The extent to which nano-enabled food products have entered the market is a mystery as are the potential effects on humans and the environment. All require immediate study, those are a few of the conclusions of a new report on nanotechnology and food issued by the British government.
The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee study entitled "First Report Nanotechnologies and Food" was issued on January 8th, 2009 and makes 32 recommendations to improve health and safety with regard to nanotechnology enabled foods as well as to advance British knowledge and nano-manufacturing capabilities with regard to food and food additives Among the many conclusions is a need for better labeling to identify nanotechnology enabled food products that are on the market.
The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee study entitled "First Report Nanotechnologies and Food" was issued on January 8th, 2009 and makes 32 recommendations to improve health and safety with regard to nanotechnology enabled foods as well as to advance British knowledge and nano-manufacturing capabilities with regard to food and food additives Among the many conclusions is a need for better labeling to identify nanotechnology enabled food products that are on the market.
According to the report, it is difficult to gauge precisely the extent to which nanotechnologies are being used in the food sector, either in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. According to the Food Standards Agency (FSA), "it is not possible to provide a definitive list of nanofoods and nanoscale food contact materials on the EU market, primarily because of the absence of an EU-wide register or inventory" (p 2).
Underlying this practical difficulty is the more fundamental issue of the absence of a common definition (discussed in Chapter 5) of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials—"It is this ambiguity", Professor Richard Jones, Professor of Physics at the University of Sheffield, suggested, which "lies behind the difference in opinion about how widespread the use of nanotechnology in food is" (p 245). Nonetheless, there is some—albeit only indicative—evidence of the current use of nanotechnologies in the food sector.
In the United States, the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars (PEN) maintains an on-line global database of consumer products which are claimed by their producers to include some form of nanotechnology in their manufacture. According to PEN, in March 2009 there were 84 food-related items on the database of which nine were listed as used in cooking, 20 were used for food storage and 44 were categorized as dietary supplements (p 333).
Three products listed were entered as foods (an oil containing nano-encapsulated ingredients, a milkshake that uses a nanoscale silica-based compound to enhance the taste and a tea that claims to use a non-disclosed form of nanotechnology). But, despite the database, PEN concluded that it was "currently unknown how many nanotechnology-enabled food products are on the market that are not clearly identified" (p 333).
As an example, some nanomaterials have been used in food processing for a number of years in the form of additives, substances which have little or no nutritional value but assist in the processing itself. For example, silica is used as an anti-caking agent to keep powders flowing freely. Dr Sandy Lawrie, Head of Novel and GM Food Safety at the FSA, explained that one type of silica used this way, fumed silica, is manufactured in a way "that does result undoubtedly in nanoparticles", although "the extent of the use of fumed silica is something which the industry has not yet been able to confirm with us" (Q 628).
The report authors recommend that, as part of their commitment to gain a better understanding of the needs of United Kingdom industry sectors likely to use nanotechnologies, the Government should pay specific attention to identifying the needs of the food industry and make provision for meeting those needs in their 2010 national strategy.
They also recommend that the Research Councils should establish more pro-active forms of funding to encourage the submission of research bids to address the severe shortfalls in research required for risk assessment of nanomaterials as set out in the EMERGNANO report, and ensure that submissions are reviewed by a committee with appropriate expertise in this field. The EMERGNANO report is a beginning in the assessment of risks posed by nanomaterials to public health and the environment.
They endorse the recommendation contained in the 2008 report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution that more attention should be paid to toxicology training. They welcome, therefore, the Government's commitment to tackling the shortage of trained toxicologists and ecotoxicologists and also their commissioning of an evaluation of the United Kingdom skills base for toxicologists and ecotoxicologists. However, the policies to address the shortfall promised for this year have not yet been launched. They look for urgent progress on this issue and ask that the Government update the Committee on its activity in this area.
