The hypocholesterolemic effect of guar gum depends on dietary sucrose--studies in minipigs

Re-evaluation of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive

The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. In the EU, guar gum was evaluated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1970, 1974 and 1975, who allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’. Guar gum has been also evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) in 1977 who endorsed the ADI ‘not specified’ allocated by JECFA. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Guar gum is practically undigested, not absorbed intact, but significantly fermented by enteric bacteria in humans. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested; no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral intake of guar gum was well tolerated in adults. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for guar gum (E 412), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. The Panel considered that for uses of guar gum in foods intended for infants and young children the occurrence of abdominal discomfort should be monitored and if this effect is observed doses should be identified as a basis for further risk assessment. The Panel considered that no adequate specific studies addressing the safety of use of guar gum (E 412) in food categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2 were available. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the available data do not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of guar gum (E 412) in infants and young children consuming these foods for special medical purposes.

Regulatory acceptability of the minipig in the development of pharmaceuticals, chemicals and other products

As part of the RETHINK European FP6 Project an overview of the acceptability and usefulness of minipigs has been carried out in the regulatory arenas of human and veterinary pharmaceuticals, food additives, cosmetics, biocides and agrochemicals, chemicals and medical devices. The safety of new pharmaceuticals for human use should be tested in non-rodents, but the regulatory world is not too prescriptive regarding the choice of species. The choice is most often dogs through long tradition. When dogs are not appropriate, in many cases non-human primates are chosen as an alternative. From information in the public domain as well as literature from the EMA and FDA, it is clear that minipigs have already been identified as suitable to take the role of non-rodent species in toxicity testing of pharmaceutical products. In the field of foodstuffs, the pig is used more extensively because of the apparent similarity in the omnivorous food pattern and digestive tract between humans and pigs. The extensive use of pigs in this field provides historical data. In the field of medical devices the ISO Guidelines indicate that the pig is regarded as a suitable animal model because of its haematological and cardiovascular similarities to man. The pig is also mentioned as suitable for testing local effects after implantation. Political and societal support for using nonhuman primates is decreasing, and it is an appropriate time to consider the role of the minipig. We have reviewed the costs of testing in minipigs, and these are not significantly higher than the costs for a study in dogs. Economical reasons should therefore not be used to argue against the use of minipigs instead of dogs or monkeys. For most purposes, minipigs may be considered an acceptable choice as non-rodent species, provided adequate justification for this choice is made.