Consideration of Raw Materials and Minimum Protein Level in the Codex General Standard for Cheese
Elaboration of a Standard for Products in Which Milk Components are Substituted by Non-Milk Components
4. The Committee noted matters of interest arising from the 23rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the 31st Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (CCFAC), the 27th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL) and the 32nd Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH).
Food Additive Provisions in the Adopted Standards
5. The Committee noted that 31st Session of the CCFAC had not endorsed[3] several food additives in the Standards for Cheese and for Milk Powders and Cream Powder and they had been removed from these Standards. The Committee considered whether or not to reinstate polydimethylsiloxane (INS 900) in the Codex Standard for Milk Powders and Cream Powder and anthocyanins (INS 163) in the Codex Standard for Cheese. It decided not to reinstate these food additive provisions into the Standards. It also noted that the forthcoming 32nd Session of the CCFAC would consider the use of pimaricin (INS 235) in sliced, cut, shredded or grated cheese on a basis of technological justification for use provided by Canada[4]. The Delegation of France asked this Committee to request the CCFAC to evaluate vegetable carbon, taking into consideration its uses in certain cheeses on the market. The Delegation was invited to propose this at the forthcoming CCFAC session.
Relationship between Food Additives Provisions in Commodity Standards and the Codex General Standard for Food Additives
6. The Committee agreed with the suggestion of the Delegation of the Netherlands to seek a clear explanation from the CCFAC on the relationship between food additive provisions in Codex commodity standards and the Codex General Standard for Food Additives, especially as related to the food category system.
Maximum Level for Lead in the Standard for Butter
7. The Committee noted that the 23rd Session of the Commission had adopted[5] the Revised Codex Standard for Butter, including the maximum level for lead at 0.05 mg/kg endorsed by the CCFAC, with the understanding that the CCMMP might need to revisit the maximum level in the context of the ongoing CCFAC elaboration of the Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Foods. The Delegation of India requested that the maximum level for lead in butter should be reverted to 0.5 mg/kg. The Delegation was invited to forward its proposal directly to the CCFAC.
Draft Amendment to the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods (Class Name: Milk Protein and Milk Protein Product)
8. The 27th Session of the CCFL agreed to combine the two class names, Milk Protein and Milk Protein Product, into one class name and to place the combined class name and a minimum level of 30/35% in square brackets. The proposed draft amendment was adopted by the 23rd Commission at Step 5. The CCFL forwarded the amendment to the CCMMP for further consideration, in particular as related to the minimum protein level[6].
9. Several delegations were of the opinion that a product labelled as Milk Protein should have a protein content above 50% and that products with a milk protein content between 30/35 and 50% should be labelled as Milk Protein Product. It was also suggested that the definition should be established only for Milk Protein Product in view of the potential confusion between the meaning of Milk Protein and Milk Protein Product to consumers; and instead of a range of 30/35%, there should be only one value as a minimum protein content. In order to distinguish these products from skimmed milk powder, the Committee agreed to the minimum milk protein level of 35%.
10. The Delegation of India noted that milk protein content should be determined on a basis of international data as opposed to selecting arbitrary figures, especially since the level varied depending on type of the product and place of production.
11. The Committee agreed that the following decision would be reported back to the CCFL:
“Milk Protein Product: Milk product containing a minimum of 35% (m/m) of any type(s) of milk protein*. If the content exceeds 50% (m/m), the word ‘product’ may be omitted.* Calculation of milk protein content: Kjeldahl nitrogen x 6.38”
12. The Committee noted that the Commission, during the discussion of the Draft General Standard for Cheese at its 23rd Session, had recorded the comments on the need for reconsideration of the section on raw materials and for inclusion of a minimum protein level. The Commission had adopted the Draft Standard at Step 8 and requested this Committee to consider: (1) inclusion of a minimum level for protein; and (2) raw materials.[8] The Committee further noted that work on the amendments to the Standard had been approved as new work by the Commission.
Description
13. The Delegation of Norway explained that the consequential modification to the sections on Description and Raw Materials from “milk, skimmed milk, partly skimmed milk, cream, whey cream and buttermilk or any combination of these materials” to “milk and/or products obtained from milk” made at the Third Session resulted in a substantial change to the definition of cheese and rendered it meaningless for the purpose of facilitating fair practices in international food trade and protecting the health of consumers. The Delegation proposed that the product definition should be amended by reverting to the previous text[9].
14. The Committee generally supported the proposal of Norway and agreed to consider the wording proposed by the International Dairy Federation (IDF)[10] which was slightly different from the proposal of Norway. It was further agreed to insert the term “the protein of” after the term “coagulation of” in paragraph (b) for the sake of consistency and to stress that cheese is obtained by the coagulation of milk protein. Some delegations questioned the use of “and/or” between paragraphs (a) and (b). It was explained that while paragraph (a) provided the definition of reference products obtained from the traditional manufacturing process, paragraph (b) provided the definition of products obtained from alternative processes. As long as the end product derived from milk and/or products obtained from milk was identical or similar to those obtained by the process described in paragraph (a), they could also be produced in accordance with paragraph (b).
15. The Committee agreed to the following Proposed Draft Amendment to Section 2.1 of the General Standard for Cheese and advanced it to Step 5 with a recommendation to omit Steps 6 and 7 for adoption by the Commission at Step 8 at its 24th Session:
“2.1 Cheese is the ripened or unripened soft or semi-hard, hard or extra-hard product, which may be coated, and in which the whey protein/casein ratio does not exceed that of milk, obtained by:Minimum Protein Level(a) coagulating wholly or partly the protein of milk, skimmed milk, partly skimmed milk, cream, whey cream or buttermilk, or any combination of these materials, through the action of rennet or other suitable coagulating agents, and by partially draining the whey resulting from such coagulation; and/or(b) processing techniques involving coagulation of the protein of milk and/or products obtained from milk which give an end product with a similar physical, chemical and organoleptic characteristics as the product defined under (a).”
16. The Delegation of Japan welcomed the decision of the Committee on the Description of Cheese which clarified that the coagulation of milk protein was the key factor in the manufacturing of cheese. However, the Delegation was of the opinion that for the facilitation of the international food trade and consumer protection, a minimum protein level was necessary to provide for guidance on product identification. The Delegation recommended a minimum protein level of 6% in dry matter based on chemical analyses with the determination error of 25%.
17. While some delegations contended that a minimum protein level was unnecessary on the basis of the amended description and should not be set in an arbitrary manner, the Committee generally supported the establishment of a minimum protein level. Many delegations mentioned the need for further studies to come up with a figure which would cover cheeses moving in international trade. The Committee noted that due to the urgent need for the clear guidance on minimum protein level for the international trade of cheese, the World Customs Organization was also working on this issue. Several delegations supported the level proposed by Japan as they felt that it would cover most of, if not all, cheeses moving in international trade.
18. Some delegations stated that, according to the definition, cheese could also be produced from cream and proposed an alternative level of 2% or a range of 2-6%. The Committee felt that the range was too broad and agreed to use 6% as a tentative value for a minimum protein level.
19. Taking into consideration the urgent need for a decision on minimum protein level, the Committee agreed to circulate the following at Step 3 for comments:
“3.3 COMPOSITION
Minimum protein in dry matter [6]% (m/m)”
The Delegation of Australia expressed its objection to this decision. The Committee requested IDF to collect data on the protein levels of cheeses for consideration by the Committee at the next Session.
20. The 23rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission adopted the General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms as a final Codex text. The Commission requested the CCMMP to consider, as a matter of urgency, the necessity to elaborate a standard for products such as filled milk and derived products (see para. 21 below), where the milk components had been substituted wholly or partially by non-milk components. Since these types of products appeared to be widespread in Asia, the Commission also requested the Codex Coordinating Committee for Asia (CCASIA) to consider this issue in parallel to the CCMMP.[12] The 12th Session of the CCASIA, taking into consideration the international trade potential, agreed to report to the 47th Session of the Executive Committee that worldwide Codex standards for Evaporated Filled Milk, Sweetened Condensed Filled Milks and Filled Milk Powders should be elaborated.[13]
21. In presenting the discussion paper, the Delegations of Malaysia and Thailand informed the Committee that filled milk products had a long history and they were produced by mixing either milk, milk powder, cream, cream powder or skimmed milk powder with vegetable oil/fat with or without any other necessary ingredients. It was stated that they provided greater choice to consumers, and they offered greater market opportunities to milk constituents. Figures and tables supporting the wideranging trade in the products were included in the discussion paper as well as preliminary texts of the proposed standards prepared utilizing, as much as possible, the respective milk product standards.
22. Several delegations felt that there was not sufficient information provided in relation to Codex Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities to make a decision on whether or not to proceed with the elaboration of standards to cover these products. These delegations were of the opinion that because the products in question were substitutes for milk products, the designation of such products would need to comply with the Codex General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms and the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods. In this regard, it was noted that many consumers in various countries were unfamiliar with such products and therefore, they would need to be marketed under a name reflecting the true nature of the product without using dairy terms. It was also suggested that a viable solution might be to amend Section 4.6.2 of the Codex General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms, by inserting a footnote or explanatory note, to provide for the use of dairy terms for these products in addition to those exceptions currently listed.
23. Several other delegations felt that as these products were traded extensively in Asia and were expanding to other parts of the world, it was necessary for a Codex standard to be established. These delegations noted that the Codex Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities had been addressed, and that with the appropriate product name descriptors, the products would not be confused with milk or milk products.
24. At the request of the Chairperson, an informal group consisting of Malaysia, Thailand and IDF considered this issue and proposed to the Committee that:
25. The group also proposed that the drafting of the standards should start immediately in parallel to collecting further information to see if the Codex Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities were met. It was further proposed that if such criteria were not met, the Committee might instead proceed by considering a footnote to the Codex General Standard for Dairy Terms to provide further guidance for the labelling and marketing of such products without the elaboration of standards.
26. The Committee generally agreed with this approach and felt that it was the competent Committee to elaborate these standards. It focused its discussion on the tentative titles for the three standards. Several delegations were of the opinion that the titles Evaporated Skimmed Milk with Vegetable Fat, Sweetened Condensed Skimmed Milk with Vegetable Fat and Skimmed Milk Powder with Vegetable Fat accurately and precisely described the products, would not mislead consumers, and were easily understood and clear.
27. Other delegations were of the opinion that these products should not be designated by any name starting with a dairy term. They supported a proposal of Spain that the titles of the standards should be Food Product Prepared with Evaporated Skimmed Milk and Vegetable Fat, Food Product Prepared with Sweetened Condensed Skimmed Milk and Vegetable Fat and Food Product Prepared with Skimmed Milk Powder and Vegetable Fat. However, it was also contended by other delegations that these latter suggestions were much too generic, broad and complicated and that they could be easily misunderstood or applied to any dairy product such as cheese, dairy spreads, etc.
28. Pending justification, the Committee agreed to request the 47th Session of the Executive Committee to approve the elaboration of worldwide Standards for Evaporated Skimmed Milk with Vegetable Fat, Sweetened Condensed Skimmed Milk with Vegetable Fat and Skimmed Milk Powder with Vegetable Fat as new work, with the understanding that the titles of the standards would be further deliberated in the course of the elaboration. The Delegations of Argentina, France and Germany expressed their reservations and the Observer from the European Commission expressed its objection to this decision.
29. In view of comments made by several countries at the 23rd Session of the Commission, the Delegation of Malaysia, supported by several other delegations, proposed the development of a footnote to Section 4.6 of the General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms, in parallel to the elaboration of the three standards. The Committee considered a possibility of adding a footnote to Section 4.6 to the effect that “The term ‘filled’ may be used or as provided for by national legislation”. The Committee agreed not to proceed with the development of a footnote. However, the Delegations of Malaysia and Thailand emphasized difficulties in trade as, according to their opinion, the current General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms was creating non-tariff barriers to trade.
30. It was concluded that pending approval of the Executive Committee, a drafting group consisting of Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Thailand and the International Dairy Federation would commence work on the three proposed draft standards. It was also understood that Australia, Malaysia, Thailand and IDF would gather information as required by the Codex Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities, as well as information on current product names and national legislation in this regard, in parallel to the elaboration of the standards. The proposed draft standards prepared by the drafting group and justification based on the Codex Criteria would be circulated for comment at Step 3 and further consideration at the 5th Session of the Committee.
