Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 20, Revision 2 (FGE.20Rev2): Benzyl alcohols, benzaldehydes, a related acetal, benzoic acids, and related esters from chemical groups 23 and 30

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil from the flowers of Cananga odorata (Lam.) Hook.f. & Thomson (ylang ylang oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil from the flowers of Cananga odorata (Lam.) Hook.f. & Thomson (ylang ylang oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 1 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 1.5 mg/kg for laying hens, turkeys for fattening and rabbits, 2 mg/kg for piglets, 2.5 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 3 mg/kg for sows, 4.5 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep, goats and horses, 5 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), fish, dogs and ornamental fish. For cats, the calculated safe concentration in complete feed is 1 mg/kg feed. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The use of the additive in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Ylang ylang oil is recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy is considered necessary.

Investigation of the genotoxicity of substances migrating from polycarbonate replacement baby bottles to identify chemicals of high concern

Due to the worldwide concern that bisphenol A might act as an endocrine disruptor, alternative materials for polycarbonate (PC) have been introduced on the European market. However, PC-replacement products might also release substances of which the toxicological profile--including their genotoxic effects--has not yet been characterized. Because a thorough characterization of the genotoxic profile of all these substances is impossible in the short term, a strategy was developed in order to prioritize those substances for which additional data are urgently needed. The strategy consisted of a decision tree using hazard information related to genotoxicity. The relevant information was obtained from the database of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), in silico prediction tools (ToxTree and Derek Nexus(TM)) and the in vitro Vitotox(®) test for detecting DNA damage. By applying the decision tree, substances could be classified into different groups, each characterized by a different probability to induce genotoxic effects. Although none of the investigated substances could be unequivocally identified as genotoxic, the presence of genotoxic effects could neither be excluded for any of them. Consequently, all substances require more data to investigate the genotoxic potential. However, the type and the urge for these data differs among the substances.