
Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 74, Revision 3 (FGE.74Rev3): Consideration of Simple Aliphatic Sulphides and Thiols evaluated by the JECFA (53 rd and 61 st meeting) Structurally related to Aliphatic and Alicyclic Mono‐, Di‐, Tri‐, and Polysulphides with or without Additional Oxygenated Functional Groups from Chemical Group 20 evaluated by EFSA in FGE.08Rev5 (2012)
Author(s) -
Nathalie Gontard
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
efsa journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.076
H-Index - 97
ISSN - 1831-4732
DOI - 10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3710
Subject(s) - food contact materials , food additive , toxicology , acceptable daily intake , food science , chemistry , environmental health , food packaging , medicine , pesticide , biology , agronomy
The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids of the European Food Safety Authority was requested to consider evaluations of flavouring substances assessed since 2000 by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (the JECFA), and to decide whether further evaluation is necessary, as laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000. The present consideration concerns a group of 19 simple aliphatic sulphides and thiols evaluated by the JECFA at the 53 rd meeting in 1999 and the 61 st meeting in 2003. The substances were evaluated through a stepwise approach that integrates information on structure‐activity relationships, intake from current uses, toxicological threshold of concern, and available data on metabolism and toxicity. For nine substances [FL‐no: 12.088, 12.179, 12.198, 12.212, 12.238, 12.239, 12.255, 12.257 and 12.291] considered in this FGE, the Panel concluded that they would pose “No safety concern at estimated levels of intake as flavouring substances” based on the MSDI approach. Besides the safety assessment of these flavouring substances, the specifications for the materials of commerce have also been considered for the substances evaluated through the Procedure and for all nine substances, the information is adequate. Thus, the Panel concluded that nine substances [FL‐no: 12.088, 12.179, 12.198, 12.212, 12.238, 12.239, 12.255, 12.257 and 12.291] do not give rise to safety concern at their levels of dietary intake, estimated on the basis of the MSDI approach. For 10 candidate substances in FGE.74Rev3 [FL‐no: 12.009, 12.013, 12.020, 12.023, 12.045, 12.074, 12.155, 12.169, 12.241 and 12.280] evaluated through the Procedure, the Panel concluded that additional toxicity data are required.