Harmonization of the EU nanomaterial definitions:


In European Union legislation, the regulatory status of nanomaterials in sectoral regulations is established by their definition, indicating what is considered a nanomaterial, and thus subject to the application of specific nano provisions in each product category. Therefore, there is more than one regulatory definition of nanomaterial. The first definitions were those of cosmetics [1] followed by the food labelling regulation [2]. The European Commission then released a Recommendation for nanomaterial definition [3]. It must be kept in mind that a Recommendation is not binding unless included in a Regulation. The Recommendation is based on particle number size distribution as the primary parameter and specific surface area as the secondary parameter. In addition, it was stated that >50% particles by number must be in the size range 1–100 nm for a substance to be considered a nanomaterial, which made the parameters measurable and thus the EC Recommendation applicable. The recommendation was taken up by more recent legislation, such as the Biocide Product Regulation [4] and the Medical Device Regulation (approved on 5 May 2017). Since 2011, the use of the EC Recommendation has resulted in issues and the need for clarification, which in turn led to the ongoing revision that should be released soon by the Environment Directorate-General. The expected revision will not include major modifications but will only add some text clarifications. Also, guidelines for implementation of the Recommendation will be issued, setting out the best testing strategy to date to identify a substance as a nanomaterial. After the revision is published, it is expected the Commission will harmonize the definition of nanomaterial across sectoral regulations.

Regulatory definition(s) of nanomaterial

The definitions of nanomaterials used in cosmetics and food are more a statement of principle than regulatory enforceable definitions. In cosmetics, nanomaterials are defined as intentionally produced substances which have particle size between 1 and 100 nm and are biopersistent and insoluble, but there is no particle number benchmark. Therefore, in principle, even one nanoparticle (if detectable) in the substance is sufficient to make it a nanomaterial, with the consequent burden of safety dossier notification. However, other nanomaterials such as nanosomes are not considered nanomaterials under the cosmetic regulation since they are not biopersistent. The result is that even if the technical function of the nanomaterial is necessary to the product, and while the safety of the ingredient has to be demonstrated, it is not necessary to provide a notification with the full nano safety dossier 6 months before placing the product on the market. The definition of nanomaterials used for food is even less clear, since it includes intentionally produced (and not ‘intentionally in the nano-range’) materials, and does not establish a particle number benchmark. In addition, it specifies that nanostructured or aggregated materials with nano-properties have to be considered nanomaterials. Therefore, in principle even a natural ingredient intentionally produced to be used in food, with one particle in the nanosize range, would be considered a nanomaterial and thus be labelled as such. Consequently, the entering into force of the Novel Food Regulation [5] which refers to the same nanomaterial definition, would make almost all substances with detectable nanoparticles novel foods. It is also not clear if nanosomes or other soft nanomaterials will be considered nanomaterials or not. This uncertainty results in the non-applicability of nano specific requirements in food. For example, there are foods using additives that are known to contain detectable fractions of nanoparticles, such as E551 (silica dioxide). However, the labels of such marketed products do not mentioned them as being nano, even though they should. This example shows the current non-application of the nano definition in food.

There are other examples suggesting that even if not official, the tendency is to consider the EC Recommendation as the de facto working definition in food. The best example is the recent EFSA opinion on TiO2 (E171) re-evaluation, which found E171 to be safe for use. The EFSA Scientific Opinion on E171 [6] reported that, based on information collected from stakeholders and other sources, E171 is not a nanomaterial because the number of particles is below 50% (i.e., ranging between <1% and 36%). Therefore, literature data on nano-TiOwas considered not relevant (and therefore not used) in the safety assessment of E171.Nano-related data were only used in the comparative assessment of the behaviour after ingestion of nano and bulk forms (essentially, absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME)). To complete the safety assessment, EFSA launched a call for data on reproductive toxicity and on particle size distribution because of the need to indicate nano fraction in E171specifications‘ due to its potential importance for toxicokinetics and toxicity’[7].


The EFSA Opinion on E171 shows there are different ways of defining nanomaterials in food. According to the food definition of nanomaterial, E171 must be classified as a nanomaterial. Therefore, for consumer information [2], (nano) should be placed beside E171 on the label’s ingredient list. However, this has not been done for products on the market. On the other hand, when determining which safety data to use, the EFSA Panel decided to follow the EC Recommendation instead (which is not mandatory for food, as it is only a Recommendation), thus deciding that E171 is not a nanomaterial. Which view is the correct one?

It is thus clear that the Commission’s intention to make the revised EC Recommendation enforceable in all regulations is necessary to eliminate the unjustified difference in the safety assessment of nanomaterials for companies in different industry sectors. The fact that the same substance can be considered a nanomaterial in one regulation and not in another with different safety requirements is not acceptable.


1. Regulation EC 1223/2009. OJ L 342, 22.12.2009, p. 59–209

2. Regulation EU 1169/2011. OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18–63

3. Commission Recommendation of 18 October 2011 on the definition of nanomaterial. OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 38–40

4. Regulation EU 528/2012. OJ L 167, 27.6.2012, p. 1–123


6. EFSA ANS Panel (EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food) (2016) Scientific Opinion on the re-evaluation of titanium dioxide (E 171) as a food additive. EFSA Journal 2016;14(9):4545, 83 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4545

7. EFSA (2017) Call for scientific and technical data on the permitted food additive titanium dioxide (E 171). https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/fs-improv-additive-20170130-call_sci-tech-data-e171.pdf

Nanotechnology and nanomaterials in food

Interest in nanotechnology and the use of nanomaterials is growing rapidly due to their particular physico-chemical properties. Reduction of materials to the nanoscale confers on them high reactivity so they can be used as catalysts, improved optical and magnetic properties for theranostic purposes, mechanical properties for improved implants and prosthesis, and biological activity so they can act as biocides. In particular, nanomaterials and nanotechnology are applied in the automotive, appliance, coating,
health and fitness, and electronic and computer industries, in the manufacture of home and garden products and goods for children, and the food and beverage sectors [1] (Fig. 1).

Schermata 2016-12-29 alle 11.18.38

In the food sector, nanomaterials and nanotechnology are mainly used for cooking appliance manufacture, food storage and food supplements. When applied to food packaging, nanomaterials are usually used for improving the storage and shelf-life of products. Nanomaterial and nanotechnology applications are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.

Schermata 2016-12-29 alle 11.18.51   Schermata 2016-12-29 alle 11.18.58

Estimation of the effects of nanomaterial use in the various sectors only considers the intentional application of nanomaterials for generating innovative products. However, nanomaterials and nanotechnology can also be used inadvertently or accidentally (Fig. 2), which has led to further research on their use in consumer products and unknown impacts on consumers. Nanotechnology refers to the design, characterization, production and application of structures, devices and systems having dimensions in the nanoscale, while nanomaterials are natural, accidental or engineered materials with one or more dimensions in the nanoscale. Some examples of nanomaterial definitions are given in Table 3. These definitions are generic and applicable to all sectors and products.

Schermata 2016-12-29 alle 11.19.20

Schermata 2016-12-29 alle 11.19.08

The unusual properties of nanomaterials are due to their small dimensions, which are responsible for the high surface area-to-volume ratio, number of particles per mass and so number of surface atoms. In addition to dimensions and surface area, the properties of nanomaterials also depend on chemical composition, shape, solubility, aggregation/agglomeration, morphology, surface energy and charge, surface coating, and crystallinity. Nanomaterials can assume different shapes depending on their basic forms, such as spheres and rods. Their chemical composition affects stability (i.e. agglomeration and aggregation) and dissolution, while coating and surface charge affect nanomaterial behaviour in real matrices such as foods. To properly evaluate their behaviour in complex systems, all the above physico-chemical properties must be considered. Depending on their chemical composition, nanomaterials can be divided into (i) organic nanomaterials such as micelles, and (ii) inorganic nanomaterials composed of metal(loids) such as silver and silica. Organic nanomaterials are mainly used for nanomedicine and nutraceutical applications to improve active molecule targeting. They can be formed by the active molecule or biocompatible elements transporting active molecules. Inorganic nanomaterials represent the active/functional element, and can introduce non-physiological elements such as silver into biological systems.

The first step to ensure the safe use of nanotechnology and nanomaterials in a regulatory context is the identification of the object as a ‘nanomaterial’. To this aim, the European Commission defined nanomaterial from a regulatory point of view as follows: “’Nanomaterial’ means a natural, incidental, or manufactured material containing particles in an unbound or an agglomerate state, where 50% or more of the particles size distribution is in the size range 1 nm–100 nm. In specific cases and where warranted by concerns for the environment, health, or safety the number size distribution threshold of 50% may be replaced by a threshold between 1% and 50%”. Therefore, it is essential to classify constitutive elements of food as nanomaterials using validated technical approaches and standard operating procedures able to comply with recently approved regulations on labelling (Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 [2, 3]) and novel foods (Regulation (EU) 2283/2015) [4]. Once the presence of nanomaterials is verified, specific safety evaluation of the commercial products is necessary. The European Commission has made great efforts to promote the development of standardized and validated methods, procedures and tests for the regulatory testing of nanomaterials and nanomaterial-containing products, risk assessment and risk management. By participating in European projects such as NANoREG and NanoValid, our laboratory is actively involved in the development of methods and validated procedures for the physico-chemical characterization and safety of nanomaterials. Some procedures have been recently published on the NanoValid website (http://www.nanovalid.eu/).


1. Woodrow Wilson Center (2013) Project on emerging nanotechnologies inventory: consumer products inventory. Available from: http://www.nanotechproject.org/cpi

2.  The European Commission (2013) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1363/2013 of 12 December 2013 amending Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers as regards the definition of ‘engineered nanomaterials’ (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal of the European Union L 343/26

3. Micheletti C, Venturini M (2015) Normativa e sicurezza. Criticità nell’applicazione ai nanomateriali. L’Integratore Nutrizionale 18(3) 48–50

4. Micheletti C, Benetti F (2016) Uso dei nanomateriali in nutraceutica. Cosa cambia con le modifiche del quadro normativo dopo il nuovo Regolamento “Novel Foods”. L’Integratore Nutrizionale 19(1) 44–47

Nutrafoods 3 – 2016

Safety of hydroxyanthracene derivatives

In 2013, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a positive scientific opinion on a health claim application for authorization related to hydroxyanthracene derivatives and improvement of bowel function. The application was based on a food supplement containing a blend of botanical ingredients and micro-organisms.

In their opinion, the EFSA Panel concluded that a cause and effect relationship was established between consumption of the substance and the claimed beneficial effect, but that in order to bear the health claim 10 mg hydroxyanthracene derivatives per day from the named botanical sources should be taken for the target population of adults.

Furthermore, some restrictions of use were noted by EFSA, as these were considered necessary. Namely, that stimulant laxatives should not be consumed continually for periods longer than 1–2 weeks without medical supervision and that long-term use of stimulant laxatives should be avoided, and these should only be used if their effect cannot be achieved by a change of diet or the administration of so-called bulking agents. However, as is the case for all health claims applications, EFSA opinions and subsequent authorizations cannot be construed as marketing authorizations, positive safety assessments or decisions on classification as a foodstuff of the concerned substance, as this is not foreseen in the framework of the Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation.

Although it was the first favourable EFSA outcome for a health claim for substances derived from botanicals, the Scientific Opinion was considered somewhat controversial and during the risk management phase related to the authorization of the health claim, concerns were repeatedly raised by certain EU Member States.

The medicinal character of these substances was evoked during the European Commission (EC) meetings, as was the importance of setting appropriate conditions of use that would fully take account of the restrictions of use concerning stimulant laxatives stated in the EFSA opinion. Following lengthy discussions in the EC working group on claims, early this year two options were discussed to resolve the issue, either to reject the claims or use the so-called Article 8 procedure to address potential safety concerns.

The EC, on their own initiative, therefore decided to request an EFSA Scientific Opinion on the safety of hydroxyanthracene derivatives under Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No. 1925/2006 on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods. This procedure provides for the potential prohibition, restriction or placing under Community scrutiny, of substances other than vitamins or minerals when added to or used in the manufacture of foods, where these represent a risk to consumers.

EFSA has indicated a deadline of 30 June 2017 to deliver their opinion, and have just initiated discussions to identify the necessary expertise to conduct the assessment and establish a dedicated Working Group. The outcome of this assessment will determine if hydroxyanthracene derivatives will be added to Annex III of Regulation 1925/2006, and therefore be subject to prohibition, restrictions or scrutiny for use in foods including food supplements in the EU.

Nutrafoods 4 – 2016

Bigger, better, busier – Vitafoods Europe

Vitafoods Europe 2016 welcomed a total of 17,666 visitors through its doors – an increase of 13% over last year, and an all-time high.

For the first time this year Vitafoods Europe took place across four halls at Palexpo, creating extra exhibition space for more stands and visitor attractions. The additional room was put to good use, with a total of 900 exhibitors taking part – 10% more than last year – and a host of new and original content that brought the nutraceutical industry to life.

Held at Palexpo in Geneva on 10–12 May 2016, this year’s event was Vitafoods Europe’s 20th anniversary. It was a truly international affair with attendees coming from 115 different countries. The show proved a huge hit with visitors, with many reporting that it had provided a superb opportunity to meet and do business with new and existing contacts across the nutrition sector.

New attractions prove popular with visitors

Vitafoods Europe 2016 heralded a fresh approach that increased the focus of the event on the key areas that matter most to visitors. In order to offer a richer experience, the show focused on four distinct sectors, as follows:

• Ingredients & Raw Materials

• Finished Products

• Contract Manufacturing & Private Label

• Services & Equipment

Vitafoods Europe 2016 also featured a number of new and returning visitor attractions that placed emphasis on interaction and meeting the business challenges of today. Making its debut was the Sports Nutrition Zone, where visitors could discover the latest developments in the exciting and fast-growing sports nutrition category. In the Optimal Health Testing Centre, meanwhile, exhibitors demonstrated how to identify specific health needs and deliver tailored nutrition solutions to meet them.

Also premiering at Vitafoods Europe 2016 was the Springboard Pavilion, a dedicated space for visitors to engage with start-ups and other entrepreneurs at the cutting edge of the nutrition sector. Likewise, the Vitafoods LaunchPad was a new feature where visitors could hear concise, bite-sized presentations from exhibitors about the latest product launches in the nutrition industry. LaunchPad products were also available to view at close hand in the Vitafoods New Products Zones.

Featuring for the second year running was the Omega-3 Resource Centre in association with GOED. Ellen Schutt, Communications Director for GOED, said: “It was a great show. We had 10 of our members that exhibited with us and for the most part we’ve heard that they were very happy with the traffic and the quality of the attendance. We had a mini-theatre inside our pavilion, and the sessions were very well attended, and I think there was a very good exchange of information”.

Another new feature, the Vitafoods Centre Stage, played host to speakers on a range of topics including sports nutrition, business growth strategies, regulatory compliance and formulating for the consumer. It was also the scene of the Vitafoods Venture Den, an exciting new competition giving nutraceutical start-ups the opportunity to pitch to investors and compete for a prize package worth €75,000. In a tight contest, the winner was botanical ingredients supplier Mazza Innovation, which uses a novel extraction method called PhytoClean™.

Strong conference line-up

Running alongside the exhibition was the Vitafoods Europe Conference, which boasted a strong line-up of speakers from the worlds of academia, market research and industry. Delegate feedback was very positive. One attendee said: “The quality of speakers has been excellent”. Another commented: “The choice of speakers was very good and the topics fitted well with what’s important in the industry at the moment”. Vitafoods Europe returns to Palexpo next year on 9–11 May 2017.

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 11.01.03

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

Sustainable Foods Summit

Sustainability and technological advances are leading to novel ingredients being extracted from food waste. As shown at the recent Sustainable Cosmetics Summit, these novel ingredients are finding new applications in foods, nutraceuticals and personal care products.

According to the FAO (United Nations), about a third of food produced for human consumption is wasted or lost in the supply chain. With food companies and retailers under pressure to become more efficient and reduce losses, many are re-directing food waste from landfill. A transition is occurring whereby waste previously directed to low-end applications – such as animal feed and biogas – is making its way into new ingredients.

Novel ingredients are being created from food waste as new technologies improve extraction and processing methods. For instance, the Swiss company FoodSolutionsTeam is using green chemistry to extract active materials from food side streams. Made from carrot pulp, its KaroPRO ingredient has water binding applications in processed foods. The Swiss company offers similar food ingredients made from organic linseed, peas and rice. Phytonext is another company using new extraction techniques to produce ingredients from citrus peel and tomato waste.

The EU is also funding research to create new ingredients from food waste. The BIORICE project involves extracting starch from rice waste to make ingredients for functional foods, nutraceuticals and cosmetics. Another project, APROPOS, involves taking proteins from salmon and rapeseed waste for cosmetic applications. A Spanish cosmetics firm plans to use the novel extract as a foundation for a new cream product.

Such ingredients have already made headway in natural personal care products. The Marks & Spencer department store is using resveratrol from grape waste from the production of its own-label wines, in its Super Grape skin care products. The French company Caudalie has built its entire range of natural personal care products from grapevine-based and grapeseed ingredients, such as resveratrol and polyphenols. Research by Organic Monitor finds the brand leads the French natural cosmetics market with products present in over 30 countries.

With the global population projected to reach 9 billion by 2050 and agricultural land becoming increasingly scarce, more investment is expected in creating new ingredients from food waste. A recurring theme in the Sustainable Foods Summit (www.sustainablefoodssummit.com) and Sustainable Cosmetics Summit (www.sustainablecosmeticssummit.com) was ‘closing loops’ whereby waste materials find a new life in fresh applications. Organisations like TerraCycle have been successful in closing the packaging loop for consumer products; it remains to be seen how soon waste from food streams will find better uses.

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.55.33

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

20th FloraGLO® Lutein Anniversary Congress:

DSM Nutritional Products and Kemin Industries hosted the 20th FloraGLO® Lutein Anniversary Congress on Thursday 2nd June in Lisbon, bringing together the world’s leading experts on lutein and zeaxanthin to present revolutionary new research on their effects on human visual performance and brain function.

Typically, lutein and zeaxanthin supplements have been aimed at older consumers with age-related macular degeneration (AMD); however, new research demonstrates a positive effect on blue light filtration and glare resistance in other age groups. These findings create a whole new target market of healthy individuals and younger generations.

Manufactured by Kemin and formulated by DSM, FloraGLO® Lutein is a naturally sourced, unesterified lutein. The introduction of FloraGLO® Lutein to the global marketplace 20 years ago created a new product category, initiating the development and use of lutein for maintaining human eye health.

Pedro Vieira, Vice-President, Human Nutrition and Health division of Kemin, stated: “The impact of FloraGLO Lutein on eye health over the last two decades has been significant, as demonstrated by this global event. Today’s Congress is not only an opportunity to highlight new science, but also to facilitate wider discussions that will shape future developments”.

The damaging effects of blue light on the eyes and the benefits of lutein and zeaxanthin in combating this growing health concern were a particular focus at the congress, with both Stuart P. Richer, OD, MS, PhD, FAAO and Billy R. Hammond Jr., PhD presenting on the topic.

“FloraGLO Lutein is the most clinically researched lutein brand in the world. The recent scientific findings allow us to offer FloraGLO Lutein to wider audiences than ever before. This is testimony to the ongoing success of both the product and our partnership with Kemin”, adds Gareth Barker, Human Health & Nutrition Vice President, DSM.

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.55.19

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

VitroScreen Symposium:

VitroScreen organized an international symposium on ‘Mucosal immunity and in vitro science’ in Milan at the historic Palazzo Clerici with its famous fresco by Tiepolo, to celebrate its 15th anniversary. VitroScreen is a laboratory focusing on biologically relevant, reproducible and predictive in vitro models in life science. It has been GPL certified since 2010 for in vitro toxicology and a member of EU-NETVAL since 2014.

The symposium dealt with the highly relevant topic of how the human mucosal immune system plays a key role in the health and well-being of humans, and discussed the state of the art of in vitro science employing the most innovative biological models in preclinical research.

Introducing the symposium, Marisa Meloni, VitroScreen’s CEO, highlighted the company’s mission both to replace in vivo tests on animals and clinical trials in humans with in vitro experimental models, and to foster an evolutionary approach to preclinical and toxicological evaluation. This approach, based on predictable and reproducible technology, delivers value to different sectors, including the pharma, cosmetics, nutritional and chemical industries.

Professor Anna Maria Castellazzi (Centro Interuniversitario di Immunità e Nutrizione, Pavia University) discussed the importance of the microbiota in close contact with the intestinal mucosa as a defence system against potentially immunogenic or pathogenic factors in the lumen. Both microbiota and mucosa, along with mucus, form the so-called mucosal barrier. The human gut microbiota is currently the focus of very advanced research techniques and over the next 10 years mucosal immunology research is expected to deliver significant information and characterize the relationship among mucosal sites, offering new insights into overall well-being and not just basic health.

The theme of mucosal immunity was further developed, focusing on the different barriers of the body. The speakers also highlighted how in vitro methods are useful in increasing the knowledge of the mechanisms maintaining tissue homeostasis and hence well-being, and how dysfunction gives rise to pathogenic events.

Carolina Devastato (Angelini SpA) dealt with the highly complex vaginal ecosystem and shared the results of research jointly carried out with VitroScreen. The vaginal microflora has been reproduced on a vaginal epithelial model colonized with Lactobacillus and Candida albicans. The model provided highly reliable and predictive results on the safety and efficacy of pharma and cosmetic formulations.

Christian Pellevoisin (Episkin Academy) underlined how human reconstructed skin and in vitro epidermal models allow research on the interactions between the skin and the resident microbiota and their impact on skin functions in a reproducible and controlled environment very similar to the in vivo conditions.

Stefano Barabino (Genoa University) focused on how the tear film, lacrimal glands, cornea, conjunctival epithelia and meibomian glands work together as a functional unit to provide an efficient system. Professor Barabino introduced a dry eye model based on in vitro reconstructed human corneal epithelium and showed, using SEM analysis, how natural polymers interact on the ocular surface.

Samuel Constant (Epithelix), an expert on respiratory airways, underlined how viral respiratory infections are the most frequent cause of acute illnesses and result in mild to severe diseases such as the common cold, bronchiolitis and pneumonia. He shared a comparative study on the infectivity and replication of the most frequent human respiratory viruses using standardized in vitro reconstructed human airways epithelia (MucilAir) and highlighted how the model is a robust, reliable and relevant tool for antiviral drug development.

Barbara De Servi and Federica Varriale (VitroScreen) described the development of a co-culture model including Caco2 and THP-1 cells for studying the interactions between inflammatory pathways, microbiota species and pathogens at the molecular and ultrastructural levels.

A round table discussion followed the stimulating presentations. Professor Thomas Hartung (John Hopkins University, Baltimore) discussed the evolution of molecular research over the last decades and highlighted the importance of new methodologies complementing and replacing traditional animal tests. New approaches towards a more organotypic cell culture have opened up fresh avenues for replicating human physiology in the test tube. He summarized the lessons learned from the development, validation and acceptance of alternative methods for the creation of new processes.

The intense discussion during the round table validated the intuition which resulted in the creation of VitroScreen back in 2001 with the aim of developing and implementing validated in vitro tests for the pharma, cosmetic, nutritional and chemical industries.

In addition to enjoying the valuable scientific discussions and presentation, participants at the symposium were delighted to attend a wonderful concert by the world-renowned maestro Andrea Griminelli who through the unparalleled harmony of his flute enhanced VitroScreen’s motto: the Art of Innovation!

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.55.06

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

Second annual NutraIngredients Awards

NutraIngredients Awards, organized by NutraIngredients.com, is aimed at recognizing and rewarding the very best European and global innovation in nutrition and food supplements. The organizers received more than 125 entries this year, and appointed a diverse panel of experts to judge the 2016 Awards.

The winners of the NutraIngredients Awards were announced during Vitafoods Europe, at a glittering awards dinner on the 11th of May at the 5-star Starling Hotel in Geneva, Switzerland.


Readers’ Ingredient of the Year: Sideral® r.m. – Sucrosomial® Iron by Alesco

Startup Ingredient of the Year: Amazing Grains by Amazing Grains

Ingredient of the Year – Healthy Ageing: Aquamin by Marigot

Ingredient of the Year – Weight Management: ProGo by Hofseth Biocare ASA

Ingredient of the Year – Sport & Energy: NUTRALYS® S85PLUS by Roquette

Readers’ Food Supplement of the Year: Protein Pow All Purpose Cooking Mixes by Protein Pow

Finished Product of the Year – Medical Foods: XaQuil™ XR – ((6S)-5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid, glucosamine salt) by Xymogen

Finished Product of the Year – Immunity: HOWARU® Protect EarlyLife by DuPont Nutrition & Health

Finished Product of the Year – Heart Health: Cardi-O-Mato by Lycored

Finished Product of the Year – Gender-Targeted Health: ProXeed Women by Sigma-Tau HealthScience International

University Research of the Year: Curcumin C3 Complex® Metabolic Syndrome Research, Sabinsa Study, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in Iran.

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.50.47

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

Acid whey isn’t waste – it’s a goldmine

Many dairy companies have yet to realise that their acid whey is a valuable raw material that can be used to create high quality and nutritious consumer products, according to Arla Foods Ingredients.

Acid whey is a by-product of a number of popular dairy goods – most famously Greek yoghurt, but also a number of cheeses including cottage and cream cheeses. Traditionally, companies have treated acid whey as waste. But when further processed – in combination with whey proteins – it offers enormous potential as the base for a range of dairy products.

Arla Foods Ingredients is promoting the possibilities presented by acid whey as part of a new campaign called ‘Maximum Yield’. The awareness drive is seeking to change perceptions of acid whey and explain how dairy companies can use it to maximise their output, increase profits and significantly cut waste.

Claus Andersen, Category & Application Manager at Arla Foods Ingredients, said: “Acid whey remains an untapped goldmine. It contains the same minerals as milk, which means it offers the same benefits to bones, teeth and general health. But it is often disposed of in waste streams or sold for little or no profit to farmers for use in animal feed. Our Maximum Yield campaign is highlighting how it can instead be converted into high value consumer products and, in turn, enable dairies to boost their efficiency by using 100% of their milk and not just a portion of it”.

Yields for some dairy products are typically only 25–50% of the milk used. In the case of Greek yoghurt, for example, only 33% of the milk ends up in the finished product: the remaining two thirds is acid whey. In addition to impacting on its efficiency and profitability, this can damage a dairy company’s sustainability credentials. Waste is among the leading consumer concerns in today’s food and beverage industry, and Euromonitor International has ranked sustainable food production among its top 10 trends for 2016.

To enable dairies to maximise their yields, Arla Foods Ingredients has developed a range of Nutrilac® whey protein solutions which, when added to acid whey, make it possible to transform it into a wide selection of high quality and nutritious dairy products.

Possible applications include cream cheese, processed cheese, dips, beverages, stirred yoghurts and desserts. As well as supplying the Nutrilac® whey proteins, Arla Foods Ingredients provides full technical support to help dairy companies use them with their acid whey.

Claus Andersen added: “If you go back 30 years, whey protein from cheese making was viewed as a by-product with little value. Now it is recognised as a high value ingredient with almost endless possibilities in multiple sectors such as dairy, bakery and sports nutrition. We are at a similar stage now with acid whey. It is an exceptional raw material, but many processors don’t know how to unlock its potential. Nutrilac® whey protein solutions are the key to achieving this and – with our expertise and technical support – we can show dairies just how easy it is”.

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.28.18

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016

Salt of the Earth Targets Sodium Reduction in the UK

In response to the new sodium reduction regulations in the UK market, Salt of the Earth, Ltd, announces its new strategy for the UK food processing and food service markets. The company selected three well-known distributors in UK countries (Scotland and England) and committed to provide a consistent, controlled supply of its leading brand, Umamix, an all-natural sodium reduction ingredient.

The FSA (Food Standards Agency) published new revised UK-wide salt reduction targets for 2017 for 76 categories of foods. These set more challenging and wide-ranging targets than the previous targets for 2012. UK food companies have already reduced sodium significantly, by 40–50% or more, and more than 11 million kilograms of salt have been removed from foods. However, average UK salt consumption remains high at approximately 8.1–8.8 g/day, so a considerable reduction is still required to meet the maximum daily intake of 6 g for adults.

Low-sodium positioned product launch activity tracked by Innova Market Insights in the USA increased by 22% in 2014 compared to 2013, which was nearly four times the 6% rise seen from 2012 to 2013. Product launch activity for 2015 has since remained stable. The number of new product launches with low-sodium positioning in the UK has been relatively consistent since 2010. Product launch activity did peak in 2015, but this constituted a 5% increase from product launch numbers tracked back in 2010, indicating continued opportunities for processors filling the anticipated increase in demand based on the new FSA targets. Many food companies tend to reduce sodium in existing food product without reporting it, with so-called ‘stealth reformulation’.

Tan International, Ltd., will market Umamix line to food manufactures in Scotland, including, makers of bakery and seafood products. Darlington, Ltd., specializes in salt products in England, while F.J. Need Foods supplies cheese ingredients, dairy products, and salt to dairy food manufacturers and pizza chains in England.

“Umamix line has gained attention in the UK food market, thanks to its proven capabilities to reduce sodium while keeping the saltiness and flavor consumers demand”, declares Avi Freund, Export Manager for Salt of the Earth. “Umamix has demonstrated a clear ability to reduce sodium in several food formulations and achieves consistently excellent results. We are excited to work with the new distributors in the UK and we seek for more distributers in other countries in the UK market.”

Umamix is a propriety mix of sea salt and vegetable extracts, rich in umami. It boosts flavour while meeting sodium-reduction goals in recipes and food formulations. “Unlike most sodium-reduction solutions, which cannot enable a clean label, Umamix affords unique opportunities for our clients”, notes Freund. “Consumers read labels and, Clean Label-compliant foods have become the new industry standard. Umamix helps formulators meet that standard.”

Schermata 2016-07-25 alle 10.28.05

da Nutrafoods 15(2) 2016