Sweden bertebos presentation

1. Bertebos
Conference 2016: Additives and
enzymes in food

6. • Free-from market:300% growth since 2000
• Growth rate of 25% per year
• Only 1 out of 10 consumers buying GF-products are coeliac patients
• 100 bread products from 15 countries
Advances in gluten
free cereal research
Professor Elke Arendt
School of Food and Nutritional Sciences
University College Cork
Ireland

12. Additives in meat products –
for good or for bad?
Professor Eva Tornberg,
Lund University, Sweden

15. EU Framework for the Scientific
Assessment of Food Additives and
Enzymes
Hubert Deluyker Scientific Adviser to EFSA Director
• EU Agency Ecosystem
• 2.Roots of EFSA
• 3.Scientific advice: building blocks
• 4.Common framework: additives, enzymes, flavourings
• 5.Food additives:
• new and
• existing
• 6.Food enzymes: all new
• GMO
• exposure assessment
• 7.Flavourings: previously established process
• 8.Discussion and Conclusions

16. Hypes, fears, facts and hopes: possible futures of food
Prof. Dr. Joachim Scholderer
Saturation is reached
• •Differentiation possibilities are coming to an end
• •At present, no less than 50% of all food products in
Europe try to position themselves on health or
sustainability
• •The ”clean label” strategy functions as a catch-all: safe,
healthy, ethical, environmentally friendly
• •However, the actual reduction of health risk or
environmental impact due to these products is
negligible
• •Credibility problems are beginning to manifest
themselves
• •Innovations are needed: not just in product
development but also in marketing

17. The next big thing
• •Digitalisation?
• •Trade liberalisation?
• •Adaptation to climate change?
• •Meat replacement products?
• •Non-traditional protein sources?

18. How the Swedish Food Agency work with
additives and enzymes in food.
Leif Busk, Scientific Adviser National Food Agency,
Sweden

19. Swedish interest in nitrite
•Nitrite in meat products
• –Inhibit growth of C. botulinum
• •Problems in risk assessment
• –Nitrite + amines = nitroso amines carcinogenic to animals
• –Formation of known animal carcinogens in man?
• –< 1 case/year –100 cancer cases in Sweden?
• •Substantial work on the formation and occurrence of N-nitroso compounds in
foods started in the 1980s
• •Nitrate –microbial reduction to nitrite
• –Nitrate a bigger problem than nitrite?
• –5-20% of ingested nitrate converted to nitrite

20. Swedish interest in artificial sweeteners
•Cyclamate
• –Pharmacokinetic differences (formation of cyclohexyamine) between rats and man
• •Necessary to lower ADI (50% reduction)
• –Intake of cyclamate in diabetic children via table top sweeteners
• •Aspartame
• –Phenylalanine source –real but limited problem
• –Formation of Methanol –irrelevant
• –Carcinogenicity –not relevant
• •Value of used models
• –CNS-effects –relevant in rare cases?
• –Efsa WG of National Experts
• –Support to the UK study on volunteers –not possible to substantiate alleged negative health
effects

21. Swedish interest in Azo dyes
•Before 1995 –prohibited as additives in SE
• –Estimated 3,000 –4,000 sensitive consumers with skin reactions.
• •No exemption at EU entry 1995
• –No allergenitcity
• –Swedes not more sensitive than others
• –Initiated a media debate
• •A study 2006
• –Presence in foods as stated in the product labelling
• •In cooperation with Swedish Asthma and Allergy Association, Regional Food Control
• –A questionnaire on the use to Swedish food producers
• –An in house project on the analysis of sweets and drinks on the market

22. Azo dyes –2006 study
•Azo dyes were declared in candies, drinks, desserts, flavour paste, noodles, chips and
caviar.
• –The majority of products containing azo dyes were imported
• •A similar study 1999 only recorded only 1 product containing azo dyes
• •An increase in azo dye containing imported foods on the market since 1999
• •Swedish food producers have a general policy of restriction
• –7/58 producers of confectionary, drinks, ice cream and fish products use azo dyes
• •Analysis of food samples
• –11% of sweets contained azo dyes
• •A similar study 2001 showed that 15% of the studied sweets contained azo dyes
• •No increase in azo dye containing sweets on the Swedish market since 2001
• –No azo dyes were found in soft drinks

23. Swedish interest in emulsifiers
•Absorption of toxicants in Caco2-cells and mice
• –Aspenström 2012 –PhD thesis. Effects of fatty acids.
• •Docosahexaeacid, DEHA increase uptake of Al and Cd in Caco2 cells
• •Oleic acid increase uptake of Al in Caco2 cells and mitoxantronein mice
• –Hypothesis
• •Surface active compounds, including food additive emulsifiers can impair
intestinal epithelium and contribute to increased absorption of molecules
that are allergenic and/or autoimunnogenic.
• •Addressed by the EMRISK-WG of EFSA and submitted to the ANS panel for
consideration

24. Some general Swedish trends
•Increased interest for “Clean label”
• –Less additives
• –Remove “unnecessary” ones
• –Replace with “natural components”
• •Citrus juice instead of Citric acid (E330), Nitrate rich extracts instead of nitrite
• •Minor ingredients or additives?Safety of the new alternatives.
• •Increased interest for fighting “Food waste”
• –Addition of citric acid to prolong shelf life in stores and at home of e.g. potatoes. Different views
on the appropriateness of this.
• •A sensitive area in media terms
• –Consumers demand products with less additives
• –Most producers tries to accommodate this
• –Authorities focus on possible new problems

25. The Risk Thermometer
• •A way of expressing the toxicityof a chemical taking human exposureand
severityof the toxic effect into account.
• –A severity-adjusted margin of exposure approach -SAMOE
• •ageneralization of the current framework for chemical risk assessment
• •BMDL10, AFs, severity factors (five options), exposure assessment
• •includes effects both with and without thresholds
• •A model for uncertainty analysis
• –semi quantitative analysis of SAMOE components
• •A risk classification approach
• –categorizes SARP values in terms of five health concern levels
• •A graphical illustration of the results-tailored for different users

26. Possible future developments?
Cocktail effect of additives
•Regulation of pesticides –introduction of CAGs (Cumulative assessment
groups)
• •If that will be introduced for food additives
• –A need for better precision in exposure assessment
• –Better alignment between food categories in the regulation of additives
and Foodex2
• –More detailed information on the occurrence of additives
• •Azo dyes and hyperactivity in children, a cocktail of 6 different chemicals
• •Cumulative effects of emulsifiers
• –Not many MS have a reasonable good system for keeping track of
additives occurrence data

27. Attitudes and Consumer Perception towards the Risks and
Benefits of Additives in Food
Lynn J Frewer
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, UK
• Research focused on GM applied to crops or general
agrifoodapplications of GM, rather than public acceptance
of GM animals.
• •Consumers intention to use the products of GM
• –animals were lower than for plants or for GM applications
in general.
• •Europeansexpressed lower intentions to purchase the
products GM organisms compared to SE Asia and North
America.
• •No differences were observed with timein any region.
• •Similar results were observed for overall attitudetowards
GM

29. Additives in food
an industry perspective
ProfessorPeter van Bladeren
Nestlé, Switzerland
• Foodadditiveshelptoensuretheavailabilityofflavorful,nutritious,safe,colorfulan
daffordablefoodthatmeetsconsumerexpectations;
• Foodadditivesarestrictlyregulated,monitoredbyAuthoritiesaroundtheworld;
• Consumerperceptionhaschanged,cleardemandforcleanlabels
• Thechallengesnowaretoobtainthesameeffectswithoutadditives,orprovidesui
tablenaturalalternativestosatisfyconsumers’demand.

30. What “Clean Label” means for the consumer
• •Clean label part of an evolution in consumer expectations
• •For the consumer, transparency and purity means:
• ‐Simple label list with fewer ingredients
• ‐Recognized ingredients (e.g., kitchen cupboard), not perceived harmful
• ‐Less processed food, more “artisan-like”
• ‐Authentic and transparent packaging showing the real product
• •Natural, GMO-free, free from and Organic are peripheral clean label attributes more and
morerelevant for consumers

31. The role of cereal grain related constituents and ingredients
in human health
Rikard Landberg, Associate Professor Food & Health, Department of Food Science
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
The role of cereal constituents and ingredients for
health- conclusions
• • Beneficial physiological effects have been proven
for specific dietary fibre
• • Evidence for bioactive compounds are
inconclusive
• • More emphasis should be put on the role of
processing
• • More long-term randomized controlled trials are
needed with well characterized material
• • OMICS-technologies should be in more extensivly
incorporated in RCTs and observational studies to
better understand the mechanisms

32. Sensory evaluation and shelf-life of
muscle food products
Wes Schilling
• It is important to focus on Beta (Type II Error) when
determining if changing to a more natural label causes a
noticeable sensory difference
• Cluster Analysis can help reduce variability among
panelists and provide additional information when
determining consumer perception of meat products.
• Shelf-life testing is important when an ingredient change
is made and should include sensory, microbial and color
testing.
• Preference mapping (consumer and descriptive analyses)
often reveals the sensory properties and intensities that
explain consumers’ perceptions of product acceptability.

33. Functionalities of Food Additives and Enzymes in
Muscle Foods: A Technological Perspective
Youling L. Xiong, PhD, Professor Fellow of IFT, ACS AGFD, IAFoST Scientific Editor,
Journal of Food Science Department of Animal and Food Sciences
Additives:Key to the success of processed meats
• Flavor
• Color (appearance)
• Texture
• Mouthfeel
• Products yield (water-binding)
• Product stability and shelf-life (antioxidant)
• Variety of products
• Food safety