Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'codex'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Celiac Disease & Gluten-Free Diet Forums

  • Diagnosis & Recovery, Related Disorders & Research
    • Calendar of Events
    • Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
    • Post Diagnosis, Recovery & Treatment of Celiac Disease
    • Related Disorders & Celiac Research
    • Dermatitis Herpetiformis
    • Gluten Sensitivity and Behavior
  • Support & Help
    • Coping with Celiac Disease
    • Publications & Publicity
    • Parents' Corner
    • Gab/Chat Room
    • Doctors Treating Celiac Disease
    • Teenagers & Young Adults Only
    • Pregnancy
    • Friends and Loved Ones of Celiacs
    • Meeting Room
    • Celiac Disease & Sleep
    • Celiac Support Groups
  • Gluten-Free Lifestyle
    • Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
    • Gluten-Free Recipes & Cooking Tips
    • Gluten-Free Restaurants
    • Ingredients & Food Labeling Issues
    • Traveling with Celiac Disease
    • Weight Issues & Celiac Disease
    • International Room (Outside USA)
    • Sports and Fitness
  • When A Gluten-Free Diet Just Isn't Enough
    • Food Intolerance & Leaky Gut
    • Super Sensitive People
    • Alternative Diets
  • Forum Technical Assistance
    • Board/Forum Technical Help
  • DFW/Central Texas Celiacs's Events
  • DFW/Central Texas Celiacs's Groups/Organizations in the DFW area

Celiac Disease & Gluten-Free Diet Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Categories

  • Celiac.com Sponsors
  • Celiac Disease Info
  • Safe Gluten-Free Food List / Unsafe Foods & Ingredients
  • Gluten-Free Food & Product Reviews
  • Gluten-Free Recipes
    • Recipes by Continent / Country
    • Biscuits, Buns, Rolls, Scones & Waffles (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Dessert Recipes: Pastries, Cakes, Cookies (Gluten-Free)
    • Bread Recipes (Gluten-Free)
    • Flour Mixes (Gluten-Free)
    • Kids Recipes (Gluten-Free)
    • Snacks & Appetizers (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Muffins (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Pancakes (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Pizzas & Pizza Crusts (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Soups, Sauces, Dressings & Chowders (Gluten-Free Recipes)
    • Cooking Tips
  • Celiac Disease Diagnosis, Testing & Treatment
  • Celiac Disease & Gluten Intolerance Research
  • Miscellaneous Information on Celiac Disease
    • Additional Celiac Disease Concerns
    • Celiac Disease Research Projects, Fundraising, Epidemiology, Etc.
    • Conferences, Publicity, Pregnancy, Church, Bread Machines, Distillation & Beer
    • Gluten-Free Diet, Celiac Disease & Codex Alimentarius Wheat Starch
    • Gluten-Free Food Ingredient Labeling Regulations
    • Celiac.com Podcast Edition
  • Journal of Gluten Sensitivity
  • Celiac Disease & Related Diseases and Disorders
  • Origins of Celiac Disease
  • Gluten-Free Grains and Flours
  • Oats and Celiac Disease: Are They Gluten-Free?
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Celiac Disease Support Groups
  • Celiac Disease Doctor Listing
  • Kids and Celiac Disease
  • Gluten-Free Travel
  • Gluten-Free Cooking
  • Gluten-Free
  • Allergy vs. Intolerance
  • Tax Deductions for Gluten-Free Food
  • Gluten-Free Newsletters & Magazines
  • Gluten-Free & Celiac Disease Links
  • History of Celiac.com

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Interests


Location


First Name


Last Name


City


State


Country


How did you hear about us?

Found 6 results

  1. Q: Why would people with celiac disease want to eat Codex wheat starch? A: Most people who have tried products made with Codex wheat starch feel that they are far superior to gluten-free products that do not contain the ingredient. Celiac.com 06/25/2000 - The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created by the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. It currently provides the only international gluten-free food standard for manufacturers. Its members include the Unites States and Canada in North America, and most European, Latin American, African and Asian countries. It is worth noting that European countries which currently conduct the most cutting-edge research on celiac disease in the world, namely Finland, Norway, Italy, Sweden and the UK, are also members of the Codex, and they currently accept the Codex standard for gluten-free foods that specifies a limit of 500 parts per million (ppm) of gluten in foods. This incredibly low level of gluten is considered safe by the Codex for people with celiac disease, as our products that contain specially made wheat starch with levels of gluten under this amount. Most manufacturers of gluten-free food use wheat starch that falls below 200 ppm, rather than the higher accepted limit of 500 ppm, and the current Codex gluten-free standard is in the process of being revised to the 200 ppm level. The acceptance of the Codex wheat starch by most European countries is based on years of research and the follow up care of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people with celiac disease, whose doctors found that they recovered fine while eating it. There is currently much clinical research being done in Europe on the safety of Codex wheat starch, the results of which have further reinforced the concept that Codex wheat starch is safe for people with celiac disease. Most people with celiac disease (excluding extremely sensitive individuals and people with wheat allergy) should be able to eat Codex wheat starch without any damage or problems associated with the disease.
  2. Celiac.com 07/23/2008 - Folks who follow a gluten-free diet can take comfort that the Codex Alimantarius, the international body responsible for setting food safety standards, has moved a step closer to adopting the gluten-free standards they drafted in November 2007, and their new standards are, for the most part, in-line with the proposed FDA regulations. However, those hoping for speedy adoption of similar standards by the FDA will just have to wait until the FDA takes one last round of public comment and evaluates safety standards used in developing the standards. Certainly, anticipation has been running high, as several blogs and otheronline sources have wrongly claimed that the new FDA standards will go intoeffect in August 2008. From June 30 to July 5, 2008, the Codex Alimentarius Commissionrecently held their 31st session, where they accepted without changethe 2007 Draft Revised Codex Standard for Foods for Special Dietary Usefor Persons Intolerant to Gluten. According to the latest CodexAlimentarius standard, any product labeled “gluten-free,” includingthose made from de-glutened wheat starch will contain no more than 20parts gluten per million. This last part is especially important, astheir earlier standards for the use of “gluten-free” on labels allowedup to 200 parts gluten per million if the product contained ingredients that normally contained gluten. The 2007 standard still includes a special category for foods that are not naturallygluten-free, but have been rendered gluten-free through processing, such as wheat starch that has had its gluten removed. Thiscategory is called “foods specially processed to reduce gluten to alevel above 20 up to 100 milligrams per kilogram.” The Codex Alimentarius Committee has yet to post the new standard on the their website. The adoption of a less than 20 ppm standard on foods labeled "gluten-free" by both the Codex Alimentarius and the FDA would mean that consumers across Europe and North America could count on a single, uniform standard for food that is labeled "gluten-free." This new standard has been driven primarily by the efforts of celiac disease support groups, people diagnosed with celiac disease, and gluten-free diet followers, whose influence also led to the creation and passage of the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act in 2004. The FDA will not issue their final ruling until they make the draft available for public review and consider one more round of commentary, along with previous public comments, as well as publishing a notice on the safety assessment made in developing the final rule. The FDA will likely publish the notice on the safety assessment soon, but there is no indication as to just when they will issue the final rule. A large part of the celiac community has been eagerly anticipating the announcement of the final rule. Until that great day, all of you gluten-free folks will just have to be content knowing that solid, reliable standards for the use of the term "gluten-free" on food labels are just around the corner. The next session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission will be held from 29 June to 4 July 2009 in Rome. Here are the new Codex Alimentarious Standards for Gluten-Free foods, which will appear on their Web site soon: 2.1.1 Gluten-free foods Gluten-free foods are dietary foods a) consisting of or made only from one or more ingredients which do not contain wheat (i.e., all Triticum species, such as durum wheat, spelt, and kamut), rye, barley, oats1 or their crossbred varieties, and the gluten level does not exceed 20 mg/kg in total, based on the food as sold or distributed to the consumer,and/or consisting of one or more ingredients from wheat (i.e., all Triticum species, such as durum wheat, spelt, and kamut), rye, barley, oats1 or their crossbred varieties, which have been specially processed to remove gluten, and the gluten level does not exceed 20 mg/kg in total, based on the food as sold or distributed to the consumer. 2.1.2 Foods specially processed to reduce gluten content to a level above 20 up to 100 mg/kg These foods consist of one or more ingredients from wheat (i.e., all Triticum species, such as durum wheat,spelt, and kamut), rye, barley, oats1 or their crossbred varieties, which have been specially processed to reduce the gluten content to a level above 20 up to 100 mg/kg in total, based on the food as sold or distributed to the consumer. Decisions on the marketing of products described in this section may be determined at the national level.
  3. This article comes to us from Frederik Willem Janssen, Zutphen, The Netherlands, e-mail: teizjanz@PI.NET. If you have specific questions about it, please contact him directly. The Codex Alimentarius provides the gluten-free standard for European food manufacturers. This article will deal with foods that are officially labeled as gluten free. In the European Union there is a directive on foods for special dietary uses (89/398/EEG), and this directive is the basis for all national legislation in the countries of the European Union. Though the directive deals with gluten-free foods there is no assigned limiting level of gluten for gluten-free food yet, so it is up to the national regulatory bodies of the member states to set their own level. There is however, an international body handling these matters: Codex Alimentarius. Codex Alimentarius is a Geneva-based International organization jointly run by the World Health Organization and FAO , and its aim is to establish worldwide standards for foods in the broadest sense. Food legislation in many countries is based on Codex Standards, although it is not mandatory to implement them in all cases. There is a Codex committee producing standards on food labeling, on hygiene, on composition etc., etc. There is a committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses (FSDU) and ... there is a Standard on gluten-free Food! The oldest Standard dates from 1981, and it says that foods may be labeled as gluten-free only if the nitrogen content of the protein derived from wheat is less than 50 mg N/100 gm on dry matter, which may be equivalent to about 20-30 mg gliadin in wheat starch. The calculation is quite complicated by the fact that most of the protein in wheat starch is starch granule protein and not gluten. There is a new Codex Standard in preparation, and a proposal to set the limiting level of gluten to 200-mg gluten/kg (20-mg/100 g) gluten-free food on dry matter. If we assume that half of the gluten is gliadin, this equals 10-mg gliadin/100 g o.d.m., so the level has gone down by a factor two in comparison to the old standard. If accepted, the new standard will be valid for end products and not for raw materials. In my previous posting I already mentioned that there are comments on the proposal from Sweden ( One of the reasons why the level in the Standard has not yet been effected (the proposal has been dealt with already two years ago) is that there is no validated analytical method (ring-tested) available to check compliance to this level. Though it might look rather simple to analyze gluten, it is generally done with an Enzyme Linked Immuno Sorbent Assay - ELISA, it is in fact very tricky, and especially as the term gluten is very imprecise. Gluten is a mixture of gliadin and glutenin - each composed of several sub-fractions - and its composition with respect to sub-fractions is cultivar dependent. There is also an effect on the recovery caused by the heat processing of the food, and although excellent work has been done by Dr Skerrit of CSIRO in Australia to circumvent this problem (he designed a method based on omega gliadin, which is the most heat stable gliadin fraction), there is still a feeling that this method still needs to be improved. Remember that agencies charged with enforcement of food laws must be able to bring suits against producers of non-complying gluten-free foods. So analytical methods need to be robust and accurate. Codex Alimentarius bases its standard on scientific facts, and thats why there is no zero tolerance. There is simply no scientific evidence that this is required (at least there is no concordant view among scientists about the maximum tolerable gluten intake), and it is reasoned that any unduly reduction in the permissive level will reduce the number of gluten-free food available unnecessary. Though Codex Alimentarius has been criticized in the past for being a food-producer driven body it is still the only world-wide forum for food standards, and its role within the framework of the GATT and WTO makes its work of sterling importance in settling trade disputes. In 1993 the National Food Alliance (UK NGO) produced a report titled Cracking the Codex. This report stated that even though the voting in Codex is nationwide, and quite often by consensus, there is a large impact of the producer lobby, especially in the preliminary stages of decision making. Even though there is no implemented standard in national legislation many countries will stick to the Codex Standard. The conclusion is that in many countries food labeled as gluten free will almost definitely contain gluten. As the regulatory agencies of most countries will not press charges against producers of gluten-free foods if the level is below the Codex Standard limit (though, as said, some countries may have lower regulatory levels). Codex Standards still do not have the status of national laws.
  4. This update comes to us from Frederik Willem Janssen, The Netherlands: fwjanssen@WXS.NL About a week ago I promised to post info about agenda item 4 (Gluten Free Food) as dealt with at the meeting of Codex Alimentarius NFSDU (Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Uses) which was held in September in Berlin Germany. As usual this meeting starts on Monday and continues till Wednesday, Thursday is a day off (time for the secretariat to draw resolutions) and on Friday these draft resolutions are discussed. Unfortunately I wasnt able to stay till Friday. However, the resolutions as discussed on Friday were handed to me afterwards however and I pass them with some corrective changes accepted during that day. For those of you who have no interest in reading this clerical stuff I summarize: The proposed limits (20) for food gluten-free by nature and 200 for food "rendered gluten-free" will stay between square brackets (so no decision has been made). The same holds for oats, awaiting further toxicological data about its celiac-toxicity it should be considered as toxic. The main obstacle for finalizing the standard is the lack of an appropriate method of analysis. Progress has been made but still not to that extent that enforcing agencies can be satisfied. Maybe we will see some progress in the next 2 years! Proposed Revisions: Alinorm 99/26, Draft Revised Standards for Gluten-Free Foods (Agenda Item 4): 31. The Committee recalled that the Twenty-second Session of the CAC adopted the Proposed Draft Standard for Gluten-Free Foods at Step 5 while recommending that comments on methods of analysis and on amounts of gluten in gluten free foods should be taken into account when finalizing the standard. The Committee noted that without an appropriate method of analysis it was not scientifically justified to advance the Draft further. 32. The Delegation of Sweden introduced their recent study on gluten determination in foods by an enzyme immunoassay using a monoclonal antibody against omega-gliadin (CRD 33), noting that the detection limit of the method (ref. AOAC 991.19) was about 20 - 40 ppm and the repeatability was acceptable. Some Delegations pointed out that the method presented raised some technical concerns: it was performed only on wheat and due to this, uncertainty exists as regards its applicability to other cereals. There were also concerns about the reproducibility of the method. It measured only omega-gliadin and other gliadins should also be taken into account. The need of further improvement was raised. Spain expressed concern about setting units where no method of analysis is available and not all the different types of gliadins can be detected. 33. The Committee noted that in some cases a proprietary method was the most specific way to detect an analyte, such as in the case of gluten detection. Since Codex had not endorsed these techniques as methods of analysis of Codex, the CCMAS (Codex committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling) should consider this problem. 34. Several delegations suggested that the Committee should ask FAO and WHO to convene an Expert Consultation to address the issue of the level and the method of analysis. Other delegations proposed to consult the CCMAS on this issue. The Secretariat informed the Committee that on the request of the CCFL (Codex committee on Food Labeling), JECFA (Joint expert committee on Food Additives) was prepared to consider the question of hypersensitivity at its 53rd Session (June 1999) and the intolerance to gluten might be discussed in this context. The Secretariat recalled that the role of the CCMAS was to endorse methods of analysis proposed by specialized Committees and the CCNFSDU needed to specify the method. 35. Several delegations and the Observer from the AAC (Association des Amidonneries Cooperative) proposed that the discussion of this draft should be adjourned until a reliable method of analysis became available. Other delegations were in favor of continuing work on it in order to meet the urgent need of the patients suffering from coeliac disease and proposed to advance the proposed draft for a single level of 200 ppm to step 8. Taking into account the absence of an appropriate and accurate method of analysis, it was proposed to maintain the gluten free level at 200 ppm for all foods and to include a new preamble suggesting the a revision of the standard when a method of analysis or new scientific evidence became available. 36. While concerning the proposed definition of "gluten-free" foods, several delegations wanted to point out that the current approach was confusing and misleading the consumer and that the level should be uniform for all foods. However, other delegations and the Observer from AOECS stressed the need for two levels with regard to the naturally gluten free foods and the products which had been rendered gluten free. The Committee noted that the proposed term "gluten-free" might mislead the consumer and recognized that the term "low or reduced in gluten" should be considered. 37. The Observer from AOECS, supported by some delegations, expressed the view that the level of 200 ppm for all gluten-free foods was too high to protect coeliacs and the gluten level should refer only to the end product for better consumer protection. 38. The Delegation of Finland proposed to remove the oats from the list as scientific studies showed that oats can be tolerated by celiacs and allows to provide dietary fibers for coeliacs. The Observer from AOECS, supported by some delegations, stressed that the square brackets on oats should be removed as oats might have negative impact on the health of coeliacs and that the medical experts had not reached consensus on this issue. 39. The Committee recognized that the development of reliable method of analysis of gluten was the key point of this discussion and that the development of the method should be encouraged by all means. Status of the Draft Revised Standard for Gluten-Free Foods 40. The Committee agreed to leave the text of the draft as it was in CX/NFSDU 98/4 and to return it to Step 6 for further consideration. The Committee also agreed that the question regarding the proprietary techniques should be raised to the CCMAS as a general matter. The following documents were discussed during the meeting: CX/NFSDU 98/4 - Add 1 (Comments from Australia, Spain, UK, AAC, ISDI); CX/NFSDU 98/4 - Add 2 (AOECS); CRD 3 (Uruguay, ISDI); CRD 13 (USA); CRD 21 (Spain); CRD 33 = CRD 42 (Sweden); CRD 44 (India); CRD 51 (Norway).
  5. This article comes to us from Frederik Willem Janssen, Zutphen, The Netherlands, e-mail: teizjanz@PI.NET. If you have specific questions about it, please contact him directly. The Codex Alimentarius provides the gluten-free standard for European food manufacturers. This article will deal with foods that are officially labeled as "gluten free." In the European Union there is a directive on foods for special dietary uses (89/398/EEG), and this directive is the basis for all national legislation in the countries of the European Union. Though the directive deals with gluten-free foods there is no assigned limiting level of gluten for gluten-free food yet, so it is up to the national regulatory bodies of the member states to set their own level. There is however, an international body handling these matters: Codex Alimentarius. Codex Alimentarius is a Geneva based International organization jointly run by the WHO and the FAO, and its aim is to establish worldwide standards for foods in the broadest sense. Food legislation in many countries is based on Codex Standards, although it is not mandatory to implement them in all cases. There is a Codex committee producing standards on food labeling, on hygiene, on composition etc., etc. There is a committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses (FSDU) and ... there is a Standard on gluten-free Food! The oldest Standard dates from 1981, and it says that foods may be labeled as "gluten-free" only if the nitrogen content of the protein derived from wheat is less than 50 mg N/100 gm on dry matter, which may be equivalent to about 20-30 mg gliadin in wheat starch. The calculation is quite complicated by the fact that most of the protein in wheat starch is "starch granule protein" and not gluten. There is a new Codex Standard in preparation, and a proposal to set the limiting level of gluten to 200-mg gluten/kg (20-mg/100 g) gluten-free food on dry matter. If we assume that half of the gluten is gliadin, this equals 10-mg gliadin/100 g o.d.m., so the level has gone down by a factor two in comparison to the "old" standard. If accepted, the new standard will be valid for end products and not for raw materials. In my previous posting I already mentioned that there are comments on the proposal from Sweden ( One of the reasons why the level in the Standard has not yet been effected (the proposal has been dealt with already two years ago) is that there is no validated analytical method (ring-tested) available to check compliance to this level. Though it might look rather simple to analyze gluten, it is generally done with an Enzyme Linked Immuno Sorbent Assay - ELISA, it is in fact very tricky, and especially as the term gluten is very imprecise. Gluten is a mixture of gliadin and glutenin - each composed of several sub-fractions - and its composition with respect to sub-fractions is cultivar dependent. There is also an effect on the recovery caused by the heat processing of the food, and although excellent work has been done by Dr Skerrit of CSIRO in Australia to circumvent this problem (he designed a method based on omega gliadin, which is the most heat stable gliadin fraction), there is still a feeling that this method still needs to be improved. Remember that agencies charged with enforcement of food laws must be able to bring suits against producers of non-complying gluten-free foods. So analytical methods need to be robust and accurate. Codex Alimentarius bases its standard on scientific facts, and thats why there is no zero tolerance. There is simply no scientific evidence that this is required (at least there is no concordant view among scientists about the maximum tolerable gluten intake), and it is reasoned that any unduly reduction in the permissive level will reduce the number of gluten-free food available unnecessary. Though Codex Alimentarius has been criticized in the past for being a food-producer driven body it is still the only world-wide forum for food standards, and its role within the framework of the GATT and WTO makes its work of sterling importance in settling trade disputes. In 1993 the National Food Alliance (UK NGO) produced a report titled "Cracking the Codex." This report stated that even though the voting in Codex is nationwide, and quite often by consensus, there is a large impact of the producer lobby, especially in the preliminary stages of decision making. Even though there is no implemented standard in national legislation many countries will stick to the Codex Standard. The conclusion is that in many countries food labeled as "gluten free" will almost definitely contain gluten. As the regulatory agencies of most countries will not press charges against producers of gluten-free foods if the level is below the Codex Standard limit (though, as said, some countries may have lower regulatory levels). Codex Standards still do not have the status of national laws.
  6. This 11/29/98 update comes to us from Frederik Willem Janssen, The Netherlands: fwjanssen@WXS.NL About a week ago I promised to post info about agenda item 4 (Gluten Free Food) as dealt with at the meeting of Codex Alimentarius NFSDU (Nutrition and Food for Special Dietary Uses) which was held in September in Berlin Germany. As usual this meeting starts on Monday and continues till Wednesday, Thursday is a day off (time for the secretariat to draw resolutions) and on Friday these draft resolutions are discussed. Unfortunately I wasnt able to stay till Friday. However, the resolutions as discussed on Friday were handed to me afterwards however and I pass them with some corrective changes accepted during that day. For those of you who have no interest in reading this clerical stuff I summarize: The proposed limits (20) for food gluten-free by nature and 200 for food rendered gluten-free will stay between square brackets (so no decision has been made). The same holds for oats, awaiting further toxicological data about its celiac-toxicity it should be considered as toxic. The main obstacle for finalizing the standard is the lack of an appropriate method of analysis. Progress has been made but still not to that extent that enforcing agencies can be satisfied. Maybe we will see some progress in the next 2 years! Proposed Revisions: Alinorm 99/26, Draft Revised Standards for Gluten-Free Foods (Agenda Item 4): 31. The Committee recalled that the Twenty-second Session of the CAC adopted the Proposed Draft Standard for Gluten-Free Foods at Step 5 while recommending that comments on methods of analysis and on amounts of gluten in gluten free foods should be taken into account when finalizing the standard. The Committee noted that without an appropriate method of analysis it was not scientifically justified to advance the Draft further. 32. The Delegation of Sweden introduced their recent study on gluten determination in foods by an enzyme immunoassay using a monoclonal antibody against omega-gliadin (CRD 33), noting that the detection limit of the method (ref. AOAC 991.19) was about 20 - 40 ppm and the repeatability was acceptable. Some Delegations pointed out that the method presented raised some technical concerns: it was performed only on wheat and due to this, uncertainty exists as regards its applicability to other cereals. There were also concerns about the reproducibility of the method. It measured only omega-gliadin and other gliadins should also be taken into account. The need of further improvement was raised. Spain expressed concern about setting units where no method of analysis is available and not all the different types of gliadins can be detected. 33. The Committee noted that in some cases a proprietary method was the most specific way to detect an analyte, such as in the case of gluten detection. Since Codex had not endorsed these techniques as methods of analysis of Codex, the CCMAS (Codex committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling) should consider this problem. 34. Several delegations suggested that the Committee should ask FAO and WHO to convene an Expert Consultation to address the issue of the level and the method of analysis. Other delegations proposed to consult the CCMAS on this issue. The Secretariat informed the Committee that on the request of the CCFL (Codex committee on Food Labeling), JECFA (Joint expert committee on Food Additives) was prepared to consider the question of hypersensitivity at its 53rd Session (June 1999) and the intolerance to gluten might be discussed in this context. The Secretariat recalled that the role of the CCMAS was to endorse methods of analysis proposed by specialized Committees and the CCNFSDU needed to specify the method. 35. Several delegations and the Observer from the AAC (Association des Amidonneries Cooperative) proposed that the discussion of this draft should be adjourned until a reliable method of analysis became available. Other delegations were in favor of continuing work on it in order to meet the urgent need of the patients suffering from coeliac disease and proposed to advance the proposed draft for a single level of 200 ppm to step 8. Taking into account the absence of an appropriate and accurate method of analysis, it was proposed to maintain the gluten free level at 200 ppm for all foods and to include a new preamble suggesting the a revision of the standard when a method of analysis or new scientific evidence became available. 36. While concerning the proposed definition of gluten-free foods, several delegations wanted to point out that the current approach was confusing and misleading the consumer and that the level should be uniform for all foods. However, other delegations and the Observer from AOECS stressed the need for two levels with regard to the naturally gluten free foods and the products which had been rendered gluten free. The Committee noted that the proposed term gluten-free might mislead the consumer and recognized that the term low or reduced in gluten should be considered. 37. The Observer from AOECS, supported by some delegations, expressed the view that the level of 200 ppm for all gluten-free foods was too high to protect coeliacs and the gluten level should refer only to the end product for better consumer protection. 38. The Delegation of Finland proposed to remove the oats from the list as scientific studies showed that oats can be tolerated by celiacs and allows to provide dietary fibers for coeliacs. The Observer from AOECS, supported by some delegations, stressed that the square brackets on oats should be removed as oats might have negative impact on the health of coeliacs and that the medical experts had not reached consensus on this issue. 39. The Committee recognized that the development of reliable method of analysis of gluten was the key point of this discussion and that the development of the method should be encouraged by all means. Status of the Draft Revised Standard for Gluten-Free Foods 40. The Committee agreed to leave the text of the draft as it was in CX/NFSDU 98/4 and to return it to Step 6 for further consideration. The Committee also agreed that the question regarding the proprietary techniques should be raised to the CCMAS as a general matter. The following documents were discussed during the meeting: CX/NFSDU 98/4 - Add 1 (Comments from Australia, Spain, UK, AAC, ISDI); CX/NFSDU 98/4 - Add 2 (AOECS); CRD 3 (Uruguay, ISDI); CRD 13 (USA); CRD 21 (Spain); CRD 33 = CRD 42 (Sweden); CRD 44 (India); CRD 51 (Norway).
×
×
  • Create New...