Summaries and Conclusions of the Working Group
Creams
Fermented Milks (Agenda Item 4b)
Dairy Spreads (Agenda Item 4c)
Processed Cheese (Agenda Item 4d)
Individual Cheeses (Agenda Item 4e)
Whey Powders (Agenda Item 4f)
Edible Casein Products (Agenda Item 4g)
50. The Committee recalled that the Third Session of the CCMMP formed two working groups to consider (1) Individual and Processed Cheeses; and, (2) Cream, Dairy Spreads and Fermented Milks. At the Third Session, the CCMMP decided that the Working Groups would be responsible for seeking solutions and making recommendations that would assist IDF in preparing draft standards on specific issues[17].
51. The Working Groups had an electronic exchange of information, and also met immediately prior to the current session. Recommendations from these Working Groups (CX/MMP 00/6 and CRD 1, and CX/MMP 00/07 and CRD 2) were accepted by the Committee. The Committee thanked the Working Groups for their efforts.
(Agenda Item 4a)[18]
52. The Committee noted that the initial recommendations of the Working Group on Creams, Fermented Milks and Dairy Spreads (WG) as contained in CX/MMP 00/6 had been incorporated in the preparation of the text. The Committee considered only substantive issues that would require redrafting of the text of the Proposed Draft as follows:
Scope
53. The Committee confirmed the recommendation of the WG that fermented cream should be covered in this Standard.
54. In response to a proposal to remove industrial creams, the Committee agreed to place the term “or further processing” in square brackets.
Description
55. The Committee considered a proposal to delete the reference to reconstituting/recombining milk products for manufacturing creams. Some delegations, however, stated that in their countries creams were obtained by reconstituting and/or recombining milk. It was mentioned that the labelling provision properly covered the use of these processes and in certain countries where milk production was low, it would be impossible to produce creams without reconstitution or recombination. The Committee agreed to retain the reference to reconstituting/recombining.
56. The Committee received proposals to include the definitions of whipping cream (to be whipped by the final consumer) and thickened cream in Section 2.1 Creams, and acidified cream in Section 2.3 Fermented Creams. The Committee noted that inclusion of these products in the section on Description would necessitate review for possible amendments of the sections on Essential Composition and Quality Factors and Labelling and to certain extent the section on Food Additives. The Committee agreed to include these products.
Permitted Ingredients
57. The Committee agreed to include gelatine and starches in accordance with the Draft Standard for Unripened Cheese (see para. 38). However, the Delegation of Australia mentioned an inconsistency between the expressions of the use of gelatine and starches in this Standard and in the Standard for Unripened Cheese.
Composition
58. The Committee agreed that a reference level for fat should be included in this section. It was explained that the reference level served for two purposes, (1) to identify products which may be named “cream” without qualification, and (2) to be used as reference value for making nutrition claims. Since there was no agreed values, the Committee decided to place 18, 20, 30, 35 and 36 %, which were proposed by delegations, in square brackets.
59. The Committee agreed to establish the absolute minimum milkfat level for cream at 10%.
Status of the Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Creams, Whipped Creams and Fermented Creams
60. The Committee agreed to advance the Proposed Draft Standard to Step 5 for adoption by the 47th Session of the Executive Committee. The agreed text is attached to this Report as Appendix VI. It requested IDF to redraft the text taking into consideration discussions, written comments submitted to, and oral comments made at the current Session, and comments submitted at Step 6 after the adoption by the Executive Committee, with a view to the consideration of a revised text at the next Session.
61. The Committee agreed that there would be one standard that covered fermented milks provided that the denomination of heat-treated products was appropriately addressed in the Labelling Section. It also agreed in general with the recommendations of the Working Group (WG) to include composite products and “mild yoghurt”. The Committee considered only substantive issues which would require redrafting of the text as follows:
Description
62. The Committee had an exchange of views on when the count of viable microorganisms specific to individual products should be controlled. Several delegations mentioned that the currently used term “to the date of minimum durability” was confusing. It was generally agreed that it would be impossible to control microbial counts at the time of consumption. The Committee agreed to include the following three options in square brackets: at the date of minimum durability; at the point of sale to the consumer; and at the time when the product leaves the manufacturer. The Committee noted that it should be the responsibility of manufacturers to undertake shelf-life tests.
63. The Committee agreed to include the term “mild yoghurt” in this section. As the Committee could not consider the definition of “mild yoghurt” thoroughly due to time constraints, it decided to place the tentative definition as follows in square brackets:
“[Cultures of Streptococcus thermophilus and other Lactobacilli other than Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus]”This definition would need to be further developed.
Composite Fermented Milk Products
64. Several delegations proposed that the maximum level of non-dairy ingredients in composite fermented milk products should be 50% to reflect the products currently in the market or in compliance with the General Standards for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods and for the Use of Dairy Terms. One delegation proposed deletion of this provision. However, a number of other delegations supported the retention of the current level of 30%. The Committee agreed to include all options in square brackets in this section.
65. The Delegation of Canada stated that gelatine and starches be allowed in plain yoghurt.
Composition
66. The Committee considered the total counts of microorganisms specific to individual products covered in the Standard. Some delegations proposed that the minimum count should be reduced to 106 cfu/g if they were to be determined at the date of minimum durability. Some other delegations requested that in addition to the minimum counts of the sum of Streptococcus thermophilus and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus in yoghurt, separate minimum counts should be developed for individual microorganisms. The Delegation of Italy was requested to submit scientific data to justify the establishment of separate minimum counts for the next redrafting.
67. The Committee recognized that the composition criteria, including acidity, should be developed for mild yoghurt[20].
Name of the Food
68. The Committee agreed to include the term “including mild yoghurt” after the term “Other fermented milks” in the third paragraph of Section 7.1.1. In compliance with the decision made for the Draft Standard for Unripened Cheese, the Committee agreed to delete the term “manufactured and/or” from the aforementioned paragraph.
69. The Committee had an extensive exchange of views concerning the labelling of products heattreated after fermentation, especially in relation to yoghurt. Many countries stated that the critical requirement of yoghurt was the presence of viable and active Streptococcus thermophilus and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus above the minimum count specified. They further stated that failing the above requirement, products must not be labelled as yoghurt. Some delegations requested that permission for the use of other safe lactic acid producing bacteria should be provided.
70. Many other delegations expressed the view that the use of the term “fermented milk” would not provide sufficient information to consumers on the identity of products and the term yoghurt should be allowed to describe the true nature of the products as long as it was accompanied by the term “heattreated” and in compliance with national legislation. A delegation stated that preventing the use of the name “heat-treated yoghurt” would restrict the trade of these products.
71. Since no consensus was reached on the above issue, a compromise solution was sought. A proposal was made to add the following sentence, which utilized the text contained in the currently valid Codex Standard for Flavoured Yoghurt and Products Heat-Treated after Fermentation, after the text proposed by the WG in the fourth paragraph of Section 7.1.1: “If the consumer would be misled by this name, the product shall be labelled in a manner permitted by national legislation in the country of sale to the final consumer”. In order to arrive at consensus, the Committee agreed to add the above sentence and an additional sentence to the paragraph as follows: “When there is no legislation in the country of sale, the product shall be labelled ‘Heat-Treated Fermented Milk’”. The Committee decided to place both sentences in square brackets.
72. It noted that the ingredient list would be sufficient to indicate the use of artificial sweeteners and there might not be a need for having a specific labelling provision to address this issue.
Status of the Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Fermented Milks
73. The Committee agreed to advance the Proposed Draft Standard to Step 5 for adoption by the 47th Session of the Executive Committee. The agreed text is attached to this Report as Appendix VII. It requested IDF to redraft the text, taking into consideration discussions and written comments submitted to and oral comments made at the current Session, and comments submitted at Step 6 after the adoption by the Executive Committee, with a view to the consideration of a revised text at the next Session.
74. The Committee agreed to the recommendation of the Working Group to align the Proposed Draft Standard for Dairy Spreads with the Codex Standard for Butter as much as possible and in a pragmatic manner, taking into consideration the General Standard for the Use of Dairy Terms. It also agreed, where necessary, to align the Proposed Draft Standard with the Proposed Draft Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads being developed by the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils (CCFO).
75. Since the above necessitated an extensive review and redrafting of the Proposed Draft Standard, the Committee agreed not to consider the current text. The Committee requested IDF to redraft the Proposed Draft Standard for circulation and comments at Step 3 prior to the next Session of the Committee. The Delegation of the United Kingdom, as the host country of the CCFO, offered to assist in the redrafting regarding the alignment with the Proposed Draft Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads. The Delegation of Argentina also expressed willingness to assist in the redrafting.
76. The Chairperson of the Working Group (WG) on Cheeses indicated that the WG was not able to provide additional recommendations to those already provided in CX/MMP 00/7 in regard to the minimum cheese content that would be required or the way it would be expressed in the proposed draft revised Codex Standard for Processed Cheese. The WG recommended that alternative solutions be sought on these issues, particularly on the basis of two proposals[23].
77. The Committee agreed that the Codex Secretariat, in collaboration with France, the United States and IDF would prepare a circular letter to obtain information and data on minimum cheese contents in processed cheeses as well as comments on the two alternative proposals and on any other relevant points (see para. 122). It was further agreed that France, the United States and IDF would collate and present the information to the next session of the Committee so as to further examine the prospect of establishing an absolute minimum cheese content for processed cheeses or alternative approaches.
78. The Chairperson of the Working Group (WG) summarized the information and recommendations contained in document CX/MMP 00/7 and these were accepted by the Committee as guidance for further elaboration of these standards.
79. On the basis of their discussions immediately prior to the Session, the WG provided to the Committee additional recommendations as contained in document CRD 2, which were also accepted by the Committee.
80. Other delegations suggested the following additional set of principles that were presented and discussed in the WG but not included in its final report, as follows:
81. Several delegations supported the continued consideration of all principles and recommendations summarized above when considering the possible revision of individual cheese standards. It was felt that requirements and criteria based on individual cheeses should only be restricted to final product provisions which were necessary to meet the Codex mandate related to protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade. In this regard, it was felt that the current drafts were much too detailed and prescriptive and that individual standards restricted to essential criteria determined by the agreed principles would be much more desirable. It was suggested that details and issues related to consumer health, such as food additives, contaminants and processing aids, could more logically be addressed by other relevant Codex committees.
82. Several other delegations were of the opinion that a set of detailed and specific criteria were essential to characterize the identity of each cheese covered by an individual cheese standard and to determine compliance with the requirements of the individual cheese variety. It was noted that a generic cheese standard could not account for the individual characterizing provisions required to maintain distinct standards of identity for various cheeses. It was felt that the sum of these characterizing provisions were directly related to the Codex mandate of consumer protection and facilitation of the food trade. No consensus was reached on the above issues.
83. The Committee decided that the IDF should consider the WG reports, written comments submitted and the above discussions when considering the redrafting of the Codex standards for individual cheeses. It was also understood that the IDF might identify a series of principles related to these issues during this review process, and that a full report and recommendations should be provided by the IDF to the CCMMP at its next session. The Committee confirmed that the Individual Standard for Cream Cheese should be revised (see para. 32)
Technical Advice on Cheese Rind, Cheese Surface and Cheese Coatings
84. The Committee had discussions on the WG reports related to the technical advice on cheese rind, cheese surface and cheese coatings, as prepared by the International Dairy Federation (CX/MMP 00/7-Add. 1), which was considered as an amendment to the Codex General Standard for Cheese.
85. The Committee deleted the Introduction section of CX/MMP 00/07-Add.1 as it was irrelevant to the provision of technical advice. The Committee also deleted the paragraph related to edible rind because in principle, every type of rind could be eaten without a hazard to health and therefore, the paragraph was unnecessary. The Committee modified the paragraph concerning rindless cheese to include ripening films as an example of an airtight barrier.
86. The Committee decided to attach the revised text of CX/MMP 00/7-Add.1 to this Report[25] for circulation and comment at Step 3, with the understanding that it would eventually form an appendix to the Codex General Standard for Cheese, subject to approval of the Executive Committee to initiate new work.
Description
87. The Committee agreed to insert the terms “fluid” and “during the manufacture of cheese, casein or similar products” in the definition of acid whey. The Committee further agreed to indicate that coagulation of acid whey was principally obtained “by acidification” instead of “with acids”.
Composition
88. Varied proposals were made regarding the minimum milk protein levels for whey powder and acid whey powder ranging from 9-11% and 6-10%, respectively. The Committee decided place in square brackets for further consideration a minimum milk protein level of 11.0% for whey powder and a minimum level of 7.0% for acid whey powder. The Committee further decided to place in square brackets a new maximum milkfat level of 7% and the current level of 2.0% for whey powder, and a new maximum ash level of 18.0% and the current level of 15.0% for acid whey powder.
Food Additives
89. The Committee decided to include phosphates (INS 339, 340, 450, 451, 452) at a maximum level of 10 g/kg for the phosphate group under the Stabilizer section.
90. The Committee decided not to include the processing aids polydimethylsiloxane (INS 900a) and polyethylene glycol (INS 1512). The Committee agreed to include sodium polyphosphates (INS 452i), sodium hydroxide (INS 524), potassium hydroxide (INS 525) and calcium hydroxide (INS 526) at a maximum level “limited by GMP” as acidity regulators. It was noted that numerical maximum levels needed to be established for sodium polyphosphate as a numerical ADI was allocated for the substance.
91. As the bleaching agent benzoyl peroxide (INS 928) had only been evaluated as a flour treatment agent by JECFA, the Committee agreed to include the compound in square brackets pending its evaluation by JECFA.
Contaminants
92. In view of the recent JECFA re-evaluation of lead (53rd Meeting), the Committee agreed to request the CCFAC to examine the maximum level for lead in the context of the Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Foods, as it was of the opinion that the maximum level of 1 mg/kg was too high, especially for infants and children.
93. In response to a request to establish maximum levels for arsenic, cadmium, copper, mercury, nitrites and zinc, it was suggested that proposals for the establishment of levels for these contaminants should be directed to the CCFAC in the context of the Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Foods. However, it was noted that levels for copper and zinc were generally established as quality factors in Codex standards.
Name of the Food
94. On the proposal to include the use of the term “sweet” for the denomination of whey powder with the pH above 6.2, it was pointed out that there was a need to define the term “sweet”. Therefore, the Committee decided not to make reference to the term “sweet” at this time.
95. The Delegation of Greece requested that the name of the product should accompany the manufacturing method, such as spray dried or roller dried.
Appendix
96. After some discussions, the Committee decided to retain the Appendix. The Committee noted that generally the maximum levels of copper and iron were regarded as quality factors.
Status of the Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Whey Powders
97. The Committee agreed to advance the Proposed Draft to Step 5. The agreed text is attached to this report as Appendix VII.
Description
98. The Committee agreed to replace the term “reaction” with the term “action” and to insert the term “or edible casein curd” after the term “edible casein”.
Composition
99. The Committee considered the minimum milk protein in dry matter in rennet casein, the maximum water in rennet casein and acid casein, and the maximum milkfat in acid casein. It noted that some proposals were based on actual trade data while others were based on national legislation. After a brief discussion, the Committee decided to retain the levels currently in the Proposed Draft Standard. The Committee noted that the literature search showed that maximum ash in acid casein could be 4.5%. Nonetheless, the Committee agreed to retain the level as currently drafted.
100. The Committee corrected the pH value for caseinate to 8.0.
Contaminants
101. The Committee agreed to request the CCFAC to review the maximum level for lead at 1 mg/kg in the context of the Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Foods. (see also para. 92)
Appendix
102. The Committee agreed to add calcium chloride (INS 509) to the list of processing aids for renneting enhancement purposes.
103. After some exchange of views concerning the title of the section containing the maximum sediment levels (additional quality factors or compositional factors), the Committee decided to retain the current title, Additional Quality Factors.
104. The Committee confirmed that the maximum levels for copper and iron were quality factors rather than safety factors (see paras 93, 96)
Status of Proposed Draft Revised Standards for Edible Casein Products
105. The Committee agreed to advance the Proposed Draft Revised Standard to Step 5 with a recommendation to omit Steps 6 and 7 for adoption at Step 8 by the Commission. This decision was made with the understanding that if technical or trade data were brought to the attention of the Committee, it would consider the need to revise/amend the Standard. The agreed text is attached to this report as Appendix III.
