How future tools can predict toxicity in food and protect consumers

Food production is a complex process resulting in a significant number of chemical reactions. These reactions produce ‘compounds of interest’, on which regulatory authorities have set acceptable and unacceptable levels – often referred to as maximum residue limits (MRLs).

Unfortunately, there are also ‘unknown known’ compounds, where the toxicological risk is not known. Therefore, as part of the risk assessment, further analysis using predictive methods such as computer modelling can help determine the risk. In silico methods, such as Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) models – which predict toxicity of compounds from their molecular structure – have been deployed for many years in risk assessments of agrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals and cosmetics. More recently, in food safety they are increasingly being considered for the identification of potential hazards and prioritisation of testing.

They can be used to predict toxicity of pesticide metabolite residues in food or the toxicity of contaminants from food contact materials (FCMs) and novel food ingredients where hazard data is often lacking. These tools offer a fast, economic and animal-free route for predicting toxicity and for those reasons they are increasingly being used in risk assessments. This method of analysis and testing for the presence of a particular compound provides the food sector with an assessment of what level of risk there may be to the consumer. Armed with this information, the food producer can determine if the presence of the compound is ‘safe’, so they need do nothing, or examine how to further reduce their levels through changes in processing – or, in a worst-case scenario, decide they need to undertake a product withdrawal/recall because the levels are of concern.

So what is the future for such tools?

In silico techniques are an emerging field in food science and their use has been recognized by EFSA to be of key importance. In the past few years there have been an increasing number of studies evaluating the performance of in silico models for predicting key endpoints such as genotoxicity, carcinogenicity and endocrine activity for a range of compounds such as FCM migrants, food additives and pesticides. Sharing of toxicological data is key to develop QSAR models and, as more becomes available (for example EFSA’s OpenFoodTox Database), it is inevitable more models with greater predictivity relevant for food safety will become available. In silico methods clearly have an important part to play in the future of food safety, but guidance and training for industry and regulators on its application is essential if the industry and regulator are to capitalise fully on the advantage they can provide.

Find out more

Visit: www.fera.co.uk/food-safety

or

Email: sales@fera.co.uk

A new impact assessment report on the potential for a digital deposit return scheme (DRS) has recently been published by the Digital DRS Industry Working Group – a group of nine trade bodies and companies across the drinks containers value chain.

The Working Group contracted the consultancy firm Resource Futures to produce an economic impact assessment (IA) of a Digital Deposit Return Scheme (DDRS) designed by Bryson Recycling.

The system is largely based on kerbside collection of drinks containers on which a unique (to individual containers) serialisation code is printed. Under the DDRS the deposit on a drinks container would be redeemed by the consumer scanning the serialisation code via a smartphone app which would also notify the supporting IT system that the deposit could not be redeemed again – a key security measure to prevent fraud. In addition to the kerbside return points, the DDRS system would be supplemented by reverse vending machines (RVMs) and manual take-back points.

The results of the assessment indicate that such a system could deliver significant financial savings versus an All-In RVM-DRS system.

You can read the impact assessment in full here

With the changes to ‘Prepacked for Direct Sale’ (PPDS) food coming into force from the 1^st October 2021, the FSA have published a summary of the current and upcoming resources available to industry and the Local Authorities:

 

PPDS Labelling Guidance

This is a dedicated page on labelling requirements for PPDS food which provides detailed information on what food businesses are required to provide on the packaging including from a legislative perspective. It also provides useful information for producers of PPDS food on things such as Quantitative Ingredient Declaration (QUID), multipacks, food additives and flavourings, as well as the responsibilities of food businesses and suppliers.

 

Allergen Q&A

In July, the  ‘Allergen Q&A’  (aimed at Local Authorities) is to be updated. The revised version will include a dedicated section for PPDS as well as a PPDS decision flowchart and some specific examples of what is and what is not PPDS.

 

PPDS Sector Guidance

The FSA have also committed to publishing sector specific guidance on food.gov during July. Each guidance document will support food businesses understand how PPDS will apply to their relevant sector and will also include examples of PPDS products, specific questions and answers, and a practical guide for labelling. Social media assets are also to be made available.

 

PPDS Webinars

The FSA will be hosting a webinar specifically for food officers who are responsible for enforcing allergen labelling requirements on Thursday 29 July 2021 at 2pm – 4pm.

A webinar aimed at businesses will also be held on Wednesday 4 August 2021.

More information on the webinars is to follow shortly.

 

Food Hypersensitivity section

A section has been created on the FSA’s Smarter Communications platform with information on Food Hypersensitivity.

Initially a folder on PPDS had been added but more folders are to be added including one on Precautionary Allergen Labelling (PAL).

Note, registration of the platform is required to access information, which is a fairly straight forward process but please do let us know should you have any problems.

 

The Government has announced that at the end of 2022, it will simultaneously introduce a 9pm TV watershed for high in fat, salt or sugar foods (HFSS) products and a restriction of paid-for HFSS advertising online.

All on-demand programme services (ODPS) under the jurisdiction of the UK, and therefore regulated by Ofcom, will be included in the TV watershed for HFSS advertising. Non-UK regulated ODPS will be included in the restriction of paid-for HFSS advertising online because they are outside UK jurisdiction. These restrictions will be legislated for via the upcoming Health and Care Bill and will come into force at the end of 2022. Details on definitions, such as ‘paid-for’ and a list of products in scope, can be found in the consultation response.

These restrictions will help protect children from developing long-term unhealthy eating habits and improve the nation’s health, and forms just one part of wider plans to tackle childhood obesity. These latest measures could wipe over 7 billion calories from the national diet every year.

Public Health Minister, Jo Churchill, said:

“We are committed to improving the health of our children and tackling obesity. The content youngsters see can have an impact on the choices they make and habits they form. With children spending more time online it is vital we act to protect them from unhealthy advertising.”

“These measures form another key part of our strategy to get the nation fitter and healthier by giving them the chance to make more informed decisions when it comes to food. We need to take urgent action to level up health inequalities. This action on advertising will help to wipe billions off the national calorie count and give our children a fair chance of a healthy lifestyle.”

In order to keep the restrictions proportional, these new regulations will apply to food and drink products of most concern to childhood obesity and will ensure the healthiest in each category will be able to continue to advertise. This approach means foods such as honey, olive oil, avocados and marmite are excluded from the restrictions.

The restrictions will apply to all businesses with 250 or more employees that make and/or sell HFSS products, meaning small and medium businesses will be able to continue advertising. The government recognises these companies may be some of the hardest hit by the pandemic and rely on online media as the sole way to communicate with their customers.

Online restrictions will be limited to paid-for advertising, ensuring brands can continue to advertise within ‘owned media’ spaces online; such as a brand’s own blog, website, app or social media page.

To find out more, click here.

Cattle are a major source of planet-heating gases, but ministers fear a backlash if they urge the public to eat less meat and dairy produce. But the Climate Change committee (CCC) say people should reduce their meat intake for their health as well as the planets.

People should be asked to eat 20% less meat and dairy produce by 2030 and 35% less by 2050, the CCC insists.

The CCC also says Boris Johnson must devise evidence-based policies to encourage healthier diets and sets clear targets.

A government spokesman said It’s net zero strategy, due in the Autumn, would show where carbon cuts would be imposed across the economy. Net zero refers to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases as much as possible and then balancing out any remaining releases by absorbing an equivalent amount from the atmosphere – by, for example, planting trees.

To read more, click here.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) and Food Standards Scotland (FSS), with Ipsos MORI, have published a survey of consumer practices relating to coated frozen chicken products. The survey identifies behaviours which could increase peoples risk to foodborne disease and was commissioned as a result of a recent Salmonella incident linked to frozen chicken products.

The findings show two thirds of adults aged 16-75 (67%) say they have recently cooked or eaten coated frozen chicken products at home. These products are particularly popular with younger adults, with 88% of those aged 16-24 having recently consumed them or cooked them at home. Participants were also more likely to have cooked or eaten these products if they have children aged 15 or under in their household (86%).

The survey also included questions on the storage and handling of these products pre and post-cooking:

• Almost two thirds of those who cook these products (62%) say uncooked coated frozen chicken products at least sometimes come into contact with other surfaces such as worktops and plates
• Over half of those who cook these products (58%) say they always wash their hands after handling coated frozen chicken products
• Almost a quarter of consumers who personally cook products say they defrost them before cooking (23%), 62% say they do not. Among those who defrost products, half say they leave them at room temperature (53%)

84% of participants who use an oven to cook coated frozen chicken products say they sometimes cook them together with other products, such as chips or vegetables. Possibly resulting in the products being cooked at a lower temperature or for a shorter period of time, meaning they may not be thoroughly cooked before consuming.

To read the survey report, click here.