No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This article analyses the consequences of the implementation of the nutrition and health claim regulation in the field of food products containing antioxidants or food products claiming antioxidant activity. To this end, it first examines the origin and creation of the regulation and the involvement of EFSA in assessing scientific substantiation of health claims. Three criteria are regarded as critical in EFSA's opinions on the scientific substantiation of a health claim: the claimed effect (i) is well defined; (ii) is a clear beneficial physiological effect; and (iii) shows a cause effect relationship with the consumption of the food or functional ingredient. These criteria have implications for the research requested to substantiate health claims, although these implications do not all seem to fit nutrition research as it is currently executed. Looking at antioxidants, the complexity of the mechanisms and actions of antioxidants is not recognised by the criteria used to evaluate proposed health claims, nor by the methodologies used to assess the effects of antioxidants. These criteria should be adjusted with novel scientific insights after consulting stakeholders.

This paper presents selected highlights from the 'Engaging with society' session of EFSA's third Scientific Conference 'Science, Food and Society' (Parma, Italy, 18-21 September 2018). The social dimension for scientific advisory bodies largely concerns science communication and public engagement. The political, economic and technological transformation of contemporary societies is challenging conventional structures and approaches in these areas. The disintermediation of communication and the proliferation of misinformation, it is argued, herald the onset of the post-truth society. A better understanding of the way individuals consume information today has led to the development of tools to guide mediators such as journalists and communication specialists in countering these trends. Public engagement can reinforce confidence in regulatory bodies and potentially contribute to the quality of the scientific process. Scientific advisory bodies in Europe have created strategies and mechanisms to engage the public that are designed to increase transparency and representativeness. To be effective, several engagement mechanisms are needed, although factors such as resource constraints, institutional culture and public/ stakeholder attitudes may limit their development. In conclusion, a more vigorous role for social research is needed to place scientific risk assessment within broader socio-economic and political contexts. Social science expertise can help to define more impactful public information strategies and to explore the potential opportunities that engaged stakeholders and citizens can make to sustain and strengthen regulatory science.

Sulphites or sulphiting agents refer to sodium hydrogen sulphite, sodium metabisulphite, potassium metabisulphite, calcium sulphite, calcium hydrogen sulphite, and potassium hydrogen sulphite. As food additives, they are widely used by the food industry with a variety of commercial uses in food and beverages. Sulphites are effective bleaching agents, antimicrobials, oxygen scavengers, reducing agents, and enzyme inhibitors. Wine, beer, dehydrated fruits and vegetables, jam, juice, sugar, processed potatoes, seafood, meat and baked products are some of the food categories in which sulphites are added. Sulphites have been implicated in various health related issues. Asthmatic reactions and some antinutritional consequences such the degradation of thiamine (vitamin B 1 ) are adverse reactions associated with sulphites. In many countries, sulphites have been regulated. Sulphites are generally recognized as safe in the USA with some exceptions when using in raw fruits and vegetables. In the European Union sulphites are also controlled, and the permitted amount varies according to the food product.

No abstract