The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provided a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of potassium nitrite (E 249) and sodium nitrite (E 250) when used as food additives. The ADIs established by the SCF (1997) and by JECFA (2002) for nitrite were 0-0.06 and 0-0.07 mg/kg bw per day, respectively. The available information did not indicate in vivo genotoxic potential for sodium and potassium nitrite. Overall, an ADI for nitrite per se could be derived from the available repeated dose toxicity studies in animals, also considering the negative carcinogenicity results. The Panel concluded that an increased methaemoglobin level, observed in human and animals, was a relevant effect for the derivation of the ADI. The Panel, using a BMD approach, derived an ADI of 0.07 mg nitrite ion/kg bw per day. The exposure to nitrite resulting from its use as food additive did not exceed this ADI for the general population, except for a slight exceedance in children at the highest percentile. The Panel assessed the endogenous formation of nitrosamines from nitrites based on the theoretical calculation of the NDMA produced upon ingestion of nitrites at the ADI and estimated a MoE > 10,000. The Panel estimated the MoE to exogenous nitrosamines in meat products to be < 10,000 in all age groups at high level exposure. Based on the results of a systematic review, it was not possible to clearly discern nitrosamines produced from the nitrite added at the authorised levels, from those found in the food matrix without addition of external nitrite. In epidemiological studies there was some evidence to link (i) dietary nitrite and gastric cancers and (ii) the combination of nitrite plus nitrate from processed meat and colorectal cancers. There was evidence to link preformed NDMA and colorectal cancers.

The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provided a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of sodium nitrate (E 251) and potassium nitrate (E 252) when used as food additives. The current acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) for nitrate of 3.7 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day were established by the SCF (1997) and JECFA (2002). The available data did not indicate genotoxic potential for sodium and potassium nitrate. The carcinogenicity studies in mice and rats were negative. The Panel considered the derivation of an ADI for nitrate based on the formation of methaemoglobin, following the conversion of nitrate, excreted in the saliva, to nitrite. However, there were large variations in the data on the nitrate‐to‐nitrite conversion in the saliva in humans. Therefore, the Panel considered that it was not possible to derive a single value of the ADI from the available data. The Panel noticed that even using the highest nitrate‐to‐nitrite conversion factor the methaemoglobin levels produced due to nitrite obtained from this conversion would not be clinically significant and would result to a theoretically estimated endogenous N‐nitroso compounds (ENOC) production at levels which would be of low concern. Hence, and despite the uncertainty associated with the ADI established by the SCF, the Panel concluded that currently there was insufficient evidence to withdraw this ADI. The exposure to nitrate solely from its use as a food additive was estimated to be less than 5% of the overall exposure to nitrate in food based on a refined estimated exposure scenario. This exposure did not exceed the current ADI (SCF, 1997). However, if all sources of exposure to dietary nitrate are considered (food additive, natural presence and contamination), the ADI would be exceeded for all age groups at the mean and the highest exposure.

Background: Heated tobacco products (HTP) are new forms of tobacco consumption with limited information available on their use among the general population. Our objective was to analyze the prevalence and associations of use of HTP across 11 countries in Europe. Methods: Within the TackSHS Project, in 2017-2018 we conducted a cross-sectional study with information on HTP use in the following countries:

AbstractSeveral dietary factors have been extensively investigated for associations with risk of breast cancer, but to date unequivocal evidence only exists for alcohol consumption. We sought to systematically evaluate the association between 92 dietary factors and breast cancer risk using a nutrient-wide association study approach. Using data from 272,098 women participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study, we assessed dietary intake of 92 foods and nutrients estimated by dietary questionnaires. Cox regression with age as the time scale and adjustment for potential confounders, was used to quantify the association between each food or nutrient and risk of breast cancer. A false discovery rate (FDR) of 0.05 was used to select the set of foods and nutrients to evaluate in the independent replication cohort, the Netherlands Cohort Study (NLCS). During a median follow-up time of 15 years, 10,979 incident invasive breast cancers were identified in the women from the EPIC study. Six foods and nutrients were associated with risk of breast cancer when controlling the FDR at 0.05. Higher intake of alcohol overall was associated with a higher risk of breast cancer (hazard ratio (HR) for a 1 SD increment in intake = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–1.07), as was beer/cider intake and wine intake (HRs per 1 SD increment = 1.05, 95% CI 1.03–1.06 and 1.04, 95% CI 1.02–1.06, respectively), whereas higher intakes of fibre, apple/pear, and carbohydrates were associated with a lower risk of breast cancer (HRs per 1 SD increment = 0.96, 95% CI 0.94–0.98; 0.96, 95% CI 0.94–0.99; and 0.96, 95% CI 0.95–0.98, respectively). When evaluated in the NLCS (2368 invasive breast cancer cases), estimates for each of these foods and nutrients were similar in magnitude and direction, with the exception of beer/cider intake, which was not associated with risk of breast cancer in the NLCS. Our findings confirm the well-established increased risk of breast cancer associated with alcohol consumption, and suggest that higher intake of dietary fibre, and possibly fruit and carbohydrates, might be associated with reduced breast cancer risk.

SummaryBackground Atopic parents may adopt lifestyle characteristics that allegedly protect against atopic disease. If this is true, infants from atopic parents will be characterized by low-risk behaviour. Consequently, aetiologic studies on lifestyle factors and allergic disease in childhood may be biased by confounding by indication. Objective We explored whether the prevalence of 'prudent' lifestyle characteristics differs between atopic and non-atopic families. Methods Information about a family history of atopic manifestations and lifestyle characteristics was collected by repeated questionnaires in the Dutch KOALA Birth Cohort Study in 2469 infants from families with divergent lifestyle practices (conventional vs. alternative). Results In conventional lifestyle families, infants were less often exposed to environmental tobacco smoke when parents were atopic than when they were non-atopic (10.0% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.001). In alternative lifestyle families, exposure to smoking was very rare in both groups (1.7% vs. 2.6%). Pets were less often present in families with than without parental atopy (38.8% vs. 51.1%, P = 0.008 for conventional lifestyle families; 43.0% vs. 48.4%, P = 0.014 for alternative lifestyle families). Infants with atopic siblings had less often been vaccinated according to the standard scheme than infants with non-atopic siblings in conventional lifestyle families (76.6% vs. 85.5%, P o 0.001). In alternative lifestyle families, the difference was in the same direction but not statistically significant (30.1% vs. 40.5%, P = 0.143). Antibiotic use, breastfeeding and consumption of organic foods were unrelated to a family history of atopic manifestations. Conclusion Some 'prudent' lifestyle characteristics differed between atopic and non-atopic families, depending on whether atopic manifestations were present in parents or older siblings. This has important consequences for the validity in epidemiological studies on the aetiology of allergy in children. Confounding by indication because of a family history of atopic manifestations can best be controlled for by considering atopy in parents and siblings as separate confounders.

No abstract

BackgroundAlthough a direct relationship between tinnitus or hearing difficulties and COVID-19 has been suggested, current literature provides inconsistent results, and no research has been undertaken in older adults.MethodsIn November 2020, we conducted the LOST in Lombardia survey, a telephone-based cross-sectional study on a sample of 4,400 individuals representative of the general population aged ≥65 years from Lombardy region, Northern Italy. Individuals with diagnosed tinnitus and/or hearing loss were asked whether their conditions had improved or deteriorated in 2020 compared to 2019.ResultsOverall, 8.1% of older adults reported a diagnosis of tinnitus and 10.5% of hearing loss. In 2020 compared to 2019, among individuals with tinnitus, those with increasing severity (5.0%) were similar to those decreasing it (5.3%). Among individuals with hearing loss, more people reported an increase (13.6%) than a decrease (3.2%) in their disease severity. No individual with a diagnosis in 2020 of tinnitus (n = 6) or hearing loss (n = 13) had COVID-19. The incidence of tinnitus was lower in 2020 (rate: 14.8 per 10,000 person-years) than in previous years (rate in 1990–2019: 36.0 per 10,000 person-years; p = 0.026). There was no change in the incidence of hearing loss (p = 0.134).ConclusionsIn this large representative sample of older adults, on average neither COVID-19 confinement nor SARS-CoV-2 infection appeared to increase the severity or incidence of tinnitus. The increased severity of hearing difficulties may totally or partially be explained by physiologic deterioration of the condition, or by a misperception due to the use of face-masks.

No abstract