ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2025
Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of copper lysinate sulfate for all animal species (Phytobiotics Futterzusatzstoffe GmbH).
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of copper lysinate sulfate for all animal species (Phytobiotics Futterzusatzstoffe GmbH).EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of copper lysinate sulfate as nutritional feed additive for all animal species. The additive has not yet been authorised in the EU. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive copper lysinate sulfate is safe for all animal species and categories at the respective maximum authorised total copper levels in feed. In the absence of reliable deposition data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive for the consumer. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the eye irritation potential of the additive. The Panel concluded that the additive is not a skin irritant and thus it should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser; inhalation and dermal exposure are considered a risk. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the additive under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the environment. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of the additive at the maximum authorised inclusion level.
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.