Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Paul Tobback.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Birgit Dusemund; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; P.E. Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Paul Tobback; Ana Maria Rincon; Alexandra Tard; Claude Lambré
Abstract 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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert-Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; P.E. Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Pasquale Mosesso; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Paul Tobback; Ana Maria Rincon; Alexandra Tard; Claude Lambré
Abstract 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.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Lieve Herman; Paul Tobback; Fabiola Pizzo; Camilla Smeraldi; Alexandra Tard; Adamantia Papaioannou; David Gott
Abstract The present scientific opinion deals with the evaluation of the safety of nisin (E 234) in the light of new toxicological data and with the proposed extension of use in unripened cheese and heat‐treated meat products. Nisin (E 234) is currently an authorised food additive in the EU under Annex II of Regulation (EC) 1333/2008 for use in several food categories. The safety of nisin (E 234) as a food additive has been evaluated in 2006 by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food, where an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0.13 mg/kg body weight (bw) was confirmed as previously established by Scientific Committee on Food (SCF). In addition to the studies previously evaluated by EFSA in 2006, the Panel considered in the present opinion, data from a new subchronic toxicity study. No adverse effects were observed in a repeated dose oral toxicity study in which rats were administered nisin A for 90 days. A no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 225 mg nisin A/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, was identified for this study. Using this NOAEL, an ADI of 1 mg nisin A/kg bw per day for nisin (E 234) was calculated applying a default uncertainty factor of 200 for extrapolation of subchronic to chronic exposure and inter‐ and intra‐species variability. The Panel calculated exposure estimates for both the current and the proposed uses based on the data available in the EFSA Comprehensive Database. The Panel considered that the overall exposure estimate was below the new ADI for nisin A for all population groups. The Panel concluded that the proposed extension of use of nisin (E 234) as a food additive in unripened cheese (at maximum level of 12 mg/kg) and in heat‐treated meat products (at maximum level of 25 mg/kg) would not be of safety concern.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Birgit Dusemund; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; P.E. Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Paul Tobback; Ana Maria Rincon; Alexandra Tard; Claude Lambré
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of polyglycerol polyricinoleate (PGPR, E 476) used as a food additive. In 1978, the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 7.5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for PGPR. PGPR is hydrolysed in the gut resulting in the liberation of free polyglycerols, polyricinoleic acid and ricinoleic acid. Di‐ and triglycerol are absorbed and excreted unchanged in the urine; long‐chain polyglycerols show lower absorption and are mainly excreted unchanged in faeces. Acute oral toxicity of PGPR is low, and short‐term and subchronic studies indicate PGPR is tolerated at high doses without adverse effects. PGPR (E 476) is not of concern with regard to genotoxicity or carcinogenicity. The single reproductive toxicity study with PGPR was limited and was not an appropriate study for deriving a health‐based guidance value. Human studies with PGPR demonstrated that there is no indication of significant adverse effect. The Panel considered a 2‐year combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study for determining a reference point and derived a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) for PGPR (E 476) of 2,500 mg/kg bw per day, the only dose tested. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the present data set give reason to revise the ADI of 7.5 mg/kg bw per day allocated by SCF to 25 mg/kg bw per day. Exposure estimates did not exceed the ADI of 25 mg/kg bw per day and a proposed extension of use would not result in an exposure exceeding this ADI. The Panel recommended modification of the EU specifications for PGPR (E 476).
EFSA Journal | 2017
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Polly Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Pasquale Mosesso; Paul Tobback; Ana Maria Rincon; Zsuzsanna Horvath; Claude Lambré
Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of mono‐ and di‐glycerides of fatty acids (E 471) when used as a food additive. The Panel considered that it is very likely that hydrolysis of mono‐ and di‐glycerides of fatty acids by lipases in the gastrointestinal tract would occur, resulting in the release of glycerol and fatty acids. Glycerol (E 422) and fatty acids (E 570) have been re‐evaluated and the Panel concluded that there was no safety concern regarding their use as food additives. Toxicological studies with mono‐ and di‐glycerides rich in unsaturated fatty acids were considered for the re‐evaluation of E 471. No evidence for adverse effects was reported in short‐term, subchronic studies, chronic, reproductive and developmental toxicity studies. Neither carcinogenic potential nor a promotion effect in initiation/promotion was reported. The available studies did not raise any concern with regard to genotoxicity. The refined estimates were based on 31 out of 84 food categories in which E 471 is authorised. The Panel noted that the contribution of E 471 represented at the mean only 0.8–3.5% of the recommended daily fat intake. Based on the approach described in the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010 and taking into account the considerations mentioned above, the Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake (ADI) and that the food additive mono‐ and di‐glycerides of fatty acids (E 471) was of no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels. The Panel recommended some modifications of the EU specifications for E 471.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Birgit Dusemund; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Paul Tobback; Sofia Ioannidou; Stavroula Tasiopoulou; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen
Abstract 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 pectin (E 440i) and amidated pectin (E 440ii) as food additives. An acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’ was allocated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) for E 440i and E 440ii. Pectin and amidated pectin would not be absorbed intact, but extensively fermented by intestinal microbiota in animals and humans; products formed from pectins in the gastrointestinal tract are similar to manufactured pectin‐derived acidic oligosaccharides (pAOS). There is no indication of genotoxicity for pectin and amidated pectin, although the available data were limited. No adverse effects were reported in a chronic toxicity study in rats at levels up to 5,000 mg pectin/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested. No treatment‐related effects were observed in a dietary one‐generation reproductive toxicity study with pAOS in rats at up to 6,200 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, the highest dose tested. The Panel did not consider E 440i and E 440ii as having allergenic potential. A dose of 36 g/day (equivalent to 515 mg/kg bw per day) for 6 weeks in humans was without adverse effects. Exposure to pectins from their use as food additives ranged up to 442 mg/kg bw per day for toddlers at the 95th percentile (brand‐loyal scenario). The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for the use of pectin (E 440i) and amidated pectin (E 440ii) as food additives for the general population and that there is no need for a numerical ADI.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Paul Tobback; Camilla Smeraldi; David Gott
Abstract The present scientific opinion deals with the safety of orthosilicic acid‐vanillin complex (OSA‐VC) as a novel food ingredient for use as a source of silicon (Si) in food supplements and with the bioavailability of Si from this source. OSA‐VC is stable in liquid solution at low pH values. OSA from OSA‐VC was available as revealed by the increase in plasma Si concentrations after oral ingestion in human volunteers. The toxicological data provided in support of the current application were not in accordance with the Tier 1 requirement of the ‘Guidance for submission for food additive evaluations’; however, this was considered justified by the Panel given that OSA‐VC at pH 6.8 dissociates into orthosilicic acid and vanillin. The daily consumption of OSA‐VC at the dose recommended by the applicant would provide a supplemental intake of Si of approximately 10–18 mg Si/day which would result in an estimated total intake of roughly 30–70 mg Si/day. The maximum vanillin intake resulting from the consumption of OSA‐VC would be less than 5% of the acceptable daily intake (ADI) value for vanillin of 10 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day established by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 2002. The Panel concluded that there would be no safety concern with the proposed use and use level of OSA‐VC as a novel food ingredient intended to be used as a source of Si in food supplements for the adult population. The Panel concluded that OSA, measured as Si, is bioavailable following ingestion of OSA‐VC and appears similar to values reported in the literature for other established sources of OSA.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; Ursula Gundert-Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Harry J McArdle; Paul Tobback; Fabiola Pizzo; Ana Maria Rincon; Camilla Smeraldi; David Gott
Abstract The present scientific opinion deals with the evaluation of the safety of di‐calcium malate (DCM) proposed as a novel food ingredient and as a source of calcium for use in foods for the general population, food supplements, total diet replacement for weight control and food for special medical purposes (FSMP), and with the bioavailability of calcium from this source. The structural formula of the proposed complex is based on expert judgement and not supported by any analytical data. On the basis of the available data, the Panel concluded that there was insufficient scientific evidence of a difference between the proposed novel food ingredient named as di‐calcium malate (DCM) and calcium malate already authorised as a source of calcium included in Annex II to Directive 2002/46/EC. Accordingly, the Panel was unable to assess the safety of DCM as a novel food ingredient. On the basis of the results provided, the Panel considered that DCM does not completely dissociate into calcium and malic acid. The Panel concluded that when DCM dissociates, calcium would be available following ingestion of DCM and the bioavailability would appear similar to values reported for other sources of calcium already permitted. Furthermore, the Panel concluded that on the basis of the information available it was not possible to calculate the exposure to DCM as a source of calcium to foods for the general population, food supplements, total diet replacement for weight control and FSMP.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Polly Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Pasquale Mosesso; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Paul Tobback; Claudia Cascio; Ana Maria Rincon; Claude Lambré
Abstract 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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Birgit Dusemund; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Polly Boon; Dimitrios Chrysafidis; Rainer Gürtler; Pasquale Mosesso; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Paul Tobback; Natália Kovalkovičová; Ana Maria Rincon; Alexandra Tard; Claude Lambré
Abstract 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.