2023年12月20日，歐盟食品安全局（EFSA）發(fā)布消息，歐盟食品安全局發(fā)布關于布氏乳桿菌NCIMB 30139作為所有動物飼料添加劑的授權更新申請的評估。
經(jīng)過評估，專家小組得出結論，該添加劑在授權使用條件下對所有動物物種、消費者和環(huán)境都是安全的。在授權更新的情況下，無需評估添加劑的功效。部分原文報道如下：
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) NCIMB 30139 as a technological additive for use in easy to ensile fresh material for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the additive should be considered as a respiratory sensitiser. The additive is not skin irritant, but no conclusions can be drawn on the skin sensitisation or eye irritation potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.
經(jīng)過評估，專家小組得出結論，該添加劑在授權使用條件下對所有動物物種、消費者和環(huán)境都是安全的。在授權更新的情況下，無需評估添加劑的功效。部分原文報道如下：
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) NCIMB 30139 as a technological additive for use in easy to ensile fresh material for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the additive should be considered as a respiratory sensitiser. The additive is not skin irritant, but no conclusions can be drawn on the skin sensitisation or eye irritation potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.
