A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. II: Graded testing.

This paper presents a graded approach to the testing of crop-derived genetically modified (GM) foods based on concern levels in a proposed risk-based classification scheme (RBCS) and currently available testing methods. A graded approach offers the potential for more efficient use of testing resources by focusing less on lower concern GM foods, and more on higher concern foods. In this proposed approach to graded testing, products that are classified as Level I would have met baseline testing requirements that are comparable to what is widely applied to premarket assessment of GM foods at present. In most cases, Level I products would require no further testing, or very limited confirmatory analyses. For products classified as Level II or higher, additional testing would be required, depending on the type of the substance, prior dietary history, estimated exposure level, prior knowledge of toxicity of the substance, and the nature of the concern related to unintended changes in the modified food. Level III testing applies only to the assessment of toxic and antinutritional effects from intended changes and is tailored to the nature of the substance in question. Since appropriate test methods are not currently available for all effects of concern, future research to strengthen the testing of GM foods is discussed.

A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. I: Conceptual development.

The predominant paradigm for the premarket assessment of genetically modified (GM) foods reflects heightened public concern by focusing on foods modified by recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (rDNA) techniques, while foods modified by other methods of genetic modification are generally not assessed for safety. To determine whether a GM product requires less or more regulatory oversight and testing, we developed and evaluated a risk-based classification scheme (RBCS) for crop-derived GM foods. The results of this research are presented in three papers. This paper describes the conceptual development of the proposed RBCS that focuses on two categories of adverse health effects: (1) toxic and antinutritional effects, and (2) allergenic effects. The factors that may affect the level of potential health risks of GM foods are identified. For each factor identified, criteria for differentiating health risk potential are developed. The extent to which a GM food satisfies applicable criteria for each factor is rated separately. A concern level for each category of health effects is then determined by aggregating the ratings for the factors using predetermined aggregation rules. An overview of the proposed scheme is presented, as well as the application of the scheme to a hypothetical GM food.

A risk-based classification scheme for genetically modified foods. III: Evaluation using a panel of reference foods.

This paper presents an exploratory evaluation of four functional components of a proposed risk-based classification scheme (RBCS) for crop-derived genetically modified (GM) foods in a concordance study. Two independent raters assigned concern levels to 20 reference GM foods using a rating form based on the proposed RBCS. The four components of evaluation were: (1) degree of concordance, (2) distribution across concern levels, (3) discriminating ability of the scheme, and (4) ease of use. At least one of the 20 reference foods was assigned to each of the possible concern levels, demonstrating the ability of the scheme to identify GM foods of different concern with respect to potential health risk. There was reasonably good concordance between the two raters for the three separate parts of the RBCS. The raters agreed that the criteria in the scheme were sufficiently clear in discriminating reference foods into different concern levels, and that with some experience, the scheme was reasonably easy to use. Specific issues and suggestions for improvements identified in the concordance study are discussed.

Health claims on foods in Canada.

Interest in the health effects of foods by both industry and consumers has put a spotlight on the role of health claims on foods in Canada. The current regulatory framework governing the use of different health claims on foods in Canada is described and compared with international approaches. Similarities were observed in how risk-reduction claims for serious diseases are managed in the United States, European Union and proposed by Food Standards Australia New Zealand, including the need for premarket authorization and the requirement for a high level of certainty based on the totality of evidence in substantiating this type of claim. However, approaches to permitting function claims other than those for the well-established functions of known nutrients are divergent among the jurisdictions compared. Canada also differs from other jurisdictions in not establishing core nutritional criteria for foods carrying disease risk-reduction claims. A brief overview of the status in Canada of a number of disease risk-reduction claims that have been approved in the United States, based on significant scientific agreement under the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act or through authoritative statements under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, is also provided.