Food Standards Agency
Saturday 4 July 2009
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's NewRSS
What is RSS?Listen
Listen to this siteTuesday 19 March 2002
Minutes of the 36th meeting held on Thursday 29 November 2001, at 11:00 am in Conference Rooms 3 and 4, Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NH.
Dr D Watson (Chairman)
Food Standards Agency (FSA)
Chemical Safety and Toxicology Division (CST)
Mr R Sinclair (Secretariat)
FSA, CST
Dr K Barnes (Secretariat)
FSA, CST
Dr P Willetts (Secretariat)
FSA, CST
Mr E Potter (Secretariat)
FSA, CST
Mr R Ashby
Consultant
Mr N Barnwell
Paper Federation of Great Britain
Mr B Cass
Linpac Plastics
Dr L Castle
Central Science Laboratory
Dr N Gault
Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland
Mr P Grayhurst
British Glass
Mr R Parry
Crest Packaging plc
Mr K Rees
Packaging & Industrial Films Association
Mr E B Reynolds
LACOTS
Dr J Shavila
FSA, CST
Mrs A Townshend
National Federation of Consumer Groups
Mr R Whitaker
Crown Corporate Technologies
1.1 The Chairman welcomed members to the meeting. He introduced Dr Karen Barnes as the new joint Head of the Food Contact Materials Unit. He also introduced Mr Edward Potter who is temporarily replacing Dr Simona Origgi-Fernando following her move to a new position in the Agency.
1.2 The Chairman informed members that the papers and agreed minutes from this meeting would be published on the Agency’s website in due course.
Back to top2.1 Apologies for absence had been received from Mr Paul Raynor, Mr John Horwood and Mr John Hewitt.
Back to topThe minutes of the 35th meeting were agreed by members and signed by the Chairman as a true record of the meeting. These minutes had been included in the Review document published earlier in the year.
Back to top4.1 Further to item 4.1 of WPFCM/MIN/35 the Chairman informed members that proposals for new scientific work on food contact materials had been included in the most recent Agency Research Requirements Document, published in late September. These proposals were summarised in Annex II of paper WPFCM/131. The deadline (20th November 2001) for the submission of bids in response to the published requirements had just passed.
4.2 Further to item 4.3 of WPFCM/MIN/35, the Chairman also informed members that the composition of the Agency’s Board had changed following the resignation of Mr Gurbux Singh. Copies of a booklet giving the Food Standards Agency’s Board current membership were available from the side table at this Working Party meeting.
4.3 Further to item 5.3 of WPFCM/MIN/35, the Chairman confirmed that the consultation exercise with stakeholders, undertaken following the publication of a Food Surveillance Information Sheet on bisphenols A and F, had been completed on 4th July. A report on the outcome of the consultation and the Agency’s current position had been placed on the FSA website.
4.4 The Chairman also noted that the Board of the Food Standards Agency had favourably reviewed the work on food contact materials carried out by the Unit, at a meeting towards the end of 2000.
Back to top5.1 In his presentation on policy for food contact materials in the Agency, Mr Sinclair highlighted the key priorities, aims and objectives for the work, referring to the importance of a sound scientific basis. He pointed to the achievements that had been made, for example in legislation on plastics and in the reporting of surveillance. In conclusion, Mr Sinclair summarised for members the impending issues to be addressed, noting in particular the prioritisation of future controls for coatings as well as those on paper and board.
5.2 In relation to the enforcement issues that Mr Sinclair mentioned, Mr Ashby enquired whether the Agency audited inspections carried out by Trading Standards.
In reply the Chairman confirmed that the Local Authority Enforcement Division of the Agency was doing this. The results of inspections are published. The Agency is in the process of developing an auditing system and those parties interested in this should contact Mr Sinclair.
Mr Reynolds said that vital information was no longer available since quarterly reports from Public Analysts had been discontinued and he noted the duty under European legislation to collate data and enforce controls. Mr Ashby similarly expressed concern, questioning whether the actions being taken were achieving their objective.
He asked whether random audits were carried out and what samples were taken, suggesting that it could be informative to look at what happens in other countries. Mr Sinclair agreed to contact the Local Authority Enforcement Division and come back on these points. The Chairman concluded that communication channels on this subject should be kept open.
ACTION: MR SINCLAIR
5.3 Mr Grayhurst asked what the term ‘coatings’ encompassed. Mr Sinclair explained that the recent interest of the Agency had been in coatings on cans, but that it was envisaged that controls in this area would involve a far wider range of surface coatings. Mr Ashby stated the need to influence the European Commission on this matter. The desirability of including polymeric coatings on metal substrates and on regenerated cellulose films in future controls was emphasised. The Chairman added that, with regard to can coatings, it was difficult to keep everybody on side, noting on-going discussions with the US regarding NOGE. Mr Sinclair confirmed, in response to Mr Whitaker, that he believed the Commission intended to take forward work on coatings drawn up by the Council of Europe.
5.4 The Chairman said that there was an evolving relationship between the Commission and the Council of Europe. It was noted, for example, that the implementation of the Safety Evaluation Scheme proposed by the Council of Europe had been postponed, following the Commission’s indication that its own processes for formal safety assessment would still have to be followed. The way in which the Scientific Committee on Food would deal with the issue of coatings remains uncertain.
5.5 The Chairman added that the aim of the Commission should be to promote harmonisation of controls and discourage national authorities from taking action on their own. He recognised that there was potential for a North/South European divide occurring over, for example, paper and board regulations. It was also important to look into the legislation on cork and household ceramics, as well as that for plastics and paper and board.
5.6 Mr Reynolds added that there was still a need for formal guidance on enforcing the law. The Chairman reported that the Agency would be looking into this with regard to plastics, in the coming year. He reminded members that, in conjunction with the British Plastics Federation, guidance on enforcing legislation on plastics had previously been produced for local authorities.
Back to top6.1 The Chairman drew members’ attention to Annex III of WPFCM/131, on proposals for projects for possible commissioning in Financial Year 2003. He invited members to comment on these proposals and to suggest other areas, indicating that ‘relevance’ was a key matter in these considerations.
6.2 The Chairman then asked members for their comments on the proposal for a project on substances migrating from ion-exchange resins. Dr Castle responded that this was an important area for research as in the use of the resins, for example to treat juices, a large area of ion-exchange resin makes contact with the foodstuff. Additionally, the consumption of these beverages is high. Mr Reynolds asked to what extent ion-exchange resins were re-used and to what degree they are damaged after re-generation. He gave an example of the tainting of cider during production, that might have occurred in this way. Dr Castle confirmed that the ion-exchange resins are re-used and consequentially this was a worthwhile area of investigation. It was agreed that foreseeable mis-use should be incorporated in any proposal on this topic.
6.3 The Chairman introduced the topic of latex protein as a potential migrant from food contact materials. He stressed that the Agency did not have data to suggest that migration occurred from rubber latex, but referred to one recent publication which indicated that latex protein might be transferred to food during handling by processors wearing latex gloves. For those individuals who are affected by exposure to this material, although the number of such people is small, it is a serious matter and might result in anaphylactic shock in sensitive individuals.
6.4 Mr Sinclair believed that the US FDA were going to consult on plans to amend their legislation requiring food handlers to wear gloves. He referred to a report conducted on the skin sensitivity of medical workers in the USA. He also reported that he had chaired a meeting with the Latex Allergy Support Group. The Chairman agreed that the group appears to have a genuine fear and that this subject offers a credible case for further scientific research. Levels at which a reaction was triggered would have to be considered. Dr Shavila suggested joint work with the Medical Devices Agency in order to put exposure into context. He commented that it may be worthwhile to conduct a study with epidemiological specialists.
6.5 Dr Barnes commented that it may be difficult to quantify the levels of latex protein transmitted from gloves to the wearer. In the recent paper on this, experimentation had been conducted on extreme conditions of use. She then referred to an example where a local health authority had asked staff not to wear latex gloves. A legislative route banning the use of latex gloves in food handling may be an alternative approach. Dr Castle noted that PVC gloves had been banned in several countries and concluded that there was a need for a balanced approach. He also acknowledged the difficulties associated with interpreting results. The Chairman confirmed that the Agency would have to take a strong line where anaphylactic shock might be involved. However he stressed the need for careful science to establish whether there was an issue.
6.6 Mr Whitaker drew attention to the fact that if food handlers were asked to stop using latex gloves, it might lead to demands for latex to be withdrawn from other applications. He pointed out that while there may be suitable alternatives to rubber latex in the case of gloves, there may not be suitable alternative substances available for other latex-type applications. Any investigation should be more far-reaching than simply an investigation into rubber gloves. He informed members that his customers often enquire about rubber used as an adhesive sealant for can ends. Mr Parry reported cases of where latex is used on packaging sealant in confectionery bars.
6.7 The Chairman asked for comments on possible research on basketware in contact with food. Dr Barnes observed that the area of basketware had not as yet been investigated. Mr Reynolds considered decorative finishes, lacquers and retained microbiological contamination as being of potential concern. Dr Barnes asked whether there are specific coatings for basketware. Mr Reynolds replied that as the production of basketware is often confined to ‘cottage industries’ very little is known about production techniques. Similarly the quality of water used in soaking willow to make it more pliable for such use is also unknown. Cheap imports from Far East countries might be a problem. The Chairman said that there could also be a problem with traceability.
6.7.1 The Chairman concluded by recommending that the three proposals listed in the Annex III of WPFCM/131 go forward for possible inclusion in the Requirements Document, with ion-exchange resins being given priority.
Members agreed.
ACTION: DR BARNES
6.8 The Chairman invited members to put forward other ideas for further research. Mr Whitaker expressed concerns over chlorohydrins from epoxidised soya bean oil (ESBO). It was suggested that this was an issue in which the Joint Research Centre may have an interest. He also recommended that the Agency consider an investigation of the chlorohydrins of fatty acids, in view of the fact that oils to which consumers were exposed contained about one per cent of mono-epoxy compounds. These could be converted to chlorohydrins during preparation of the foodstuff. The Chairman thanked Mr Whitaker, asking him to leave the matter with FSA, noting the previous surveillance for ESBO and the intention to return to this topic.
6.10 The Chairman suggested there was not a restriction on investigating physiological effects of contaminants in the FSA’s research.
He suggested that Dr Shavila look into toxicological aspects of epoxy compounds in fats. Mr Whitaker reported that adequate supporting information was also required in respect of consumption/exposure assessments.
In reply, the Chairman noted the difficulties of using probabilistic modelling to assess intakes and asked Dr Shavila what the impact of limited exposure data was in SCF deliberations.
Dr Shavila responded that SCF used to have a working group looking into intakes but this no longer meets regularly.
Dr Willetts noted that there seemed to be a developing interest in the area of exposure/risk assessment. There had been a recent ILSI meeting on this topic, and there was a forthcoming meeting on risk assessment being arranged by the Royal Society of Chemistry.
ACTION: DR SHAVILA
6.11 Mr Barnwell asked whether with levels of consumer exposure to packaging increasing (especially paper and board) the Agency is overlooking a potentially vital area of research (on changes in use of packaging).
Some work had been done by industry. Dr Barnes explained that there is currently a project underway investigating aspects of the packaging for staple foodstuffs in the diet. It includes a categorisation of the risk associated with chemical components in the packaging, though it is only a ‘sighting’ study.
At the Chairman’s suggestion Mr Barnwell said he could possibly attend the next meeting with the contractors for this project. Dr Barnes noted that the project is nearing completion so this may not be possible, but Mr Barnwell could be sent a copy of the published report.
Mr Reynolds asked whether the project would provide information on differing approaches to packaging made by different retailers, citing an example of rice packaged either in cardboard or in heat-sealed plastic bags.
Dr Barnes referred to soup as an example of a product in the project where different types of packaging were being considered. Mr Barnwell asked whether a boxed-pizza was included in this project.
Dr Willetts noted that this was included in a current project on take-away foods.
6.12 The Chairman then invited members to consider Annex IV of WPFCM/131. He noted that all materials apart from metals/alloys and cork had been prioritised equally. Mr Reynolds suggested that materials should be ranked by frequency of use. Mr Cass commented that attention should not be limited to current uses of packaging but also to estimated future use. He agreed with Mr Whitaker that the use of laminates and recycled materials was likely to increase in the future. Mr Barnwell noted that the recycling of paper and board was established. Mr Whitaker added that investigating recycled packaging (especially plastics) would be worthwhile. He considered that it was difficult to demonstrate if such materials were safe for use. Whilst not so concerned with glass and metal he suggested that imported items, for example recycled kitchen roll, required attention.
6.13 Mr Reynolds observed that peelable and resealable packaging does not always get realigned between use. He asked whether this was being investigated.
The Chairman responded that this could be looked into.
Mr Reynolds then asked if any work had been conducted on claims made by packaging manufacturers that their products are ‘easily openable’.
Mr Grayhurst confirmed that the Packaging Federation was looking into this matter.
The main priority was to protect the contents and this might conflict with ease of opening. Mrs Townshend commented that if convenience foodstuffs are to be eaten ‘on the move’ then they must be openable without the need for kitchen implements. The Chairman welcomed the flow of information on this topic and asked Mr Sinclair to make enquiries (within the Agency) about progress on resealable packaging.
ACTION: MR SINCLAIR
6.14 Mr Reynolds expressed his concerns over the exposure of base metals after the covering of plated metalware had been removed. Dr Barnes referred to an FSA-funded project on the migration of metals and coating materials from kitchenware products, and a project investigating migration from ceramics. The effects on migration of repeat use, including scouring and dishwashing cycles, are being investigated in both of these projects.
Back to top
(Badge and related substances in canned foods WPFCM/132, 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole and benzothiazole from rubber WPFCM/133, and Survey of bisphenols in canned foods WPFCM/134)
7.1 These papers were noted.
8.1 The Chairman informed members that the Research Review Group, chaired by Sir John Arbuthnott, had published its review of the Agency’s research portfolio and the future strategy for the programme of research and surveillance. In its recommendations, the Review Group had highlighted the need for the Agency to establish a Research Advisory Committee (to oversee the Agency’s research strategy and advise on the direction of its research). It was also recommended that the Agency should develop active links with other appropriate research organisations and that joint funding of initiatives, both nationally and internationally, is encouraged. The Agency should continue to procure the majority of its research through an open and competitive process but this approach should be supplemented by supporting one or two centres of excellence if appropriate, and setting up a scheme for postgraduate scholarships
8.2 Dr Barnes said that Dr Roger Wood (FSA) had asked her to draw the attention of Working Party members to a draft report from CEN TC 194/SC1 on the validation of analytical methods, migration testing and analytical data for materials and articles in contact with food. Copies of this report are available from Dr Wood who would appreciate any comments or criticism. Dr Wood’s contact details were provided.
Back to topThe Chairman informed members that the Secretariat would trawl by post for a suitable date for the next meeting, which would be held in May 2002. Mr Reynolds asked if the trawl could be performed before Christmas. The Chairman confirmed that it would be carried out as quickly as possible.
SECRETARIAT
December 2001
Find out what our other sites have to offer