Conclusions

67.          Using occurrence data from the 2011 TDS for EAs and consumption data from the NDNS for woman of childbearing age, all estimated mean and 97.5^th percentile exposures are below the respective ARfD and TDI of 0.4 μg/kg bw and are therefore not of toxicological concern. These exposures are also below any therapeutic dose of natural or synthetic EAs reported to have adverse effects.

68.          The assessment was based on a relatively small sample size (food groups, EAs tested), which reduced confidence in the estimates. In addition, the consumption data may not be fully representative of the maternal diet as the data were for women of childbearing age. However, estimation of total exposure using the 97.5^th percentile for all food groups was conservative, as it assumed high consumption across all food groups. On balance, it is concluded that the margin of safety is sufficient to conclude that dietary exposure to EAs is not of toxicological concern in pregnant women.

69.          The COT noted that environmental factors such as climate change may affect exposure to EAs, with wetter weather resulting in an increase of EAs in foods, e.g. rye. However, this is part of a wider issue on climate change and a potential increase in food borne risks and would not be limited to just EAs.