The estimated financial cost of food allergy is around $2,369 per person per annum. If the value of lost wellbeing is included, the cost is $8,920 per person per annum. Concerned re regulation being New Zealand Food and For the reasons outlined in this report, implemented in the context of Grocery Council FSANZ considers Option 3 and the approved lack of data and a not overly variation to be warranted. The severity and significant health and safety potential risk of allergenic reactions requires impact. a proportionate risk management approach. Supports Option 2 for New See sections 2.2., 2.3, 2.4., Attachment C Zealand’s purposes but and SD1. recognises need for trans-Tasman consistency. Thereby, supports adoption of Option 2 only, or Options 2 and 3 with the implementation of Option 3 (regulation) in place for adoption at a future date, based on evaluation of the uptake by industry, and lupin allergen incidence. Industry should be encouraged to Victorian Departments Noted, however outside FSANZ area of develop a Receivables Standard of Health and Human responsibility. Industry demand for superior (RS) for lupin for human Services; Development specifications for lupin grains to be used in consumption. and Economic niche market food products will drive Development, Jobs, appropriate Receivables Standards Transport and Resources Advice is sought on how lupin Victorian Departments Further detail provided in section 2.3.4. can be tested for compliance of Health and Human purposes Services; Development and Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources There is an error in the second United States Food and Noted, corrected in Approval Report sentence at the top of page 6. Drug Administration The US FDA does NOT require any special allergen labelling for lupin or lupin-derived ingredient
The estimated financial cost of food allergy is around $2,369 per person per annum. If the value of lost wellbeing is included, the cost is $8,920 per person per annum. Concerned re regulation being implemented in the context of lack of data and a not overly significant health and safety impact. Supports Option 2 for New Zealand’s purposes but recognises need for trans-Tasman consistency. Thereby, supports adoption of Option 2 only, or Options 2 and 3 with the implementation of Option 3 (regulation) in place for adoption at a future date, based on evaluation of the uptake by industry, and lupin allergen incidence. New Zealand Food and Grocery Council For the reasons outlined in this report, FSANZ considers Option 3 and the approved variation to be warranted. The severity and potential risk of allergenic reactions requires a proportionate risk management approach. See sections 2.2., 2.3, 2.4., Attachment C and SD1. Industry should be encouraged to develop a Receivables Standard (RS) for lupin for human consumption. Victorian Departments of Health and Human Services; Development and Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources Noted, however outside FSANZ area of responsibility. Industry demand for superior specifications for lupin grains to be used in niche market food products will drive appropriate Receivables Standards Advice is sought on how lupin can be tested for compliance purposes Victorian Departments of Health and Human Services; Development and Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources Further detail provided in section 2.3.4. There is an error in the second sentence at the top of page 6. The US FDA does NOT require any special allergen labelling for lupin or lupin-derived ingredient United States Food and Drug Administration Noted, corrected in Approval Report