft drinks, “saft” and nectar in Norway (Regulation No 668 of 6 June 2011 on food additives, 2011). • In scenario 5 the consumption of beverages with added sweeteners or sugar reported in dietary surveys were used for the calculations. • In scenario 6 it was assumed that all consumed soft drinks, “saft” and nectar contained sweeteners (no sugar). In the current risk assessment, the intake of the sweeteners was calculated for 2-year-old children and 18-70 year old men and women. Due to lack of new dietary surveys, the other age groups of children and adolescents were not included. For all age groups in all scenarios, the intake of the sweeteners cyclamate, saccharin, neohesperidine DC, steviol glycosides and neotame was below their respective established ADI values. Due to possible differences in the calculation, it was not possible to compare the current calculated intake of saccharin and cyclamate to the calculated intake reported by VKM in 2007. VKM concludes that there is no major health concern related to the intake of the sweeteners cyclamate, saccharin, neohesperidine DC, steviol glycosides and neotame from the beverage categories included in this risk assessment per today. VKM further concludes that among young women who are high consumers of beverages with cyclamate, and 2-year-old children who are high consumers of beverages with steviol glycosides, the estimated intake approaches the ADI values. The high intakes approaching ADI are considered conservative estimates, as the highest reported content of sweetener or the maximum allowed amounts is used. Thus, these estimates are only relevant for the part of the population that are both loyal to beverages with sweeteners and a particular brand of sweetened beverage. It should be noted that intake of sweeteners from other foods or from tabletop sweeteners is not included in the intake estimates, and that a considerable contribution from these sources cannot be excluded.