TY - JOUR T1 - Risk assessment of chlorinated paraffins in feed and food JF - EFSA Journal Y1 - 2020 A1 - Dieter Schrenk A1 - Marguerita Bignami A1 - Laurent Bodin A1 - James Kevin Chipman A1 - Jesús del Mazo A1 - Bettina Grasl‐Kraupp A1 - Christer Hogstrand A1 - Laurentius Hoogenboom A1 - Jean‐Charles Leblanc A1 - Carlo Stefano Nebbia A1 - Evangelia Ntzani A1 - Annette Petersen A1 - Salomon Sand A1 - Tanja Schwerdtle A1 - Christiane Vleminckx A1 - Heather Wallace A1 - Beat Brüschweiler A1 - Pim Leonards A1 - Martin Rose A1 - Marco Binaglia A1 - Zsuzsanna Horváth A1 - Luisa Ramos Bordajandi A1 - Elsa Nielsen KW - chlorinated paraffins KW - feed KW - food KW - LCCP KW - MCCP KW - Risk Assessment KW - SCCP AB -

The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific opinion on the risks for animal and human health related to the presence of chlorinated paraffins in feed and food. The data for experimental animals were reviewed and the CONTAM Panel identified the liver, kidney and thyroid as the target organs for the SCCP and MCCP mixtures tested in repeated dose toxicity studies. Decreased pup survival and subcutaneous haematoma/haemorrhage were also identified as critical effects for an MCCP mixture. For the LCCP mixtures tested, the liver was identified as the target organ. The Panel selected as reference points a BMDL10 of 2.3 mg/kg bw per day for increased incidence of nephritis in male rats, and of 36 mg/kg bw per day for increased relative kidney weights in male and female rats for SCCPs and MCCPs, respectively. For LCCPs, a reference point relevant for humans could not be identified. Due to the limitations in the toxicokinetic and toxicological database, the Panel concluded that derivation of a health‐based guidance value was not appropriate. Only limited data on the occurrence of SCCPs and MCCPs in some fish species were submitted to EFSA. No data were submitted for LCCPs. Thus, a robust exposure assessment and consequently a complete risk characterisation could not be performed. A preliminary risk characterisation based only on the consumption of fish was performed, and the calculated margins of exposure suggested no health concern for this limited scenario. The Panel noted that dietary exposure will be higher due to the contribution of CPs from other foods. The Panel was not able to identify reference points for farm animals, horses and companion animals. No occurrence data for feed were submitted to EFSA. Therefore, no risk characterisation could be performed for any of these animal species.

VL - 18 CP - 3 M3 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5991 ER -