The Risk Assessment About Values Of Core Nutrients On Food Nutrition Labeling

"The regulation of food nutrition labeling management"(Thereinafter briefly named"the regulation")has been established and announced by Chinese Ministry of Health in December 2007.It is the milestone for food industry in China,and the key step that make the chaos situation for our country's food nutrition labeling to become orderly managed,it is the practice of nutritional science.It involves basic definition for nutrition terms,analysis method,data evaluation,etc.Nutrients analysis and reasonable declaration are the guarantee and prerequisite for nutrition labeling implementation.Because regulations and standards about nutrition in our country are still very weak and nutrients analysis in labs is also very limited,therefore the accuracy for nutrients measurement and nutrition labeling research in our country is still far from enough.ObjectivesTo assess the current status of nutrients analysis standard system in respects of analysis method,sampling method,and certificated reference materials in China.To assess the current status of detection level and error for key nutrients in labs in China.To assess the risk of declared value of energy and core nutrients on food nutrition labeling.Methods1.Comparing research on key nutrients analysis standard system The status,advantage,and disadvantage of Chinese national analysis standard system for nutrients were learned from comparing analysis standard methods,sampling methods,and certificated reference material(CRM).The differences were observed by analyzing methods for 8 nutrients(protein,fat, carbohydrate,moisture,ash,sodium,calcium,and cholesterol)among CODEX,AOAC and Chinese National Analysis Standards(Thereinafter briefly named GB methods)in respects of methods number,involved food groups, detection theory,and analysis error requirements.The differences were compared for food sampling methods among CODEX,AOAC and Chinese National Standards in respects of number,including food groups,and sampling amount.And meanwhile the difference was compared with CRMs in 8 countries in respects of number,food raw material,and nutrients values.2.The analytic variation for key nutrients in labs in China Seven kinds and fourteen prepackaged foods,which including cereals,beans, meats,dairies,beverages,nuts,and snacks were selected as food samples for analysis,according to the condition of high intake frequency,wide nutrient content range,and multi diversity of food basic material.Seven labs were selected to participate the collaborative analysis for 7 key nutrients(protein,fat, moisture,ash,sodium,calcium and cholesterol),according to analysis ability certification,regional distribution,and administration rank.Protein,fat,sodium, calcium and cholesterol of 14 food samples were required to three paralleled measures by using GB methods,while moisture and ash one paralleled measure.Total dietary fiber was detected by lab of Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety,China CDC.The concentration of carbohydrate and energy,and 95%relative uncertainty of analysis of all the analyzed and calculated nutrients were calculated by researching group.3.The risk assessment for declared values of energy and core nutrients The source and classification of variety between analysis result and declared value on labels were affirmed by combination of lab analysis,food composition database searches and calculation,food industry survey,and website or science literature searches.The risk of energy and core nutrients declared values was assessed under the added or fortified status,or naturally contained status.Then the declared methods and decreasing risk approaches were discussed combined with the error data.Results1.Comparison of analysis standard system The number of 8 nutrients analysis in GB methods is less than the ones of CODEX and AOAC.The involved food groups of GB methods were more integrity for raw material especially fungus than CODEX and AOAC methods, but with much less complicated manufactured food.There were 21 CRMs in China,but the raw food materials of them were repeatable and nutrients were singularly.This proved that the structure of GB methods has been basically established,but need to be more improved.The analyzed principal of GB methods was almost the same as CODEX and AOAC.This indicates that the sensitivity and detection condition for GB methods in China is almost the same as CODEX and AOAC.The involved detail food kinds were ambiguously described for the methods about general food.It indicated that the food involved specification for GB methods need to be improved.The sample number of Chinese NL demand is less than the ones of America and Canada NL.The analysis RSD of inner and inter labs for methods were almost absent in China.The raw food materials were repeatable and the special nutrients values were too singular for Chinese CRMs.These status showed the specificity and accuracy of analysis standard system in China need to be developed.2.The analysis variety in labs All labs only use one method to analyze a nutrient for all food samples.The E lab could not select methods according to the food group.This indicated the labs did not select all the methods according to the food group.The up to grade rates of total nitrogen,sodium and calcium analysis results for 2 single blind samples,which were all CRMs),were respectively 55.9%,61.1% and 52.6%,and less than 55%for city class labs.This indicates that the current status for labs in our country to conduct nutrient analysis is far from optimistic.The analysis precision of Chinese labs,representative by RSD,was less than AOAC methods prescription,especially RSD inter-labs contributing 80%in total analysis RSD of labs.The RSD is in negative correlation to concentration. The 95%relative accuracies of nutrients analysis results were energy 4.55%, fat 20.08%,total nitrogen 7.47%,carbohydrate 7.80%,sodium 29.96%,and calcium 39.10%.Only nitrogen analysis accuracy was in accordance with NL regulation.3.Risk assessment for declared values of energy and core nutrients The variety between declared value and detected value was called error,which consisted of analysis variety inner and inters labs,producing error,and raw material error.The most proportion of error from analysis inters labs and raw material was respectively 78.82%and 93.89%,and they were regarded as the main source for error.The risk rate decreased as sample number and/or relative difference between detective and declared values increase,and/or error decrease.It was regarded that increasing the sample number to 12,and decreasing the error range were the most two effective approaches. When sample number equal to 12 andδ=10%,the industry risk for non restrictively intake nutrients were lower than restrictively ones naturally contained in food,and risk for consumer is moderately 1%lower than for industry.If the declared value was the average analysis result,under the current error data from this study and the intolerance range of the NL Regulation,the industry risk rate for naturally contained energy and core nutrients were respectively energy 25.0%,fat and sodium 24.3%,protein 5.4%,carbohydrate 19.3%.And the consumer risk is 1%less than the industry risk.If the declared value was the upper limit(energy,fat,sodium)or the lower limit(protein, carbohydrate)of 95%credible range of analysis result,the industry risk rates were most decreased,and were respectively energy 9.4%,fat and sodium 2.6%,protein 0.2%,carbohydrate 4.9%.Conclusions1.The structure of GB method has been basically established in China,but far from enough.The sensitivity and detection condition is almost same as CODEX and AOAC,but the measurement method and quality control still need to be improved.2.The analysis status in China was not optimistic.The labs were not all selected methods according to the food group.The up to grade rates of nutrients analysis were low.The analysis variety inter labs were high.Apart from protein,the analysis accuracy of energy and core nutrients is out of intolerance range of NL Regulation.3.Error from analysis inters labs and raw material was regarded as the main source for total error.The risk rate was decreased as sample number and/or relative difference between detective and declared values increase,and/or error decrease.If the declared value was the average analysis result,under the condition of current error data from this study and the intolerance of the NL Regulation,the industry risk rate for naturally contained energy and core nutrients were respectively energy 25.0%,fat and sodium 24.3%,protein 5.4%, carbohydrate 19.3%.When using the upper limit(enegy,fat,sodium)or the lower limit(protein,carbohydrate)of 95%credible range of analysis result,the risk rates were most decreased.Advises1.We should greatly improve the GB analysis method for Nutrients and establish the methods for complicated manufactured foods,strictly demand the error range,and develop the CRMs in respects of food group and organic nutrients values when carrying out the NL regulation. 2.Since NL regulation is voluntary in China and error is large in labs analysis and food raw materials,the governmental supervising departments should currently emphasize on guiding the unification and legal nutrition labeling,but not punishment.