zilongwang/ReadingBank huggingface dataset:
Table 13: Proportion (%) of total sodium intakes contributed by breakfast cereal in Australia for the total population National Nutrition Survey Sex NRV Age Group % contribution of sodium from breakfast cereal to sodium intake 2011–12 NNPAS Males 2–3 years 4 4–8 years 3 9–13 years 3 14–18 years 2 19–30 years 2 31–50 years 2 51–70 years 2 71 years & above 3 Total Males 2 Females 2–3 years 3 4–8 years 3 9–13 years 2 14–18 years 2 19–30 years 2 31–50 years 2 51–70 years 2 71 years & above 3 Total Females 2 Persons Total 2 years & above 2 Table 14: Proportion (%) of total sodium intakes contributed by breakfast cereal in New Zealand National Nutrition Survey Sex NRV Age Group % contribution of sodium from breakfast cereal to total sodium 2008–09 NZ ANS Males 15–18 years 3 19–30 years 2 31–50 years 3 51–70 years 3 71 years & above 4 Total Males 3 Females 15–18 years 2 19–30 years 2 31–50 years 2 51–70 years 3 71 years & above 3 Total Females 3 Persons Total 15 years & above 3 3 Application of the NPSC to breakfast cereals 3.1 Consumption of breakfast cereals that did not meet the NPSC Following a request from FSANZ, a number of breakfast cereal manufacturers provided details of their product ranges, identifying which breakfast cereal products did not meet the NPSC (FSANZ, 2013). For those companies that provided information, approximately of products did not meet the NPSC. One company advised that all of their product range met the NPSC.
Table 15: Proportion (%) of Australian consumers and mean and P90 breakfast cereal consumption (consumers only) for all breakfast cereals, breakfast cereals that met the NPSC, and breakfast cereals that did not meet the NPSC (2011–12 NNPAS) NRV Age Group No. of Respondents All breakfast cereals Breakfast cereals that met the NPSC (85%) Breakfast cereals that did not meet the NPSC (15%) % consuming breakfast cereal Consumption of breakfast cereal, consumers only (g/day) % consuming breakfast cereal Consumption of breakfast cereal, consumers only (g/day) % consuming breakfast cereal Consumption of breakfast cereal, consumers only (g/day) Mean P90 Mean P90 Mean P90 2–3 years 317 54 28 51 46 28 48 9 27 68 4–8 years 775 52 37 64 42 37 64 10 33 56 9–13 years 862 38 51 91 33 51 91 6 48 80 14–18 years 740 31 66 122 26 69 122 5 47 92 19–30 years 2188 30 70 136 27 71 136 3 53 104 31–50 years 3535 32 64 128 29 65 126 2 49 95 51–70 years 2714 36 59 117 35 59 117 2 49 122 71 years & above 1023 50 45 92 48 46 92 2 26 50 Total 2 years and above 12153 36 57 108 33 58 111 3 44 92 Note: proportion consuming breakfast cereal that met the NPSC and proportion consuming breakfast cereals that did not meet the NPSC may not total the proportion consuming all breakfast cereals as some consumers may have reported consuming both types of cereal on the day of the survey, and figures have also been rounded.
3 Variation of Schedule 17 The Schedule varies Schedule 17 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code – Vitamins and minerals. Schedule [1] Table to section S17—4 [1.1] Under the entry for ‘Cereals and cereal products’, omit ‘ Breakfast cereals, as purchased Reference quantity—a normal serving Provitamin A forms of Vitamin A 200 μg (25%) Thiamin 0.55 mg (50%) Riboflavin 0.43 mg (25%) Niacin 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin B6 0.4 mg (25%) Vitamin C 10 mg (25%) Vitamin E 2.5 mg (25%) Folate 100 μg (50%) Calcium 200 mg (25%) Iron – except ferric sodium edetate 3.0 mg (25%) Magnesium 80 mg (25%) Zinc 1.8 mg (15%) ’ [1.2] Under the entry for ‘Cereals and cereal products’, insert in alphabetical order: ‘ Breakfast cereals, as purchased Reference quantity—a normal serving Provitamin A forms of Vitamin A 200 μg (25%) Thiamin 0.55 mg (50%) Riboflavin 0.43 mg (25%) Niacin 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin B6 0.4 mg (25%) Vitamin C 10 mg (25%) Vitamin D 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin E 2.5 mg (25%) Folate 100 μg (50%) Calcium 200 mg (25%) Iron – except ferric sodium edetate 3.0 mg (25%) Magnesium 80 mg (25%) Zinc 1.8 mg (15%)
The variation commences on the date of gazettal. SCHEDULE [1] Standard 1.3.2 is varied by omitting under the entry for “Cereals and cereal products” in the Table to clause 3 “ Breakfast cereals, as purchased A normal serving Carotene forms of Vitamin A Thiamin Riboflavin Niacin Vitamin B6 Vitamin C Vitamin E Folate Calcium Iron – except ferric sodium edetate Magnesium Zinc 200 g (25%) 0.55 mg (50%) 0.43 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 0.4 mg (25%) 10 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 100 g (50%) 200 mg (25%) 3.0 mg (25%) 80 mg (25%) 1.8 mg (15%) ” [1.2] inserting under the entry for “Cereals and cereal products” in the Table to clause 3, in alphabetical order “ Breakfast cereals, as purchased A normal serving Carotene forms of Vitamin A Thiamin Riboflavin Niacin Vitamin B6 Vitamin C Vitamin D Vitamin E Folate Calcium Iron – except ferric sodium edetate Magnesium Zinc 200 g (25%) 0.55 mg (50%) 0.43 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 0.4 mg (25%) 10 mg (25%) 2.5 μg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 100 g (50%) 200 mg (25%) 3.0 mg (25%) 80 mg (25%) 1.8 mg (15%) ” Explanatory Statement 1. Authority Section 13 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 (the FSANZ Act) provides that the functions of Food Standards Australia New Zealand (the Authority) include the development of standards and variations of standards for inclusion in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code).
Provitamin A forms of Vitamin A 200 μg (25%) Thiamin 0.55 mg (50%) Riboflavin 0.43 mg (25%) Niacin 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin B6 0.4 mg (25%) Vitamin C 10 mg (25%) Vitamin E 2.5 mg (25%) Folate 100 μg (50%) Calcium 200 mg (25%) Iron – except ferric sodium edetate 3.0 mg (25%) Magnesium 80 mg (25%) Zinc 1.8 mg (15%) ’ [1.2] Under the entry for ‘Cereals and cereal products’, insert in alphabetical order: ‘ Breakfast cereals, as purchased Reference quantity—a normal serving Provitamin A forms of Vitamin A 200 μg (25%) Thiamin 0.55 mg (50%) Riboflavin 0.43 mg (25%) Niacin 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin B6 0.4 mg (25%) Vitamin C 10 mg (25%) Vitamin D 2.5 mg (25%) Vitamin E 2.5 mg (25%) Folate 100 μg (50%) Calcium 200 mg (25%) Iron – except ferric sodium edetate 3.0 mg (25%) Magnesium 80 mg (25%) Zinc 1.8 mg (15%) ’ Explanatory Statement 1. Authority Section 13 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 (the FSANZ Act) provides that the functions of Food Standards Australia New Zealand (the Authority) include the
1 Name This instrument is the Food Standards (Application A1090 – Addition of Vitamin D to Breakfast Cereal) Variation. 2 Variation to Standards in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code The Schedule varies a Standard in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. 3 Commencement The variation commences on the date of gazettal. SCHEDULE [1] Standard 1.3.2 is varied by [1.1] omitting under the entry for “Cereals and cereal products” in the Table to clause 3 “ Breakfast cereals, as purchased A normal serving Carotene forms of Vitamin A Thiamin Riboflavin Niacin Vitamin B6 Vitamin C Vitamin E Folate Calcium Iron – except ferric sodium edetate Magnesium Zinc 200 g (25%) 0.55 mg (50%) 0.43 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 0.4 mg (25%) 10 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 100 g (50%) 200 mg (25%) 3.0 mg (25%) 80 mg (25%) 1.8 mg (15%) ” [1.2] inserting under the entry for “Cereals and cereal products” in the Table to clause 3, in alphabetical order “ Breakfast cereals, as purchased A normal serving Carotene forms of Vitamin A Thiamin Riboflavin Niacin Vitamin B6 Vitamin C Vitamin D Vitamin E Folate Calcium Iron – except ferric sodium edetate Magnesium Zinc 200 g (25%) 0.55 mg (50%) 0.43 mg (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 0.4 mg (25%) 10 mg (25%) 2.5 g (25%) 2.5 mg (25%) 100 g (50%) 200 mg (25%) 3.0 mg (25%) 80 mg (25%) 1.8 mg (15%) ”
Sweet Potato Hawaii 3,300 Hal (2011) Rambutan, longan, apple banana, dragon fruit, mangosteen Hawaii 1,200 Hal (2011) Guava Mexico 9,000 Hal (2011) Grapefruit, mango, sweet lime, manzano pepper Mexico 1,100 Hal (2011) Mango India, Pakistan 100 Bustos-Griffin et al (2012) Longan, rambutan, mangosteen Thailand 700 Bustos-Griffin et al (2012) Dragonfruit, rambutan Vietnam 1400 Bustos-Griffin et al (2012) * Amounts are approximate only. It is sometimes unclear whether long tons (UK), short tons (US) or metric tonnes are being quoted. 3.0 Current requirements for Australian and New Zealand irradiated foods in the Code The Australian and New Zealand requirements for irradiating food are contained in Standard 1.5.3 – Irradiation of Food. This Standard has requirements relating to prohibitions on irradiation of food (Clause 2), the permission to irradiate foods (clauses 4 and 5), the labelling of irradiated food (Clause 6) and record keeping requirements (clause 7). 3.1 Prohibitions and permissions to irradiate food This Standard prohibits irradiation of food unless an express permission is given. All permissions in the Standard are subject to dosage requirements, and only apply where irradiation is undertaken for a permitted purpose. In Australia and New Zealand herbs and spices, herbal infusions, persimmons, tomatoes, capsicums and some tropical fruits can be irradiated. The purpose and conditions are identified in Table 3. Table 3: Purpose and conditions Food Minimum and Maximum Dose (kGy) Purpose Bread fruit Capsicum Carambola Custard apple Longan Litchi Mango Mangosteen Papaya (Paw paw) Persimmon Rambutan Tomato Minimum: 150 Gy Maximum: 1 kGy Pest disinfestation for a phytosanitary objective. Herbs and spices as described in Schedule 4 to Standard 1.4.2 Minimum: none Maximum: 6 kGy Control of sprouting and pest disinfestation, including control of weeds.
Proposed timeframe for assessment: ‘Early Bird Notification’ due: 3 April 2014 Commence assessment (clock start) Late Sept 2014 Completion of assessment & preparation of draft food reg measure Late Feb 2015 Public comment Late Feb – early April 2015 Board to complete approval Mid-June 2015 Notification to Forum Late June 2015 Anticipated gazettal if no review requested Early Sept 2015
Bt crops have been linked to health and environmental issues GMFAA MADGE There has been widespread consideration about the safety of GM crops modified to contain Cry genes (see e.g. Mendelsohn et al. 2003; Hammond and Koch 2012) and the conclusion reached through assessment of the data available is that Bt crops do not pose a safety concern. It is also relevant to note that products derived from B. thuringiensis have been sprayed on crop plants for 50 years. The effect of these products on human health and the environment was the subject of a critical review by the WHO International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO 1999). The review concluded that ‘B. thuringiensis products are unlikely to pose any hazard to humans or other vertebrates or the great majority of non-target invertebrates’ Products containing Bt are approved for use on crops in Australia and New Zealand and in both countries there is an exemption from maximum residue limits (MRLs) when Bt is used as an insecticide.
WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA TABLE OF SPECIFICATIONS AND PRODUCT OFFERED ITEM IT EQUIPMENT Required Specifications Quantity Product Offered RFID Reader Handheld RFID Reader Capable of reading ISO 11784 & ISO 11785 HDX and FDX-B transponders Battery Power with more than 4 hours of capacity 57 units Make: Reading Capability: Battery Life:
File Name: A 11-12R Macduff: A True Hero Argument/Opinion Grade 12 Range of Writing Macduff: A True Hero Though many refer to the titular character of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth as a tragic hero, another character stands out as a much greater protagonist. While Macbeth is driven towards madness and to committing atrocities through his tragic flaw of ambition, Macduff lacks such a flaw and remains uncorrupted and heroic throughout the play. As Macbeth strives to gain power and prestige at the expense of the lives of his king, his friends, and his countrymen, Macduff meanwhile endures great personal loss in his attempts to stop Macbeth’s tyrannical rue and to restore justice and freedom to Scotland. With a name so similar to Macbeth’s, it is ironic yet fitting that Macduff acts so much more nobly than his king (Piotr 20). Throughout the tragic, events of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, Macduff serves as a heroic figure through his demonstrations of intelligence, loyalty, and righteousness. Macduff’s prevalence is minimal early in the play, though his intelligence can first be noted in his actions that follow King Duncan’s death. While many Scottish nobles prepare to welcome Macbeth to the throne and accept him as their king, Macduff shows his skepticism of the story surrounding the king’s demise. Though Macduff at first accepts the verdict that Malcolm and Donalbain are the most likely suspects in the murder of their father, he does so reluctantly and only because the evidence points to them given that they have fled the scene. When asked if he will attend Macbeth’s inaugural ceremonies, Macduff responds, “No, cousin, I’ll to Fife” (2.4.36). Macduff is less convinced than the others that the mystery of the king’s death has been solved, and he wisely distances himself from Macbeth, in whose home the
Appendix 2 – Dietary Exposure Assessment Results Table A2.1: Estimated dietary exposures to Ace K based on 2004 sweetener survey (consumers only) Country Age group 2004 sweetener survey dietary exposures Mean 90th %ADI %ADI Australia and New Zealand combined 12 years and above 3 6 Australia 12 years and above 4 6 New Zealand 12 years and above 3 6 Table A2.2: Estimated consumption of intense sweetened intensely chewing gum Country Survey Age group No. Respondents Consumers Consumption (Day1 consumers only) Mean 90th % count g/day g/day Australia 2011 2 years and above 12153 <1% 50 7.4 25 12 years and above 10572 <1% 47 7.7 25 7-11 years 802 <1% 3 2.5 NA 2-6 years 779 Not consumed NA NA New Zealand 2008 15 years and above 4721 <1% 13 4.9 5.8 2002 5-14 years 3275 1% 37 4.6 16
(b) if the transition period is extended to 18 January 2017 Item Number of products to be reformulated Cost of reformulation Transition period ending 18 January 2016 Transition period ending 18 January 2017 Part B – Question for all stakeholders Question 10 Please indicate your preference for the commencement date of the provisions in Standard 1.2.7 – Nutrition, Health and Related Claims for nutrition content claims about dietary fibre. Please check the appropriate box. Retain 18 January 2016 Change to 18 January 2017 No preference for either date Please state your reasons in the box below. Reasons to support your answer
31 October 2014 [22–14] Administrative Assessment Report – Application A1102 L-carnitine in Food Date received: 3 September Date due for completion of administrative assessment: 24 September 2014 Date completed: 24 September 2014 Applicant: Lonza Ltd Potentially affected Standards (as identified by the Applicant): 1.3.4 – Identity and purity 2.1.1 – Cereal and cereal products 2.5.1 - Milk 2.5.3 – Fermented milk products 2.6.1 – Fruit juice and vegetable juice 2.6.2 – Non-alcoholic beverages and brewed soft drinks 2.6.4 – Formulated caffeinated beverages 2.9.3 – Formulated meal replacements 2.9.4 – Formulated supplementary sports foods Brief description of Application: To permit the addition of L-carnitine in a variety of food categories including dairy products (excluding butter and butter fat), confectionery, cereal and cereal products, food intended for particular nutritional uses, non-alcoholic beverages and gels. Procedure: General Estimated total hours: More than 1000 hours Reasons why: The Application is for the addition of to a broad range of foods. There is a large volume of studies on that FSANZ will need to review. Estimated start work: Mid-Jan 2015 Decision Application accepted Date: 24 September 2014
Standards Management Officer Delegate of the Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand Note: This variation will be published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. FSC XX on XX Month 20XX. 1 Name of instrument This instrument is the Food Standards (Application A1108 – Rebaudioside M as a Steviol Glycoside Intense Sweetener) Variation. 2 Commencement This instrument commences on 1 March 2016 immediately after the commencement of Standard 5.1.1 – Revocation and transitional provisions —2014 Revision. 3 Variation of Standard 1.3.1 Schedule 1 varies the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code – Standard 1.3.1 – Food additives. 4 Variation of Schedule 3 Schedule 2 varies the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code – Schedule 3 – Identity and purity Schedule 1 – Variation of Standard 1.3.1 [1] Omit paragraphs (g) to (j) of the definition of CF in subsection 1.3.1—4(7), substitute “ (g) rebaudioside M—0.25; (h) rubusoside—0.50; (i) steviolbioside—0.50; (j) stevioside—0.40.” Schedule 2 – Variation of Schedule 3 [1] Insert after section S3—30 “S3—31 Specification for rebaudioside M (1) In this section: rebaudioside M means the chemical with the Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number 1220616-44-3 and the formula C56H90O33. (2) For rebaudioside M, the specifications are the following: (a) assay—not less than 95% of the total of the steviol glycosides named in the JECFA steviol glycosides specification and rebaudioside M, on the dried
5. Statement of compatibility with human rights This instrument is exempt from the requirements for a statement of compatibility with human rights as it is a non-disallowable instrument under section 94 of the FSANZ Act. 6. Variation 6.1 Variation to Standard 1.3.1 Item 1 of Schedule 1 of the draft variation amends paragraphs (g) to (j) of the definition of CF (Conversion Factor) in subsection 1.3.1—4(7) of Standard 1.3.1. The effect of this amendment is to include rebaudioside M in the list of permitted steviol glycosides that can be added to specific food categories as an intense sweetener food additive. It does this by adding rebaudioside M and its conversion factor used to calculate steviol equivalents to the list within subsection 1.3.1—4(7) to the revised Code. The permissions for adding steviol glycosides to food exist in the table to section S15—5 of Schedule 15 of the revised Code. No changes are required in this Schedule. 6.2 Variation to Schedule 3 Item 1 of Schedule 2 of the draft variation inserts a new section S3—31 into Schedule 3 of the revised Code. The new subsection adds a specification for rebaudioside M to Schedule 3. This specification is linked to the current JECFA specification for steviol glycosides, noting that the JECFA specification does not specifically mention rebaudioside M, but refers to nine other comparable steviol glycosides.
Proposed timeframe for assessment: ‘Early Bird Notification’ due: 8 April 2015 Commence assessment (clock start) 30 March 2015 Completion of assessment & preparation of draft food reg measure Late June 2015 Public comment Early July – mid-August 2015 Board to complete approval Early December 2015 Notification to Forum Mid-December 2015 Anticipated gazettal if no review requested Late February 2016
Attachment A – Draft variation to the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code Food Standards (Application A1112 – Food derived from Herbicide-tolerant Corn Line MZHG0JG) Variation The Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand gives notice of the making of this variation under section 92 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The variation commences on the date specified in clause 3 of the variation. Dated [To be completed by Standards Management Officer] Standards Management Officer Delegate of the Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand Note: This variation will be published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. FSC XX on XX Month 20XX. This means that this date is the gazettal date for the purposes of the above notice. 1 Name This instrument is the Food Standards (Application A1112 – Food derived from Herbicide-tolerant Corn Line MZHG0JG) Variation. 2 Variation to a Standard in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code The Schedule varies a Standard in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. 3 Commencement The variation commences on the date of gazettal. [1] Schedule 26 is varied by inserting in the table to subsection S26—3(4) in alphabetical order under item 2 “ (x) herbicide-tolerant corn line MZHG0JG ”
4 References Codex (2004) Principles for the risk analysis of foods derived from modern biotechnology. CAC/GL Codex Alimentarius Commission, Rome. FSANZ (2007) Safety assessment of genetically modified foods - guidance document. Document prepared by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. FSANZ (2013) Application handbook. Prepared by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Attachments A. Draft variation to the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code B. Draft Explanatory Statement Attachment A – Draft variation to the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code Food Standards (Application A1114 – Food derived from High Yield Corn Line MON87403) Variation The Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand gives notice of the making of this variation under section 92 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The variation commences on the date specified in clause 3 of the variation. Dated [To be completed by Standards Management Officer] Standards Management Officer Delegate of the Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand Note: This variation will be published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. FSC XX on XX Month 20XX. This means that this date is the gazettal date for the purposes of the above notice. 1 Name
2.4.1 Section 29 2.4.1.1 Consideration of costs and benefits In June 2016, the OBPR advised that, based on the information provided, the Application appears to be machinery in nature and will not have adverse impacts on business, community organisations or individuals. Therefore, a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required. However, FSANZ has considered the costs and benefits of the regulatory options for the purposes of section 29. This is not intended to be an exhaustive, quantitative economic analysis and, in fact, most of the impacts that are considered cannot easily be assigned a dollar value. Rather, the assessment considers the qualitative impacts of each option, deliberately limited to broad areas such as trade, consumer information and compliance. In reaching its decision to prepare a draft variation, FSANZ considered two options: Option 1: Prepare a draft variation to the Code to permit the use of IMO as a novel food in all foods except infant formula products, infant foods, and formulated supplementary food for young children. Option 2 Reject the Application. For Option 1: Consumers may benefit as foods containing IMO would provide an alternative sweetener on the market, possibly with a preferred taste profile. Additional products may become available due to the availability of IMO for Australian and New Zealand food manufacturers, and the access to imported food products containing IMO that are currently manufactured overseas. Food manufacturers would have an alternative bulk sweetener available which could provide an opportunity to reformulate or develop new products. Any increased costs would be a business decision based on expected returns. Government enforcement agencies may have some costs to validate the analytical method of analysis for IMO, and if they choose to analyse for the presence of this sweetener. Given the voluntary nature of the addition of IMO, its addition will occur only if there is demand from consumers because of the enhanced attributes of the product (taste, cost or health) or other benefits (technological or cost) to be obtained by manufacturers. No harms or costs have been associated or identified with consumption of IMO for most consumers. However, individuals with sucrose-isomaltase deficiency will not gain any potential benefit from the use of IMO in foods. For Option 2: Any benefits identified above would be lost through maintaining the status quo. In conclusion, FSANZ considers that the direct and indirect benefits that would arise from a food regulatory measure developed or varied as a result of the Application are highly likely to
* Major group in bold, sub-group indented and not bold Scenario 2: Nearly all food groups (except infant formula products, infant foods and formulated supplementary foods for young children) Food group* Contribution to IMO exposure (%) Alcoholic beverages 2.6 Beers 0 Cider and perry 0 Other alcoholic beverages 2.6 Spirits 0 Wines 0 Cereal based products and dishes 18.2 Batter-based products <1 Cakes, muffins, scones, cake-type desserts 9.9 Mixed dishes where cereal is the major ingredient 1.7 Pastries 1.2 Savoury biscuits <1 Sweet biscuits 4.6 Cereals and cereal products 3.4 Breakfast cereals, hot porridge style <1 Breakfast cereals, ready to eat 2.9 English-style muffins, flat breads, and savoury and sweet breads <1 Flours and other cereal grains and starches 0 Pasta and pasta products (without sauce) 0 Regular breads, and bread rolls (plain/unfilled/untopped varieties) <1 Confectionery and cereal/nut/fruit/seed bars 9.7 Chocolate and chocolate-based confectionery 5.6 Fruit, nut and seed-bars <1 Muesli or cereal style bars <1 Other confectionery 3 Dairy & meat substitutes <1 Cheese substitute 0 Dairy milk substitutes, flavoured <1 Dairy milk substitutes, unflavoured <1 Dishes where meat substitutes are the major component <1 Meat substitutes <1 Soy-based ice confection <1 Soy-based yoghurts <1 Egg products and dishes <1 Dishes where egg is the major ingredient <1 Eggs 0 Fats and oils 0 Butters 0 Dairy blends 0 Margarine and table spreads 0 Other fats 0 Plant oils 0 Unspecified fats 0 Fish and seafood products and dishes <1 Crustacea and molluscs (excluding commercially sterile) <1 Fin fish (excluding commercially sterile) 0 Fish and seafood products (homemade and takeaway) <1
Isoleucine 705 687 0.7803 145 – 1,346 525 – 953 Leucine 1,266 1,228 0.6831 477 – 2,174 685 – 1,383 Lysine 1,111 894 0.2049 100 – 3,363 687 – 1,368 Methionine 418 386 0.0410 100 – 593 300 – 500 Phenylalanine 799 787 0.7459 397 – 1,395 552 – 1,087 Proline 768 718 0.4801 100 – 1,492 355 – 1,464 Serine 575 548 0.5840 100 – 1,362 500 – 1,022 Threonine 659 646 0.7744 226 – 1,315 500 – 1,022 Tryptophan4 204 200 0.5724 115 – 435 436 – 855
Ash (%) 1.05 1.08 0.5871 0.39 – 1.89 0.44 – 1.9 Crude Fibre (%) 0.47 0.47 0.8625 0.14 – 0.69 0.17 – 3.5 Carbohydrates (%) 18.5 18.5 0.9866 12.3 – 25.9 13.3 – 30.5
3 May 2016 [11-16] Administrative Assessment Report – Application A1129 Monk Fruit Extract as a Food Additive Date received: 8 March 2106 Date due for completion of administrative assessment: 1 April 2016 Date completed: 31 March 2016 Applicant: Saraya Co. Ltd Potentially affected standards: Schedule 3 Schedule 15 Schedule 8 Standard 1.2.4 Brief description of Application: To seek permission for monk fruit extract as a food additive, specifically as an intense sweetener. Procedure: General, Level 2 Estimated total hours: Max 650 hours Reasons why: Involves an assessment of the risk to public health and safety of average complexity. Provisional estimated start work: Mid-October 2016 Decision Application accepted Date: 31 March 2016 Has the Applicant requested confidential commercial information status? Yes No✔ Has the Applicant provided justification for confidential commercial information request? Yes No N/A✔ Charges Does FSANZ consider that the application confers an exclusive capturable commercial benefit on the Applicant? Yes No ✔ Does the Applicant want to expedite consideration of this Application? Yes No Not known ✔ Application Handbook requirements
Table of contents 1 Introduction Objectives of the assessment Currently, there are no permissions for the enzyme triacylglycerol lipase derived from Candida cylindracea in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code). Therefore, any application to amend the Code to permit the use of this enzyme as a food processing aid requires a pre-market assessment. The objectives of this risk and technical assessment were to: determine whether the proposed purpose is clearly stated and that the enzyme achieves its technological function in the quantity and form proposed to be used as a food processing aid
Food Standards (Application A1131 – Aqualysin 1 (Protease) as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)) Variation The Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand gives notice of the making of this variation under section 92 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The variation commences on the date specified in clause 3 of this variation. Dated [To be completed by Standards Management Officer] Standards Management Officer Delegate of the Board of Food Standards Australia New Zealand Note: This variation will be published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. FSC XX on XX Month 20XX. This means that this date is the gazettal date for the purposes of clause 3 of the variation. 1 Name This instrument is the Food Standards (Application A1131 – Aqualysin 1 (Protease) as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)) Variation. 2 Variation to a standard in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code The Schedule varies a Standard in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. 3 Commencement The variation commences on the date of gazettal. Schedule [1] Schedule 18 is varied by adding the following to the table to subsection S18—9(3) in alphabetical order Aqualysin 1 (EC 3.4.21.111) sourced from Bacillus subtilis containing the aqualysin 1 gene from Thermus aquaticus For use in the manufacture of bakery products GMP Attachment B – Draft Explanatory Statement 1. Authority
Table 1: Product specifications for commercial enzyme preparation compared to JECFA and Code specifications for enzymes Analysis Specifications Product JECFA Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (metals) (section S3—4) Lead (mg/kg) <0.10 ≤ 5 ≤2 Arsenic (mg/kg) <0.10 - ≤1 Mercury (mg/kg) <0.010 - ≤1 Cadmium (mg/kg) <0.010 - ≤1 Antimicrobial activity Not detected Not detected - Coliforms (cfu/g) <10 ≤30 - Salmonella (in 25 g) Absent Absent - E. coli (in 25 g) Absent Absent - Based on the above product specifications, the final enzyme preparation meets international and Code specifications for enzyme preparations used in the production of food. 2.2.4 Stability The aqualysin 1 enzyme has optimal activity from pH 7, with the peak at pH 9.5. Its optimum activity is achieved at approximately 70°C, within the range of 30–80°C. The enzyme has high thermostability but is inactivated at 90°C. The enzyme activity was stable in the pH range of 7–10 and the temperature of 70°C. Analyses provided in the Application confirmed that commercial powdered enzyme preparations to be stable for up to 12 months. 2.3 Food technology conclusion The stated purpose of this enzyme preparation, namely, for use as a processing aid in the manufacture of bakery products is clearly articulated in the Application. The evidence presented to support the proposed uses provides adequate assurance that the enzyme, in the form and prescribed amounts, is technologically justified and has been demonstrated to be effective in achieving its stated purpose. The stated purpose is to reduce the mechanical dough development by lowering the dough viscosity and increasing the extensibility of the dough. The enzyme performs its technological purpose during processing and manufacture of food after which it is inactivated so does not perform any technological function in the final food. It is therefore appropriately categorised as a processing aid and not a food additive. The enzyme preparation meets international purity specifications. 3 Hazard assessment 3.1 Background 3.1.1 Chemistry Aqualysin 1 is an alkaline serine protease from the extreme thermophile T. aquaticus. Relevant physicochemical and enzymatic properties of aqualysin 1, and product specifications, are in the food technology assessment (Section 2).
15 July 2016 [18-16] Administrative Assessment Report – Application A1132 Broaden Definition of Steviol Glycosides (Intense Sweetener) Date received: 20 May 2016 Date due for completion of administrative assessment: 14 June 2016 Date completed: 14 June 2016 Applicant: PureCircle Limited Potentially affected standards: Standard 1.3.1, Schedule 3 Brief description of Application: To expand the definition of steviol glycosides for use as an intense sweetener to include all steviol glycosides present in the Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni leaf. Procedure: General Estimated total hours: Up to 350 Reasons why: Seeking a changed approach to the permissions for a currently permitted food additive Provisional estimated start work: Early July 2016 Decision Application accepted Date: 14 June 2016 Has the Applicant requested confidential commercial information status? Yes✔ No What documents are affected? Section B.5.1 and one as yet unpublished reference Has the Applicant provided justification for confidential commercial information request? Yes✔ No N/A Charges Does FSANZ consider that the application confers an exclusive capturable commercial benefit on the Applicant? Yes No ✔
NZ ANS 2008 (Day 1) 15–17 years (n=4) 7.3 27.9 Not consumed Not consumed 18–44 years (n=51) 10.7 13.6 Not consumed Not consumed 45+ years (n=167) 17.0 15.9 Not consumed Not consumed All ages (n=223) 13.8 15.6 Not consumed Not consumed NZ NCNS 2002 (Day 1) 5–12 years (n=5) 13.4 13.8 Not consumed Not consumed 13–14 years (n=2) 37.3 Not consumed Not consumed Not consumed All ages (n=7) 22.0 13.8 Not consumed Not consumed * Other food groups to which plant sterols were permitted to be added, where there was no consumption for any population groups for either country have not been included in this table. These are yoghurts and breakfast cereals. ** Includes salt reduced Table A6: Food contributors to the baseline dietary exposure estimate for foods containing added plant sterols Survey Age groups % Contribution to plant sterol dietary exposure Edible oil spread, standard fat Edible oil spread, reduced fat Unflavoured milk Processed cheese Standard salt Reduced salt Standard salt Reduced salt NNPAS 2011-12 (Day 1&2) 2–4 years (n=7) 0 61 0 39 0 0 5–12 years (n=22) 0 42 0 58 0 0 13–17 years (n=15) 0 19 0 81 0 0 18–44 years (n=81) 0 55 0 41 0 0 45+ years (n=298) 0 61 0 36 2 1 All ages (n=422) 0 57 0 40 2 1 NZ ANS 2008 (Day 1) 15–17 years (n=4) 8.5 0 91 0 0 0 18–44 years (n=51) 24 0 65 11 0 0 45+ years (n=167) 33 0 57 10 0 0 All ages (n=223) 31 0 59 10 0 0 NZ NCNS 5–12 years (n=5) 88 0 12 0 0 0
Application as it was agreed. The departments do not support the request for exclusivity to the Applicant. This is because the request is an extension of use of an already existing permission therefore they believe there has been limited investment in research and development by the Applicant to warrant such exclusivity. Such investments that would be required, ingredient costs and manufacturing technology and assets, are typical of commercial businesses and would be incorporated into new product development processes. They do not believe this demonstrates significant investment to justify exclusivity. The submission also notes the Higher Order Policy Principle on Novel Foods provides a regulatory environment that mentions ‘encourages fair trade’. To do so the submission suggests the permissions should not be applied exclusively. Victorian Departments of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources; and Health and Human Services (Vic Govt) Noted. The Applicant requested exclusivity on the basis that it has invested resources in research and development to ensure higher levels of plant sterols can be uniformly incorporated into their brand of breakfast cereal without detrimental visual or flavour impacts. The submission agrees with FSANZ’s observation that it is debatable whether plant sterols should be still considered novel. FSANZ should give consideration to how foods and substances can be transitioned from being considered novel to status. Vic Govt Noted. The comment is noted. This issue is being considered by Proposal P1024 – Revision of the Regulation of Nutritive Substances & Novel Foods. The submission supported the Application. It expressed an interest to view the evaluation and/or report after the 15 month exclusivity period prior to supporting a general permission after the exclusivity period expires. Dietitians Association of Australia Noted. There is no requirement to conduct a separate evaluation report after the completion of the 15-month exclusivity period is completed. The current assessment that has been performed, which is summarised in this report, deals with both the exclusivity period and the general permission. The submissions support the continued use of the novel foods framework to consider future plant sterol applications, and in particular the whole of Department of Health Western Australia Noted
1.3 The current Standard 1.3.1 Standard 1.3.3 and Schedule 18 Enzymes used in processing and manufacturing food are considered processing aids, regulated under Standard 1.3.3. Only those enzymes and sources listed in Schedule 18 are permitted to be used in producing food sold in Australia and New Zealand. Permitted enzymes of microbial origin, in conjunction with their permitted source organisms, are listed in the table to subsection S18—4(5). There is no current permission in this subsection for the enzyme β-galactosidase (EC number 3.2.1.23) sourced from B. licheniformis. 1.3.2 International standards Codex Alimentarius does not have specific standards for processing aids or enzymes, and many countries do not regulate processing aids or enzymes in the same manner as the Code. However, there are internationally recognised specifications for enzymes. These enzyme specifications are provided by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA, 2006) and the Food Chemicals Codex (Food Chemicals Codex, 2015). 1.4 Reasons for accepting Application The Application was accepted for assessment because: it complied with the procedural requirements under subsection 22(2); and it related to a matter that warranted the variation of a food regulatory measure]. 1.5 Procedure for assessment The Application was assessed under the General Procedure. 1.6 Decision The draft variation as proposed following assessment was approved without change. The variation takes effect on the date of gazettal. The approved draft variation is at Attachment A. The related explanatory statement is at Attachment B. An explanatory statement is required to accompany an instrument if it is lodged on the Federal Register of Legislation. 2 Summary of the findings 2.1 Summary of issues raised in submissions Three submissions were received, two from government and one from an industry peak body. All three supported the proposed variation and two also provided an analysis of their reasoning. No issues were raised.
COST £10.00 per member, £19.00 per guest (only available after 12/06/2017 if places still available) IMPORTANT NOTES – PLEASE READ The Head of Party must be a CSSC TWN member (working or living in the NE, SR1-7 or TD12 or TD15 postal districts). This will be a popular trip so apply quickly. The closing date is midday 28th June 2017 or when all places have been taken. Return the booking form and make payment quickly remembering to note the form where everyone in your party is to be picked up (BPV or Central Station) and your meal choice. Enter CSSC’s membership number for all members - any member who does not know their membership number should contact CSSC Head Office on 01494 888415/418 (and can request a replacement membership card at the same time). Total your costs and pay by online/BACS payment to the following account “CSSC TWN AREA ACC No. 17606186 Sort Code 09-01-55. Please quote reference ‘MBT2’ followed by the head of party’s surname. DO NOT SEND OR SEEK TO PAY BY CHEQUE or CASH. Monies cannot be returned unless either the event is cancelled by CSSC or, in the case of individual cancellations, the organiser is able to sell the places on. In cases of late cancellation or non-attendance the CSSC subsidy will need to be repaid – HOPs, please make all those in your party aware of this. All events are on a ‘first paid – first served’ basis. Bookings only accepted once payment has been confirmed. Places cannot be reserved. To assist leave requests, Heads of Party will be advised quickly about seat availability, but we reserve the right to review seat allocations if CSSC membership is not verified. Send your completed booking form by e-mail to: CLOSING TIME & DATE FOR RECEIPT OF BOOKING FORM for members and guests – midday 28th June 2017. (However, we expect demand to be greater than supply, so don't delay in sending your booking form and making payment)
13 December 2016 [31–16] Administrative Assessment Report – Application A1137 Polysorbate 20 as a Food Additive Date received: 19 October 2016 Date due for completion of administrative assessment: 10 November 2016 Date completed: 10 November 2016 Applicant: Earlee Products Pty Ltd Potentially affected standard: Schedule 15 Brief description of Application: To permit the use of polysorbate 20 as an emulsifier. Procedure: General Estimated total hours: 350 Reasons why: Seeking permission for a new food additive which is similar to currently permitted food additives and risk assessment is expected to be straightforward Provisional estimated start work: Early April 2017 Decision Application accepted Date: 10 November 2016 Has the Applicant requested confidential commercial information status? Yes✔ No What documents are affected? Appendix 8 Has the Applicant provided justification for confidential commercial information request? Yes✔ No N/A Has the Applicant sought special consideration e.g. novel food exclusivity, two separate applications which need to be progressed together? Yes No✔ Charges
14.3 Alcoholic beverage not included in item 14.2 14.3 Alcoholic beverage not included in item 14.2 20 Foods not included in items 0 to 14 20 20.1.1.4 20.1.1.6 20.2.1.1.1.2 20.2.1.1.3.2 20.2.1.2.3.2.1 20.2.2.1 20.2.2.3 20.2.3.1.2.1 20.2.4.2.2 20.2.5.2 20.2.5.3.6.1 20.2.5.3.6.2 20.2.6.2. 20.2.6.2.5 20.2.7.1 20.2.7.2 20.2.8.1 20.2.8.2 Mixed foods commercial Beverages, non-alcoholic, choc, dry mix Beverages, non-alcoholic, choc, dry mix Desserts, dairy, choc; custard & blanc mange mix/powder Desserts, dairy, no choc/coffee; custard & blanc mange mix/powder Desserts, no dairy, no choc/coffee; pavlova/meringue Grains and cereals, with fruit/nut Cereal products, bars Bakery products, sweet, no choc, bread, yeast, hot cross bun Snack foods, not dairy or fat based, not confectionary Prepared dishes, fruit/vegetable/legume based Prepared dishes, pies & pastries, Asian style Prepared dishes, pies & pastries, savoury, {not Asian} Gravy, sauces & condiments Sauce, horseradish Mayonnaise Salad dressings Soups, liquid Soups, dry mix
Appendix 3: Dietary Exposure Assessment Results Table A3.1: Mean and 90th percentile (P90) estimated refined baseline and total (baseline + PS20) dietary exposure to Polysorbates for all age and population groups assessed Survey Age Group (no. of respondents) No. of consumers Cons. as a % of respond. Refined baseline Mean exposure Refined baseline P90 exposure Refined baseline + Polysorbate 20 Mean exposure Refined baseline + Polysorbate 20 P90 exposure mg/day mg/kg BW/dayβ % ADI mg/day mg/kg BW/dayβ % ADI mg/day mg/kg BW/day* % ADI mg/day mg/kg BW/day* % ADI NNPAS 2011-12 (Day 1&2) 5-14 years (1014) 1014 100.0 341 9.8 40 695 21.1 85 354 10.2 40 730 21.9 85 15+ years (6421) 6395 99.6 361 4.8 20 801 10.7 45 373 5.0 20 837 11.2 45 All ages (2+years) (7735) 7709 99.7 353 5.8 25 770 13.0 50 366 6.0 25 806 13.5 55 NZ ANS 2008 (Day 1) 5-14 years ѱ (3275) 3242 99.0 373 10.4 40 832 23.7 95 386 10.8 45 858 24.7 100 NZ NCNS 2002 (Day 1) 15+ years* (4721) 4479 94.9 400 5.2 20 931 11.9 50 416 5.4 20 973 12.6 50 β Individual respondents’ exposures are divided by their own body weight before deriving mean and P90 dietary exposures. Mean body weights for each group: Australians 5-14 years = 38 kg, 15+ years = 77 kg, all ages (2+ years) = 70 kg, New Zealand 5-14 years = 40 kg, All ages (15+ years) = 79 kg Derived using the Australian 2011-12 NNPAS (2 day average exposure) ѱ Derived using the NZ NCNS 2002 (Day 1) * Derived using the NZ ANS 2008 (Day 1)
Intervening sequence 14,532 – 14,670 139 pBR322 pCambia-1301 backbone1 Origin of replication for pBR322 (pBR322 ori) 14,671 – 14,951 281 pBR322 Bacterial origin of replication1 Intervening sequence 14,952 – 15,241 290 pBR322 pCambia-1301 backbone1 Neomycin phosphotransferase II (nptII) gene 15,242 – 16,036 795 Tn5 transposon Aminoglycoside phosphotransferase for kanamycin resistance; to selective positive bacterial transformants1 Intervening sequence 16,037 – 16,231 195 Vector DNA pCambia-1301backbone1 Terminator of the ubiquitin-3 gene (tUbi3) 16,232 – 16,586 355 S. tuberosum Terminator for ipt gene transcription Intervening sequence 16,587 – 16,937 351 A. tumefaciens Ti-plasmid Sequence for DNA cloning Isopentenyl transferase (ipt) gene 16,938 – 17,660 723 A. tumefaciens Ti-plasmid Allows for identification of plantlets that have incorporated the backbone DNA Intervening sequence 17,661 – 17,672 12 Synthetic DNA Sequence used for DNA cloning Polyubiquitin promoter (Ubi7) 17,673 – 19,410 1,738 S. tuberosum (var. Ranger Russet) Promoter to drive expression of the ipt backbone marker gene Intervening sequence 19,411 – 19,660 250 Vector DNA pCambia-1301 backbone1 1pCAMBIA-1301 sequence as indicated by the blue shading is available @
Origin of replication for pBR322 (pBR322 ori) 14,671 – 14,951 281 pBR322 Bacterial origin of replication1 Intervening sequence 14,952 – 15,241 290 pBR322 pCambia-1301 backbone1 Neomycin phosphotransferase II (nptII) gene 15,242 – 16,036 795 Tn5 transposon Aminoglycoside phosphotransferase for kanamycin resistance; to selective positive bacterial transformants1 Intervening sequence 16,037 – 16,231 195 Vector DNA pCambia-1301backbone1 Terminator of the ubiquitin-3 gene (tUbi3) 16,232 – 16,586 355 S. tuberosum Terminator for ipt gene transcription Intervening sequence 16,587 – 16,937 351 A. tumefaciens Ti-plasmid Sequence for DNA cloning Isopentenyl transferase (ipt) gene 16,938 – 17,660 723 A. tumefaciens Ti-plasmid Allows for identification of plantlets that have incorporated the backbone DNA Intervening sequence 17,661 – 17,672 12 Synthetic DNA Sequence used for DNA cloning Polyubiquitin promoter (Ubi7) 17,673 – 19,410 1,738 S. tuberosum (var. Ranger Russet) Promoter to drive expression of the ipt backbone marker gene Intervening sequence 19,411 – 19,660 250 Vector DNA pCambia-1301 backbone1 1pCAMBIA-1301 sequence as indicated by the blue shading is available @
1 Introduction This Application seeks to amend the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code) to include an analytical method for the determination of resistant starch as a specifically named fibre in food. It has been requested that AOAC Official Method 2002.02 (Resistant Starch in Starch and Plant Materials) is added to Schedule 11 – Calculation of values for nutrition information panel in S11—4 Methods of analysis for dietary fibre and other fibre content. S11—4 currently does not include a prescribed method of analysis for resistant starch. 2 Assessment of resistant starch as dietary fibre as defined in the Code In order to assess the Application it is necessary to determine if resistant starch fulfils the definition of dietary fibre in Standard 1.1.2 – Definitions used throughout the Code: Dietary fibre means that fraction of the edible part of plants or their extracts, or synthetic analogues that: