Toxicological evaluation of some food additives including anticaking agents, antimicrobials, antioxidants, emulsifiers and thickening agents WHO FOOD ADDITIVES SERIES NO. 5 The evaluations contained in this publication were prepared by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives which met in Geneva, 25 June - 4 July 19731 World Health Organization Geneva 1974 1 Seventeenth Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives, Wld Hlth Org. techn. Rep. Ser., 1974, No. 539; FAO Nutrition Meetings Report Series, 1974, No. 53. GUAR GUM Explanation This substance has been evaluated for acceptable daily intake by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (see Annex 1, Ref. No. 19) in 1969. Since the previous evaluation, additional data have become available and are summarized and discussed in the following monograph. The previously published monograph has been expanded and is reproduced in its entirety below. BIOLOGICAL DATA BIOCHEMICAL ASPECTS The digestibility of guar gum in rats fed 0.4 g/day was estimated to be 76% (Booths et al., 1963). The rat can use guar gum as precursor for liver glycogen but at a much reduced efficiency (Krantz et al., 1948). Feeding chicks for four weeks on a diet containing 3% cholesterol, 3% guar gum and 3% cholesterol plus 3% guar gum reduced the serum cholesterol levels, especially if both cholesterol and guar gum were ingested. Liver cholesterol was only depressed if cholesterol and guar gum were fed (Couch et al., 1966). The caloric value was determined in groups of 10 rats fed for one week a 5 g basal diet supplemented with either 1 g or 3 g corn starch or 1 g and 3 g guar gum. At 1 g level guar gum was equivalent to corn starch but at the 3 g level there was a lower equivalence. All animals had large intestines but normal faeces (Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation Laboratory, 1964). TOXICOLOGICAL STUDIES Acute toxicity No data available. Short-term studies Rat Five male rats were fed 0 and 5% guar gum for 91 days in their diet. No differences were observed between the two groups in weight gain and food efficiency (Booths et al., 1963). Five rats were fed a diet containing 0.5% guar gum and varying amounts of water. Weight gain and protein efficiency increased with higher water content (Keane et al., 1962). Fifteen male and 15 female rats were fed a diet containing 5% of guar flour. Thirty rats served as control. Animals were sacrificed for autopsy studies at two to three month intervals. Seven male and eight female animals were carried to termination at 104 weeks. There were no adverse effects on growth, and gross and microscopic pathology (Krantz, 1947). A 90-day feeding study with groups of 10 male and 10 female rats at levels of 0, 1, 2 and 5% is in progress (Til & Spanjers, 1973). Monkey Two monkeys (no duration animals) received 1 g of guar flour in their diet per day. Wellbeing, growth and haematology (RBC, WBC, HP and urea N2) remained normal (Krantz, 1947). Chicken Groups of 20 chicks, one-day-old, maintained on diets containing 2% guar gum for 21 days showed depressed growth, reduced nitrogen retention, fat absorption. Pancreatic weight was significantly increased when diets contained guar gum in a high protein (30%) diet (Kratzer et al., 1967). Long-term studies None available. OBSERVATIONS IN MAN Five volunteers ingested 1 g of guar flour in a capsule per day for 10 days without any apparent effect (Krantz, 1947). Comments: Guar gum is consumed in some parts of the world as a component of guar flour. When it comprises less than 15% of the diet it is calorically equivalent to corn starch. A short-term and a long-term study in rats, though both not adequate by present standards, revealed no adverse effects at the 5% level. A new adequate short-term study is under way to check the reliability of the older studies. Further work would be desirable on the potential effects of macromolecules storage in the body. EVALUATION Estimate of acceptable daily intake for man Not limited.* FURTHER WORK OR INFORMATION Desirable Results on the short-term study which is in progress to check the reliability of the older studies. REFERENCES Booths, A. N., Hendrickson, A. P. & De Eds, F. (1963) Toxic appl. Pharmacd., 5, 478 Couch, J. R., Bakski, Y. K. & Farr, F. M. (1966) VII International Congress of Nutrition, Abstracts, p. 195 Keane, K. W. et al. (1962) J. Nutr., 77, 18 Krantz, J. C. (1947) Unpublished report by General Mills Inc. Krantz, J. C., Carr, C. J. & Farson, C. B. (1948) J. Amer. diet. Ass., 24, 212 Kratzer, F. H., Rajaguru, R. W. A. S. B. & Vohra, P. (1967) Poultry Sci., 46(6), 1489-1493 Til, H. P. & Spanjer, M. T. H. (1973) Report No. 4093, TNO Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation Lab. (1964) Unpublished report No. 3110860/1 to Stein, Hall & Co. * See relevant paragraph in the seventeenth report, pages 10-11.
See Also: Toxicological Abbreviations Guar gum (FAO Nutrition Meetings Report Series 46a) GUAR GUM (JECFA Evaluation)