Archive for August, 2009
Friday, August 28th, 2009
FSANZ Response to the Review Recommendations
In May 2008, an international expert was invited to undertake a review of FSANZ’s safety assessment procedures for genetically modified (GM) foods. The aim of this review was to assess FSANZ’s performance in the assessment of GM food safety against international best practice and to identify areas for enhancement. The reviewer prepared a report for FSANZ in which several recommendations were made.
OVERVIEW
The review report provided a comprehensive analysis of the current FSANZ approach to GM food safety assessments, benchmarked against international best practice in the area. As highlighted in the Review, the current approach used by FSANZ to assess GM foods is consistent with the Codex Principles for the Risk Analysis of Foods Derived from Biotechnology (1), developed by the Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology. Additionally, the report also notes that the comparative approach (or substantial equivalence) to identify potential new or altered hazards associated with GM food used by FSANZ is in line with other regulatory agencies.
The report identifies a number of strengths in the FSANZ approach to GM food safety assessments including:
• highly knowledgeable and multidisciplinary scientific staff involved in the assessment of GM food.
• use of relevant external experts engaged in the FSANZ Fellows program to provide additional scientific input.
• transparency of the communication on GM food safety assessments, including inviting comment from all interested stakeholders and providing documents on the website.
• holding workshops to further educate interested stakeholders in the assessment of GM foods.
• strong international engagement and input into GM areas.
The report also identifies areas where FSANZ could further strengthen its approach to GM food assessments, including:
• ensuring staff have the appropriate expertise to meet any new challenges in GM food assessments arising for the next generation of GM foods currently in the pipeline (e.g. GM animals).
• ensuring capacity within the GM team to continue with international work.
The report identified six key recommendations for FSANZ to consider in relation to the assessment of GM food. The key recommendations from the report are outlined below.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Maintain strong scientific GM team and further strengthen expertise to address future challenges associated with the safety assessment of the next generation of complex GM food.
2. Enhance the engagement of external scientific expertise as appropriate to address future knowledge gaps in assessing the safety of GM food.
3. Investigate the feasibility of managing workload associated with the safety assessment of a GM food application.
4. Continue to engage and establish closer working relationships with other Australian and New Zealand regulatory agencies.
5. Continue to build on FSANZ’s strong international reputation as a leader in GM food safety assessment and explore mechanism(s) to enhance collaboration with international regulatory partners.
6. Continue to provide an open and transparent GM food safety assessment process and enhance the risk communication efforts with key stakeholders.
Proposed FSANZ Actions
Following consideration of the key recommendations in this Review, a number of responses have been developed that address where FSANZ can directly or indirectly implement actions to enhance the standard of GM food assessments. These are:
1. In the future, it is likely that FSANZ will receive applications for GM foods derived from species other than plants, e.g. GM animals. FSANZ will exploit recruitment opportunities to ensure that the scientific capability and technical expertise of staff in the GM team are appropriate to the changing needs of the organisation. FSANZ will also continue to participate in forums to keep abreast of future developments and ensure adequate skills within the organisation.(Recommendations 1 and 3)
2. The development and widespread commercialisation of GM crops results in the need for regulatory approvals to be obtained in many different countries. FSANZ will actively collaborate and share information on GM foods and assessment methodologies with regulatory partners overseas to promote consistency with internationally accepted processes. This could be achieved by using existing Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with other food agencies, exploring the possibility of new MoUs and utilising contacts established through existing networks including the International Chemical Food Safety Liaison Group.(Recommendation 4)
3. Working at the international level to share knowledge and expertise and to develop harmonised approaches to assessing GM food is integral to maintaining the rigor of the safety assessment process and, therefore, is an important component of FSANZ work. FSANZ (representing Australia) will continue to Chair and actively participate in the OECD Taskforce for the Safety of Novel Foods and Feeds and will maintain its role as delegation leader to the Codexad-hocIntergovernmental Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology, should it be re-convened in the future. FSANZ will also consider participation at other forums, e.g. Expert Consultations, to continue to build capacity in assessing GM food.(Recommendation 5)
4. Strengthening capability, including ensuring adequate resources and expertise, will assist in meeting future challenges in relation to GM food safety assessment and enhancing the FSANZ knowledge base. FSANZ will investigate opportunities for FSANZ staff, external to the GM team, to undertake training to increase the pool of internal expertise available to undertake GM food safety assessments. FSANZ will also consider expanding linkages with external experts, including through the FSANZ Fellows Program, to ensure an adequate breadth of scientific knowledge relating to GM food is covered. FSANZ will continue the practice of using external expertise to undertake ad-hoc peer reviews of FSANZ GM food safety assessments. (Recommendation 1,2 and 3)
5. Communicating GM food safety assessment outcomes to a wide range of stakeholders continues to be a challenging process. FSANZ will actively consider ways to engage different stakeholders in the GM food safety assessment process. FSANZ will also continue to use existing forums such as the Consumer Liaison Committee (CLC), Retailers and Manufacturers Liaison Committee (RML) and the Jurisdictional Forum for sharing information related to GM food safety assessments. Additionally, due to the wide and varied nature of stakeholders interested in GM food, FSANZ will consider alternative communication mechanisms including webinars, to communicate GM food issues.(Recommendation 6)
The Review can be found at http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/GM%20Peer%20Review%20Report.pdf
The information in this article was reproduced with permission of Food Standards Australia New Zealand. You can subscribe to this information source by subscribing to the FSANZ website under the Subscription Service http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/subscriptionservice.cfm.
Wednesday, August 26th, 2009
Across Australia, reputable advertising and marketing companies are operating according to the Food and Beverage Code when advertising and marketing foods and beverages.
This Code has been adopted by the AANA (Australian Association of National Advertisers) and it’s members as part of advertising and marketing self-regulation. The object of this Code is to ensure that advertisers and marketers develop and maintain a high sense of social responsibility in advertising and marketing food and beverage products in Australia.
The Code can be found at http://www.aana.com.au/documents/CodeFoodBeverage.pdf
The Code has recently been tested during an advertising complaint against Kellogs. The Advertising Standards Board reviewed submissions from both the company and the complainants and used the Code to determine the result, and it was in favour of Kellogs.
“A complaint about claims and nutritional benefits of a breakfast cereal has resulted in a determination in favour of the cereal company based on the Board’s understanding of how the target audience would interpret the advertisement,” Advertising Standards Bureau, Chief Executive Officer, Ms Fiona Jolly said.
“The complainant argued that the product (Nutrigrain) contains high levels of sugar and salt and is not a healthy product overall and that the advertiser makes selective claims about certain nutrients to create a misleading impression that the product is healthy. This raised a number of interesting issues for the Board,” Ms Jolly advised. “In determining whether an advertisement is truthful the Board’s task is to reflect the community’s attitude - to assess whether the advertisements meet current community expectations for truthfulness given the message the advertisements convey to ordinary consumers.”
“In the Board’s view the community does not expect that an advertisement for a food product will list all, most or even the most significant elements of the food, but it does expect that the information that is presented is correct,” Ms Jolly said.
“The Board’s view is that it is still a community expectation that advertisements are designed to raise consumer interest in a product but are not expected to be the source of all information on which a consumer will base their purchasing decisions. The complete information about the product will be found in store or on the label and packaging material,” Ms Jolly concluded.Information about the advertisement and marketing complaints process for the Advertising Standards Board and a full list of the advertisements considered are on the ASB website: www.adstandards.com.au under ‘Case Reports’.
Monday, August 24th, 2009
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) released the Food Labelling Guide in June. It is intended to provide grocery and food manufacturers with information about the laws and actual guidelines on making claims and representations on any food / beverage labels, packages and advertisements.
“It’s essential that food and grocery manufacturers understand their legal obligations to consumers when labelling, packaging and promoting their products. There are some subtle differences between the requirement of the Code (Food Standards Code) and the Act (Trade Practices Act) , so just complying with the Food Standards Code doesn’t mean manufacturers have met the obligations of the Trade Practices Act,” said Kate Carnell, the Australian Food and Grocery Council Chief.
The Guide is only 17 pages long, is simple and easy to understand. Amongst other useful information, it summarises the penalties that are in place for breaches of the Code and Act. The Guide also provides a really useful checklist that manufacturers can use to ensure they do not breach the Act.
Included in the Food Labelling Guide is a simple explanation of the role of the two main agencies involved in food and grocery labelling - the Food Standards Australia New Zealand and the ACCC. This will be a significant help to business in understanding the structure of labelling law development and monitoring.
As there is a potential of penalties of up to $1.1m and related costs if a company breaches the labelling laws, this Guide will be a huge help to food and grocery manufacturers. It can be found at www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/877504
Thursday, August 20th, 2009
FSANZ INVITES PUBLIC COMMENT ON FOOD SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR PRODUCTION
OF SEED SPROUTS (Australia only)Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) today invited individuals and organisations with an interest in the regulation of food to provide information and comment on a proposal to develop measures to maximise seed sprouts safety.
The proposal is considering the development of a food safety standard for the production of seed sprouts (e.g.alfalfa, mung beans) for human consumption in Australia. Such a standard would be incorporated into the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code.
Submissions should reach FSANZ by Wednesday 26 August 2009.
Primary production and processing standard for seed sprouts (Australia only)
(Proposal P1004 - First Assessment Report)
FSANZ is progressively developing national food safety standards for Australia’s primary industries. The intention is to improve food safety from farm to table by extending existing food safety requirements in the Food Standards Code for the processing, handling and retail sale of food to the primary production and processing of food commodities.
Seed sprouts could be contaminated by pathogenic microorganisms ─ such as Salmonella ─ and, if contaminated, could present an unacceptable health risk to consumers. FSANZ has assessed the risks to human health from hazards introduced at various stages of the production process and is proposing several management options to minimise food safety risks associated with consumption of seed sprouts. We invite interested parties to comment on our food safety evaluations and on the risk mitigation options being considered.
Submissions: FSANZ welcomes public comment from industry, public health professionals, government agencies and consumers. Details of the First Assessment Report for the primary production and processing of seed sprouts can be found on
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/P1004%20PPPS%20Seed%20sprouts%201AR%20FINAL.pdf
The above information was provided with permission from Food Standards Australia New Zealand.
Tuesday, August 18th, 2009
In Australia, the Heart Foundation Tick is well recognised as showing foods that meet strict health limits, and it is known that consumers purchase these foods based on the Tick being on the label.
There has been some discussion overseas about having a symbol on the label for products containing any of the recognised food allergens. It is not yet a requirement in Australia, but is certainly an issue that is being raised by many.
With the incidence of allergies increasing across the world, allergen labelling of food and other products (eg; skin care) is becoming more and more of an issue. In Australia and New Zealand, the Food Standards Code contains all the current allergen labelling requirements for foods. Non food products are not covered by these however, and as such there is a potential allergy issue with these types of products when the food allergens are added to them, eg; peanut oil being used in skin care products.
There are two basic groups of food allergens; those meant to be in the food or product and the unintended. The unintended allergens are those that are not in the ingredient list or recipe and therefore should not be in the food or product. The Food Standards Code requires that there be no unintended allergens in a food, so food businesses must therefore have controls in place to ensure that it meets this requirement. Labelling is just one of these controls.
Whilst an allergen symbol on a food or product label would be extremely useful to the public and particularly to those who have food allergies, there are significant issues with it and it’s implementation in the food industry.
In Australia, an allergen symbol will provide those that do not speak English with an easily identifiable way of knowing that a food contains at least one allergen. It will also support current allergen labelling requirements and remove much of the current confusion about the “May Contain” and similar statements.
The food industry issues include;
• what type of symbol,
• should there be variations identifying the different types of allergens (eg; a red version for peanuts),
• when does the symbol actually have to be used (when we know the allergens is definitely there or only when it may be there),
• will there be a fee for use,
• what guidelines will be in place for it’s use,
• who would be responsible for the symbol,
• will a testing program be required to have and maintain use of the symbol,
• what will the symbol look like and how is it to be used and placed on the package
Before an allergen symbol can be used on foods and other products in Australia and New Zealand, these and other issues need to be resolved. In the meantime, the Allergen Bureau has a scientifically tested method for labelling allergens (VITAL) which provides both the food industry and the public with a simple and effective way of identifying the presence of allergens in a food. It can be found at www.allergenbureau.net.au
