Beyond the costs of recalling products, the reputational risk can have long-term impacts. Well-managed companies strive to stay well below the action level to avoid risking a recall. We are working with Fapas and other stakeholders to update the list.Ī lab needs to measure contaminants at levels much lower than FDA’s action level. We helped develop the criteria and evaluate the labs before EDF withdrew from the Council in October 2021. To find a list of labs that met the four criteria, we encourage you to use the list published by the Baby Food Council as of August 2021. If you see a reporting level over 6 ppb, consider a different lab. Only when challenged to lower the reporting limit did they upgrade their reports and update their accreditation. Some reported levels as high as 10, 15, or 20 ppb as nondetectable, despite being able to do better. We also found that labs demonstrating proficiency at around 6 ppb needed to upgrade their lab reports to meet the fourth criterion. We encourage stakeholders to ensure participation of any labs on which you might rely. Fapas is conducting another round of proficiency testing starting August 8, 2022. Almost half of the labs failed to accurately measure the toxic elements at that level.Ī second round of testing yielded similar results for labs that either failed the first round or participated for the first time. As described in detail below, Fapas, a company that performs third-party proficiency testing internationally, conducted a blinded test with baby food samples containing lead, arsenic, and cadmium at around 6 ppb. In our experience, the third criterion is the most challenging. Here is the list of labs that met these criteria as of August 2021. Provide a written report of results at that level.Demonstrate proficiency in a third-party, blinded test to quantify lead, arsenic, and cadmium to around 6 parts per billion (ppb) and.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |