Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Precautionary allergen labelling: Perspectives from key stakeholder groups

  • A. DunnGalvin
  • , C. H. Chan
  • , R. Crevel
  • , K. Grimshaw
  • , R. Poms
  • , S. Schnadt
  • , S. L. Taylor
  • , P. Turner
  • , K. J. Allen
  • , M. Austin
  • , A. Baka
  • , J. L. Baumert
  • , S. Baumgartner
  • , K. Beyer
  • , L. Bucchini
  • , M. Fernández-Rivas
  • , K. Grinter
  • , G. F. Houben
  • , J. Hourihane
  • , F. Kenna
  • A. G. Kruizinga, G. Lack, C. B. Madsen, E. N. Clare Mills, N. G. Papadopoulos, A. Alldrick, L. Regent, R. Sherlock, J. M. Wal, G. Roberts
  • Food Standards Agency
  • Unilever
  • University of Southampton
  • MoniQA Association
  • German Allergy and Asthma Association (Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund (DAAB))
  • University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  • Imperial College London
  • Murdoch Children's Research Institute
  • Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne
  • Anaphylaxis UK
  • ILSI Europe
  • University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin
  • Hylobates Consulting S.r.l.
  • Hospital Clínico San Carlos de Madrid
  • Nestle
  • Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research
  • University College Cork
  • Anaphylaxis Ireland
  • Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  • Technical University of Denmark
  • University of Manchester
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
  • Camden BRI
  • Allergen Bureau and DTS Facta
  • AgroParisTech
  • Isle of Wight NHS Trust
  • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) was introduced by the food industry to help manage and communicate the possibility of reaction from the unintended presence of allergens in foods. However, in its current form, PAL is counterproductive for consumers with food allergies. This review aims to summarize the perspectives of all the key stakeholders (including clinicians, patients, food industry and regulators), with the aim of defining common health protection and risk minimization goals. The lack of agreed reference doses has resulted in inconsistent application of PAL by the food industry and in levels of contamination that prompt withdrawal action by enforcement officers. So there is a poor relationship between the presence or absence of PAL and actual reaction risk. This has led to a loss of trust in PAL, reducing the ability of consumers with food allergies to make informed choices. The result has been reduced avoidance, reduced quality of life and increased risk-taking by consumers who often ignore PAL. All contributing stakeholders agree that PAL must reflect actual risk. PAL should be transparent and consistent with rules underpinning decision-making process being communicated clearly to all stakeholders. The use of PAL should indicate the possible, unintended presence of an allergen in a consumed portion of a food product at or above any proposed action level. This will require combined work by all stakeholders to ensure everyone understands the approach and its limitations. Consumers with food allergy then need to be educated to undertake individualized risk assessments in relation to any PAL present.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1039-1051
Number of pages13
JournalAllergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume70
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2015

Keywords

  • consumers
  • food allergen
  • food allergy
  • precautionary allergen labelling
  • quantitative risk assessment

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Precautionary allergen labelling: Perspectives from key stakeholder groups'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this