Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Peter Moldeus is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Peter Moldeus.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Re‐evaluation of alginic acid and its sodium, potassium, ammonium and calcium salts (E 400–E 404) as food additives

Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; 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; Leon Brimer; Oliver Lindtner; Pasquale Mosesso; Anna Christodoulidou; Zsuzsanna Horvath; Federica Lodi; Birgit Dusemund

Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of alginic acid and its sodium, potassium, ammonium and calcium salts (E 400–E 404) when used as food additives. Alginic acid and its salts (E 400–E 404) are authorised food additives in the EU in accordance with Annex II and Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404), and that there was no safety concern at the level of the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) as food additives. The Panel further concluded that exposure of infants and young children to alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) by the use of these food additives should stay below therapeutic dosages for these population groups at which side‐effects could occur. Concerning the use of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) in ‘dietary foods for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants’ (Food category 13.1.5.1) and ‘in dietary foods for babies and young children for special medical purposes as defined in Directive 1999/21/EC’ (Food category 13.1.5.2), the Panel further concluded that the available data did not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) in infants and young children consuming the food belonging to the categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Re‐evaluation of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive

Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; 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; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Paul Peters; Jacqueline Wiesner; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund

Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. In the EU, guar gum was evaluated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1970, 1974 and 1975, who allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’. Guar gum has been also evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) in 1977 who endorsed the ADI ‘not specified’ allocated by JECFA. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Guar gum is practically undigested, not absorbed intact, but significantly fermented by enteric bacteria in humans. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested; no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral intake of guar gum was well tolerated in adults. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for guar gum (E 412), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. The Panel considered that for uses of guar gum in foods intended for infants and young children the occurrence of abdominal discomfort should be monitored and if this effect is observed doses should be identified as a basis for further risk assessment. The Panel considered that no adequate specific studies addressing the safety of use of guar gum (E 412) in food categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2 were available. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the available data do not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of guar gum (E 412) in infants and young children consuming these foods for special medical purposes.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Re‐evaluation of glycerol (E 422) as a food additive

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

Re‐evaluation of propane‐1,2‐diol (E 1520) as a food additive

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

Approach followed for the refined exposure assessment as part of the safety assessment of food additives under re‐evaluation

Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Birgit Dusemund; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; 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; Christina Tlustos; Davide Arcella; Alexandra Tard; Jean-Charles Leblanc

Abstract This statement describes the approach followed by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) for performing refined exposure assessment in the framework of the re‐evaluation of already permitted food additives. Estimation of exposure is obtained through combination of different type of data originating from different sources: food additive concentration is obtained from information provided to EFSA on use levels and/or information obtained by means of analytical measurements. In recent years, the use of market research data has also been used. The statement provides also a description of the three different scenarios used for the exposure assessment of food additives under re‐evaluation, from the more conservative regulatory maximum level exposure assessment scenario to more refined ones. Lastly, a description is provided on the approach used for the uncertainty analysis which accompanies the exposure assessment.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Safety of nisin (E 234) as a food additive in the light of new toxicological data and the proposed extension of use

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

Re-evaluation of tara gum (E 417) as a food additive

Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; 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; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund

Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of tara gum (E 417) as a food additive. Tara gum (E 417) has been evaluated by the EU Scientific Committee for Food (SCF, 1992) and by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA, 1987), who both allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’ for this gum. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives, re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available for tara gum (E 417). Tara gum (E 417) is unlikely to be absorbed intact and is expected to be fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported at the highest doses tested in subchronic, chronic and carcinogenicity studies and there is no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for tara gum (E 417) and that there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of tara gum (E 417) as a food additive at the reported uses and use levels.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Re‐evaluation of polyglycerol polyricinoleate (E 476) as a food additive

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

Re‐evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive

Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; 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; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund

Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive. In the EU, acacia gum has not been formally evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF), and therefore, no ADI has been allocated. However, it was accepted for use in weaning food (SCF, 1991). In 1999, the SCF considered ‘that the use of acacia gum/gum arabic in coatings for nutrient preparations containing trace elements is acceptable provided carry‐over levels in infant formulae, follow‐on formulae or FSMP do not exceed 10 mg/kg’. Acacia gum was evaluated by JECFA in 1982 and 1990 and the specifications were amended in 1998. Based on the lack of adverse effects in the available toxicity studies, an ADI ‘not specified’ was allocated. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Acacia gum is unlikely to be absorbed intact and is slightly fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested and there is no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral daily intake of a large amount of acacia gum up to 30,000 mg acacia gum/person per day (approximately equivalent 430 mg acacia gum/kg bw per day) for up to 18 days was well tolerated in adults but some individuals experienced flatulence which was considered by the Panel as undesirable but not adverse effect. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for acacia gum (E 414), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Re‐evaluation of mono‐ and di‐glycerides of fatty acids (E 471) as food additives

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.

Collaboration


Dive into the Peter Moldeus's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Agneta Oskarsson

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Gott

European Food Safety Authority

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Maged Younes

World Health Organization

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Fernando Aguilar

European Food Safety Authority

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Pierre Galtier

European Food Safety Authority

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Riccardo Crebelli

Istituto Superiore di Sanità

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jean-Charles Leblanc

Institut national de la recherche agronomique

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Birgit Dusemund

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge