The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the agency of the European Union (EU) that provides independent scientific advice and communicates on existing and emerging risks associated with the food chain. EFSA was established in February 2002, is based in Parma, Italy and had a budget for 2008 of €65.9 million.

The work of EFSA covers all matters with a direct or indirect impact on food and feed safety, including animal health and welfare, plant protection and plant health and nutrition. EFSA supports the European Commission, the European Parliament and EU member states in taking effective and timely risk management decisions that ensure the protection of the healthof European consumers and the safety of the food and feed chain. EFSA also communicates to the public in an open and transparent way on all matters within its remit.

EFSA automated RSS feed

EFSA | All updates

Latest items

Published on: 13 August 2019

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) organised the International Conference on Uncertainty in Risk Analysis. Its aim was to bring together internationally recognized leaders of uncertainty analysis in food safety, environmental, occupational, animal, and plant health and to start a holistic discussion of uncertainty: its cognitive basis, methods and approaches of analysis, communication and consideration in decision making, and in discourse with society. The conference was held from February 21‐22, 2019 at the BfR in Berlin. On February 20, the preconference workshops took place with in total four parallel workshops.In total, nearly 300 people participated in the conference,18% of them coming from outside the European Union. Most of the presentations were livestreamed. The importance of uncertainty analysis for scientific assessments, the associated implications for decision making, and the need to communicate the most relevant uncertainties to decision makers and to the broad public was emphasised.Three main conclusions were drawn: firstly,training can be helpful in improving understanding of uncertainty. Secondly, scientists have an ethical responsibility to communicate uncertainty. In the short term this may not necessarily result in increased public trust of scientific work but enables society to engage in more informed discourse which should lead to better understanding and trust in the longer term.Thirdly, the risk assessor needs to take active steps to avoid undetected sources of uncertainty: to discover potential surprises and take account of uncertainty arising from choices of model structure, the use of standard measures and even the unambiguous definition of the problem itself.


© European Food Safety Authority, 2015

International Conference on Uncertainty in Risk Analysis


Published on: 13 August 2019

In October 2018 the ENETWILD consortium created suitability maps based on available data on wild boar occurrence at 10 km square resolution and initial version of abundance models based on hunting statistics at NUTS3 and NUTS2 resolution, that were statistically downscaled for MSs to 10x10 km grid squares. This report presents updated suitability map for wild boar presence based on additional occurrence data and new algorithms, and new models based on high‐resolution hunting yield data for MSs and neighbouring countries. New environmental variables closely associated with wild boar abundance and distribution were also included. Our results showed no consensus for a single best occurrence model: out of those tested, both Maxent and random forest could be considered the best options depending on the choice of assessment metric. Predictions from these models notably disagreed in eastern Europe where data on wild boar occurrence are limited. Despite agreement among models, predictions in the south appeared over‐predicted, most likely due to a lack of contrasting absence data. Whilst there remain some methodological adjustments which could be tested, substantial improvement in the prediction from occurrence models relies on further collection of wild boar occurrence data in the east and complimentary data on survey effort in the south.The predictive performance of the hunting yield model was high. Although the incorporation of new data at higher spatial resolution markedly improved predictions, such data is still needed in some regions, ideally coupled with hunting effort, which would allow such estimates to be transformed into reliable densities. Comparison between predictions from the occurrence and hunting yield models showed they were statistically associated, but the strength of that relationship was dependent on the type of occurrence model and the bioregion. These findings are compatible with previous interpretations of the occurrence model, and highlight the relevance of obtaining more accurate data, especially from northern and eastern bioregions in Europe.


© European Food Safety Authority, 2015

ENETwild modelling of wild boar distribution and abundance: update of occurrence and hunting data‐based models


Published on: 12 August 2019

Following a request from the European Commission, the 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 RONOZYME® WX CT/L as a feed additive for sows for reproduction. This additive contains endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase produced by a genetically modified strain of Aspergillus oryzae and it is authorised in the EU as a feed additive for poultry for fattening, weaned piglets and pigs for fattening. The applicant requests the extension of use of the additive to sows for reproduction at 200 FXU/kg feed. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that there are no concerns for consumer safety and no risks for the environment are expected from the use of RONOZYME® WX in sows. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is not a skin or eye irritant, but it should be considered a respiratory sensitiser, but could not conclude on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. A tolerance trial in lactating sows and two toxicological studies were made available to support the safety of the target species. Based on the data available, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for sows for reproduction at the recommended level with a wide margin of safety. Three efficacy studies in lactating sows were evaluated. Sows that received RONOZYME® WX showed improvements on the apparent faecal digestibility of the energy in the three trials. The enzyme activity in feed that showed efficacy ranged from 124 to 287 FXU/kg feed, and the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in lactating sows at a level of approximately 250 FXU/kg feed. No data has been provided in gestating sows, and consequently, the Panel could not conclude on this physiological stage of the productive cycle.


© European Food Safety Authority, 2015

Safety and efficacy of RONOZYME®WX CT/L (endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase) as a feed additive for sows for reproduction


Brussels 14 May 2019

Background

The 4th meeting of the Stakeholder Bureau took place in Brussels on 14 May 2019. The agenda of the meeting was co-created with the Bureau members and designed with a view to allow space for interaction and questions. The first part of the discussion was focused on the implementation of the revised General Food Law. The Bureau was updated on the ongoing communication activities such as the Eurobarometer 2019, social science roadmap, and the EU elections campaign.

Finally, this meeting was an opportunity to present the upcoming stakeholder engagement opportunities with a focus on the annual gathering of all registered stakeholder – the Stakeholder Forum. The Bureau was also updated on the progress with the mandatory three-year review of EFSA’s approach to the stakeholder engagement.

Documents


4th meeting of the EFSA Stakeholder Bureau


Published on: 12 August 2019

Following a request from the European Commission, the 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 3‐phytase FLF1000 as a feed additive for pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for growing. This additive contains 3‐phytase produced by a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii and it is authorised in the European Union as a feed additive for feed for chickens for fattening, laying hens, chickens reared for laying and for minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying or for breeding. The applicant requested the extension of use of the additive to pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for growing. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the product as a feed additive for pigs raises no concerns for the consumer safety nor for the environment. The additive should be regarded as a potential respiratory sensitiser. The applicant provided a combined tolerance and efficacy trial in weaned piglets to support the safety for the target species. However, owing to the lack of precise data on the total feed intake of the animals, the FEEDAP Panel did not consider further the study for the assessment and consequently no conclusion could be drawn regarding the safety of the additive for pigs for fattening nor for other minor growing porcine species. Three studies were considered for the efficacy and from the data obtained the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious in improving the phosphorus utilisation in pigs for fattening at a minimum level of 500 FTU/kg feed.


© European Food Safety Authority, 2015

Safety and efficacy of 3‐phytase FLF1000 as a feed additive for pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for growing