　　 食品伙伴网讯2023�?�?7日，�?a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_1377.html' class='zdbq' title='欧盟食品安全局相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>欧盟食品安全局＇�a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_10.html' class='zdbq' title='EFSA相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>EFSA）消息，欧盟食品添加剁�/a>咋�a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_343.html' class='zdbq' title='调味剂相关食品资�? target='_blank'>调味剁�/a>小组（FAF）重新评�?a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_1810.html' class='zdbq' title='碳酸相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>碳酸钙（calcium carbonate）（E 170）作�?6周以上�a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_3731.html' class='zdbq' title='婴儿相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>婴儿食品添加剂的安全性，并对其作为食品添加剂用于所有人群进行了后续评估�

　　部分原文报道如下９�/div>

　　Calcium carbo nate (E 170) was re-e valuated in 2011 by the former EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS). As a follow-up to this assessment, the Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to assess the safety of calcium carbo nate (E 170) for its uses as a food additive in food for infants below 16 weeks of age belo nging to food category 13.1.5.1 (Dietary foods for infants for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants) and as carry over in line with Annex III, Part 5 Section B to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. In addition, the FAF Panel was requested to address the issues already identified during the re-e valuation 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 business operators (IBOs) to provide the requested information to complete the risk assessment. The Panel co ncluded that there is no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake (ADI) for calcium carbo nate and that, in principle, there are no safety co ncern with respect to the exposure to calcium carbo nate per se at the currently reported uses and use levels in all age groups of the population, including infants below 16 weeks of age. With respect to the calcium intake resulting from the use of E 170 in food for the general population and infants < 16 weeks of age, the Panel co ncluded that it co ntributes o nly to a small part to the overall calcium dietary exposure. However, the unavoidable presence of aluminium in E 170 is of co ncern and should be addressed. In addition, the Panel co ncluded that the technical data provided by the IBO support further amendments of the specifications for E 170 laid down in Commission Regulation (EU) No 231/2012.