WRITTEN QUESTION E-0871/02 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cyclamate — a health hazard?.
Date: 2002-04-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: carcinogenic substance, foodstuffs legislation, health risk, market approval, non-alcoholic beverage, sweetener

C 205 E/230

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

(2002/C 205 E/251)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0869/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 April 2002)

Subject: Pesticides in ground water

Greenpeace in Sweden reported on 22 February 2002 that the Swedish National Chemicals Inspectorate
had written a letter to the Commission in which it retreats from the principle that pesticides should not be
allowed to leak into ground water. For over ten years, Sweden has argued that pesticides constitute an
unacceptable risk if they reach ground water. However, according to the Inspectorate’s letter to the
Commission, Sweden is now prepared to accept EU guidelines which allow degradation products in
ground water. It is accepted that substances believed to be harmless reach ground water. History shows,
however, that it is difficult to predict which substances are dangerous.

Can the Commission confirm that the Swedish National Chemicals Inspectorate has changed its standpoint
and does the Commission consider that it is possible, with 100 % certainty, to establish that certain
substances are harmless if they reach ground water?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2002)

The Commission cannot
the
Commission is not aware of any change in the position of the Inspectorate of the nature suggested by
the Honourable member.

the Swedish National Chemicals

Inspectorate. However,

speak for

The Commission considers that it is possible, on the basis of state of the art scientific assessments, to
identify levels of exposure to individual substances, which pose no unacceptable risk to consumers. This is
reflected in many areas of Community legislation including the Drinking Water Directive,
(Council
Directive 75/440/EEC of 16 June 1975 concerning the quality required of surface water intended for the
abstraction of drinking water in the Member States (1)), which sets maximum concentration limits for many
compounds including copper, which is a pesticidal active substance and certain classes of chlorinated
hydrocarbons, which do also occur as degradation products of pesticides.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.

(2002/C 205 E/252)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0871/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 April 2002)

Subject: Cyclamate : a health hazard?

Cyclamate is a sweetener which the Swedish Food Administration claims can cause some people to
produce a substance (CHA), which in large doses in animal experiments affected the testicles. The earlier
Swedish ban on cyclamate (E 952) as a sweetener in food was lifted in 1999. In Sweden, cyclamate has
been available only in tablet or powder form whereas, in the EU, it is permitted in a number of low-calorie
products such as soft drinks, cakes, ice-cream, deserts and tinned fruit. The Swedish Government instructed
the Food Administration to make a study of cyclamate, the results of which show that children with
diabetes have in some cases already ingested too much cyclamate. If it is now also to be used as a
sweetener in fruit juices and soft drinks, there is a risk that substantially increased number of diabetics will
exceed the acceptable daily intake.

Does the Commission rate the sweetener cyclamate as a health hazard and is a ban on cyclamate in the
Community a possibility?

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/231

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2002)

The Commission would like to refer to its reply to written question E-0051/02 by Alexander de Roo (1).

In addition, the Commission wishes to point out that the study on sweetener intake and exposure among
Swedish diabetics commissioned by the Swedish Food Administration is based on the use levels of
cyclamate as laid down in the Community legislation. The results, although based on the former
Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), do therefore already reflect the situation after 1999, when the ban on the
use of cyclamate in Sweden was withdrawn, and include thus its use in fruit juices and soft drinks.

(1) OJ C 147 E, 20.6.2002.

(2002/C 205 E/253)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0878/02

by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission

(21 March 2002)

Subject: Violation of Decision 2000/766/EC (ban on processed animal protein)

Council Decision 2000/766/EC (1) required Member States to ban both exports and imports of processed
animal protein for feeding to farm animals intended for the production of food. In Decision 2001/9/EC (2),
the Commission required Member States to monitor compliance with this ban in certain specified ways.

Despite these measures, there are now reports that processed animal protein has been exported via ports in
Belgium and the Netherlands to Brazil, where it has been used to feed chickens which were subsequently
exported to the EU for sale as food.

Can the Commission confirm or deny these reports? If they are true, what has the Commission done to
put a halt to this? If they are false, how has the Commission ascertained this?

(1) OJ L 306, 7.12.2000, p. 32.
(2) OJ L 2, 5.1.2001, p. 32.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 April 2002)

Article 3 (2) of Commission Decision 2001/9/EC of 29 December 2000 concerning control measures
required for the implementation of Council Decision 2000/766/EC concerning certain protection measures
with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and the feeding of animal protein (1) (known as
the extended feed ban) prohibits the export of processed animal proteins provided they are destined for
uses prohibited by the feed ban. Therefore, processed animal proteins can not be exported when intended
for use in feed intended for farmed animals which are kept, fattened or bred for the production of meat
such as broilers. A Member State may export processed animal proteins for other purposes such as pet
food production or incineration, provided that a bilateral agreement with the third country is made prior
to exportation, which includes an undertaking from the third country to respect the final use and not to
re-export the product for prohibited uses. Member States which allow such exportation shall inform the
Commission and the other Member States of all terms and conditions as agreed with the third country
concerned in the context of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and the Animal Health.

The Commission has reminded the Member States of these obligations on several occasions. Also, the
control of the production, use, destruction and exportation of processed animal proteins is one of the key
issues monitored during missions of the Food and Veterinary Office in Member States.