Substances For Food Contact Materials Research Articles

Perfluoroalkyl substances in food contact materials: preliminary investigation in Vietnam and global comparison.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a group of concerned persistent toxic substances, especially for their application or unintentional formation in food contact materials (FCMs). However, information about the occurrence, sources, and fate of these pollutants in food packaging materials from Vietnam as well as Southeast Asian countries is probably still obscured. In this study, levels of 13 perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) and 4 sulfonates (PFSs) were determined in various types of food packaging samples collected from Vietnamese markets. Generally low concentrations of total 17 PFASs (median 0.341; max 624 ng/g) suggested that these compounds were mainly inadvertently produced rather than intentionally added to the packaging materials. A few mochi paper tray samples had relatively high PFAS levels (372-624 ng/g), which were dominated by long-chain (C8-C12) PFCAs. A comprehensive and updated overview of PFASs in FCMs from different countries in the world was also provided. Current database could not provide conclusive trends of PFAS concentrations and profiles in FCMs between continents and countries. The highest levels up to ppm were reported for PFCAs (e.g., PFBA, PFHxA, PFOA, and PFDA) and several fluorotelomer alcohols and carboxylic acids, while PFSs were almost absent in FCMs. FPASs can emit from FCMs, migrate to food, and then contribute to dietary exposure in humans and animals. Additional investigations on the occurrence, sources, behavior and fate, and impacts of PFASs in FCMs are critically needed, especially in emerging and developing countries.

Effect of food simulants on stability of copper oxide in bionanocomposite food packaging film

AbstractAddition of copper oxide nanoparticles (CuONPs) to poly (butylene‐adipate‐co‐terephthalate) (PBAT)/thermoplastic starch (TPS) biopolymer blend produced bionanocomposite films with improved mechanical and oxygen barrier properties, as well as enhanced other benefits including antimicrobial activity. In this study, the PBAT/TPS‐CuO bionanocomposite films with varying CuONPs contents (0.05%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2%) were challenged by food simulants (10% ethanol represented to aqueous food and 3% acetic acid represented to acidic food) in accordance with European Regulation 10/2011. CuONPs in the bionanocomposite films demonstrated good stability when exposed to 10% ethanol; however, it was dissolved in 3% acetic acid. The X‐ray diffraction and the energy dispersive spectroscopy results showed that CuONPs in the film were completely lost after acid exposure, whereas CuONPs in the films exposed to 10% EtOH were preserved. The maximum overall migration value was 5.0 mg/dm2. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy was used to confirm the presence of Cu in the simulants. The highest soluble Cu value of 12.39 mg/kg was detected from PBAT/TPS‐CuO2%, while migration value decreased as concentration ratio in film decreased. Although both values were within the threshold limits established by current legislation for non‐specific migration limit substances in food contact materials, the properties of bionanocomposite were altered. The mechanical properties of a post‐migrated PBAT‐TPS/CuO films taken from acidic conditions were reduced by 22% in tensile strength and 53% in elongation at break due to holes and microcracks on the film surface observed by scanning electron microscope. The average sealing strength of all bionanocomposite films decreased by about 25% after acid exposure. The oxygen permeability, on the other hand, was significantly improved, with a 16.3% reduction. Because the film had lost all of its active agent, film was unable to inhibit Escherichia coli growth. While 3% acetic acid caused dissolution of CuONPs and significant changes in properties of PBAT/TPS‐CuO film, 10% ethanol caused very minor to no changes in bionanocomposite film properties.

A Collision Cross Section Database for Extractables and Leachables from Food Contact Materials.

The chemicals in food contact materials (FCMs) can migrate into food and endanger human health. In this study, we developed a database of traveling wave collision cross section in nitrogen (TWCCSN2) values for extractables and leachables from FCMs. The database contains a total of 1038 TWCCSN2 values from 675 standards including those commonly used additives and nonintentionally added substances in FCMs. The TWCCSN2 values in the database were compared to previously published values, and 85.7, 87.7, and 64.9% [M + H]+, [M + Na]+, and [M – H]− adducts showed deviations <2%, with the presence of protomers, post-ion mobility spectrometry dissociation of noncovalent clusters and inconsistent calibration are possible sources of CCS deviations. Our experimental TWCCSN2 values were also compared to CCS values from three prediction tools. Of the three, CCSondemand gave the most accurate predictions. The TWCCSN2 database developed will aid the identification and differentiation of chemicals from FCMs in targeted and untargeted analysis.

Safety assessment of the substance poly((R)-3-hydroxybutyrate-co-(R)-3-hydroxyhexanoate) for use in food contact materials.

The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP Panel) assessed the safety of poly((R)‐3‐hydroxybutyrate‐co‐(R)‐3‐hydroxyhexanoate) (PHBH), CAS No 147398‐31‐0 and food contact material (FCM) substance No 1059. This biodegradable copolymer is produced by fermentation of palm oil using a genetically modified microorganism (Cupriavidus necator). Overall migration was up to 5.4 mg/kg. Oligomers are hydroxyl‐terminated or with crotyl‐ and hexenyl end‐groups from dehydration of hydroxyl end‐groups. In the absence of calibration standards, the total oligomer migration was set at the overall migration values. Other degradation products are crotonic acid and (E)‐2‐hexenoic acid. Crotonic acid is authorised for use in FCMs with a specific migration limit (SML) of 0.05 mg/kg food. For (E)‐2‐hexenoic acid, no indication for genotoxicity was identified by the EFSA CEF Panel in its group evaluation of flavouring substances in FGE.05Rev2 (EFSA CEF Panel, 2010b). The other migrating substances detected, ■■■■■, are from the authorised substance ‘palm oil and/or palm fatty acid distillate’ (FCM substance No 9) used as a carbon source for the fermentation and do not give rise to safety concern. A PHBH oligomer mixture was synthesized to simulate that migrating. It did not give rise to concern for genotoxicity. From the repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats, the Panel identified the no‐observed‐adverse‐effect level (NOAEL) at the highest dose tested in males, 1,364 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. The Panel concluded that the potential for bioaccumulation of oligomers is low. Overall, the CEP Panel concluded that the substance PHBH is not of safety concern for the consumer if it is used alone or blended with other polymers in contact with all kinds of food during more than 6 months at room temperature or below, including hot‐fill or a short heating up phase. The specific migration of all oligomers < 1,000 Da should not exceed 5 mg/kg food. The migration of crotonic acid should not exceed the SML of 0.05 mg/kg food. As the migration of (E)‐2‐hexenoic acid can be expected to be always lower than that of crotonic acid, no individual restriction is necessary.

Review of the state of the art of human biomonitoring for chemical substances and its application to human exposure assessment for food safety

Review of the state of the art of human biomonitoring for chemical substances and its application to human exposure assessment for food safety

Non-intentionally added substances in food contact materials: EU regulatory requirements and safety assessment

Non-intentionally added substances in food contact materials: EU regulatory requirements and safety assessment

Scientific Opinion on the safety assessment of the substance, polyglycerol, CAS No 25618‐55‐7, for use in food contact materials

This scientific opinion of EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids deals with the safety assessment of the additive polyglycerol with the CAS No 25618-55-7, the FCM substance No 01017 for use as plasticizer at a maximum use level of 6.5 % w/w in polymer blends of aliphatic-aromatic polyesters. Final articles are intended to be used in contact with all type of foods for any time at room temperature. Specific migration from a material containing the maximum requested concentration for polyglycerol was calculated by migration modelling to be up to 50 mg/kg food under contact conditions of 10 days at 40 °C. Polyglycerol esters were evaluated by JECFA who established an ADI of 0–25 mg/kg bw, and are listed as a food additive (E 475) at levels between 500 and 10 000 mg/kg in certain foods. Up to 7 % of free glycerol/polyglycerol is allowed in E 475 (i.e. 700 mg/kg). No accumulation of polyglycerol in body tissue was observed in an ADME study. The Panel considered that impurities and glycerol which is authorised as a food contact material substance in Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 without a specific migration limit do not raise a safety concern. The CEF Panel concluded that the substance polyglycerol does not raise a safety concern for the consumer if the substance is only to be used as plasticizer at a maximum use level of 6.5 % w/w in polymer blends of aliphatic-aromatic polyesters in contact with all type of foods for any time at room temperature and below.

Food contact materials, flavouring substances and smoke flavourings

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food (AFC Panel) and the subsequent Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) have undertaken evaluations of the safety of flavourings (both chemically defined substances and mixtures such as smoke flavourings) and food contact materials (FCM), as well as assessments on other substances used in food. The major progress in methodologies for the evaluation of the safety of these substances is highlighted in this article. By December 2011, scientific opinions had been adopted for 247 substances for food contact materials, mainly plastics. Adoption of a series of opinions on active and/or intelligent packaging substances and on recycling processes of plastics is planned between July 2012 and December 2013. Panel opinions, EFSA statements/reports and guidance documents were published on specific issues and on substances for which there was an urgent request for safety evaluation (for example isopropylthioxanthone (ITX), bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, epoxidised soybean oil (ESBO), benzophenone and 4-methylbenzophenone). By 2009, the AFC and CEF Panels had completed the safety review of 2 067 flavourings substances used in the EU. Additional data, which were requested for 404 substances, are currently under evaluation or have been generated. Eleven smoke flavourings have been evaluated, and the CEF Panel has prepared a guidance document on the future data required for the evaluation of flavourings.

Risk assessment of food-contact materials: past experience and future challenges

The tiered approaches used in the European Union and the USA for the risk assessment of substances in food-contact materials are based on the principle that the amounts of data required to establish safety-in-use depend on the extent of dietary exposure. Tiered approaches are increasingly recognized as sound approaches for chemical risk assessment, which not only offer consumers reasonable certainty of no harm, but also avoid unnecessary toxicological testing and focus scarce risk-assessment resources on substances of potential concern. Although the European Union and United States approaches were developed separately, their tiered testing recommendations are similar. This paper indicates the savings they have brought in the use of animals and suggests areas where testing recommendations for higher dietary exposures might be further refined. It also discusses some of the future challenges in risk assessment of food-contact materials.

Scientific Opinion on 26th list of substances for food contact materials

Scientific Opinion on 26th list of substances for food contact materials

25th list of substances for food contact materials

25th list of substances for food contact materials

24th list of substances for food contact materials

24th list of substances for food contact materials

23rd list of substances for food contact materials

23rd list of substances for food contact materials

22nd list of substances for food contact materials

22nd list of substances for food contact materials

21st list of substances for food contact materials - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF)

21st list of substances for food contact materials - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF)

20th list of substances for food contact materials ‐ Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF)

EFSA JournalVolume 6, Issue 10 816 OpinionOpen Access 20th list of substances for food contact materials - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 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: 09 October 2008 https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2008.816 Panel members: Arturo Anadón, David Bell, Mona-Lise Binderup, Wilfried Bursch, Laurence Castle, Riccardo Crebelli, Karl-Heinz Engel, Roland Franz, Nathalie Gontard, Thomas Haertlé, Trine Husøy, Klaus-Dieter Jany, Catherine Leclercq, Jean-Claude Lhuguenot, Wim Mennes, Maria Rosaria Milana, Karla Pfaff, Kettil Svensson, Fidel Toldrá, Rosemary Waring, Detlef Wölfle. Acknowledgement: The European Food Safety Authority wishes to thank Herman Autrup, Mona-Lise Binderup, Laurence Castle, Riccardo Crebelli, Wolfgang Dekant, Roland Franz, Nathalie Gontard, Sander Koster, Eugenia Lampi, Jean-Claude Lhuguenot, François Xavier Malcata, Maria Rosaria Milana, Karla Pfaff, Tjoena Siere, Linda Stolker, Paul Tobback, Detlef Wölfle and Esther Zondervan for their contribution to the draft opinion. Adoption date: 25 September 2008 Published date: 9 October 2008 Question number: EFSA-Q-2006-139, EFSA-Q-2006-171, EFSA-Q-2006-183, EFSA-Q-2007-013, EFSA-Q-2007-019, EFSA-Q-2008-030 Amended: 9 June 2017 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 onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume6, Issue10October 2008816 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and their salts Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food chain.

Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and their salts Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food chain.

19th list of substances for food contact materials - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC)

19th list of substances for food contact materials - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC)

18th list of substances for food contact materials - Opinion of the Scientific Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food

18th list of substances for food contact materials - Opinion of the Scientific Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food

Opinion of the Scientific Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC) on a request related to a 17th list of substances for food contact materials

Opinion of the Scientific Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC) on a request related to a 17th list of substances for food contact materials