PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Food Additives”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
PubMed1977

[Principles of the hygienic standardization of extraneous substances (food additives and admixtures) in food products].

At the root of hygienic standardization of extraneous substances on the ground toxicological experimentation there lies the notion of the noxious action threshold and of the maximum permissible concentration of the substance (MPC). The influence of diverse environmental factors of low intensity on man should not bring forth even temporary disturbances of the homeostasis, including the reproductive function, as well as the strain on defensive and adaptive compensatory mechanisms during the whole of the life span. There arises the need for elaborating indicators that might characterize the "viability" of the organism, or, in other words, the possibility of its performing all the functions that are inherent in a given species. In setting up a biological experiment the maximum attention should be concentrated on integral tests and behavioral reactions that reflect general processes proceeding in the organism, as well as on utilization of "functional loads" that reveal the physiological reliability, on a study of late after-effects at all stages marking the development of the species, but, especially, on bearing in mind the possibility of emerging teratogenic properties. Much study still requires the problem of "indirect" toxic effect of extraneous substances and also of a stringent recording of the food ration for the test animals, which plays an important part in the protection, or, conversely, the debiliation of the organism.

Animals↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Estimation of food additive intake. Nordic approach.

Food additive intake has been estimated in Finland by means of a stepwise system using simultaneously two different methods. The first method, based on food consumption and food control analysis, can be classified into the group of Estimated Daily Intake methods (EDI). The second method, a questionnaire to food manufacturers concerning the use of food additives, has been employed five times. Estimates have been timed to reflect legislative changes and their influence on the intake. The intake of most food additives and sweeteners by Finnish diabetic adolescents was well below Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs). The average nitrite intake, especially by children and adolescents, was greater. Estimates of nitrite intake by children varied between 39% and 89% of ADIs depending on the method used and the new ADIs given by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Diabetic children's and the mothers' daily intake of nitrite was shown to be greater when compared with that of non-diabetics and the results of that other Finnish study gives support the evidence that dietary nitrites may be associated with the development of Type I diabetes. New estimates of additive intakes, based on a nationwide control project carried out in 1994, will be worked out. The results will reflect the situation in Finland before EU membership.

Finland↗
PubMed1979

Food additives (natural and synthetic).

Food additives can be divided into the following categories: intentional, unintentional, contaminants, and those resulting from food processing procedures. Representative food additives from each category are discussed, with special attention being paid to the status of those suspected or proven to be toxic to humans. In addition, certain chemical components of food and methods for testing food additives are considered. Areas requiring additional testing include saccharin, cooking procedures, especially charcoal broiling, and hydrozines in mushrooms. The more recent developments in test procedures, including in vitro test methods, the transplacental exposure route, the use of maximal tolerated dose, and the initiation--promotion sequence, are evaluated.

Animals↗
PubMed1987

[Food additives from the viewpoint of the food chemist].

Food additives serve the consumer and are a necessity for food retailers and producers. Additives, such as vitamin D and iodine, increase the nutritional physiological value of foodstuffs. Additives, which improve food preservation by preventing microbiological deterioration are especially important. Some additives are added during food production and have no further use in the finished product. They are no longer present (solvents, clarifying agents). With regard to health, many food additives are better tested than most foods.

Food Additives↗
PubMed1987

Oral challenge with food additives.

A randomized, placebo-controlled oral challenge with food additives (preservatives and food colorings) was carried out in 101 patients with eczema of undetermined origin who suspected that the intake of certain foods aggravated their dermatitis. 37 reacted to 1 or more of the food additives but not to a placebo, while 16 reacted to the placebo, or both the placebo and food additives. 48 had no reactions. The difference between the number of reactions to the food additives and the number of reactions to the placebo was not statistically significant. The reactions could be reproduced in only 1/3 of those challenged twice. It was not possible to correlate the reactions to food additives to reactivity to specific foodstuffs containing the same additives. If intolerance to food additives is suspected, an elimination diet seems warranted, regardless of whether the patient reacts to oral challenge with food additives.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1987

Indirect food additive migration from polymeric food packaging materials.

Many foods contact polymeric packaging materials which contain residues of the polymerization process or additives employed to facilitate processing. The extent of migration of such materials from the packaging to foods is the focus of the present article. A major experimental program using eight polymer-migrant systems is described. Migration was measured to food-simulating liquids (FSL) and to foods. Accelerated tests were conducted with FSL under FDA guidelines conditions so as to develop correlations between such data and those found using foods under normal storage temperatures and shelf lives. In the majority of tests, the migration was found to be approximately proportional to the square root of time, to increase significantly with a rise in temperature, and to be proportional to the initial concentration of migrant in the polymer. Stirring in the FSL or food phase was generally not important except for the system involving dioctyl adipate migrating from polyvinyl chloride film. In some instances, after a period of time, migration rates became very low, and this effect was attributed to saturating the FSL or food phase with migrant. The foods comprised a variety of types, including liquid, semisolid, solid, and dry; both oily and aqueous foods were included. The physical steps involved in migration include the diffusion of the migrant from the interior of the film to the surface, where it can dissolve in the external FSL or food phase. The nature of the FSL or food is shown to be very important in that components can penetrate the polymer and dramatically increase migration rates. Consistent with the FDA guidelines in effect at the time of this study, testing was performed with five FSL (water, 3% acetic acid, 8% and 50% ethanol, and n-heptane) at 49 degrees C. Detailed comparisons were made between the migrations to foods and to FSL; following are the more relevant conclusions. (1) Three percent acetic acid showed no advantage over water as a food simulant even in those cases where the food could be considered acidic in nature. (2) Water, when used as an FSL at 49 degrees C for 5 days, overestimated migration in aqueous foods in about 75% of the cases. In some instances, however, the water phase became saturated with migrant. In other situations, this test protocol underpredicted migration--especially in those cases where there were components in the food that were able to penetrate into the polymer and enhance migration (such as orange juice).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Chemical Phenomena↗
PubMed1989

Oral provocation tests with aspirin and food additives in asthmatic patients.

Aspirin and food additives are known to induce bronchoconstriction, angioedema or urticaria in susceptible patients. To evaluate the incidence of hypersensitivity to aspirin and food additives, 36 subjects with bronchial asthma, 33 of whom were non-allergic asthmatics and 3 were allergic asthmatics who had a history of aspirin sensitivity, were challenged orally with six compounds: acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), sodium bisulfite, tartrazine, sodium benzoate, 4-hydroxy benzoic acid, and monosodium L-glutamate. Significant bronchoconstrictions were found in 15 (41.7%) of the 36 subjects tested. Eight of the 15 subjects showed positive asthmatic responses to the aspirin, two showed asthmatic responses to the food additives, and five responded to both aspirin and the food additives. It is suggested that ASA and food additives could be causes of clinically significant bronchoconstriction in moderately severe non-allergic asthmatic patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Assessing food additive toxicity using a cell model.

Food additives are widely used for technological purposes and their presence is often substantial daily diet. They have also been accused forvarious toxic reactions in humans. The toxicity of the food color tartrazine, the preservatives sodium nitrate and sodium benzoate, and the antioxidant BHT, was studied using the protozoan Tetrahymenapyriformis as a toxicological model. The 4 food additives were added to Tetrahymena cultures and DNA content of the protozoan nuclei measured by an image analysis system. These food additives caused a statistically significant increase in DNA content suggesting stimulation of the mitotic process. This system may contribute to the investigation of the cellular action of food additives, since mitogenic stimuli substantially alter susceptibility to chemical carcinogenesis.

Animals↗
PubMed1994

Prevalence of food additive intolerance.

1. The existing prevalence estimates of food additive intolerance are being reviewed. 2. In the EEC report the estimated frequency of food additive intolerance is 0.03% to 0.15% based on data from patient groups. 3. The British population study results in a prevalence estimate of 0.026%. The challenged population is 81 children and adults with a history of reproducible clinical symptoms after ingestion of food additives. 4. In the Danish population study a prevalence of 1-2% is found in children age 5-16. In this study a total of 606 children mainly with atopic disease have been challenged. 5. The prevalence estimates vary with a factor 100. As the results vary so do the study populations. 6. If the different study populations are accounted for, a common conclusion can be drawn: Food additive intolerance is found in adults with atopic symptoms from the respiratory tract and skin. The prevalence estimates are questionable but may be less than 0.15%. In adults and children with reproducible, and with more subjective symptoms, such as headache and behavioural/mood change the prevalence is even lower (0.026%). Food additive intolerance is primarily found in atopic children with cutaneous symptoms where the additive is aggravating an existing disease. The prevalence of food additive intolerance in children age 5-16 is 1-2%.

Adolescent↗