Did you know that ... 20% of food is lost by microbial spoilage? All you need to know about food additives.

In this new post we will try one of the topics that generates more controversy related to food. Let's talk about a family of compounds that has been both criticized and praised over the years: food additives. We will describe what they are, how they are classified and what they are used for, how their use is regulated and by whom, and finally we will discuss about adverse effects, denying some false rumors and emphasizing those that show greater truthfulness. Existing information about food additives is practically endless, so we had to select very carefully the information that we show. This issue has generated so much debate so many of the scientific references contradict each other and find a consensus among all those opinions is not easy.

Soon in the next post we will talk about food additives from a more interactive and less theoretical point of view. We will analyze real nutrition labels, we will show you where you can check the E numbers that appear in your food and even talk of an app which, entering the E number or the full name of the additive, gives you detailed information of it, its potential adverse effects associated and what people should avoid using it. Finally, we will go to the streets to ask consumers about these compounds, what information held about them and the general opinion regarding its use.

Hope you like it!

www.nationofchange.org

What are food additives?

Food additives are substances added to foods in small amounts during its production or processing in order to improve its organoleptic characteristics including flavour, texture, appearance, and/or to increase its duration and maintaining consistency, healthiness and freshness. Within the large family of food additives, food preservatives help preventing food spoilage avoiding undesirable chemical changes or action of microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi and yeasts. In addition, some of these microorganisms such as Clostridium botulinum, Bacillus cereus and Staphylococcus aureus, among others, are pathogenic to humans and their emergence and spread should be avoided at all costs. It is not allowed to use food additives unless their safety has been assessed by the competent food authority, being the requirements for this assessment very strict and not very different from those that require drug products. The added amount of each of these compounds must be strictly regulated and within the acceptable daily intake.

The use of food additives has increased enormously in recent decades due in large part to the fast lifestyle we lead and the growing supply from the markets, tending to eat more processed and/or precooked foods. Processed foods are defined as those who have suffered some kind of variation before we can consume them. But in fact these compounds have been among us for centuries; it is the case of vinegar, salt or sugar. With the advent of processed foods, around the second half of the twentieth century, many more additives have emerged both natural and artificial and its use has become part of our daily routine. Currently there are approximately 4000 of these compounds commercially available.

www.touregypt.net

Food additives are classified in several ways. One is according to its source, then speaking about natural and synthetic additives. Natural additives derive from natural sources such as plants, animals and minerals. Some examples are soybeans and corn, used to maintain consistency of food, or beet and candy, used as dyes. Synthetic additives are those made from one or more chemical compounds by synthetic methods. Some of these are aspartame, used as a sweetener, or erythrosine and tartrazine, used as colorants.

Another way to classify them is according to their function. Some of them are:

• Antioxidants: compounds added to food to retard oxidation and thus extend its wholesomeness, palatability and durability. Examples of natural antioxidants are vitamin C and tocopherols, and among synthetic ones, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT).
• Colouring agents: added to restore natural colors that have been lost during processing thereof or simply to give them a more natural and appealing color. Although most of them do not provide any nutritional value, many consumers would not buy or eat certain foods without colours. We found a large number of natural colours extracted from seeds, flowers, insects and other foods. Among the most commonly used, bixin (red), turmeric (yellow), erythrosine (red), caramel (brown) or cochineal extract (red) are included, and they are widely used in lipstick, butter and cheese, among others. Within the artificial ones the best known are tartrazine, which gives a yellow color, and carmoisine/azorubine, red colour.
• Nutritional supplements: used for restoring lost nutritional value during food processing or storage, or simply enrich existing ones. For example, during the production of white flour, grain husk, rich in vitamins and minerals, it is ruled by its brown color. In this case, some vitamins and other micronutrients are added to white flour.
• Flavours and flavour enhancers: flavouring additives are substances that, when are added to foods, give its characteristic flavour. An example of natural flavourings are spices and extracts, whereas in artificial ones we can include, for instance, artificial fruit flavours. Flavour enhancers amplify one or more other preexisting substances in food through a synergistic mechanism. One of the best known, widely used and controversial is monosodium glutamate or MSG. This compound was discovered and isolated in Japan in 1908, receiving the name of "umami", which means "tasty" once translated. In the right amount, MSG can enhance other compounds already present, improving the overall flavour of certain foods
• Sweeteners: generally used to prevent caloric intake of sugars, preserving or even increasing the sensation of sweetness. An increase in the incidence of obesity, diabetes and metabolic syndrome, along with a great consumer awareness, has led to the use and even abuse of low calorie artificial sweeteners. These substances are called non-nutritive sweeteners"or NNS and provide greater sweetness and fewer calories per gram than sugar. They are used in a wide variety of drinks, dietary products, drugs, etc. It is currently approved the use of six NNS: saccharin, aspartame, sucralose, neotame and acesulfame-K.
• Preservatives: its objectives are threefold: preservation of nutritional characteristics, preservation of appearance and prolongation of food storage. It is estimated that a fifth of food around the world are lost due to the action of microorganisms. Most of these compounds generally exert their action by making the environment unfavorable for the emergence and proliferation thereof. Examples of natural preservatives are sugar (including honey), salt, alcohol or certain acids such as acetic acid (vinegar).
• Stabilizers: generally hydrophilic compounds that increase or stabilize the texture of food preventing crystallisation, stabilizing emulsions, encapsulating flavors, etc. Various polysaccharides, agar, pectins, gelatin and carrageenan are popular stabilizers.

How is regulated the use of these compounds?

There are several agencies that regulate and determine what additives should be added to foods and its quantities to avoid possible adverse effects. In the European Union we have the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and internationally  there is a committee of experts from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) called Joint Expert English Committee on Food Aditives (JECFA). Their assessment is based on a review of all toxicological and epidemiological data from human and animal models, animal experiments and short-term tests. From these data they obtain the maximum amount of additive that has been shown to have no toxic effect, called no-observed-adverse-effect level  or NOAEL, which is used to determine the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) or the amount of each compound that can be consumed daily without any risk of any adverse effect on health, expressed in milligrams per bodyweight kilogram in a day (mg/kg bw/day). The calculated ADI is considered valid for children and adults. Because of the strict regulation and through continuous testing by these agencies and organizations, food additives can be considered safe components in our diet.

www.efsaexpo2015.net

In the European Union, to regulate and to inform consumers of the nature of these additives each one is assigned a unique "E number". In other countries outside the Union they are simply called them by number. For obtain this number, additives should be comprehensively and stringently evaluated by EFSA. The E number also speeds tagging of compounds with a long name, but it is also the strategy of many manufacturers to hide certain additives associated with any controversy or that have generated it in the past. For instance, tartrazine is E102 and has an ADI of 7.5 mg/kg bw/day, while the BHA, whose full name is rather extensive, is E320 and its ADI is0.5 mg/kg bw/day.

Are there any adverse effects related to its consumption?

Although food additives do not cause any problem to the vast majority of people, there are certain people who may be especially sensitive to any of them. Such effects must be validated by a health professional or dietician to ensure the dietary restrictions that apply, paying special attention to food labeling. We will discuss some examples.

There is much concern regarding to that some food additives can cause allergies or food intolerance problems. However, food additives have rarely been shown to cause a true allergic reaction, in immunity terms. Colours like tartrazine (E102) or carmoisine (E122) have occasionally produced skin rashes, nasal congestion or hives, even signs of asthma. But the incidence is really low: 1 person in 10,000 and in special situations. Excessive and prolonged intake of tartrazine is also associated with a variety of side effects including genotoxic effects in human lymphocytes in vitro and neurotoxicity and impaired learning, memory and behavior in rats and mice. However, none of these effects has been validated in long-term human studies within the ADI established, so its use is considered completely safe. Sulfites (E220-228) are preservatives used to control microbial growth in fermented beverages and have been widely used in wines and beers for centuries. It has been reported that these compounds can trigger shortness of breath and coughing in asthmatic individuals, but rarely.MSG (E621) flavour enhancer has been associated with headache and tingling but several studies have failed finding a relationship between the compound and these reactions suggesting some psychological susceptibility or the action of other components of the food. In addition, some people have experienced symptoms comparable to a heart attack when consumed large amounts of food with MSG but its use has been extensively researched and has been determined that there is no danger in consumption.

Tartrazine (modified from www.food-additive.wikispaces.com)

About 1970 a big stir broke out due to many researchers suggested that food additives, mainly specific colours or combinations of several of them as tartrazine (E102), carmoisine (E122), cochineal red (E120) or quinoline yellow (E104), could be linked to hyperactivity problems in children. Moreover, that the combination of these colours with the preservative sodium benzoate (E211) could trigger behavior problems in hyperactive children. In 2007, a study linked an increase in hyperactivity in children with a high consumption of sodium benzoate. However, in 2008 the EFSA determined, with the help of experts child psychologists, pediatricians and statistics, that most of the children who participated in these studies were previously hyperactive and those results are not representative at all of the general population.

Regarding sweeteners or NNS, we dont metabolize many of them and their consumption is considered generally safe. However, it has always existed a concern about this "safety". In 1994 it was observed that a very extensive use of NNS (>1680 mg/day) can lead to an increased risk of bladder cancer in people with hereditary high predisposition, or may aggravate the course of the disease in patients already diagnosed. In a study in 2007 about physical exercise with 14 men with type 2 diabetes it was observed that a continued breakfast with aspartame increased levels of glucose and insulin even reaching those of a breakfast with white sugar, suggesting that NNS are not suitable for diabetics, contrary to what might seem to limit caloric intake. In 2014, an article published in Nature reported that NNS intake in mice for 11 weeks led to the development of glucose intolerance by altering the intestinal microbiota. This sparked alarms regarding the use of these sweeteners in humans at the posibility of having metabolic alterations because of the dysbiosis and an increased the risk of diabetes and obesity. More much longer studies are needed but, again, we are talking about exorbitant amounts of these compounds or studies with very specific population. Steviol glycosides, commercially best known as Stevia (E960) because of the name of the plant from which are derived, are natural sweeteners that have not reported any adverse effect to date, even they have shown a therapeutic effect by decreasing blood glucose. In animal models it has also been shown to have antihypertensive effects. This is why Stevia is considered a very attractive glucose substitute. However, their antidiabetic properties remain inconclusive at present and their use by these people remain very cautious.

Stevia (www.ponteensalud.net)

Among the latter ones, the artificial NNS aspartame (E951) has also been associated with a variety of adverse effects. There are more than 160 studies performed about it. In 2001 this colour constituted the 80% of the complaints to the FDA about food additives, including carcinogenicity, headache, dizziness, mood changes, nausea, seizures, abdominal pain, abnormal vision, diarrhea and memory loss, among others. Even with all this, the FDA said that there is no danger in its consumption. But after that, in 2007, a study with 200 adult individuals suffering from migraines, randomized, double-blinded with placebo demonstrated that the headaches were more intense and frequent in the group that received aspartame. In addition, in 2011, another study with 40 patients with depression showed that these ones were particularly sensitive to aspartame and it was recommended to avoid its use. An important note is that aspartame is formed from the amino acids phenylalanine and aspartate. Patients with phenylketonuria (PKU) can not degrade the amino acid phenylalanine, which accumulates in the blood and is toxic to the brain. That is why in these particular individuals the use of aspartame is not recommended, but not because of a direct action of aspartame. Even with all, both the FDA and EFSA ensure that a responsible use of it is harmless, arguing that there is no validated scientific study to support all of the above cases, as they were made with especially susceptible isolated populations which do not reflect at all the general population. Generally it has been estimated that these compounds may exacerbate an existing condition, mainly allergic, rather than induce or cause an adverse effect per se. In the DOCS page of the blog you could find, as an example, the safety sheet ofEFSA on aspartame.

Aspartame (www.docplayer.net)

All this controversy could be solved by limiting the use of non-strictly necessary additives. Its use is mainly justified by the premise that food would spoil much sooner. Much of it is true but the reality is that about 4000 food additives currently used, more than 3000 are used only for esthetic reasons. Another justification is that the amounts of these compounds added to foods are so small that makes them completely harmless. It is true that not exceeding the ADI determined by the competent authority there should not be any kind of problem linked to its consumption both short and long term in the general population. Even so, a large number of detractors, both scientists and non-scientists, still argue that a continued use of certain additives may lead, in the long term, some of the problems detailed above. We can conclude that currently there is a real debate about the abuse of food additives and the posible adverse effects, that should be no problem with its use following the institutional guidelines and that studies showing adverse effects linked to the consumption of certain of these compounds are not representative of the general population or have been studied in vitro, not being extrapolated to whole organisms. We must not forget that a concrete ADI is informing us of how much we can take of a compound without danger in a day and that continued use of it should not produce any adverse effects, but all based on toxicological data in humans and animals. There should be no long-term danger but this does not mean that you are not going to have it, only that it has not been studied or validated. That is where the real controversy lies. The reality is that we are adding substances to foods that originally were not in them, in most cases for purely esthetic or organoleptic issues, even if they were extensive and strictly evaluated.

With all that we mean that you must always have an overview of the issue to be addressed before making the alarm run and listen the opinion of both independent experts and  oficial food agencies that govern the approval and application of these compounds, although both contradict. We advocate a responsible use of food additives avoiding in any case overuse by the manufacturers, either for esthetic or not issues. Sometimes it is better to take food in its natural form, although do not look so "nice". On the other hand, now speaking directly to consumers, all additives that are added to food have been studied and tested conscientiously by EFSA, FDA or whom it may concern. If a compound shows any signs of possible adverse effect or minimal doubt about it before going to market it is completely ruled out. That is, it is not easy to market a new additive, it must be shown to be harmless from many points of view and necessary for any of the utilities for which these compounds are employed. In other words, a justified use is needed. On the other hand, we would like to remember you again that the ADI is determined based on epidemiological, animal experiments and short-term tests data and is it is very difficult to detect adverse effects when an additive is already on the market. That is why so extensive testing and periodic safety are needed. We also promote, as far as possible, the consumption of organic food, preferably not packaged or processed. This will avoid going into unnecessary debates on the use of additives and enjoy food as we find them in nature.

www.clker.com

Finally here we leave you a three minutes video of an Australian educational website about what are food additives, why they are used, since when are they used, adverse effects that have been reported and some examples of these compounds.

For any questions or suggestion do not hesitate to contact us.

REFERENCES:

1. www.efsa.europa.eu
2. www.fda.gov
3. www.fao.org/home/es/
4. www.who.int/es
5. www.eufic.org
6. “Food additives. Use, intake and safety”. Nils-Gunnar I, Busk L. Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition 2000, 44:141-9.
7. “Food additives and hyperactive behaviour in 3-year-old and 8/9-year-old children in the community. A randomised, double-blindes, placebo-controlled trial”. McCann D, Barrett A, Cooper A, Crumpler D, Dalen L, Grimshaw K, Kitchin E, Lok K, Porteus L, Prince E, Sonuga-Barke E, Warner JO, Stevenson J. The Lancet 2007, 370(9598):1560-7.
8. “The diet factor in pediatric and adolescent migraine”. Milichap J, Yee MM. Pediatric Neurology 2007, 28(1):9-15.
9. “Maternal exposure to nitrate from drinking water and diet and risk for neural tuve defects”. Croen LA, Todoroff K, Shaw GM. Am. J. Epidemiol 2001, 153(4):325-31.
10. “Lung tumor promotion by curcumin”. Dance-Barnes ST, Kock ND, Moore JE, Lin EY, Mosley LJ. Carcinogenesis 2009, 30(6):1016-23.
11. “The dark side of curcumin”. Burgos-Moron E, Calderón-Montano JM, Salvador J, Robles A, Lopez-Lázaro M. International Journal of Cancer 2010, 126(7):1771-5.
12. “Intake of artifically sweetened soft drinks and risk of preterm delivery: a propesctive cohort study in 59.334 Danish pregnant women”. Halldorsson TI, Strom M, Petersen SB, Olsen SF. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010, 92(3):626-33.
13. “Effect of food azo dye tartrazine on learning and memory functions in mice and rats, and the posible mechanisms involved”. Gao Y, Li C, Shen J, Yin H, An X, Jin H. J.Food Sci. 2011, 76:125-129.
14. “Food: Its preservatives, aditives and applications”. Abdulmumeen HA, Ahmed NR, Agboola RS. Int J. of Chemical and Biochemical Sciences 2012, 1:36-47.
15. “Review of the regulation and safety assesment of food substances in various countries and jurisdictions”. Magnuson B, Munro I, Abbof P, Baldwin N, López-García R, Ly K, McGirr L, Roberts A, Scolovsky S. Food additives and Contaminants 2013, 30(7):1147-1220.
16. “The good and bad of antioxidant foods: an immunological perspective”. Gostner JM, Becker K, Ueberall F, Fuchs D. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2015, 80:72-9.
17. “Effects of food additives and preservatives on man- A review”. Inetianbor JE, Yakubu JM, Ezeonu SC. Asian Journal of Science and Technology 2015, 6(2):1118-35.
18. “Artificial sweeteners as a sugar substitute: Are they really safe?”. Sharma A, Amarnath S, Thulasimani M, Ramaswamv S. Indian J Pharmacology 2016, 48(3):237-240.