Control of glyphosate residues in food in the European union in the period 2007-2022

EFSA JournalVolume 10, Issue 6 2763 Reasoned OpinionOpen Access Reasoned opinion on the review of the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for amitrole according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 European Food Safety Authority, European Food Safety AuthoritySearch for more papers by this author European Food Safety Authority, European Food Safety AuthoritySearch for more papers by this author First published: 12 June 2012 https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2763 Correspondence: pesticides.mrl@efsa.europa.eu Acknowledgement: EFSA wishes to thank the rapporteur Member State France for the preparatory work on this scientific output. Approval date: 9 June 2012 Published date: 12 June 2012 Question number: EFSA-Q-2008-488 On request from: EFSA AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References EC (European Commission), 1996. Appendix G. Livestock Feeding Studies. 7031/VI/95 rev.4. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997a. Appendix A. Metabolism and distribution in plants. 7028/IV/95-rev.3. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997b. Appendix B. General recommendations for the design, preparation and realization of residue trials. Annex 2. Classification of (minor) crops not listed in the Appendix of Council Directive 90/642/EEC. 7029/VI/95-rev.6. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997c. Appendix C. Testing of plant protection products in rotational crops. 7524/VI/95-rev.2. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997d. Appendix E. Processing studies. 7035/VI/95-rev.5. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997e. Appendix F. Metabolism and distribution in domestic animals. 7030/VI/95-rev.3. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997f. Appendix H. Storage stability of residue samples. 7032/VI/95-rev.5. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 1997g. Appendix I. Calculation of maximum residue level and safety intervals. 7039/VI/95. As amended by the document: classes to be used for the setting of EU pesticide maximum residue levels (MRLs). SANCO 10634/2010. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 2000. Residue analytical methods. For pre-registration data requirement for Annex II (part A, section 4) and Annex III (part A, section 5 of Directive 91/414. SANCO/3029/99-rev.4. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 2001. Review report for the active substance amitrole. Finalised in the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at its meeting on 12 December 2000 in view of the inclusion of amitrole in Annex I of Council Directive 91/414/EEC. SANCO 6839/VI/97 Final, 22 March 2001. Available online: ec.europa.eu/sanco_pesticides/public/index.cfm?event=tctivesubstance.selection EC (European Commission), 2010a. Classes to be used for the setting of EU pesticide Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs). SANCO 10634/2010 Rev. 0, finalized in the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at its meeting of 23–24 March 2010. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 2010b. Residue analytical methods. For post-registration control. SANCO/825/00-rev.8-1. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EC (European Commission), 2011. Appendix D. Guidelines on comparability, extrapolation, group tolerances and data requirements for setting MRLs. 7525/VI/95-rev.9. Available online: ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/resources/publications_en.htm EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007. Reasoned opinion on the potential chronic and acute risk to consumers' health arising from proposed temporary EU MRLs according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 on Maximum Residue Levels of Pesticides in Food and Feed of Plant and Animal Origin. 15 March 2007. EURL (European Union Reference Laboratories for Pesticide Residues), 2012. Data pool on method validation for pesticide residues. Status on 31 May 2012. Available online: www.crl-pesticides-datapool.eu FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations), 1974. amitrole. In: Pesticide residues in food – 1974. Report of the Joint Meeting of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Expert Group on Pesticide Residues. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations), 1993. Amitrole. In: Pesticide residues in food – 1993. Evaluations. Part I. Residues. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 117. Available online: www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-themes/theme/pests/pm/jmpr/jmpr-rep/en/ FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations), 1998. Amitrole. In: Pesticide residues in food – 1998. Evaluations. Part I. Residues. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 079. Available online: www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-themes/theme/pests/pm/jmpr/jmpr-rep/en/ FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations), 2009. Submission and evaluation of pesticide residues data for the estimation of Maximum Residue Levels in food and feed. Pesticide Residues. 2nd Ed. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 197, 264 pp. France, 1996. Draft assessment report on the active substance amitrole prepared by the rapporteur Member State France in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, June 1996. France, 2000. Addendum to the draft assessment report on the active substance amitrole prepared by the rapporteur Member State France in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, March 2000. Volume10, Issue6June 20122763 ReferencesRelatedInformation

EFSA Supporting PublicationsVolume 12, Issue 12 918E External scientific reportOpen Access Use of the EFSA Standard Sample Description ver. 2.0 (SSD2) for the reporting of data on the control of pesticide residues in food and feed according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA), National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA) National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA)Search for more papers by this author National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA), National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA) National Sanitary Veterinary and for Food Safety Authority of Romania (ANSVSA)Search for more papers by this author First published: 17 December 2015 https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2015.EN-918 The present document has been produced and adopted by the bodies identified above as author(s). This task has been carried out exclusively by the author(s) in the context of a contract between the European Food Safety Authority and the author(s), awarded following a tender procedure. The present document is published complying with the transparency principle to which the Authority is subject. It may not be considered as an output adopted by the Authority. The European Food Safety Authority reserves its rights, view and position as regards the issues addressed and the conclusions reached in the present document, without prejudice to the rights of the authors. Published date: 17 December 2015 Question number: EFSA-Q-2014-00487 AboutReferencesRelatedInformationPDFPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessClose modalShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL References EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2010. Standard sample description for food and feed. EFSA Journal 2010; 8(1):1457, 54 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1457 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2014a. Use of the EFSA Standard Sample Description for the reporting of data on the control of pesticide residues in food and feed according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (2013 Data Collection). EFSA Journal 2014; 12(1):3545 60 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3545 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2014b. Guidance on the data exchange version 2.0. EFSA Journal 2014; 12(12):3945, 173 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3945 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015a. The EFSA Data Warehouse access rules. EFSA supporting publication 2015:EN-76, 18 pp. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015b. The 2013 European Union report on pesticide residues in food. EFSA Journal 2015; 13(3):4038, 169 pp, doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4105 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015c. Guidelines for reporting data on residues of veterinary medicinal products. EFSA supporting publication 2015:EN-783. 77 pp. European Commission, 2013. Guidance document on analytical quality control and validation procedures for pesticide residues analysis in food and feed. SANCO/12571/2013. Volume12, Issue12December 2015918E ReferencesRelatedInformation RecommendedUse of the EFSA Standard Sample Description for the reporting of data on the control of pesticide residues in food and feed according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005European Food Safety Authority, EFSA JournalUse of the EFSA Standard Sample Description for the reporting of data on the control of pesticide residues in food and feed according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (revision 1)European Food Safety Authority, EFSA JournalUse of the EFSA Standard Sample Description (SSD) for the reporting of data on the control of pesticide residues in food and feed according to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (Version: 2013 Data Collection)European Food Safety Authority, EFSA JournalStandard Sample Description ver. 2.0European Food Safety Authority, EFSA JournalEFSA Catalogue browser User GuideEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Sofia Ioannidou, EFSA Supporting Publications

Modification of the existing MRLs for dimethomorph in various commodities

Disharmonization in the Regulation of Transgenic Plants in Europe

Modification of the current MRLs for acetamiprid in flowering brassica and figs

The present report is based on data from the 2010 EFSA Report on pesticide residues in food, the Norwegian monitoring programmes 2007-2012 and data from peer reviewed literature and governmental agencies. It is a challenge to perform quantitative estimates and comparative studies of residue levels due to large variation in the measured levels, and the large number of different pesticides present in the samples. Thus, the focus is on the frequency of observed contaminations in relation to regulatory limits and to present examples to illustrate the variation in residue values and number of detected substances. 
 Pesticide residues in conventional and organic products:
 Of the 12,168 samples (plant- and animal products) in the 2010 EU-coordinated programme, 1.6% exceeded the respective maximum residue level (MRL) values, and 47.7% had measurable residues above the limit of quantification (LOQ), but below or at the MRL. Of the 1168 samples analysed in Norway in 2012 (from both imported and domestic products), 1.9% exceeded MRL and 53% contained measurable pesticide residues. Direct comparison of these values is however not possible, since they contain different types of food samples, and are analysed for a different number of pesticides.
 When organic and conventional samples from fruit, vegetables and other plant products in the 2010 EU-coordinated programme were compared, 4.2% of the conventional and 1.0% of the organic samples exceeded the MRL values, while 43.2% of the conventional and 10.8% of the organic samples had measurable residues below or at the MRL value. Most of the pesticide residues detected in organic samples are not permitted for use in organic farming. 
 Of the 624 organic samples analysed in Norway 2007 - 2012, 0.2% (one sample) had residues exceeding MRL, while measurable residues were detected in 1.8% of the samples (11 samples).
 Conventional products were often found to contain different pesticides while most organic samples were found to contain few or only one type of pesticide. 
 Lack of data on pesticide residue levels of organic samples in the EU-coordinated programme, and few Norwegian samples do not allow for a quantitative comparison of pesticide residue levels in organic and conventional samples. Comparative estimation of pesticide residues faces a number of challenges and uncertainties. However, it seems unquestionable based on available data that organic plant products contain fewer and substantially lower amounts of pesticide residues than conventional products.
 Health risk associated with pesticide residues:
 The general level of pesticide residues in both conventional and organic food is low, and well below what is likely to result in adverse health effects. This conclusion is based on the comparison of estimated dietary exposure with toxicological reference values i.e. acceptable daily intake (ADI) for chronic effects, and acute reference dose (ARfD) for acute effects. The finding of pesticide residues that exceeds established regulatory limits in a minority of tested samples is not considered to represent a health risk.
 When dietary exposure that was estimated in six different food commodities in the 2010 EUcoordinated programme was compared with their relevant reference values, EFSA concluded that for 79 of 18243 conventionally grown fruit and vegetable samples, a short-term acute consumer health risk could not be excluded. The conclusion was based on the exceeding of ARfD. None of these 79 samples were organic. It is important to also consider that the exceeding of the acute reference value only occurred in 0.4% of the samples and that the scenario used for acute intake assessment is conservative, suggesting that the toxicological implications are limited. This is also reflected in the chronic exposure assessment, where none of the samples were found to exceed the toxicological reference value ADI. 
 Dietary exposure assessments on the basis of Norwegian samples of apples, tomatoes, carrots, strawberries and lettuce did not show an exceeding of any toxicological reference value. 
 Combined exposure and cumulative risk assessment of pesticide residues:
 No generally accepted methodology is at present established for cumulative risk assessment of combined exposure to pesticide residues. Available data suggest however that combined exposure is not likely to result in increased human health risk.

In accordance with Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005, European Union (EU) Member States have to communicate to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) the results of their official controls on pesticide residues in food. In the framework of this communication, the EU Member States, Iceland and Norway provided a short summary report outlining the main findings of the control activities during the reference year. This technical report is the compilation of the contributions of the reporting countries.

In accordance with Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005, European Union (EU) Member States provide to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) the results of their official controls on pesticide residues in food. In this framework, the EU Member States, Iceland and Norway provided further information in the form of explanatory text outlining main findings of their control activities during the reference year. This Technical report is the compilation of those contributions of the reporting countries.

In accordance with Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005, European Union (EU) Member States provide to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) the results of their official controls on pesticide residues in food. In this framework, the EU Member States, Iceland and Norway provided further information in the form of explanatory text outlining main findings of their control activities during the reference year. This Technical report is the compilation of those contributions of the reporting countries.

In accordance with Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005, European Union (EU) Member States have to communicate to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) the results of their official controls on pesticide residues in food. In the framework of this communication, the EU Member States, Iceland and Norway provided a short summary report outlining the main findings of the control activities during the reference year. This technical report is the compilation of the contributions of the reporting countries.

EFSA JournalVolume 7, Issue 6 306r Reasoned OpinionOpen Access Modification of the existing MRLs for spirotetramat in plums and cherries European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)Search for more papers by this author European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)Search for more papers by this author First published: 12 June 2009 https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2009.306rCitations: 2 Approval date: 9 June 2009 Published date: 12 June 2009 Question number: EFSA-Q-2009-00460 AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References Austria, 2008. Draft Assessment Report on spirotetramat prepared by the Rapporteur Member State Austria under Directive 91/414/EEC. April 2008. EFSA, 2008. Addendum to the reasoned opinion of EFSA prepared by PRAPeR on the potential chronic and acute risk to consumers' health arising from proposed temporary EU MRLs according to Regulation (EC) 396/2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in food and feed of plant and animal origin. EFSA Scientific Report (2008) 132, 1– 317. EFSA, 2009. Reasoned opinion of EFSA prepared by the Pesticides Unit (PRAPeR) on the modification of the existing MRLs for spirotetramat in various fruit crops. EFSA Scientific Report (2009) 242, 1– 29. FAO/WHO, 2009. Pesticide residues in food – 2008. Report of the Joint Meeting of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Expert Group on Pesticide Residues. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 193, 2009. Citing Literature Volume7, Issue6June 2009306r ReferencesRelatedInformation

Under European Union legislation (Article 32, Regulation (EC) No 396/2005), the European Food Safety Authority provides an annual report assessing the pesticide residue levels in foods on the European market. In 2022, 96.3% of the overall 110,829 samples analysed fell below the maximum residue level (MRL), 3.7% exceeded this level, of which 2.2% were non‐compliant, i.e. results in a given sample exceeded the MRL after taking into account the measurement uncertainty. For the EU‐coordinated multiannual control programme subset, 11,727 samples were analysed of which 0.9% were non‐compliant. To assess acute and chronic risk to consumer health, dietary exposure to pesticide residues was estimated and compared with available health‐based guidance values (HBGV). Continuation of the probabilistic assessment methodology was consolidated to all pesticides listed in the 2022 EU Regulation providing the probability of a consumer being exposed to an exceedance of the HBGV. Overall, the assessed risk to EU consumer's health is low. Recommendations to risk managers are given to increase the effectiveness of European control systems and to ensure a high level of consumer protection throughout the EU.

Advancing food safety: strategic recommendations from the 'ONE - Health, Environment & Society - Conference 2022'.

Pesticide residues in food in the European Union: Analysis of notifications in the European Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed from 2002 to 2020

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) undertook two crisis training activities during 2021. Both were facilitated online and based on the fictional scenario of a Rift Valley Fever (RVF) outbreak in the European Union (EU). An External Crisis Preparedness Training (ECPT) workshop occurred in July 2021, targeting participants from EU Member States (MSs), EU Agencies and international animal/human health organisations. It was jointly devised, developed and delivered by EFSA with the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’ Abruzzo e del Molise (IZSAM), and has been reported in EFSA Supporting Publications (IZSAM & Instinctif Partners Ltd., 2021). The second workshop, described in this document and designated the Internal Crisis Preparedness Training (ICPT), occurred in November 2021. Using a repurposed version of the ECPT’s RVF scenario, the ICPT’s overall training objective was to plan and practise EFSA’s management of risk communication, in conjunction with other European agencies, during a joint urgent response to a multi-country animal health/public health outbreak. Fourteen participants from EFSA, EFSA’s Communications Expert Network (CEN) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) attended the training, plus 13 observers from EFSA and the European Commission’s (EC’s) Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTE). Plenary and working group activities extended across 1 day, including 3 presentations on EFSA’s and ECDC’s remits, capabilities and communications best practice. A scenario exercise explored how EU agencies and DG SANTE would respond and collaborate if RVF entered the EU. The fictional scenario’s 3 escalating outbreak phases spanned several weeks, encompassing infection spread amongst animal and human populations within several MSs and an EU candidate country. Plenary debrief sessions distilled both events’ discussions into practical recommendations for future enhancements and improvements in areas of collaboration, process and communication. The objectives of each event were achieved, based on recorded outcomes and evaluative feedback from participants.