ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2019
Opinion on the re-evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow-up of its re-evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups.
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent trends in encapsulated bioactives for improving the delivery of infant milk fortifiers.Food science of animal resources · 2026Review
- Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of acacia gum (gum Arabic) for all animal species (A.I.P.G. Association for International Promotion of Gums).EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2022Article
- A Review on the Main Phytoconstituents, Traditional Uses, Inventions, and Patent Literature of Gum Arabic EmphasizingMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Opinion on the re-evaluation of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age and the follow-up of its re-evaluation as a food additive for uses in foods for all population groups.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EFSA is re-evaluating the safety of food additives already permitted in the Union before 20 January 2009 and issuing scientific opinions on their safety in line with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Acacia gum (E 414) was re-evaluated in 2017 by the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS). As follow-up to this assessment, the Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to assess the safety of acacia gum (E 414) as carry-over in food for infants below 16 weeks of age belonging to food categories 13.1.1 (Infant formulae) and 13.1.5.1 (Dietary foods for infants for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants) and to address the issues already identified during the re-evaluation of the food additive when used in food for the general population. The process involved the publication of a call for data to allow the interested parties to provide the requested information to complete the risk assessment. Based on the analytical data submitted in response to this call, the Panel recommended to lower the limits in the specifications for toxic elements and identified the need for further specifications for aluminium, microbiological criteria and protein residues. The Panel noted that information was not provided for oxidising enzymes and recommended that oxidases and peroxidases should be inactivated during the manufacturing process. The interested parties did not submit toxicological, clinical and post-marketing surveillance data specific for the assessment of the safety of acacia gum (E 414) in infants below 16 weeks of age. However, taking the highest doses tested without adverse effects from the subchronic studies available from the previous re-evaluation and comparing them with the estimated exposure in infants, the margins of safety were large indicating that there is no reason for health concern.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.