fishing images
"During the quarter ended October 31, 2024, we saw a decrease in revenue, when compared to the quarter ended October 31, 2023, but an increase in revenue when compared to the quarter ended July 31, 2024. The year-over-year decrease was primarily due to a slowdown in consulting revenue, while the sequential increase was driven by our funding portal business. Despite the challenges we faced during a tough quarter, we remain optimistic about the future,” said Martin Kay, CEO of Netcapital Inc. "Recently our wholly-owned subsidiary, Netcapital Securities Inc. received approval from FINRA to become a FINRA-member broker-dealer, which marks a significant achievement for the Company as it begins to open up opportunities for more revenue channels. Looking beyond the second quarter we are focused on leveraging our new broker-dealer license and expanding our capabilities. With NSI as a registered broker-dealer, we can now support companies raising capital under Reg A and Reg D offerings, facilitate and charge fees on larger fundraises, potentially provide a broader range of investment choices for our investor base, and establish fee-sharing agreements with other broker-dealers.” Second Quarter Fiscal 2025 Financial Highlights The Company will host an investor conference call on Tuesday, December 17, 2024, at 10 a.m. ET. Participant access: 844-985-2012 or 973-528-0138 Conference entry code: 894026 For additional disclosure regarding Netcapital's operating results, please refer to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2024, which has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. About Netcapital Inc. Netcapital Inc. is a fintech company with a scalable technology platform that allows private companies to raise capital online and provides private equity investment opportunities to investors. The Company's consulting group, Netcapital Advisors , provides marketing and strategic advice and takes equity positions in select companies. The Company's funding portal, Netcapital Funding Portal, Inc . is registered with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) and is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), a registered national securities association. Forward Looking Statements The information contained herein includes forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or to our future financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements since they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond our control and which could, and likely will, materially affect actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Any forward-looking statement reflects our current views with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, growth strategy and liquidity. We assume no obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future. Investor Contact 800-460-0815 [email protected] NETCAPITAL INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (Unaudited) (Audited) NETCAPITAL INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
Brookfield Infrastructure Renews Its Normal Course Issuer Bids
Keyes Company enters Sarasota with affiliation of Signature Premier, Florida Suncoast
Cybersecurity Certification Market Future Scope, Size, Share, Growing Trends & Demand, Opportunities, Key Segments And Forecast To 2030 12-16-2024 10:46 PM CET | Business, Economy, Finances, Banking & Insurance Press release from: ABNewswire SGS(Switzerland), DEKRA(Germany), Intertek(UK), Bureau Veritas(France), DNV GL(Norway), TUV SUD(Germany), UL Solutions(US), Eurofins Scientific (Luxembourg), TUV NORD(Germany), Element(UK), Keysight(US), BSI(UK), TUV Rheinland(Germany), EY Certifypoint(Ne Cybersecurity Certification Market by Certification Category (Cloud Security, Information Security, AI Certifications), Target User (Individual Professionals and Enterprises), Delivery Mode (Online and in-person) - Global Forecast to 2030. The global Cybersecurity Certification market [ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/cybersecurity-certification-market-18576137.html?utm_campaign=cybersecuritycertificationmarket&utm_source=abnewswire.com&utm_medium=paidpr ] is expected to grow from USD 3,987.6 million in 2024 to USD 8,033.5 million by 2030, registering a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12.4% during the forecast period. The increasing sophistication of cyber threats, coupled with a shortage of skilled professionals, is driving the demand for cybersecurity certifications. Organizations are turning to certification programs to upskill their workforce, enabling employees to effectively address emerging risks. Additionally, stringent regulations like GDPR mandate certified teams for robust risk management, further fueling the adoption of these programs. Cybersecurity certifications not only strengthen an organization's security posture but also enhance employees' skills and confidence in managing advanced cyber risks. This growing need for protection and preparedness is encouraging more companies to invest in cybersecurity certifications. Download PDF Brochure@ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=18576137 [ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=18576137&utm_campaign=cybersecuritycertificationmarket&utm_source=abnewswire.com&utm_medium=paidpr ] By Vertical, the IT & ITeS segment will account for the largest market size. The high reliance on technology makes this segment IT and ITeS the leader in the cybersecurity certification market, with information security as a key concern as it is the sector that is most susceptible to sophisticated cyberattacks. The rising frequency of threats like ransomware and phishing call for more certified professionals in skills areas such as cloud computing and AI security. This usually becomes highly observable and is facilitated by the mandate of regulatory compliance, which requires adherence to frameworks such as GDPR and HIPAA through their respective certifications. Moreover, rapid technology integration into business processes introduces security loopholes; hence, continuous learning and specialized certifications are required to build a skilled workforce that can efficiently tackle risks. By Delivery Mode, the Online sector is estimated to have the highest CAGR during the global forecast. Online segment is leading the cybersecurity certification market growth due to adaptability, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness of the same. High-speed internet eliminates geographical barriers and opens up the world to engage into many courses. Flexible learning accommodates personal and professional obligations, while the shortage of cybersecurity skills globally is driving demand for scalable online training. The pandemic hastened the adoption of virtual education usage and, thus, became the new norm. Online programs are more affordable, contain real-time updates of content, and use interactive formats like multimedia and simulations for better learning. Specialized certifications attract targeted learners for continuous professional development and updated skills for professionals to handle better emerging cyber threats. "By region, In North America, US is projected to have the largest market during the forecast period." The US dominates the cybersecurity certification market as it is in need of lots of expert professionals in mitigating increasing and sophisticated cyber threats. New vulnerabilities arising from the implementation of the coming next-generation technologies such as cloud computing, AI, and IoT call for specific training and certifications. There has been significant investment in the training of cybersecurity at organizations. This is mainly due to a growing realization of threats and a strong commitment to protecting digital assets. A robust security ecosystem by cybersecurity firms in the US, the shift to remote work expanded its attack surface, and continuous learning and managed security services further buttress the upward trend in demand for certifications. Request Sample Pages@ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestsampleNew.asp?id=18576137 [ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestsampleNew.asp?id=18576137&utm_campaign=cybersecuritycertificationmarket&utm_source=abnewswire.com&utm_medium=paidpr ] Unique Features in the Cybersecurity Certification Market The cybersecurity certification market offers a diverse array of certifications catering to different skill levels and specialties. From foundational certifications like CompTIA Security+ to advanced ones such as CISSP, CISM, and CEH, professionals can choose programs tailored to their career paths and organizational needs. A unique aspect of this market is the availability of both vendor-specific certifications, such as Cisco's CCNA Cyber Ops, and vendor-neutral certifications, like those offered by (ISC) and ISACA. This variety allows individuals and organizations to focus on technologies relevant to their ecosystems or adopt broader, technology-agnostic skillsets. Modern cybersecurity certification programs increasingly incorporate practical, hands-on training through simulated environments, labs, and real-world scenarios. This feature ensures that certified professionals are well-prepared to handle actual cyber threats and incidents effectively. Many certifications are designed to align with global compliance and regulatory frameworks such as GDPR, HIPAA, and ISO/IEC 27001. These programs help organizations meet regulatory requirements and strengthen their governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) strategies. Certifications now cover specialized areas like cloud security, AI-driven threat analysis, blockchain security, and IoT protection. This evolution reflects the growing need for expertise in safeguarding next-generation technologies against cyber threats. Major Highlights of the Cybersecurity Certification Market A global shortage of skilled cybersecurity professionals is driving the demand for certifications. Organizations are relying on certification programs to reskill and upskill their workforce, ensuring employees are equipped to handle sophisticated cyberattacks effectively. Regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA are compelling organizations to adopt cybersecurity certifications to meet compliance standards. Certified teams play a critical role in mitigating risks, securing sensitive data, and adhering to industry-specific legal frameworks. Cybersecurity certifications not only strengthen organizational security frameworks but also boost employee confidence and expertise. These programs empower individuals to handle advanced cyber risks, fostering a culture of preparedness and resilience within organizations. The market is witnessing increased adoption of specialized certifications in areas like cloud security (e.g., AWS Certified Security), ethical hacking (e.g., CEH), and advanced threat analysis (e.g., GIAC Certifications). This trend reflects the growing need for niche expertise in combating specific cybersecurity challenges. Industries such as BFSI, healthcare, and IT are leading adopters of cybersecurity certifications. These sectors face heightened security risks and compliance demands, making certified professionals essential for maintaining trust and operational integrity. Inquire Before Buying@ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Enquiry_Before_BuyingNew.asp?id=18576137 [ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Enquiry_Before_BuyingNew.asp?id=18576137&utm_campaign=cybersecuritycertificationmarket&utm_source=abnewswire.com&utm_medium=paidpr ] Top Companies in the Cybersecurity Certification Market The major players in the Cybersecurity Certification market with a significant global presence SGS(Switzerland), DEKRA(Germany), Intertek(UK), Bureau Veritas(France), DNV GL(Norway), TUV SUD(Germany), UL Solutions(US), Eurofins Scientific (Luxembourg), TUV NORD(Germany), Element(UK), Keysight(US), BSI(UK), TUV Rheinland(Germany), EY Certifypoint(Netherlands), A-Lign(Florida), HITRUST(US), Schellman(US), Coalfire Certification(US), DQS(Germany), Control Case(US), ISC2(US), Infosec Train(India), EXIDA(US), ISASecure(US), ISACA(US), CompTIA(US). The market players have adopted various strategies, such as developing advanced products, partnerships, contracts, expansions, and acquisitions, to strengthen their position in the Cybersecurity Certification market. The organic and inorganic strategies have further helped the market players to expand globally. SGS SGS is a global leader in inspection, verification, testing and certification. The company has around 99,600 professionals working in 2,600 offices and labs. SGS offers a wide range of cybersecurity services, such as certifications: ISO/SAE 21434, conformity with the EU Cybersecurity Act, and compliance with standards like ETSI EN 303 645 and NIST IR 8259A. Other services that SGS offers include consulting, training, gap analysis, penetration testing. Serving sectors like automotive, IoT, industrial automation, healthcare, and smart grids, SGS addresses unique industry challenges, offering lifecycle security, IEC 62443 compliance, and sensitive data protection, enhancing trust and security postures. Dekra DEKRA delivers comprehensive cybersecurity assessment and certification services for connected vehicles in automotive, IoT, ICT, healthcare, industrial automation, and cloud services. Its standards compliance is through ISO/SAE 21434 for connected vehicles, ETSI EN 303 645 for IoT devices, and Common Criteria (ISO 15408) for ICT systems. DEKRA helps companies deal with industry-specific challenges such as AI, remote security, and penetration testing, along with cybersecurity surveillance and tailored training. DEKRA is supporting regulatory compliance with innovative methods such as drone-based infrastructure assessment and integration of cybersecurity into corporate responsibility, while strengthening defenses against evolving threats and establishing a sustainable market position under the Strategy 2025. Media Contact Company Name: MarketsandMarkets Trademark Research Private Ltd. Contact Person: Mr. Rohan Salgarkar Email:Send Email [ https://www.abnewswire.com/email_contact_us.php?pr=cybersecurity-certification-market-future-scope-size-share-growing-trends-demand-opportunities-key-segments-and-forecast-to-2030 ] Phone: 18886006441 Address:1615 South Congress Ave. Suite 103, Delray Beach, FL 33445 City: Florida State: Florida Country: United States Website: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/cybersecurity-certification-market-18576137.html This release was published on openPR.Best Black Friday Roomba deals 2024 | BestReviews
Ryder Names Chief Operating Officer and New Chief Financial Officer
Day one on the cruise ship Viking Jupiter in Buenos Aires and the atmosphere quivers with passion. Tango Cervila dance company has come on board. The music moans, high heels rattle the stage of the ship’s theatre, long legs extend from red dresses. I’m electrified out of my jet lag. A short pause, like the sigh of the unrequited, and then the audience stands to applaud. This is a worthy opener to a cruise from Buenos Aires around the toe of South America to Valparaiso in Chile. I’ll find abundant passion of all sorts on this cruise. Next day we meet our local guide Agostina, who is passionate about Argentine history. She’s a diminutive firecracker with an eyebrow ring; she rolls her Rs as if about to burst into song. Local colour in Beunos Aires. Down in La Boca district, she and other locals are obsessed with Argentinian football heroes. Diego Maradona and Lionel Messi are plastered on T-shirts and fridge magnets, and depicted like church icons on building walls brightly painted in team colours. Next day, I discover Uruguayans are passionate about their version of carnival, and lose themselves in drumming and dancing. We’ve docked in Montevideo, a capital with character. The old town has down-at-heel Mediterranean squares and dusty bakeries, but its stirring statues of revolutionary generals are distinctively South American. Our guide Mirtha, whose husband is Australian, endearingly talks everything up in the habit of people from obscure countries. The Uruguayan carnival lasts longer than Brazil’s. The parliament building is a world wonder. That obelisk is beautiful! We Uruguayans are great at football! A statue of Uruguayan hero General Artigas in Plaza Independencia, Montevideo. Credit: Alamy Who doesn’t enjoy such passion? I feel I’m a convert to all things Uruguayan and, as we sail away and I tuck into a hearty Florentine steak in the ship’s Manfredi’s restaurant, I feel I must come back to Uruguay one day for more. This Viking cruise connects disparate places: big cities, windblown ports, isolated islands. It opens on the warm, sluggish, muddy River Plate but culminates in frozen Patagonia. It sails out into the Atlantic and finishes in the Pacific. I’ve been on many cruises, but none quite like this one for variety and unexpectedness. Buenos Aires was hot and steamy: buildings have sub-tropical stains, jacarandas flourish, lovers slump on park benches. But as Viking Jupiter slides southwards, the Argentine coast becomes dry and scrubby. The surrounds of Puerto Madryn could be South Australia if it weren’t for the snooty guanacos, and flamingos bent like question marks above small lagoons. It could equally be a flat Wales. In Puerto Madryn I encounter another unexpected passion on a shore excursion: locals fiercely proud of their Welsh immigrant heritage. But wistful, weary Argentina doesn’t really feel like anywhere else. It’s one of those one-of-a-kind places every traveller hopes for. Its capital has old-world glamour and dainty coffee shops, while its countryside celebrates macho cowboy culture and barbecues. Its people are proud and passionate and don’t forget their history. At every port, we’re fervently reminded that the Islas Malvinas, or Falkland Islands, ought to be Argentine. Monuments to dead soldiers sit on every windy waterfront like sore teeth the Argentines can’t help poking. I detect passion in the subjects of our onboard lectures: working-class heroine and president’s wife Eva Peron, legendary tango singer Carlos Gardel, former revolutionary and prisoner turned Uruguayan president Jose “Pepe” Mujica. As we sail the Atlantic on a day at sea, guest Argentinian lecturer Kevin Saslavchik provides a balanced view of the 1982 Falklands War and its causes, in which he includes fascinating video clips including the opinions of a Falklands islander and an Argentine war veteran. And then we’re sailing into the Falkland Islands themselves. Low, scraped lumps of rock recede to high hills. We tender into Port Stanley past fishing ships: 50 per cent of Spain’s calamari comes from these waters. Gentoo penguins on the beach in the Falkland Islands. Credit: Getty Images Port Stanley is, much like everywhere else in the South Atlantic – eccentric. Locals celebrate a midwinter plunge into 5C water to get a Certificate of Lunacy signed by the governor. Red pillar post boxes are still stamped with George VI’s initials. Our guide Tim lost an eye when the RAF accidentally bombed his farmhouse. Local ladies sell jam made from red teaberries, and penguins waddle on the beaches. As we leave, two sea lions appear on the pier to bask in the sun. The light is beautiful as the ship sails, giving a glow to the low green vegetation, and a yellow sheen to the Falklands’ exposed rock, teasing out the beauty of this wild and grim place. Patagonia is nipping at my ears and sneaking under my jacket as I pace the deck on our way back to continental South America. Viking Jupiter’s relaxed spa – a retreat of style without fuss – is the place to warm up with a plunge into its Scandinavian-style hot tub or a session in its sauna. Then I flop into the warm-water swimming pool. South America ends in scoured rock and salty winds, snowy mountains and smelly sea lions. We dock in Ushuaia, where tours and restaurants and shops all market themselves as The End of the World. Buenos Aires is 3000 kilometres away, Antarctica 1000 kilometres, and a sky swollen with dark clouds presses down like a lid. Ushuaia – the southernmost city in Argentina. The scenery is Alaskan, but Ushuaia’s bright yellow church and red-roofed buildings might have been teleported from Mexico. The wind is on a mission to blow me into the harbour. I’m surprised to discover Ushuaia was established as a penal colony. A Viking guide takes us to the old prison, a grim, cramped and frigid place that must have seemed as remote as Port Arthur in Tasmania to its 19th-century inmates. Ushuaia is an unprepossessing town of ankle-breaking pavements, shabby buildings and an air of neglect, but it exhilarates me. The landscapes here have chilly passion. They can seduce you or, as they did to early European explorers, chew you up and spit you out. Viking Jupiter isn’t shaken by the Strait of Magellan nor the Chilean fjords. We glide through scenery of distant mountains, volcanoes like witch’s hats, glaciers like crumbled meringue. Seabirds gather like extras in a Hitchcock movie. I barely see a house, a boat, a sign of life. Only in the Australian outback have I seen such empty vastness. Even the ship’s officers come out on deck to stare, as if mesmerised. Valparaiso – a rickety madness of time-worn buildings. Distances are big, and this cruise has quite a few days at sea. The hours seem short, however. Viking is the thinking person’s cruise company. Bookshelves are well stocked with history and travel books, and every ship hosts a resident historian. Ours is Geoff Peters, formerly of the Royal Australian Navy, who covers local history and maritime exploits and engages guest in Q&A sessions. Guests scurry from wildlife watching to astronomy lectures, mahjong competitions to afternoon tea in the Wintergarden. One day at the Pool Grill, waiters serve churrascaria-style grilled meat as a band plays. Chile feels different from Argentina. Punta Arenas, Ushuaia’s rival, is more polished. The tour coaches are better, the sights more tourist-trim. The town centre is full of weatherbeaten old mansions built on the wool and gold booms of the 19th century. I hike into Magellan’s Strait Park with enthusiastic guide Bartolo. His passion is for birds and endemic plants, and such is his enthusiasm that I find myself becoming entranced by meadowlarks and lichens amid the outsized scenery. Our final port, Valparaiso, in contrast to Punta Arenas, is a rickety madness of time-worn buildings, street markets and graffitied neighbourhoods that cling to steep hillsides. There’s no city planning at all, observes our local Viking guide Ervands with a chuckle, as if he approves. But who cares? Valparaiso too has passion. You can see it in the explosion of street art, the wanton bougainvillaea, the blaring music and mad clamour in every plaza. This is a city unlike any of the others we’ve visited: a suitable end to a cruise for those who think they’ve seen it all. THE DETAILS Viking Jupiter at sea. CRUISE Viking Cruises’ 18-day South America & Chilean Fjords cruise between Buenos Aires and Santiago (Valparaiso) visits Argentina, Uruguay, the Falkland Islands and Chile, and sails iconic maritime destinations such as the Beagle Channel, Cape Horn and the Strait of Magellan. BOOK There are eight departures between November 2024 and March 2025, from $9995 a person including accommodation, all meals and meal-time drinks, Wi-Fi, gratuities and a complimentary shore excursion in each port. See vikingcruises.com.au MORE argentina.travel uruguaynatural.com falklandislands.com chile.travel The writer was a guest of Viking Cruises.
The 48th session of the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL48) finalized a historical update of the section on allergens in the General Standard on the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods (GSLPF or CXS 1) and completed work on two new guidelines on the use of new information technologies to convey food labelling and on foods sold in E-commerce. CCFL48 advanced the review of draft guidelines on precautionary allergen labelling (when the “may contain” statement would be used when presence of allergens would be above ‘action levels,’ based on acute reference dose levels of these allergens). CCFL48 returned the proposed amendments to the GSLPF about dedicated sections on pre-packaged foods in multipacks or in joint presentations for further work while making good progress regarding various proposed definition options. CCFL48 endorsed the labelling provisions for dried saffron mandatory country of origin, while guidance from CAC47 on the country of harvest. CCFL48 agreed to work on new guidelines introducing flexibility in mandatory labelling in cases of domestic supply chain disruptions or global emergencies. Despite efforts deployed to reach a consensus, CCFL48 decided to stop work on a definition for a proposed set of guiding principles on sustain-ability (environmental) claims, as well as on alcoholic beverage labelling. Finally, CCFL48 agreed to an internal prioritization mechanism. Proposals on “high in” claims, “added sugars,” and a harmonized definition for “small packages” were all sent back to the inventory for possible future work, provided they are consistent with the next Codex Strategic Plan (2026-2031), sponsored by a Codex member to lead the work and fit within the top tier of CCFL priorities. CCFL48 was held in person in Québec City (Québec, Canada) from Sunday, October 27 to Friday, November 1st, 2024. The next CCFL meeting (CCFL49) will be held in Spring 2026, in a venue still to be determined. CCFL48 was chaired for the first time by Dr. Parthi MUTHUKUMARASAMY, the current Executive Director of Canada’s Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), who was unanimously praised for his performance in leading the Committee to overcome the difficult issues that were the subjects of discussion at that session. More information about CCFL48 supporting documents and official proceedings are available [ii] [iii]. FOOD ALLERGEN – Standing ovation for the first full revision of the relevant GSLPF provisions since 1985. CCFL48 finalized the draft revised provisions to the General standard for the labelling of pre-packaged foods (CXS 1) relevant to allergen labelling and sent it for final adoption by CAC47 (as included in Appendix II of CCFL48 report, see endnote iii). CCFL48 agreed to inform the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH) about the completion of this work and ask CCFH to ensure a full consistency of concepts used in the Codex Code of practice on allergen management for food business operators (CXC 80) with the newly approved definitions and revised sections of the GSLPF. CAC47 will be held from November 25th to November 30th in Geneva (Switzerland) [iv]. CCFL48 considered the outcome of the work of an intersessional electronic working group (EWG) led by Australia and co-led by the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA). A virtual working group (VWG) met prior to CCFL48, and recommendations are included in the report of that VWG. During that process, the EWG and VWG took into account the FAO/WHO Scientific Advice, in particular, the review and validation of the Codex priority allergen list through risk assessment (Part 1) and the review and establishment of exemptions for the food allergens (Part 4). The working groups also considered a literature review performed by the International Social Science Liaison Group (ISSLG) on a review of consumer response to allergen declarations and precautionary allergen labelling [v] [vi]. CCFL48 agreed on definitions for “food allergy,” “food allergens,” “allergenic foods,” and “coeliac disease” [vii]. CCFL48 also agreed to consider that there were two types of allergenic foods and food ingredients: those that are internationally relevant and those that are viewed as relevant for mandatory declaration only at the regional level. However, both are subject to a national risk management decision, as pointed out by Brazil (for soy) and Japan in particular (where scientific names of the fish and the crustacean are more meaningful than just ‘fish’ or ‘crustacean’) [viii]. The other significant change is the revised paragraph about the ability of national and/or regional competent authorities to exempt some highly refined food ingredients obtained from the allergenic foods listed in the two batches from being declared as “allergenic foods.” Such exemptions are to be subject to a risk assessment to establish the safety of the allergenic food derivative and will be the new section 4.2.1.6 of the future re-published revised GSLPF in its 2024 version. In that regard, it is recommended to read the FAO/WHO briefing summary of Part 4 of the expert consultation [ix]. CCFL48 also significantly clarified the GSLPF on ways to declare foods and food ingredients possibly containing food allergens [x]. These provisions will apply when the allergenic foods or food ingredients are intentionally added and present in the manufactured foods, as opposed to unintentional allergen presence (through cross-contact). Such unintentional presence of allergens will be addressed through guidelines on precautionary allergen labelling (PAL). The section on sulphites was revised so that “when present in concentrations of 10 mg/kg or more in a food, [they] shall always be declared using the specified name ‘sulphite’ or ‘sulfite’ in addition to or as part of the ingredient name.” Sulphites are to be measured “on a sulphur dioxide (SO2) equivalents basis.” PRECAUTIONARY ALLERGEN LABELLING – Good progress made, new EWG formed. Proposed New Guidelines CCFL48 agreed to advance the draft Guidelines on the use of precautionary allergen labelling for mid-process approval by CAC47. The revised draft of the proposed guidelines is included in Appendix III of CCFL48 report (see endnote iii). CCFL48 agreed to inform CCMAS of the progress made on these draft guidelines and encouraged CCMAS to provide further advice on suitable methods of analysis before CCFL49. CCFH will also be informed of the progress made on these guidelines on PAL, and once this work on PAL is completed by CCFL, CCFH will have to consider targeted revisions of CXC 80 to include information on conducting risk assessment in relation to PAL. Further guidance was requested from FAO and WHO on qualitative risk assessment and specific scientific advice on the level of reference doses (expressed in milligrams of the total protein from the allergen) or concentrations for cereals containing gluten or gluten. FAO and WHO were encouraged to develop capacity-building activities for countries on PAL and risk assessment. An EWG led by the USA and co-led by Australia and the UK was tasked to continue drafting these guidelines while leaving open the possibility of holding a VWG (or a PWG) prior to CCFL49 [xi]. Methods of Analysis on the Presence of Food Allergens Participants highlighted that the recommended RfDs were based on data from Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and mass spectrometry (MS) methods. Current analytical capabilities allow reaching to reach the limit of quantification (LOQ). Some training is necessary to link the results obtained by these analytical methods and the determination of action levels [xii]. CCFL48 further noted that CCMAS is also reviewing methods of analysis (as requested by CCFL47) through a dedicated EWG led by USA under the purview of CCMAS. The EWG is currently working on compiling all the relevant methods that meet performance criteria set in the AOAC validation guidelines and the CEN 17855 standard and will make recommendations at the next CCMAS meeting(s), which in turn will formulate recommendations to CCFL49. Codex Guidance on sampling plans sufficient in the Codex General guidelines on sampling (CXG 52), were revised and adopted in 2023. E-COMMERCE – Go for final adoption and publication. CCFL48 agreed to forward the draft Guidelines on the provision of food information for pre-packaged foods to be offered via e-commerce to CAC47 for final adoption (as included in Appendix IV of the CCFL48 report, see endnote iii). CCFL48 discussed the draft text based on the outcome of an intercessional work (EWG) and the report of the VWG held a few days prior to CCFL48, led by the UK and co-led by Chile, China, India, and Japan. CCFL48 discussed all outstanding issues, including purpose, an indication of a durability clause and related definition, the maintenance under certain conditions of small unit exemptions (from some mandatory labelling particulars), and the proposal that access to information should be at ‘no cost’ to the consumer. CCFL48 simplified the purpose of the guidelines. The issue of durability was moved to the section on voluntary particulars, noting that these aspects were related to providing information prior to shipping food at the point of e-commerce sale, but no definition for durability was finally retained. Exemptions for small units could be allowed by competent authorities in specific circumstances but, in general, would not be considered justified. The reference to “fee” was replaced with “a charge”. With regards to the optional information prior to the point of e-commerce sale, CCFL48 agreed that the provision should read as follows: “A statement may be provided on the product information e-page prior to the point of e-commerce sale to inform the consumer about the relation between the best before, best quality before, use-by, or expiration date and the product shipping date or at the point of delivery” [xiii]. NEW INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – Go for final adoption and publication. CCFL48 agreed to forward the Guidelines on the use of technology to provide food information in food labelling to CAC47 for final adoption (as included in Appendix IV of the CCFL48 report; see endnote iii). CCFL48 discussed the report of an intersessional work (EWG) on the draft guidelines, as led by Canada and co-led by India and New Zealand, as revised by the EWG Chair and Co-Chairs, based on written comments submitted prior to CCFL48 in response to a circular letter, and further editorial amendments integrated live. The guidelines include twelve main principles, which were discussed and eventually amended by CCFL48, and they should guide countries’ future development of national guidance or appropriate legislation. These new guidelines are general in nature but are relevant to all foods, standardized or not. They contain 12 core principles and define Food information as “the information that is the subject of a Codex text about a pre-packaged food” and Technology as “any electronic or digital means, including but not limited to websites, online platforms, and mobile applications.” Section (5.2) was specifically debated and even subject to an informal in-session drafting group. It related to the concepts of “health,” “nutrition,” and “safety.” It was agreed to retain only ‘safety’ and ‘nutrition’ because the term ‘health’ would account for issues impacting health but unrelated to food safety, yet remaining within the Codex’s mandate, such as nutrition labelling vis-a-vis non-communicable diseases, food allergens, etc. CCFL48 noted the general support for the concept of “health” but agreed to use the term “nutrition” instead. It was also suggested that a reference to other mandatory information as determined by the competent authority be added so that consumers can make better-informed decisions at the time of purchase (online), in addition to the name of the food and food information concerning nutrition and safety (which themselves should always be provided on the label/labelling of the food). The Committee also noted support for the addition of “and any other mandatory food information as determined by the competent authority.” JOINT PRESENTATION AND MULTIPACK FORMATS – Detailed discussions on “Container” descriptor, but no consensus found on the various proposed options. CCFL48 agreed to return the draft amendments to the GSLP relevant to joint presentation and multipack formats for redrafting and further consideration by a newly established EWG, to be led by Colombia and co-led by Canada, India, and Jamaica. CCFL48 discussed the outcome of the intersessional work (EWG) held on these proposed provisions based on the CRD 38 prepared by the Colombia chair, proposing amending provisions to the GSLP on the sections relating to the definition of terms, mandatory labelling provisions, and the presentations of such mandatory information (respectively sections 2, 4 and 8 of the GSLPF (CXS 1)). CCFL48 discussed in particular how the two terms, i.e., “joint presentation” and “multipack,” could be best reflected in the GSLPF. The Committee support was split among three proposed options, including self-standing definitions, references in the definition of container, and/or the use of examples in both cases. PROPOSED NEW WORK – Go ahead to a new Guidance in emergency situations; others retained as possible new work (“high in,” “small packs,” “added sugars”) to be decided at the next meeting(s); others were parked (“sustainability,” “alcoholic beverages labelling”); Kenya entrusted to update the inventory document for new work. CCFL48 reaffirmed the decision to keep the inventory of future work and emerging issues up to date and, for that purpose accepted Kenya’s proposal to update the CCFL future work inventory table (last version was included in Appendix II of CX/FL 24/48/14) and present the inputs received from Codex members and observers in response to a new Circular Letter to be issued by the Codex Secretariat and by removing those items already approved as new work by CAC47. Kenya will prepare and present the updated discussion paper on future work and emerging issues in advance and at CCFL49 session. Flexibilities in Emergency Situations – Go ahead. CCFL48 agreed to start new work on the application of food labelling provisions in emergencies and submit the project document for critical review by CCEXEC87 and approval by CAC47 (as included in Appendix VI of the CCFL48 report, see endnote iii). The new work is to be handled via a new EWG, led by the USA, and with a possibility for a pre-CCFL49 VWG, or PWG, to be chaired by the USA. CCFICS will be informed of this new work, given the relevance of existing approved Codex guidelines, as developed by that committee (e.g., Codex Principles and guidelines for the exchange of information in food safety emergency situations (CXS 19)). The purpose and scope of the proposed work is to provide high-level guidance (i.e., principles and criteria) to assist governments in case of emergencies and to develop national guidance for any flexibilities in mandatory food labelling that might still support a safe and adequate food supply in such emergencies. The future guidelines would include sections on Purpose, Scope, Principles, and/or General Criteria. The proposed new work will take into consideration the Codex Principles and guidelines for the exchange of information in food safety emergency situations (CXS 19) [xiv]. High In – No country support, but kept in the roster for future new work As there was no formal support from any Codex Member during CCFL48, the Committee agreed to return this item to Part A of the inventory table under the agenda item on future work. Should there be interest in the future, the project document could be accompanied by a discussion paper to provide further clarity on the background and concrete objectives of the work. This proposal, by Canada, aimed at developing new guidelines for the use of “high in” claims made for nutrients that raise public health concerns, particularly for sodium, saturated fats, and sugar. Canada explained that the new work would entail a revision of the Guidelines for the use of nutrition and health claims (CXG 23), specifically to develop guidance on “high in” claims for nutrients of public health concern related to excessive intake. The proposal followed CCNFSDU’s decision not to pursue nutrient profiling work and CCFL’s completion of the guidelines for front-of-pack nutrition labelling. The WHO representative informed CCFL48 about ongoing WHO work to develop a globally relevant nutrient profiling model (NPM), which foresees thresholds for high (in) levels of nutrients of concern, notably including numerical concentration values for total fats, saturated fats, trans fats, free sugars, and sodium. WHO announced a global NPM available by end of 2024 [xv]. Small Packs – New proposal from industry added to the roster for future new work CCFL48 agreed to return the proposal for “small packs” to Part A of the inventory table and under the agenda item on future work. CCFL48 noted a proposal from the Observer of the International Chewing Gum Association (ICGA) to review the criteria for small units and packages, including in relation to front-of-pack nutrition labelling, to ensure appropriate and feasible implementation for smaller-sized products. ICGA representative was given a rare opportunity to introduce the proposal for new work that would consist of two steps: a review of the implementation of the current definitions for foods pre-packaged in ‘small units’ (as defined in the CXS 1) and foods pre-packaged in ‘small packages’ (as defined in CXG 2), followed by a discussion of possible identified gaps and formulation of future recommendations based on the review. However, given that no Codex Member indicated a formal support or volunteered to lead on this work, the Committee agreed to keep this item into the Part A of the inventory for possible new work under the agenda item on future work for a possible consideration by CCFL in future meeting(s) [xvi]. Alcoholic Beverages Labelling – WHO left alone, no country acceptance for a global harmonization in Codex, just as of yet. The discussion paper prepared by the WHO, parent organization of the Codex Alimentarius Commission but observer in Codex meetings, was intensively discussed by CCFL48, but CCFL48 agreed to keep the work on the inventory for future work and recommended that it should be up to a Codex Member to submit a formal project document in reply to the regular circular letter requesting proposals for new work. Added Sugars – so close, but no; kept in the roster of new work proposals CCFL48 agreed to keep the topic in Part A of the inventory of future work so that Members could bring forward a new project document in reply to the CL requesting proposals for new work in the future. CCFL48 discussed in detail a proposal that had been subject to an intersessional work (EWG) led by Costa Rica on a discussion paper to establish a clear and harmonized definition of “added sugars” to be based on sound scientific evidence, be practical for industry and understandable for consumers. Costa Rica noted, however, the lack of unambiguous analytical methods to quantify and differentiate “added sugars” from naturally occurring sugars, hence it could be an issue for enforcement purposes, but was not seen as an obstacle to the development of a definition. The scope has been further limited to developing a definition of “added sugars” in the context of the “with no sugar addition” claim set in CXG 23. Noting the support from a significant number of Codex Members to develop a new definition for “added sugars,” CCFL48’s Chairperson offered dedicated time for a detailed review of the scope and purpose of the proposed new work. However, no consensus could be reached after attempts to refine the scope and purpose. The Chairperson proposed to discontinue the discussion at this time and to keep the topic on the inventory list for future work [xvii]. Sustainability and Environmental Claims – possible to revisit it at a later stage. The proposal put forward and led by New Zealand, which had been subject to an intersessional EWG, was debated during CCFL48. While there was general support from a large number of Codex Members for this work and its importance, CCFL48 noted a lack of consensus and agreed not to start new work on sustainability labelling claims and to return the proposed topic to Part B of the inventory table relating to previous work identified by the Committee, noting that the topic could still be reopened for discussion, should a new proposal be elaborated in the future. MISCELLANEOUS Prioritization Mechanism on Emerging Issues /New Work Proposals – Guidelines adopted (to be published as information document) CCFL48 formally adopted its own priority-setting mechanism (as included in Appendix VII of CCFL48 report). It establishes criteria and scores for the relevance of each proposal to the CCFL mandate (yes, no, partly), and high-to-low scores about its impact on consumer health; if and how far it helps address false, misleading, or deceptive labelling practices; its impact on consumer’s ability to make an informed decision; and its impact on international trade. The main purpose is to help rank future new work proposals and help CCFL focus on those at the top tier. Endorsement – Country of harvest for dried saffron still unresolved, guidance from CAC requested, other endorsements went through. CCFL48 agreed to endorse the section of the standard on Country of origin (mandatory declaration) but could not reach an agreement on the mandatory declaration of Country of harvest and thus was unable to endorse the provision. CCFL48 thus referred the matter to CCEXEC87 and CAC47 for consideration and further guidance. CCFL48 also agreed to endorse the labelling provisions in the standards for fish oils (amendment to existing CXS 329), dried or dehydrated roots, rhizomes, and bulbs – turmeric , as well as the new Regional Standard for Castilla lulo (naranjilla) . CCFL48 agreed to inform all committees to take note of the General standard for the labelling of pre-packaged foods (CXS 1) and the General standard for the labelling of non-retail containers of foods (CXS 346) and strive to follow the format, terminology, and the flow to avoid redundancy for any future labelling provisions. Endnotes: [i] Food Production Systems Engineer, Food Standards & Food Safety Regulatory Specialist, Counsellor at Keller and Heckman LLP Brussels office [ii] See CCFL48 webpage: https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/meetings/detail/en/?meeting=CCFL&session=48& [iii] See REP24/CCFL48: https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/meetings/en/ [iv] See CAC47 Agenda and working documents: [v] See FAO/WHO reports on allergen labelling (Part 1 to 5): https://www.who.int/groups/ad-hoc-joint-fao-who-expert-consultation-on-risk-assessment-of-food-allergens [vi] See ISSLG literature review on Consumers and [Food] Allergens Labelling (FSANZ, 2020): https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/sites/default/files/science-data/Documents/Allergens%20-%20ISSLG%20-%20Combined%20Report%20October%202020.pdf [vii] “Allergenic Food” means a food (including ingredients, food additives, and processing aids) that can elicit immunoglobulin class E (IgE)-mediated or other specific immune-mediated reactions in susceptible individuals. “Coeliac disease” means a chronic immune-mediated intestinal disease in genetically predisposed individuals induced by exposure to dietary gluten proteins that come from wheat, rye, barley, and triticale (a cross between wheat and rye). “Food allergen” means the substance in an allergenic food, usually a protein or protein derivative, that can elicit IgE-mediated or other specific immune-mediated reactions in susceptible individuals. “Food allergy” means a reproducible adverse health effect arising from an IgE antibody or non-IgE antibody immune-mediated response following oral exposure to a food. [viii] Internationally relevant allergenic foods: Cereals containing gluten such as wheat and other Triticum species; rye and other Secale species; barley and other Hordeum species and products thereof [Note: includes spelt, Khorasan, and other specific cereals containing gluten that are species or hybridized strains under the genus names of Triticum, Secale, and Hordeum. Specified names are to be used according to the associated genus. Hybridized strains are to use specified names in conjunction from all of the parent genera (e.g., ‘wheat’ and ‘rye’ for triticale)] [Note: in addition to the specified name of ‘wheat,’ ‘rye,’ and ‘barley,’ the word ‘gluten’ may be used]. These can be declared as wheat’, ‘rye’, ‘barley’. Crustacea and products thereof declared as ‘crustacea’. Eggs and products thereof, as ‘egg.’ Fish and products thereof, as ‘fish.’ Peanuts and products thereof as ‘peanut.’ Milk and products thereof as ‘milk’. Sesame and products thereof as ‘sesame’. Specific tree nuts (Almond (Prunus amygdalus); Cashew (Anacardium occidentale); Hazelnut (Corylus spp. ); Pecan (Carya illinoinensis); Pistachio (Pistacia vera); Walnut (Juglans spp.) and products thereof, respectively as ‘almond,’ ‘cashew,’ ‘hazelnut,’ ‘pecan,’ ‘pistachio,’ and ‘walnut.’ Regionally relevant allergenic foods: Buckwheat and products thereof; Celery and products thereof; Oats and other Avena species (and their hybridized strains) and products thereof [Note: Oats can be tolerated by most but not all people who are intolerant to gluten. Therefore, the allowance of oats that are not contaminated with wheat, rye or barley in foods covered by this standard may be determined at the national level]; Lupin and products thereof, Mustard and products thereof, Soybean and products thereof; specific tree nuts (Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa), Macadamia (Macadamia spp.), pine nut (Pinus spp.)) and products thereof; to be declared respectively as ‘buckwheat,’ ‘celery,’ ‘oats,’ ‘lupin,’ ‘mustard,’ ‘soy.’ The main changes compared to current GSLPF is for sesame, considered as internationally relevant (due to high potency of the reaction), and soy ‘retrograded’ as regionally relevant only. The declaration of any other foods and ingredients as allergenic foods, including those listed below, may also be required using a specified name in addition to or as part of the ingredient name, while the ingredient declaration should specify the true nature of the food and be specific and not generic. Such declaration shall be based on available risk assessment data for the respective population(s), taking into account risk management considerations. For that purpose, national authorities should perform an assessment of the risks in the respective population(s) to be based on the evidence criteria of prevalence, potency, and severity of immune mediated adverse reactions to the food or ingredient as established by Part. 1 of the FAO/WHO risk assessment of food allergens. [ix] See Exemption for Highly Refined Food Ingredients: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/379046/B09032-eng.pdf?sequence=1 and FAO/WHO Part 4 (see endnote v for reference), where case studies have been presented for Glucose syrups, Alcohol distillates, Peanut oil, Soybean oil, Soy lecithin, Soy phytosterols/tocopherols, Fish gelatine, Ice structuring protein (ISP), Wheat-based maltodextrins, Isinglass, Lactitol, Extensively hydrolysed infant formula. [x] The specified name for the foods and ingredients listed subject to allergen labelling shall be declared in a clear and distinct manner, such as through the use of font type, style, or colour that contrasts from the surrounding text. They shall be declared in the list of ingredients or in a separate statement or in both as determined by the competent authority. If used, the separate statement shall commence with the word ‘Contains’ (or equivalent word) and be placed directly under or in close proximity to the list of ingredients when present. If a separate statement is used on the label, the specified name for each of the allergenic foods must be declared in the statement, even if that specified name is already shown in the list of ingredients. Where a food is exempt from declaring a list of ingredients, and no list of ingredients is present, allergenic foods shall be declared in a separate statement made in accordance with section 8.3.2.1. For single-ingredient foods, the declaration of allergenic foods does not apply if they are declared as part of, or in conjunction with, the name of the food. [xi] CCFL48 agreed with the definition of “Precautionary allergen labelling” (or PAL) as “a statement made in the labelling of pre-packaged foods to indicate a risk from the unintended presence of a food allergen(s) due to cross-contact with an allergenic food that has been identified by a risk assessment.” CCFL48 generally agreed that effective food allergen management practices, including controls to prevent or minimize the unintended presence of food allergens caused by cross-contact with allergenic foods shall be implemented in accordance with the Codex Code of practice on allergen management for food business operators (CXC 80) adopted in 2020. The use of PAL shall therefore be restricted to those situations in which the unintended presence of a food allergen(s) cannot be prevented or controlled using these allergen management practices. The decision to use PAL should be based on the findings of a risk assessment, which can include but is not limited to a quantitative risk assessment of unintended food allergen presence (see in particular Sections 3.3.1 to 3.3.6 of the FAO/WHO Expert consultation (Part 3) providing guidance for the risk assessment of unintended food allergen presence (see endnote v)). Where CCFL48 couldn’t find an agreement yet was on the conditions under which PAL could be used and on globally relevant action levels based on internationally agreed reference doses (RfD). CCFL48 found some common ground to define action levels as the reference dose (expressed mg total protein from the allergen) divided by the amount of the food (kg)) while such amount of food would be determined based on the quantity that can reasonably be expected to be consumed on a single ating occasion, preferably by using the 50th percentile. Several countries (led by Brazil) were of the view that such determination should rather be subject to national flexibility (and accountability), as it would entail some risk management decisions. In principle, there was no objection with the proposed reference doses proposed for the main allergenic foods provided in the draft Guidelines. Concerns were raised with respect to the level of protection for the most vulnerable consumers and whether the available data provided the necessary assurances that the proposed thresholds provided an equivalent or better level of protection in terms of defining action levels and on how these RfDs were derived (i.e., the eliciting dose ED05 chosen, instead of ED01). The triggering points for using PAL were to be further discussed (i.e., whether PAL should be used only when RfDs – or action levels – are exceeded or use of PAL even when RfDs – or action levels – are not exceeded). [xi] Subject to future discussions, the draft guidelines also foresaw that in the case where a reference dose was not established for a particular food allergen in these guidelines, that regional or national authorities could establish a reference dose consistent with recognized principles (described in Part 2 of the FAO/WHO expert consultation) for the purposes of determining an action level. The guidelines also foresee that PAL shall be accompanied by education and information programs to ensure understanding and appropriate use of PAL by consumers, health care providers and food business operators. With regards to the PAL statement itself, it would commence with the words ‘May contain’ (or equivalent words) and include the identified allergenic food(s) using the specified names (just agreed by CCFL48 for inclusion in the GSLPF). The PAL statement shall contrast distinctly from surrounding text such as through the same font type, style or color used for declarations of allergenic foods as per the future amended GSLPF (2024 version). These provisions may be revisited by the EWG as well. [xii] See, in particular, Table 11. Action Levels (ALs) for priority allergens based on recommended RfDs and calculated for predefined intake categories; Table 13. LOQ required for analytical methods to meet calculated ALs taking into account method performance; and Table 15. Assessment of test method performance for selected allergenic foods. See FAO/WHO Expert consultation Part 2 (see endnote v for reference). [xiii] Other definitions were added to the guidelines on E-commerce, i.e., “At the point of delivery” means the moment when consumers receive pre-packaged food. “E-commerce” means the production, distribution, marketing, sale, or delivery of goods and services by electronic means as applicable to foods. “Food information” means the information that is the subject of a Codex text about a pre-packaged food. “Prior to the point of e-commerce sale” means provided before consumers commit to ordering and purchasing the food. “Product information e-page” means the virtual space on any consumer-facing transactional electronic platform, which is intended to facilitate informed e-commerce sale. [xiv] As it is reasonable to expect that emergencies disrupting supply chains will occur in the future, such as human pandemics, climate change, animal disease outbreaks, natural disasters, disruption of critical infrastructure networks, war, or famine. Such emergencies, generally not predictable, involve critical time constraints and pressure on decision-makers, and the disrupting supply chains may occur in combination with one another and may be experienced globally or regionally, though even local or regional emergencies can have far-reaching global effects. The proposed new work intends to identify flexibilities to competent authorities, which of the mandatory required information on foods offered for sale domestically and on foods exported to other countries, where acceptance from the importing country is confirmed by the competent authority, could be skipped in cases of emergencies. In particular, those risk-based decisions on food labelling exemptions to ensure safe and adequate food supply, with consideration be given to vulnerable populations while ensuring fair practices in trade in such scenarios. [xv] During the discussion, Codex members questioned whether “high in” claims are compatible with the current CXG 23, which typically supports voluntary, positive claims. High in claims carry more of a negative aspect and might need to be mandatory to ensure effectiveness, which may not fit within the framing of the current guidelines. They also pointed out unclear definitions of the roles of CCFL and CCNFSDU in relation to the establishment of Nutrient Reference Values for nutrients associated with NCDs (NRV-NCDs), such as the ones already developed for sodium and saturated fat. Some members also raised concerns about the potential overlap with the existing Guidelines on front-of-pack nutrition labelling, recalling past challenges in reaching a consensus on this issue and indicating a reluctance to revisit it at this time. [xvi] See CCFL48’s CRD 20: https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/sh-proxy/en/?lnk=1&url=https%253A%252F%252Fworkspace.fao.org%252Fsites%252Fcodex%252FMeetings%252FCX-714-48%252FCRDs%252FCRD20%252Ffl48e_crd20.pdf [xvii] During the discussion, it was noted the differentiation between total sugars and “added sugars” was essential to avoid misleading information. It was also noted that such a definition could also be useful and be drafted in the context of the Guidelines on nutrition labelling (CXG 2). Before agreeing formally on a worded definition for added sugars, CCFL should first clarify how such definition would be used in existing or future Codex texts. It was pointed out that CCNFSDU may need to develop the definition itself, while CCFL could consider where such a definition could be applied in the Codex system. It was noted that national regulations defining “added sugars” on food labelling were different depending on the situation of “added sugars” intake in each country or region, and the issue of “added sugars” should rather be considered within CXG 2. CCFL48 noted the EU intervention, indicating that current available scientific opinions indicated clearly that mono- and di-saccharides, as well as sugars naturally present in honey, syrups, concentrated fruit juices, and fruit juices, had the same nutritional health effects. As such, the EU and its Member States consider that any new work in this area should first consider all sugars, meaning covering both “added sugars” and “free sugars.” They claimed that a wide range of mono- and disaccharides and other nutritive sweeteners were added to foods, and all should be identified as “added sugars” to distinguish them from intrinsic sugars that are naturally found in foods that are otherwise nutritious. IDF indicated that lactose should be excluded from the definition of “added sugars,” as it is naturally present in dairy products, and that lactose was currently excluded from the classification of free sugars in the 2015 WHO Guidelines on sugar intake for adults and children. Other interventions called for a mandatory inclusion of “added sugars” on the label, as “consumers had a right to access to full information relating to them” through their indication as a subtotal of « total sugars » in the nutrition declaration panel, or within the list of ingredients (e.g., quantitative indication of the type of “added sugars”). It was noted that such a Codex definition would also support WHO efforts on reducing the consumption of “added sugars,” including “free sugars,” and the ban of their use in food products for children of one to three years old. There was a call by the IFU that should the work proceed, some nuanced and science-based approach should be adopted, especially for 100% fruit and vegetable juices, which contain only naturally occurring sugars present in the fruits themselves. It was emphasized that CCNFSDU would be consulted, especially before proceeding with any further work on CXG 23, and CCMAS would also be consulted on the issue of methods of analysis. A proposal was put forward to onsult the ISSLG to ensure that any definition could adequately be well understood by the consumers, as intended to be drafted and used. The Representative of WHO noted that the development of a definition for “added sugars” in Codex would require considering the concept of free sugars to prevent misleading consumers to believe that products with free sugars that contain no “added sugars” are not harmful to diets and health, in order to be protective of health of consumers."Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC "Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" To keep reading, please log in to your account, create a free account, or simply fill out the form below.