EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Can we define a tolerable level of risk in food allergy? Report from a EuroPrevall/UK Food Standards Agency workshop



Can we define a tolerable level of risk in food allergy? Report from a EuroPrevall/UK Food Standards Agency workshop



Clinical and Experimental Allergy 42(1): 30-37



There is an emerging consensus that, as with other risks in society, zero risk for food-allergic people is not a realistic or attainable option. Food allergy challenge data and new risk assessment methods offer the opportunity to develop quantitative limits for unintended allergenic ingredients which can be used in risk-based approaches. However, a prerequisite to their application is defining a tolerable level of risk. This requires a value judgement and is ultimately a 'societal' decision that has to involve all relevant stakeholders. The aim of the workshop was to bring together key representatives from the stakeholders (regulators, food industry, clinical researchers and patients), and for the first time ever discuss the definition of a tolerable level of risk with regard to allergic reactions to food. The discussions revealed a consensus that zero risk was not a realistic option and that it is essential to address the current lack of agreed action levels for cross-contamination with allergens if food allergen management practice is to be improved. The discussions also indicated that it was difficult to define and quantify a tolerable level of risk, although both the clinical and the industry groups tried to do so. A consensus emerged that doing nothing was not a viable option, and there was a strong desire to take action to improve the current situation. Two concrete actions were suggested: (1) Action levels should be derived from the data currently available. Different scenarios should be examined and further developed in an iterative process. On the basis of this work, a tolerable level of risk should be proposed. (2) 'One-dose' clinical trial with a low challenge dose should be performed in multiple centres to provide additional information about the general applicability of dose-distribution models and help validate the threshold levels derived.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 051920116

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 22093016

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2011.03868.x



Related references

UK Food Standards Agency Workshop Report: carbohydrate and cardiovascular risk. British Journal of Nutrition 103(11): 1688-1694, 2010

UK Food Standards Agency Workshop Report: the effects of the dietary. 2007

Iron bioavailability UK Food Standards Agency workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 96(5): 985-990, 2000

Iron bioavailability: UK Food Standards Agency workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 96(5): 985-990, 2006

Folate bioavailability - Food Standards Agency workshop report. Nutrition Bulletin 28(3): 281-282, 2003

UK Food Standards Agency a-linolenic acid workshop report. The British Journal of Nutrition 88(5): 3-9, 2002

UK Food Standards Agency cis-monounsaturated fatty acid workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 88(1): 99-104, 2002

UK food standards agency workshop report: diet and immune function. British Journal of Nutrition 103(11): 1684-1687, 2010

UK Food Standards Agency alpha-linolenic acid workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 88(5): 573-579, 2002

Dietary lipids and vascular function: UK Food Standards Agency workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 91(3): 491-500, 2004

Functional markers of selenium status UK Food Standards Agency workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 96(5): 980-984, 2000

Functional markers of selenium status: UK Food Standards Agency workshop report. British Journal of Nutrition 96(5): 980-984, 2006

Food Standards Agency multidisciplinary workshop childrens food choice in the family setting. Nutrition bulletin 32(4): 398-401, 2007

Food allergy--science and policy needs--The UK Food Standards Agency Research Programme. Toxicology 278(3): 319-325, 2011