laporan bersama perwakilan malaysia - Food Safety and Quality ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Principles and methods for the risk assessment of chemicals in food (EHC 240, IPCS 2009) and the Principles for the safety assessment of food additives and contaminants in food (EHC 70, IPCS 1987). The Delegation noted that the requested food additives were comprised of various substances with different profiles. Since they had not been forwarded to the CCFA for endorsement, it was not appropriate for the Committee to take any position on whether their use in infant formula was acceptable. The JECFA Secretariat clarified that EHC 240 was an updated version of EHC 70, but, as EHC 70 was more detailed in several aspects, it was still referred to and still available on the JECFA website. On food additives in infant formula, EHC 240 had confirmed the position of EHC 70. COMMITTEE'S DECISION animals. Requests for evaluation should be presented to the CCFA. Such requests should be made using the agreed form, include an inventory of available studies and should state that the data meet the requirements for this age group by JECFA as laid down in the Principles and methods for the risk assessment of chemicals in food (EHC 240) and the Principles for the safety assessment of food additives and contaminants in food (EHC 70). The Committee encouraged the CCNFSDU to give consideration to the grouping of substances proposed in paras 14-18 of CX/FA 11/43/5, where the requested additives had been grouped in accordance with their needs for different levels of assessment TINDAKAN MALAYSIA 2.2.4 DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE ALIGNMENT OF THE FOOD ADDITIVE PROVISIONS OF THE STANDARDS FOR MEAT PRODUCTS AND RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE GSFA (Agenda Item 4c) HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION (Documents: CX/FA 11/43/6, CRD 10 (Brazil, EU, Indonesia, IDF), CRD 25 (Japan)) The Delegation of Australia introduced the report of the eWG. COMMITTEE'S DECISION In view of the general support for the TINDAKAN MALAYSIA JKCK FA perlu ambil 14
HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION They explained that the working group members were generally supportive of using a decision-tree approach to harmonise the food additives provisions in commodity standards and the GSFA. There was consensus that food additives needed to be technologically justified and assessed as safe before being permitted into the commodity standards and the GSFA. The decision-tree approach had been tried out on the standards for processed meat and should be applicable to all commodity standards. However, more discussion was needed on the details of the flow chart. There were different views on certain fundamental aspects of the approach to align the food additives provisions in commodity standards and the GSFA: which standards should be the default; what should be the technological justification for the use of a standard in a certain region and under certain climatic conditions; and should food additives be considered by functional class or individually. The Delegation recommended continuing work on the discussion paper taking into account the comments and suggestions made. The Committee generally supported the decision-tree approach recommended by the e-WG as a way to progressively achieve the goal of making the GSFA the single Codex reference for food additives, while ensuring that food additives were technologically justified and safe for use. In the discussion a number of requirements for the alignment were pointed out: the specific quality requirements and technological needs of standardised products should be respected when aligning the food additive provisions and they should not be broadened without justification; the flow chart used to align the provisions should address situations where food additives provisions were not endorsed by the CCFA; the flow chart should address one-tomultiple relationships between the scope of commodity standards and GSFA food categories; and an approach for the addition of new food additives in commodity standards should COMMITTEE'S DECISION decision-tree approach and the number of options and ideas expressed to address the fundamental issues concerning the alignment, the Committee agreed to establish an e-WG, led by Australia and working in English only, to continue work on the discussion paper and the decision-tree approach for consideration at its next session. The Committee also requested that the eWG include a proposal for the revision of the food additive provisions of the five standards for processed meat. TINDAKAN MALAYSIA perhatian perkara ini 15
Page 1 and 2: 1. Delegasi Malaysia Tiga (3) orang
Page 3 and 4: 2.2.2 MATTERS REFERRED BY THE CODEX
Page 5 and 6: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Working Pr
Page 7 and 8: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION and asked
Page 9 and 10: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Proposed d
Page 11 and 12: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Proposed D
Page 13: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION what the r
Page 17 and 18: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION The pWG ha
Page 19 and 20: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION sweeteners
Page 21 and 22: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION their rese
Page 23 and 24: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION expressed
Page 25 and 26: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Verbal int
Page 27 and 28: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION this sessi
Page 29 and 30: 2.2.6 PROVISIONS FOR ALUMINIUM CONT
Page 31 and 32: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Recommenda
Page 33 and 34: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION the descri
Page 35 and 36: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION The Commit
Page 37 and 38: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION the use of
Page 39 and 40: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION amendments
Page 41 and 42: standards. HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION
Page 43 and 44: 2.2.11 PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION OF T
Page 45 and 46: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION analytical
Page 47 and 48: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION Recommenda
Page 49 and 50: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION The FAO JE
Page 51 and 52: HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION The Commit
Page 53 and 54: JECFA. HIGHLIGHTS OF DISCUSSION The
Page 55 and 56: 2.2.17 OTHER BUSINESS AND FUTURE WO

laporan bersama perwakilan malaysia - Food Safety and Quality ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?