Author Archives: Hiroyuki Kawai

About Hiroyuki Kawai

Label bank Co., Ltd. CEO (Founder) Born in Japan. Working on solving various issues related to food labeling operations. Also regularly gives lectures for various organizations in Japan. Co-author of 'Latest edition: Guide book Food Labeling Law and related business practical points - from scratch (Japanese version only)' (DAI-ICHI HOKI CO., LTD/2019).

Comments invitation on partial revision draft of Food Labeling Standards started ~Addition of walnuts to the list of Specified allergens (mandatory labeling items for allergens) and Addition of rapeseed producing EPA/DHA to the list of specified genetically modified agricultural products~(Japan)

On October 13, 2022, the Consumer Affairs Agency announced the start of invitation for public comment on the “Partial Revision of Food Labeling Standards.” The public comment was closed on November 12.

Summary of the revision

According to the public comment procedure, the outline of the revision draft is as follows.

  1. “Walnut”, which contains a substance that causes allergy, is currently on the list of recommended labeling for allergen. However, the result of the Report on the National Survey of Health Damage Caused by Immediate-type Food Allergy, etc. has led to the policy that labeling is required, and “walnuts” will be added to the list of Specified allergens (mandatory labeling items for allergens in Japan).
  2. In the future, it is expected that foods derived from rapeseed genetically modified to produce eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) will be distributed in Japan after a safety assessment by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Therefore, such rapeseed is to be added to the list of specified genetically modified agricultural products to be labeled under the labeling system for genetically modified foods.

Revision of mandatory allergen labeling items

Allergen labeling is required for “foods containing processed foods made from Specified Allergens (for mandatory labeling items for allergens in Japan) (including those made from said processed foods and excluding those whose antigenicity is not recognized) and additives derived from Specified Allergens (excluding those whose antigenicity is not recognized and flavour).” Appended Table 14, which specifies Specified Allergens, will be revised as follows. (Revised parts are underlined in red letters)

Appended Table 14 (before the revision) Appended Table 14 (after the revision)
Shrimp
Crab
Wheat
Soba (Japanese buckwheat noodle)
Egg
Milk
Peanuts		 Shrimp
Crab
Walnut
Wheat
Soba (Japanese buckwheat noodle)
Egg
Milk
Peanuts

Walnuts were previously listed as an item for which labeling was recommended as “Specified raw material equivalents” but this will now be shifted to an item for which labeling is mandatory.

About the addition of rapeseed producing EPA and DHA

Matters concerning genetically modified foods are covered in “Appended Table 17 (Target Agricultural Products and Processed Foods) and Appended Table 18 (Target forms and characteristics and Processed Foods)”, of which Appended Table 18, which specifies forms and characteristics, will be revised. (Revised parts are underlined in underlined in red letters)

Appended Table 18 (before the revision)

Form and characteristicsProcessed foodsTarget agricultural products
Stearidonic acid production １ Food made mainly from soybeans (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the upper table (left) after being defatted)
２ Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1 		Soybean
High lysine １ Food made mainly from corns (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the upper table(left))
２ Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1 		Corn

Appended Table 18 (after the revision)

Form and characteristics Processed foods Target agricultural products
Stearidonic acid production

1 Food made mainly from soybeans (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the upper table (left) after being defatted)

2 Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1		 Soybean
High lysine

1 Food made mainly from corns (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the upper table(left))

2 Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1		 Corn
Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) production 1 Food made mainly from rapeseed (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the left table
2 Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1 		Rapeseed
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) production

Although rapeseed is listed as a target agricultural product in Appended Table 17, no requirements are set for its processed foods. As a result of this revision, it will be necessary to confirm the characteristics (EPA/DHA production) of items that fall under the category of “items whose main ingredient is rapeseed (and items whose main ingredient is food whose main ingredient is rapeseed).”

Upcoming schedules

In the revision draft based on invited public comments, the transitional measures period and the effective date regarding Appended Table 14 (allergen labeling) have not yet been determined.

(Effective Date)
Article 1 This Cabinet Office Ordinance comes into effect as of the date of promulgation. However, the revised provisions of Appended Table 14 shall come into effect as from XX(date) XXX(month), XXXX(year).
(Transitional Measures)
Article 2 With regard to the labeling of processed foods (excluding processed foods for business use) which are manufactured, processed, or imported and processed foods for business use to be sold by from the date of enforcement of the revised provisions prescribed in the proviso of the preceding article to XX(date) XXX(month), XXXX(year) and processed foods for business use which are sold by the same date, the provisions then in force shall remain applicable notwithstanding the provisions of Appended Table 14 of the Food Labeling Standards revised by said revised provisions.

A report on the revision draft was published on December 13, 2022. The transitional period is until March 31, 2025.

(Effective Date)
Article 1 This Cabinet Office Ordinance comes into effect as of the date of promulgation.
(Transitional Measures)
Article 2 With regard to the labeling of processed foods (excluding processed foods for business use) manufactured, processed, or imported from the date of enforcement of this Ordinance to March 31, 2025, and processed foods for business use to be sold by the same date, the provisions then in force shall remain applicable notwithstanding the provisions of Appended Table 14 of Food Labeling Standards revised by this Ordinance.

If the allergen labeling currently covers only seven items, it will be necessary to re-check from the stage of product specification in order to add a new indication. Especially in the case of handling imported foods and ingredients it must be carefully checked whether or not walnuts are contained (because many countries collectively handle them as “nuts”).

As for walnuts, the revision is implemented in response to a background such as an increase in the number of cases of allergy. Even during the transitional measures period, it is important to reconfirm information management, such as ingredient specifications, to be able to respond to inquiries from consumers.

Reference

Regarding Comments invitation on partial revision draft of Food Labeling Standards

Newsletter Signup

We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

Related Service

Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

Japanese Agricultural Standards (JAS) for “Processed Food Suitable for Vegetarians or Vegans” established (JAPAN)

On September 6, 2022, the Japanese Agricultural Standards (JAS) for processed foods suitable for vegetarians or vegans was established. It was added to the JAS list on the website of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries on the same day, and we would like to summarize the outline and key points for labeling below.

Background of summary

Around May 2021, a study for JAS standardization (study body: Japan Vegetarian Society, an authorized nonprofit organization) began, followed by an invitation for opinions on the draft for JAS in June 2022, and led to the current enactment. “Technical standards for the certification” and “inspection methods” are shown in line with the establishment of the “standard” for processed foods suitable for vegetarians or vegans. The standard defines the requirements for four foods: “processed food suitable for vegetarians who eat eggs and dairy products (Lacto-Ovo Vegetarians)”, “processed food suitable for vegetarians who eat eggs (Ovo-Vegetarians)”, “processed food suitable for vegetarians who eat dairy products (Lacto-Vegetarians)” and “processed food suitable for vegan”.

Standard for each food type (Clause 4)

According to this standard, the definition of each food type can be summarized as follows.

  Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume eggs and dairy products (Lacto-Ovo Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume eggs (Ovo-Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume dairy products (Lacto-Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegan
4a)   – Animal-derived primary and secondary ingredients (Processing aids for secondary ingredients shall be limited to bone charcoal obtained from animals and crustaceans) shall not be used.
– However, regardless of primary and secondary ingredients, in the case where ingredients/additives at any stage are easy to determine from the name of the ingredients or additives that they are animal derived, such ingredients/additives shall not be used.
Ingredients of animal-derived that can be used* Animal eggs or their processed foods

〇

〇

×

×
Animal milk or their processed foods

〇

×

〇

×
Honey or bee products (beeswax, propolis, etc.)

〇

〇

〇

×
Wool fat containing lanolin

〇

〇

〇

×

4b)

 No animal tests of the above foods must be conducted by manufacturers, etc.

* “〇” includes its ingredients or their derivatives.

About Ingredient receipt, storage and manufacturing (Clause 5)

The standards for production process management can be summarized as follows.

 

 Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume eggs and dairy products (Lacto-Ovo Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume eggs (Ovo-Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegetarians who consume dairy products (Lacto-Vegetarians) Processed food suitable for vegan
Receipt and storage of primary ingredients At the time of receipt of procured primary ingredients, the grounds for satisfying 4a) of each food shall be obtained, and the primary ingredients shall be managed separately so as not to be mixed with ingredients/additives which do not satisfy 4a).
Manufacturing – Appropriate precautions must be taken to prevent the unintentional contamination of unsuitable ingredients/additives in each food product.
– No oil for frying ingredients unsuitable for each food or processed food made from such ingredients shall be used.
– In the case where the production line for processed foods using ingredients/additives suitable for each food is shared with the production for processed foods using ingredients/additives unsuitable for each food, cleaning must be fully carried out before the start of the production of processed foods using ingredients/additives suitable for each food. This shall also apply to any surface with which the relevant machinery, equipment, tools and ingredients come into contact.

About labeling (Clause 6)

According to the definitions in the Standard, the labeling standard can be summarized as follows.

Terms*

“Vegetarians who consume eggs and dairy products (Lacto-Ovo Vegetarians)”

“Vegetarians who consume eggs (Ovo-Vegetarians)”

“Vegetarians who consume dairy products (Lacto-Vegetarians)”

 “Vegan”
“Vegetarian”
Labeling items – The labeling of the above terms must meet the applicable requirements of Clause 4 (Standard for processed foods suitable for vegetarian or vegan consumption) and Clause 5 (Standard for production process control of processed foods suitable for vegetarian or vegan consumption).
– Even in the case of possible unintentional contamination of unsuitable ingredients/additives in each food product, the above terms may be indicated if appropriate precautions have been taken. – The above terms may be used even when an allergen alert based on the possibility of unintentional contamination of ingredients/additives unsuitable for each food product is labeled.
Labeling methods In order to distinguish processed foods similar to those of animal-derived, the above terms must be indicated in the same field of view as the product name of the processed foods.
Manner of Indication, etc. – (N/A)
Prohibited labeling items – (N/A)

* Terms with similar meanings to these are included as well.

Keeping an eye on future international trends

In March 2021, International Organization for Standardization for foods suitable for vegetarians or vegans, ISO 23662：Definitions and technical criteria for foods and food ingredients suitable for vegetarians or vegans and for labelling and claims) was published and it serves as a reference for the establishment of the JAS Standard this time. 　On the other hand, regarding terms such as “plant-based” and “plant-based food”. the result of the public comment states that “there is no definition in Japan* or internationally, and we will monitor and respond to future international trends”. When considering the labeling of terms related to foods suitable for vegetarians or vegans as well as related terms such as plant-based, it would be a good idea to start by checking the JAS standard for this issue.

*For reference information at this time, the “Q&A on Labeling of Plant-Based Foods, etc. (Consumer Affairs Agency)” states, “‘Plant-based food’ as used in this Q&A refers to products made from mainly plant-derived ingredients (not including livestock or marine products) that resemble livestock products such as meat and fish or marine products such as fish. Even if animal-derived additives are contained, if the main ingredient is plant-derived, it shall be included in ‘plant-based food'”.

References

Newsletter Signup

We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

Related Service

Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

Inviting comments started about the partial revision(draft) “Matters to be Noted relating to Health Foods under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations and the Health Promotion Act” (Japan)

On August 9, 2022, the Consumer Affairs Agency(CAA) prepared and announced a partial revision (draft) of “Matters to be Noted relating to Health Foods under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations and the Health Promotion Act”. From the same day until September 7, comments were invited through public comments. The purpose of the partial revision is to “contribute to the proper advertising activities by business operators with clearer indication of the concept against labeling that may cause a problem under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations and the Health Promotion Act after many years since the full revision of these precautions”. I would like to summarize the outline of the proposal as follows.

Major Revisions (The old and new comparative table)

1) Revised or supplemented by revision (partial excerpt) (revised parts are underlined in red letters)

◆ Addition of the statement that general food items (that are clearly recognized as such) are targeted as well to this precaution”

Article 65, Paragraph 1 of Health Promotion Act prohibits false and exaggerated labeling of health maintenance and promotion effects, etc. with regard to products 1 offered for sale as food, including not only food in the form of tablets or capsules, but also vegetables, fruits, cooked products, etc. that are clearly recognized as general food from their appearance, shape, etc.

◆ Supplemental notes on the applicability of “labeling”

When the advertisements, such as a booklet containing information on health-promoting effects of a specific food or ingredient as well as a booklet containing information on a specific product with such effects and free samples of the product, are all deemed to induce general customers who make inquiries to the contact point listed in the advertisement regarding the health maintenance/promotion effects of the specific food or ingredient, etc, to purchase the specific product.
When circumstances are found that may remind general consumers who are exposed to advertisements regarding the health maintenance/promotion effects of a specific food or ingredient, etc. of a specific product because the name of the specific food or ingredient is used as the product name or brand name.

◆ Supplemental notes on the labeling subjectivity of affiliate advertisements

With regard to such labeling on affiliate sites, if the advertiser is evaluated as having been involved in determining the content of the labeling, even though the advertiser is not specifically aware of the content of the labeling, the advertiser is an entity subject to measures under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations and Health Promotion Act, such as in cases where the advertiser entrusts the affiliate to determine the contents of the labeling despite being able to determine themselves. (snip) it is necessary.

2) Newly added due to revision (partial excerpt)

◆ Addition of examples related to health maintenance and improvement effects

(1) “Effect of maintaining and improving health”

  1. (a) Effect aimed at treatment or prevention of disease: Addition of “prevention of coronavirus” and “prevention of dementia”
  2. (b) Effects with the main purpose of general enhancement or enhancement of body tissue functions: Addition of “anti-aging”, “activation of cells”, etc.
  3. (c) Effect of being suitable for a specific health use: addition of “help to lose body fat”, etc.
  4. (d) Nutritional effects: Addition of “vitamin D is a nutrient that facilitates the absorption of calcium in the intestine and helps bone formation”

(3) Those that implicitly or indirectly express “health maintenance/promotion effects, etc.”

  1. (a) Labeling made as part of a product name or marketing claims
    Addition of “Fertility,” “Intestinal activity,” “Slim XX,” “Reduced fat XX,” “Detox XX,” and “Clean up the excess accumulated in your body”
  2. (d) Labeling problematic issues such as anxiety and worries related to the body’s organizational functions, etc., with examples
    Addition of “The lack of XX may be the cause why I feel weak these days”, etc.

◆ Addition of examples where the labeled effects do not adequately correspond to the verified effects
e.g. A report of a human study using a product with a claim for slimming effect was submitted, but there was a significant discrepancy between the demonstrated content and the indicated effect on visceral fat and body weight loss.
e.g. Addition of items in which a report of a human study using a product that claims that a slimming effect can be obtained only by taking the product without any particular exercise or dietary restriction was submitted, but in fact subjects in the human study were provided with intervention guidance on exercise and dietary restriction, etc.

◆ Addition of the concept of advertising part of the post-check Guidelines for Foods with Function Claims

(2) Foods with Function Claims

(a) Labeling exceeding the contents of the submitted documents
e.g. Although the content of the labeling is “Has the functionality to help obese people reduce visceral fat”, the labeling as a whole makes it appear as if anyone can easily obtain the effect of slimming the abdomen without any special exercise or dietary restrictions.

(d) When the scientific evidence supporting the labeling lacks rationality
As for Foods with Function Claims, please refer to a detailed explanation of the concepts that may lead to false and exaggerated representations, etc. as advertisements and other labeling that may be problematic under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations in the “Guidelines (draft) on ensuring the transparency of ex-post regulations (post-checks) based on relevant laws on food labeling for Foods with Function Claims”.

◆ Addition of examples of “health maintenance/promotion effects, etc.”

2 Examples of problematic labeling in health foods (so-called health foods) other than Foods with Health Claims

(1) Examples of problematic issues such as anxieties, worries, etc. related to the body’s organizational functions, etc. that have not yet been resolved
Labeling problematic issues such as anxiety and worries related to the body’s organizational functions, etc., such as symptoms of diseases that cannot be resolved by the health maintenance/promotion effects, etc. of health foods, etc. with examples(snip) Labeling changes in body tissue functions, etc., which totally cannot be obtained with the functionality of the food or the functional component from health maintenance/promotion effects, etc. that health foods have, by using illustrations or photographs (snip)

(4) In the case of use of superlative or similar expressions
(snip)When the No. 1 indication of the quality of the contents of the goods, etc. or the superiority of the terms of trade is not based on reasonable grounds or is otherwise different from the facts in the cases where labeling such as “No. 1 in sales in the diet category” or “No. 1 in customer satisfaction ranking” (so-called “No. 1 labeling”) is seen (snip)

(5) Inappropriate use of the experience report (addition of underlined parts in red letters)
In addition, when even the statements in the labeling such as “These are my personal opinions,” “The effects are not guaranteed,” or “These are the results of light exercise in combination with the product,” does not affect the determination of whether or not the product constitutes false and exaggerated labeling, etc. and the general consumers are led to believe that the product has health maintenance/promotion effects, etc. from the labeling that claims the effects of the ingredients contained in the product or the entire content of the labeling, including testimonials, etc., but the product does not actually have such effects (snip)

◆ Supplemental notes on Fine print* (*also known as “disclaimer”)

In cases where the effects of health food are mentioned in the testimonials, in order to avoid misleading consumers, it is recommended to clearly indicate.

  1. the number and attributes of persons with the experience
  2. the percentage of those who experienced the same effects as persons with the experience
  3. the percentage of those who did not experience the same effects as persons with the experience based on a survey conducted by the business operator when labeling such testimonials

Future schedules

After a public comment period until September 7, 2022, the results will be publicly announced on December 1, 2022, after the announcement of the result. This will be an important revision for those who handle foods with health and functional claims. I think it would be good to confirm at first the partial revision of the invitation for comments.

References

Newsletter Signup

We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

Related Service

Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

Educational leaflets and posters “the guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use'” released (Japan)

In June, the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) has released educational leaflets and posters on “the guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use'”on its website. In addition, “illustrations of 10 type items” are also posted on the website and I would like to focus on these in this column.

The leaflets and posters were published on June 22, 2022. Although this guideline was prepared for consumers, there are examples of specific labeling, which will be also helpful for food manufacturers to understand the guidelines. However, there are two versions of these leaflets and posters, “single-sided” and “double-sided” versions, and there are slight differences in the content of those illustrations. First of all, I would like to sort out what I understand from the three examples described.

Educational leaflet and poster (single-sided)
Educational leaflet and poster (double-sided)

1. e.g. Strawberry juice

– If what is not added is not clear, such case may violate the guideline.
– As e.g. 1, when colouring or an ingredient/ additive having a function similar to that of colouring is not used, it can be labeled as “No colouring added”, etc. (However, cranberry extract, etc. fall under the category of ingredients having a function similar to that of colouring.)
– As e.g. 2, it can be labeled such as “The red colour of juice is the colour of strawberry itself.”

2. e.g. Donut

– Labeling that artificial sweetener is not used may violate the guideline.
– As e.g. 1, when sweetener or an ingredient/ additive having a function similar to that of sweetener is not used, it can be labeled as “No sweetener used”, etc. (However, licorice extract, etc. fall under the category of ingredients having a function similar to that of sweetener.)
– As e.g. 2, it can be labeled that “Sweetness extracted from the plant called Rakanka (monk fruit) is used”.

3. e.g. Rice ball

– Labeling of “No preservative added” on foods with antioxidant may violate the guideline.
– As e.g. 1, when preservative or an ingredient/ additive having a function similar to that of preservative is not used, it can be labeled as “No preservative added”, etc. (However, antioxidants or pH regulators. etc. fall under the category of “additives having a function similar to that of preservative.”)
– As e.g.2 it can be labeled that “Antioxidant is used to provide a preservative function”.

In addition, these leaflets and posters do not mention the possibility that both e.g.1 (non-use labeling) and e.g.2 (an ingredient/additive having same function / similar function) may be indicated.

Around November, 2022, there were some revisions of educational leaflets and posters, as follows.

The following parts have been deleted.

  • (e.g. 2 of Strawberry juice) “The red colour of juice is the colour of strawberry itself.”
  • (e.g. 2 of Doughnut) “Sweetness extracted from the plant called Rakanka (monk fruit) is used”
  • (Rice ball) “*antioxidant, pH regulator. etc.”

Next, specific examples are included in “illustrations of 10 type items”, so I would like to excerpt them here.

In the case of rice ball labeling, “no preservative added” for foods containing “glycine expected to improve shelf life” falls under Type 4 (Labeling on foods with additives having same function / similar function). The explanation in the guideline includes only “labeling of ‘no preservative added’ on foods with additives to improve shelf life other than preservatives”, which means that glycine, as a specific example, should be noted (falls under an additive with similar functions to preservative).

In addition, in the case of Shirodashi(pale colored broth), it can be seen that labeling “no seasoning (amino acid, etc.) added” for foods that “contain yeast extract whose main ingredient is amino acid” falls under Type 5 (Labeling on foods with ingredients having same function / similar function). The explanation in the guideline includes only “labeling of ‘no seasoning as an additive used’ on foods that use extracts containing amino acids as ingredients “, which means that yeast extract, as a specific example, should be noted (falls under an additive with similar functions to seasoning (amino acids, etc.)).

As shown in these leaflets and posters and the “illustrations of 10 type items”, the key point to keep in mind when trying to label non-use of additives is to “clarify what is not added and what is used”. For future review of labeling of your products, we think it would be good to check it from the following URL.

References

The move from recommended to mandatory allergen labeling for “walnuts” (Part 2) (Japan) ~Report on the national fact-finding survey of health damage caused by immediate-type food allergy in 2021~

At the 67th Consumer Commission Food Labeling Section Meeting held on June 6, 2022, the prospect of the mandatory allergen labeling of “walnuts” was announced. I would also like to take up the “Report on the national fact-finding survey of health damage caused by immediate-type food allergy in 2021”, which was the background of the announcement.

Main Points

  • According to the survey (2020), nuts have become one of the three major foods causing allergies, surpassing wheat
  • Among nuts, allergens caused by walnuts have increased significantly, followed by cashew nuts
  • The revision bill to make walnuts subject to mandatory labeling is expected to be consulted by the end of this fiscal year

Background to date

It was at the 56th Consumer Commission Food Labeling Section Meeting held on July 5, 2019, that the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) announced its policy of “designating walnuts as products subject to mandatory labeling.” The background is that the number of cases caused by almonds and walnuts increased compared with the previous two surveys in the report compiling the results of the survey at that time (“Report on the national fact-finding survey of health damage caused by immediate-type food allergy in 2018”).

Subsequently, almonds were added to the list of items for recommended allergen labeling in September 2019. As for walnuts, the issues to be considered were organized as follows, -need to confirm whether or not the number of cases is not just temporary
-when designating an item as subject to mandatory labeling, test methods need to be developed and validated from the perspective of ensuring the implementation.

In addition, the “Advisors’ Meeting on Food Allergen” which started in February 2021, proceeded with preparations and discussions, including surveys.

Based on the results of the survey, a concrete target (aiming for consultation by the end of this fiscal year) was set regarding the timing of the transition of walnuts to a mandatory labeling item.

About this survey

The following is an excerpt from the 67th Food Labeling Section Meeting material, “Regarding labeling of foods containing allergens”, which provides an overview of the survey.

Method of the surveys

  • The subjects of the survey were “Patients who had any reaction within 60 minutes of food ingestion and visited a medical institution” except the cases in which symptoms were induced by food oral load testing or oral immunotherapy (OIT).
  • The survey period was from January to December 2020, and postcards were mailed every three months. Reports were received by postcard or by email when requested.

Subject of the survey

6,080 cases were analyzed after excluding 414 cases with unidentified causative substances, 83 cases with causative substances other than food (70 cases of Anisakis, 13 cases of mite), and 100 cases with unclear age, gender, treatment/outcome, first-time cases of allergy/ erroneous food intake, and OIT out of a total of 6,677 cases.

Causative food

Chicken eggs 2,028 cases (33.4%), cow milk 1,131 cases (18.6%), and nuts 819 cases (13.5%). Until the previous survey, the top three causative foods were chicken eggs, cow milk, and wheat, but in this survey, the proportion of nuts increased to third place (from 8.2% in the previous survey to fourth place). Among the nuts, walnuts were the largest number (463 cases), followed by cashew nuts (174 cases) and macadamia nuts (45 cases).

Chart 2: Proportion of causative foods
Type n % of total
Walnuts 463 7.6%
Cashew nuts 174 2.9%
Macadamia nuts 45 0.7%
Almonds 34 0.6%
Pistachios 22 0.4%
Pecan nuts 19 0.3%
Hazelnuts 17 0.3%
Coconuts 8 0.1%
Cacao 1 0.0%
Chestnuts 1 0.0%
Pine nuts 1 0.0%
Mixed nuts/category unknown 34 0.6%
Total 819

Table1: Breakdown of tree nuts

Shock symptoms

Until the previous survey, the top three causative foods causing shock symptoms were chicken eggs, cow milk, and wheat, but in this survey, the proportion of nuts increased to third place (from 12.8% in the previous survey, the fourth place). As the breakdown of the nuts, walnuts were the most common at 58 examples, ranking higher than peanuts (46 cases) alone. Cashew nuts followed with 30 cases.

Chart 3: Causative foods causing shock symptoms
Typen% of total
Walnuts 58 8.8%
Cashew nuts 30 4.5%
Almonds 7 1.1%
Pistachios 6 0.9%
Macadamia nuts 5 0.8%
Pecan nuts 3 0.5%
Mixed nuts/category unknown 6 0.9%
Total 115

Table3: Breakdown of tree nuts causing shock symptoms

Discussion and Conclusion

Similarly, “Regarding labeling of foods containing allergens” from the 67th Food Labeling Section Meeting material provides the summary of the discussion and conclusions as follows.

Chart 4: Change in the proportion of cases of top causative foods

Looking at the increasing trend of nuts since 2005, while chicken eggs, cow milk, and wheat, which are high-ranking items, have remained almost unchanged, nuts have increased since 2014.

Chart 5: Change in the proportion of cases of tree nuts
(Only tree nuts with more than 0.5% extracted in the 2020 survey)

Looking at the breakdown of nuts, the increase of cases by walnuts is remarkable.

  1. The number of survey cases this time was 6,080, keeping an increasing trend from the previous survey (4,851 cases).
  2. Until the previous survey(2017), the top three causative foods were chicken eggs, cow milk, and wheat, but in this survey, the proportion of nuts increased to third place surpassing wheat.
  3. Among nuts, allergens caused by walnuts have increased significantly, followed by cashew nuts.
  4. In terms of causative foods for first-time cases of allergy reaction onset, chicken eggs, cow milk, and wheat were the most common in the 0-year-old group, while tree nuts were among the top three in the infant and school-age groups.
  5. The increase in tree nuts as causative foods for immediate-type food allergy is not a temporary phenomenon.

Based on the above, as the conclusion of “-need to confirm whether or not the number of cases is just not temporary” for walnuts, walnuts will be added to the list of specified ingredients for mandatory labeling because they are considered to be “significantly increasing and not a temporary phenomenon”.

Future schedules

CAA plans to consult with the Consumer Commission on the revision of Food Labeling Standards, by the end of this fiscal year at the latest. In addition, with regard to “Development and validation of test methods”, which had been previously considered as an issue to be considered, development is currently underway with aiming of its completion in the next fiscal year. Therefore, it can be assumed that Food Labeling Standards will be revised by the end of March 2023, and walnuts will be changed to items subject to mandatory allergen labeling.

In the meantime, I would like to recommend those who are involved in food labeling read this report of investigation results. In addition to walnuts, the increase in cashews can also be reconfirmed, as well as the proportion of first-time cases of allergy and erroneous food intake, and the proportion of cases of food labeling errors among erroneous food intake. We hope that it will be utilized for future confirmation work.

References

Newsletter Signup

We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

Related Service

Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

Fact finding survey results on labeling for the country of origin of ingredients released (Japan)~and regarding improvement of the legibility of allergen labeling~

On March 28, 2022, the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) published the “The FY 2021 Results of a fact-finding survey on new labeling system for country of origin of ingredients for processed foods”. New labeling system for countries of origin of ingredients started with the revision of Food Labeling Standards in September 2017, and the new system was introduced in April 2022 after the completion of the transitional period. We would like to organize the published survey results here so that we can take the opportunity to look back on the system revision and subsequent labeling.

Summary of the survey

The fact-finding survey was launched in 2019, and this is the third time it has been conducted so far. The summary of the past three surveys is as follows. There are three survey items related to labeling for countries of origin of ingredients in common, while the other items seem to be surveyed as required by year.

  FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021
Date July 29, 2019 July 27, 2020 July 27, 2021
Location Supermarket in Yokohama City, Kanagawa Prefecture
Subjects (breakdown)

1,514 items on the second shelf from the top of each store shelf

(Breakdown: 1,349 domestically made (in Japan) products and 165 imported products)

1,349 items on the second shelf from the top of each store shelf

(Breakdown: 1,231domestically made (in Japan) products and 118 imported products)

1,744 items on the second shelf from the top of each store shelf

(Breakdown: 1,458 domestically made (in Japan) products and 286 imported products)
Survey items (1) Whether the country of origin of ingredients is indicated or not
(2) Grounds acts/ordinances, etc. on labeling countries of origin of ingredients
(3) Labeling methods based on new labeling system for country of origin of ingredients
(4) Implementation status of labeling based on Food Labeling Standards (4) Status of initiatives of the legibility improvement of allergen labeling
  (5) Status of non-use labeling, etc. for food additives  
Method of the surveys Confirm labeling place of mandatory labeling items (collective labeling frame) and claims labeling, etc. on containers and packaging by taking pictures with a digital camera.

Whether the country of origin of ingredients is indicated or not

The summary of the past three surveys is as follows. The results of the survey on “no labeling of the country of origin of ingredients” in FY2021 may be due to the fact that there were approximately six months remaining until the end of the transitional period when the survey was conducted (in many cases, mainly foods with a short shelf life were switched to the new labeling system after September 2021).

  FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021
The country of origin of ingredients is indicated 494 627 1,122
The country of origin of ingredients is not indicated 855 602 332
Total 1,349 1,229* 1,454*

* Excluding processed foods consisting solely of additives (2 items in 2020 and 4 items in 2021).

Grounds acts/ordinances for products with labeling for the countries of origin of ingredients

See the following result: “②New labeling for countries of origin of ingredients” has increased the most for the three years of the survey period, which indicates that many foods were subject to new labeling system for the first time.

Labeling method for products with new labeling for countries of origin of ingredients

See the following result: Labeling in descending order of weight by country is indicated the most.

When the subject ingredients are fresh foods

  FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021
① Conventional labeling for countries of origin of ingredients
(Appended Table 15 Food Labeling Standards)		 91 88 87
② New labeling for countries of origin of ingredients
(Article 3 Food Labeling Standards (excluding Appended Table 15))		 274 457 892
③ The Rice Traceability Act 99 55 98
④ Law Concerning Liquor Business Associations and Measures for securing Revenue from Liquor Tax 14 11 26
⑤ Fair Competition Code 15 14 18
⑥ Industry guidelines, etc. 1 2 1
Total 494 627 1,122

When the subject ingredients are processed foods

  FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021
Labeling for place of origin (labeling in descending order of weight by country) 131 161 244
Labeling for the place of origin (“And/Or” labeling)* 2 6 21
Labeling for the place of origin (“All inclusive” labeling) * 2 8 9
Labeling for the place of origin (“All inclusive” labeling & “And/Or” labeling ) 0 0 8
Total 135 175 282

* “And/Or” labeling: A labeling method listing potential supplying countries as countries of origin of ingredients in descending order by weight based on the past records or the future plans on ingredients use for a defined period of time in the past or in the future, whose country names will be connected with “or.”
* “All inclusive” labeling: A labelling method for bundling foreign supplying countries together in a category classed as “import”.

Regarding improvement of the legibility of allergen labels

Finally, here are some excerpts from the results of the survey on improvement of the legibility of allergen labels, which was conducted only in FY 2021.

The labeling method among products that have an indication of allergens within the collective labeling frame

  Number of products
Individual labeling* 445
Collective labelling* 588
Total 1,033

* “Individual labeling”: A labeling method stating that specified allergens (mandatory labeling items for allergens in Japan) are included in parentheses immediately after the names of each ingredient/additive are labeled.
*“Collective labeling”: A labeling method in which “(一部に○○・○○・…を含む) (EN: partially contains XX・XX・… ) ” is labeled at the end of the ingredient column (when the ingredients and additives are listed separately by providing respective columns, the end of the ingredient column and the end of the additive column, respectively).

Presence/absence of claims for allergen outside collective labeling frame

  Number of products
Presence of labeling 598
Absence of labeling 435
Total 1,033

Presence/absence of the labeling scope (number of subject items) among allergen claims outside the collective frame

  Number of products
Labeling indicating “only specified allergens”* 7
Labeling indicating “specified allergens, etc. “* 534
Absence of labeling 57
Total 598

 Examples of “labeling scope of allergens (number of items subject to allergen labeling)”
-Labeling indicating “only specified allergens” (mandatory labeling items for allergens in Japan): “Seven mandatory labeling allergens are in the scope”, “Allergens (only mandatory labeling items for allergens)”, etc.
-Labeling indicating “specified allergens, etc. “(mandatory & voluntary labeling items for allergens in Japan): “28 allergens are in the labeling scope”, “Allergens (28 items)”, etc.

    Presence/absence of “labeling indicating no specified allergens are used” on products that do not have an indication of allergens within the collective labeling frame

      Number of products
    Presence of labeling 47
    Absence of labeling 410
    Total 457

    Other survey results can be found such as “labeling methods for characters for products with allergen claims outside the collective labeling frame (“colour of characters”, “size of characters”, “thickness of characters” and “presence/absence of underlining” compared with the characters in the collective labeling frame)”

    Regarding labeling methods for countries of origin of ingredients, I think that it is only a grasp of the actual situation. Allergen labeling, however, includes information on the labeling scope of allergens and how to indicate the characters, which may provide you with hints for future improvements.

    References

    “Results of fact-finding survey on new labeling system for country of origin of ingredients for processed foods” (CAA)

    Newsletter Signup

    We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
    If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

    Related Service

    Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
    We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

    “The guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use'” released (Japan)

    “The guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use'” was released by the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) on March 30, 2022. The main changes from the content of “[Material 2] Revised and reflected version of the guideline” (revised draft after inviting opinions) used at “The 8th discussion about the guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use’ ” (March 1, 2022)” are shown here (underlined in red).

    (5) This guideline is a summary of specific items concerning non-use labeling of food additives that should be taken into consideration so as not to mislead consumers. They do not uniformly prohibit non-use labeling of food additives. This guideline can be used by food-related business operators, etc. to conduct self-inspection to determine whether or not any of their labels correspond to prohibited labeling items stipulated in Article 9 of Food Labeling Standards.

    The rest is the same as the revised draft after inviting opinions, but I would like to summarize the outline of the guideline this time again.

    Type items of labeling for non-use additives

    Types 1 to 10 of non-use labeling are as follows. (Excerpt from the explanation and examples of the guideline.)

    Type 1

    Mere “not added” labeling

    e.g. Out of mere “Not added” labels”, what is not added is not clear to consumers
    Type 2

    Labeling terms not stipulated in Food Labeling Standards

    e.g. Terms such as “artificial”, “synthetic”, “chemical”, “natural”, etc. are used along with “not added” or “non-use” such as “No artificial sweeteners”, etc.
    Type 3

    Labeling on foods with use of additives not permitted by the regulation
    e.g. 1 Soft drink labeled “No sorbic acid used”( use of sorbic acid in soft drinks violates the standards for use)

    e.g. 2 Food with a name specified in Appended Table 5 of Food Labeling Standards, when a specific additive is used, labeling as “not added” or “non-use” of additives that fall outside the definition of Appended Table 3 of the Standards
    Type 4

    Labeling on foods with food additives having same function / similar function　
    e.g. 1 Labeling “No preservatives used” on foods with food additives other than preservatives for enhancing shelf life

    e.g. 2 Labeling “No XX colour” used (XX colour is listed in the Designated additive colouring list in Japan ) on food with Existing additives colouring (listed in natural colouring list in Japan)
    (Claims must not be used if an additive has been replaced by another one that gives the food an equivalent characteristic except that this fact is conspicuously stated to the same degree in the claim).
    Type 5

    Labeling on foods with ingredients having same function / similar function
    e.g. 1 Labeling “no seasonings as additives used” on foods with extracts containing amino acids as an (non-additive) ingredient
    e.g. 2 Labeling “no emulsifier used” on foods made from highly processed ingredients with emulsifying properties

    (Substituting with a substance that is considered to lose its original scientific identity as a food by extracting only specific component from the food is different from substituting with a substance that is considered as food in terms of social norms.) In the case where “non-use” labeling is present and indications of ingredients with the same function / similar function are not present, there is a risk of misleading about the content as consumers may misunderstand that the function of the food is due to the function of another food.
    Type 6

    Labeling associating with health and safety
    e.g. 1 Labeling “not added” or “non-use” for being good for health

    e.g. 2 Labeling “not added” or “non-use” for being safe
    Type 7

    Labeling associating with something other than health and safety
    e.g. 1 Labeling “not added ” or “non-use” for good tastes
    (The case where a causal link between the reason for the good taste and the absence of food additives cannot be explained)
    e.g.2 Without mentioning “after opening the package,” the label states, “No preservatives used, so please consume as soon as possible”
    (When the indication gives an impression that the food must be consumed earlier than its best before date.)
    e.g. 3 Labeling “no colouring used” as the reason for the possibility of discolouration of the product

    (The case where no explanation can be given as to the relationship between the discolouration and the use of colouring)
    Type 8

    Labeling on foods with use of additives not expected
    e.g.1 A food product of the same type that is generally free of colouring and has the original colouring of the food is labeled as “No colouring used”

    e.g. 2 Labeling “non-use of the additive” on foods in which use of the certain additive is uncommon among similar products and in which use of it is not expected by consumers such as
    -use of preservatives in mineral water
    -use of colouring in mineral water
    ,etc.
    Type 9

    Labeling on food with a processing aid or carry-over (or cannot be confirmed not to be used)
    e.g. 1 Labeling “No preservatives used” on a final product with a part of ingredients used containing preservative
    e.g. 2 Labeling “not added” or “non-use” with the indication that the verification of labeling is based only on the product manufacturer’s own manufacturing process because the whole manufacturing process of each ingredient cannot be confirmed

    (As for labeling of food additives, checking the use of the food additives is needed even in manufacturing and processing processes of respective ingredients of the food. There is a risk of misleading the content if the labeling, which is an indication even outside the collective labeling frame, is not based on the results of verification. )
    Type 10

    Excessive claims
    e.g. 1 Labeling “non-use of XX” in prominent colour on many places of a package of a product
    e.g. 2 Labeling “Not added” in a big font beside “Preservative, colouring” in a small size on foods with additives other than preservative and colouring used

    (Fonts, sizes, colours, terms, etc. that are excessively emphasized in comparison with the labeling in the collective labeling frame. When combined with other type items, it may promote misleading by the other type items.)

    At the same time, Food Labeling Standard Q & A (Revision of Process-90 and Deletion of Process- 232) related to the non-use labeling of additives has also been revised.

    [Revision] Is it allowed to indicate that food additives are not used, such as “additives are not used at all” or “XX not added” on labeling?

    (Answer)
    We believe that it is necessary to give careful attention to labeling so as not to mislead consumers.
    For example, (omitted)
    Points to note in order not to mislead consumers are summarized in the attached “the guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use'”.

    [Deleted] (Process -232) Is it allowed to indicate that food additives are not used for a substance other than sugars or salt (sodium) if it is true?

    Upcoming schedules

    As a review of the labeling, a transitional period of approximately two years (until the end of March 2024) is indicated. In addition, by the application of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations, etc. based on the guidelines, a reduction in non-use labeling is also expected for non-use labeling on websites, advertisements, and other items other than containers and packaging. (Fair Competition Code is also expected to be reviewed.)
    As stated in the opinions received on the public comments, “it is difficult to list every example” and “judged as a whole on a case-by-case basis”, the guideline is not intended to provide specific examples, but is positioned as an interpretation of the prohibition on labeling. In many cases, it may be difficult to make a judgment when reviewing labeling, but in such cases, we believe it is important to confirm the issues and solutions of non-use labeling by reading the materials by the discussion of the guideline.

    References

    “Japanese Agricultural Standards for Textured Soy Protein Products” established (Japan)~Notes on the labeling of plant-based foods~

    On February 24, 2022, Japanese Agricultural Standards (hereinafter referred to as “JAS”) for Textured Soy Protein Products were established. On the same day, it was added to the JAS list on the website of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, and we would like to summarize the outline and key points for labeling below.

    Summary of background

    In the fall of 2020, the discussion on JAS (discussed mainly by Otsuka Foods Co., Ltd.) started and after, soliciting opinions on the JAS draft in November 2021, the current establishment was accomplished. “Technical standards for certification” and “inspection methods” are shown in line with the establishment of “Standards” for textured soy protein products. The standard defines the requirements for two food products: “Soy meat product” and “Prepared soy meat product”.

    “Soy meat product” and “Prepared soy meat product”

    According to the definitions in the Standard, the differences between the two products can be summarized as follows.

      Soy meat product Prepared soy meat product
    Processing Processing soy meat ingredients to have meat-like characteristics unique to the product. Processing soy meat ingredients to have meat-like characteristics unique to the product.
    Ingredients No animal ingredients or processed products made from animal ingredients shall be used as ingredients from primary ingredients to tertiary ingredients. No animal ingredients (excluding milk and edible poultry eggs) or processed products made from animal ingredients (excluding seasoning) shall be used as ingredients from primary ingredients to tertiary ingredients.
    Soy protein content rate Soy protein content rate must be at least 10 %. Soy protein content rate must be at least 1%.
    Amino acid score of ingredients Soy meat ingredients with an amino acid score of 100 must be used. – (N/A)

    The reason behind the setting of the standard for amino acid score is that it is important to claim that “all essential amino acids can be taken in good balance” “for the purpose of suggesting to consumers a new way of taking soy protein”.

    About labeling

    According to the definitions in the Standard, the labeling standard can be summarized as follows.

      Soy meat product Prepared soy meat product
    Labeling items “大豆ミート食品 (EN: Soy meat product)” or “大豆肉様食品(EN: meat-like product from soy)” must be written in an easily visible location on the container or packaging.* “調製大豆ミート食品 (EN: Prepared soy meat product)” or “調製大豆肉様食品 (EN: Prepared meat-like product from soy)” must be written in an easily visible location on the container or packaging.*
    An explanation of the fact that the product is not meat (“no meat used”, “meat-free”, etc.) must be provided in an easily visible location on the container or packaging.
    Labeling methods – (N/A)
    Manner of Labelling, etc. – (N/A)
    Prohibited labeling items – (N/A)

    * For processed food for business use, it can be indicated on invoices, delivery slips, etc. or specifications.

    As for the point that textured soy protein products needed to be labeled as “No meat used ” or “meat-free”, the “Q&As (FAQs) on the Labeling of Plant-Based (Plant-Derived) Foods” published by the Consumer Affairs Agency last summer will probably be a good reference for that. The following is a summary of the relevant Q&As.

    Q&As (FAQs) on the Labeling of Plant-Based Foods

    The following is an excerpt from the same Q&A published on August 20, 2021, as notes regarding the labeling of “meat” (alternative meat) from plant-based foods. (The definition of “plant-based food” is “a product made to resemble livestock products, such as meat, or marine products such as fish, using ingredients (not including livestock products or marine products) that are mainly derived from plants. Even if a product contains additives of animal origin, if the main ingredient is from plant, it is included in “plant-based (plant-derived) food.”)

    Example of labeling Note
    Labeling “大豆肉 (EN: soy meat)” or “ノットミート(EN: non-meat)” in product names The labeling as a whole must not mislead the general consumer into believing that the product is meat when it is not. Therefore, apart from the product name, it must be labeled “Made with soy,” “Contains soy ingredients” “Does not contain meat,” “Meat-free”, etc.
    Labeling of hamburger steaks made from soy alternative meat as “大豆からつくったハンバーグ(EN: hamburger steak made from soy)” in the product name If the rate of used alternative meat is not 100%, for example, the rate of used alternative meat must be indicated separately from the product name, so that general consumers are not misled into believing that the rate of used alternative meat is 100% when it is not.
    “Labeling of alternative meat made from soy as “大豆ミート (EN: soy meat)” with the words “100%植物性 (EN: 100% plant-based)” added to the product name The labeling as a whole must not mislead general consumers into believing that all ingredients, including food additives, are plant-based when they are not. Therefore, for example, apart from the product name, it must be labeled “Ingredients are plant-based (excluding food additives).

    The above are notes for all labeling, including containers and packaging. And the following are the notes regarding “labeling of ingredient names” in collective labeling. It is necessary to note that terms including “meat” and “egg” cannot be used in ingredient names for plant-based foods.

    Q. How should ingredient names for collective labeling be listed for plant-based(derived from plant) foods? For example, would it be possible to label it as “Alternative meat” or ” Liquid egg”?

    A. Food Labeling Standards stipulate that “the most common name must be used” for products’ ingredient names. As for names of plant-based (plant-derived) foods as ingredients, “Soybeans”, or “Soy-based processed food”, etc. is acceptable for foods made from soybeans. As for ingredient names for plant-based (plant-derived) foods, we believe that terms including meat and eggs cannot be considered as “common names” at present.

    The above is an overview of JAS for textured soy protein products and notes on the labeling of plant-based foods. As a related food, the standardization for JAS of “foods suitable for vegetarians or vegans” is also under consideration. If you are handling soybeans or other plant-based foods, it would be a good idea to consider this situation.

    References

    Newsletter Signup

    We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
    If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

    Related Service

    Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
    We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

    The revised draft of the guideline of “non-use” additive labeling released after inviting comments (Japan)

    On March 1, 2022, the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) released the revised “the guideline of additive labeling for use of ‘non-use’”(draft) after inviting comments (public comments) at the discussion about the guidelines of additive labeling for use of “non-use”. Some points have been changed since the draft proposal for the request for comments, so we would like to summarize them here.

    Contents of the received comments

    The draft was opened for comment on December 22, 2021, and closed on January 21, 2022. The total number of comments received was 758. A breakdown of the comments is also available in the document (“comments in Public Comments”). The category with the most comments was “Types (376 comments),” followed by “overall guidelines (208 comments) of the categories of “overall guidelines,” “scope of application of guidelines,” “Types,” “dissemination/enlightenment,” “review period of the labeling,” and “others”. Among “Types”, the one with the most comments was “Type 5: Labeling on foods with ingredients having same function / similar function (68 comments)”, followed by “Type 10: Excessive claims (50 comments),” and then “Type 4: Labeling on foods with food additives having same function / similar function (47 comments) and then “Type 2: Labeling terms not stipulated in Food Labeling Standards (46 comments)”.

    Major changes in the revised draft after inviting comments

    The discussion group has published a document titled “Revised Version of the Guidelines with strikethrough” which clearly shows the revisions made to the draft guidelines at the time of the request for comments. The following is an excerpt of the changes that may have an impact on actual label creation work.
    (Among text in red, underlines were newly added and cross-out text was deleted.)

      Revision after inviting comments
    Background and purpose This guideline can be used by food-related businesses, etc. to conduct self-inspection to determine whether or not they are subject to prohibited labeling items stipulated in Article 9 of the Food Labeling Standards.
    Type 1: Mere “not added”; labeling e.g. Labeling merely “no added” without indicating what is not added.
    Type 2: Labeling terms not stipulated in Food Labeling Standards e.g. Terms such as “artificial”, “synthetic”, “chemical seasoning“, “natural”, etc. are used along with “not added” or “non-use” such as “No artificial sweeteners”, etc.
    Type 3: Labeling on foods with use of additives not permitted by the regulation – (Minor corrections only)
    Type 4: Labeling on foods with food additives having same function / similar function

    – When the difference between a food additive with non-use label and the other food additives with the same or similar function contained in the food is not clear from the labeling.

    e.g. 2: Labeling “No synthetic colour”; “No XX colour used”; (XX colour is listed in the D esignated additive colouring list in Japan) on food with Existing additives colouring (listed in natural colouring list in Japan)
    Type 5: Labeling on foods with ingredients having same function / similar function e.g. 1 Labeling “No chemical seasonings seasoning as additives used”; on foods with extracts containing amino acids as an (non-additive) ingredient.
    Type 6: Labeling associated with health and safety – (Minor corrections only)
    Type 7: Labeling associated with something other than health and safety e.g. 2: Without mentioning “after opening the package,” the label states, “No preservatives used, so please consume as soon as possible.
    Type 8: Labeling on foods with use of additives not expected e.g. 1: A food product of the same type that is generally free of colouring and has the original colouring of the food is labeled as “No colouring used”;.
    Type 9: Labeling on food with a processing aid or carry-over (or cannot be confirmed not to be used) – (Minor corrections only)
    Type 10: Excessive claims e.g. 1: Labeling “non-use of XX”; in excessively prominent colour on many places of a package of a product
    Review of labeling based on the guidelines

    – During the next two years (until the end of March 2024), it is required to review the labeling as necessary appropriately.

    – Although it will be unavoidable that processed foods manufactured and sold during this period will be distributed with the labeling before the revision, it is desirable to review the labeling of processed foods as soon as possible, even if it is less than two years.

    In Type 4 and 5, which have most comments as public comments, and Type 10 of “Views on comments”, which has an impact on these types, the following answers were often used. Since it is expected to be difficult to list specific examples such as “XX case falls under Type”, self-inspection will be left to the judgment of each business operator.

    “Since the accuracy of labeling is considered to be important in consumers’ product selection, this guideline provides an interpretation of prohibited labeling items as stipulated in Article 9 of Food Labeling Standards, in order to prevent consumers from selecting products based on misleading or contradictory labeling regarding the non-use of food additives.”

    “Article 9 of Food Labeling Standards does not give any stipulations in detail what kind of labeling provides accurate information to consumers, and what kind of labeling misleads consumers. Since the types of non-use labeling of food additives on food products are diverse, it is difficult to enumerate every example.”

    “This guideline is newly formulated as an indicator to determine whether or not a label on product falls under prohibited labeling items stipulated in Article 9 of Food Labeling Standards.”

    “In addition, whether or not the labeling of non-use of food additives falls under the prohibited labeling items stipulated in Article 9 of Food Labeling Standards shall be judged not only based on the case that each Type is considered to have a high possibility of falling under the prohibition of labeling, but also as a whole on a case-by-case basis based on the nature of the product, knowledge level of general consumers, actual conditions of transactions, labeling methods, and contents subject to labeling.”

    Future schedules

    The official guidelines are expected to be announced by March 2022. After that, labeling is expected to be reviewed by the end of March 2024. It is recommended that those who handle products with the relevant labeling read through the draft guidelines and other materials of the discussion in advance.

    Reference

    Newsletter Signup

    We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
    If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

    Related Service

    Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
    We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.

    Regarding plan for partial revision of food labeling standards (Japan)~Organizing nutrient analysis methods, adding genetically modified “Mustard greens” to the mandatory labeling list, etc.~Regarding plan for partial revision of food labeling standards (Japan)

    On January 17, 2022, the 66th meeting of the Food Labeling Section Meeting was held at the Consumer Commission of the Cabinet Office to discuss the partial revision of Food Labeling Standards. After inviting opinions on the proposed revision regarding nutrients, genetic modification, etc. (from October 27 to November 26, 2021), the partial revisions are scheduled to be promulgated by the end of March 2022 and go into effect on the same day. I would like to summarize the main revisions based on the Food Labeling Section Meeting’s document “Partial revisions to Food Labeling Standards (Consumer Affairs Agency).

    Main Points

    • Integration and consolidation of fat analysis methods, and addition of new methods for chromium, selenium, and iodine analysis.
    • Addition of “Mustard greens” to agricultural products subject to GMO labeling.
    • Deleting “High oleic acid” from the list of specified genetically modified agricultural products.

    About nutrients

    The revision of the analysis methods in the 2020 edition of the Standard Tables of Food Composition in Japan (8th revision), published by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in December 2020, can be said to lead to this revision. The following is an excerpt from the document “Regarding Partial Revision of Food Labeling Standards”.

    The official methods for nutrients, etc. are specified in Appended Table 9 of the Standards and in the attached methods of analysis of nutrients, etc. in “Regarding Food Labeling Standards”, (hereinafter referred to as “Notification of Analysis, etc.”). Some issues have been pointed out regarding the operation of the Notification of Analysis, etc., such as the fact that there are cases where methods other than those described in the Notification of Analysis, etc. are more suitable for quantification.
    In addition to this, the 2020 edition of the Standard Tables of Food Composition in Japan (8th revision) published by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has added new analysis methods for nutrients, etc. Based on this, and taking into consideration the feasibility by business operators and the possibility of verification by prefectures, the Consumer Affairs Agency conducted a “Research and Study Project on Analysis Methods for Nutrients in Food Labeling Standards” to discuss the necessity of revising the related acts and regulations, etc.

    And based on the results of the above discussion of the research and study project, the current revision proposal was presented.

    Based on the discussions in the “Research and Study Project on Analysis Methods for Nutrients in Food Labeling Standards”, Appended Table 9 of the Standards, which stipulates analysis methods for nutrients, labeling of Foods with Nutrient Function Claims and nutrient content claims, will be revised, and new analysis methods will be added.
    Measurement and calculation methods other than the Gelber method specified in the current Appended Table 9 of the Standards, and the acid/ammonia decomposition method, which was judged appropriate to be added in the “Research and Study Project on Analysis Methods for Nutrients in Food Labeling Standards”, shall be reorganized as “solvent extraction-gravimetric method”. The specific analysis methods, etc. will continue to be specified in　Notification of Analysis, etc.

    The revised part is Appended Table 9 of the Food Labeling Standards. The following is a summary of the current and proposed revisions, excerpting only “Nutrients and Calories” and “Measurement and calculation methods” in Appended Table 9.

    Nutrients and calories Measurement and calculation methods
    Fat Current Ether extraction method, Chloroform-Methanol mixture extraction method, Gerber method, Acid decomposition method, or Roese-Gottlieb method
    The revision bill Gerber method or Solvent extraction-gravimetric method
    Chromium Current Atomic absorption spectrophotometry or Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy
    The revision bill Atomic absorption spectrophotometry, Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy or Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
    Selenium Current Fluorography or Atomic absorption spectrophotometry
    The revision bill Fluorography, Atomic absorption spectrophotometryor Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
    Iodine Current Titration method or Gas chromatograph method
    The revision bill Titration method, Gas Chromatographor Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

    In addition, “Standard Value per 100kcal for high claims” for “Vitamin K” in the appended Table 12 is changed from 30㎍ to 15㎍.
    Although the method of calculating calorific value was changed in the 2020 edition of the Standard Tables of Food Composition in Japan (8th revision) (Calculated value is obtained from multiplication of protein (as amino acid composition), fat (as triacylglycerol equivalents of fatty acids), available carbohydrates (monosaccharide equivalents), sugar alcohols, dietary fiber, organic acids, and alcohols by the energy conversion factor of each component), as a result of the research and study project, it was decided to continue calculating calorific value using the “modified Atwater method.

    About Genetic Modification

    There are two major revisions planned: the addition of “Mustard greens” and the deletion of “High oleic acid”.
    Here are the excerpts on the background and outline of the revision from “Regarding Partial Revision of Food Labeling Standards” for each of the above.

    Following a safety review of genetically modified mustard greens (hereinafter referred to as “GM mustard greens”) by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, GM mustard greens-derived foods are expected to be distributed in Japan.
    For this purpose, “Mustard greens” shall be added to the target agricultural products listed in Appended Tables 16 and 17 of the Standards.
    Since GM mustard greens, which are undergoing safety review at this time, are a variety for oil and are expected to be distributed only as edible oil, the processed foods pertaining to mustard greens in Appended Table 17 shall not be specified.

    High oleic acid genetically modified soybeans are considered as “Specified genetically modified agricultural products” whose composition, nutritional value, and other characteristics are significantly different from those of normal agricultural products because they were produced using recombinant DNA technology.
    Now that soybeans with the high oleic acid trait can be produced by conventional breeding, high oleic acid genetically modified soybeans no longer fall under the definition of “Specified genetically modified agricultural products”. For this reason, “High oleic acid” will be deleted from the upper column of Appended Table 18 of the Standards, which stipulates the subject of mandatory labeling as “Specified genetically modified agricultural products”.

    The revised parts are Appended Table 16, 17, and 18 of the Food Labeling Standards.

    Appended Table 16 (related Article 2)

    [1-8 omitted]
    9 Mustard greens [Added]

    Appended Table 17 (related Article 3, Article 9)

    Target agricultural products Processed foods
    (Omitted)  
    Mustard greens [Added]  

    Appended Table 18 (related Article 3, Article 18)

      Form and characteristics Processed foods Target agricultural products
    Current High oleic acid １ Food made mainly from soybeans (except ones which do not have form and characteristics listed in the left column* after being defatted)
    ２ Food made mainly from an ingredient listed in 1    		 Soybean
    Stearidonic acid production
    The revision bill [Deleted]
    Stearidonic acid production

    As the revised standards do not prevent the labeling of “High oleic acid” traits, businesses operators wishing to claim high oleic acid traits as an added value may continue to do so on a voluntary basis based on the evidence. In addition, when claiming the use of “High oleic acid soybeans”, the label must be in accordance with “Matters concerning special ingredients, etc.”.
    With regard to “soy sauce” and “edible vegetable oils and fats” in Appended Table 22 of the Food Labeling Standards (Prohibited labeling items), the wording of the cited sections has been changed in accordance with the revision of the Japanese Agricultural Standards (JAS).

    Future schedules

    It is scheduled to be promulgated and enforced on the same day by the end of March 2022. Although the revision does not require immediate correction of labeling, it is advisable to check again if you handle products with the relevant labeling.

    References

    Newsletter Signup

    We issue monthly e-newsletters, which provide you with the latest updates on food labeling/regulations in Japan.
    If you want to make sure to not miss any issue, please click below.

    Related Service

    Research Services on Ingredients & Food Labeling -For the Japanese Market-
    We verify the conformity of ingredients and additives with the standards for use in Japan based on specifications such as formulation lists. We also verify the conformity of the proposed labeling of ingredient names, nutrients, etc. with the labeling standards based on specifications such as formulation lists.