Rosanna Pecere, IPA Europe https://www.ipaeurope.org/ 

The 44th Session of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods of Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU44) in Dresden from 2 to 6 October 2024: conclusion on the Agenda Item 6.21 Discussion Paper on Harmonized Probiotic Guidelines for Use in Foods and Food Supplements prepared by the Electronic Working Group chaired by Argentina and co-chaired by Malaysia and China. The CCNFSDU Chair noted that while many members supported the new work proposal, others considered it was not a priority, or there were divergent views on the scope of the work. FAO/WTO representatives indicated that “there is potential for a review, but financial resources should be provided by the countries.”

Despite many delegations supporting the creation of Codex Guidelines on probiotics, CCNFSDU44 did not agree to start this new work. CCNFSDU44 acknowledged FAO and WHO’s willingness to take on the task, and encouraged Countries delegations to provide resources for their review. Once the review of the two documents is completed, a new work proposal on probiotics could be reconsidered. In practice this will result in maintain the status quo, for the next 3-5 years.

Despite thirteen Codex Members representing nearly 75% of the human population, supporting the development of dedicated Codex guidelines for probiotics, Codex seems to have missed a unique opportunity to provide clarity for global consumers. The scientific knowledge on the functionality and safety of probiotics has been well established since the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultations held in 2001 and 2002, which have since then served as a global definition of what probiotics are. Does the CCNFSDU decision imply that the current definition would be outdated?.

The proposal of Codex Guidelines on probiotics presented by Malaysia and China gained significant support from several national delegations (Asian countries, the African Union, Saudi Arabia). In plenary discussions, the European Commission, representing EU countries, shifted its position from opposition to a softened stance of “no objection, but with concerns.” This shift may be influenced by the ongoing Ombudsman inquiry questioning the European Commission’s stance on probiotics and the lack of concrete action on the issue.

Members from various regions highlighted that many probiotic products are available in their markets, with scientific backing for health benefits. However, concerns were raised about some products that do not meet established definitions. The guidelines would have been a step forward to help countries in developing national legislation, ensuring probiotic products meet safety criteria and are properly labelled, allowing consumers to make informed choices.

Within IPA Europe, the European probiotic industry is engaged in creating favourable conditions to uphold the competitiveness and the quality of the probiotic food and food supplements industry, and foster a regulatory environment that provides consistency and promotes innovation. https://www.ipaeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IPA-EU-2024-brochure.pdf