EFSA evaluates previous cargoes of food transport ships

The safety body’s CONTAM panel published its opinion this week following a request from the European Commission for the evaluation of compounds and mixtures included in Proposed Draft List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes.

The majority of substances reviewed were deemed safe although cyclohexanol, cyclohexanone and 2,3-butanediol were rejected because of uncertainties over toxicity and possible cancer-causing properties.

Opinions​

The group highlighted its opinions on the following substances:

• Calcium nitrate, ammonium nitrate, the double salt and their solutions, as well as hydrogen peroxide, isobutene and fructose would not pose a hazard as previous cargoes. There were no toxicological concerns particularly in relation to their genotoxic or carcinogenic potential. The substances were not considered allergenic. Potential impurities and any possible reaction products from interaction with fats or oils were not considered a concern.

• Kaolin slurry would not cause any health issues as a previous cargo, provided it complied with the European Legislation on dioxins.

Low level concern​

The panel noted industry had not provided enough information on the sources and specifications of the following:

• Unfractionated fatty acid mixture or mixtures of fatty acids from natural fats and oils.​ It concluded nonetheless the “anticipated toxicological profile” ​for these “would generally indicate a low level of concern for human health and therefore would not cause any health concern as previous cargoes, provided their sources are edible types of oils and fats”.​

• Likewise, the EFSA experts said industry had not supplied sufficient information on the sources and specifications for fatty alcohol mixture or mixtures of fatty alcohols; and unfractionated fatty ester mixtures or mixtures of fatty esters​ from natural fats and oils.

The panel’s verdict on these, and methanol and ethanol, said they were safe “provided the sources are restricted such that the fatty acids and the fatty alcohols are from edible types of fats and oils not contaminated with compounds of toxicological concern (e.g. oils from waste collection sites, polychlorinated biphenyls)”.​

​

Carcinogenicity anxieties​

But the CONTAM experts raised concerns over cyclohexanol, cyclohexanone and 2,3-butanediol​ , because of “uncertainties about the potential carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity”. ​The group also flagged anxieties on the “possible toxicity”​ related to expected reaction products from cyclohexanone. EFSA concluded the three substances “did not meet the criteria for acceptability as previous cargoes”.

The panel said it was unable to evaluate epoxidised vegetable oils as previous cargoes because it had no information on what substances this would cover.

This is the second EFSA opinion in six months on edible fats and oils. In June, the body reviewed the criteria for their bulk transport and previous cargoes. It recommended changes on the number of previous cargoes on which records needed to be maintained and widened the scope of allergens not allowed in fats and oils.

Access the full opinion via the following link​