Time filter

Source Type

Minneapolis, MN, United States

Zielinski G.,Covance Laboratories Inc. | De Vries J.W.,Medallion Laboratories General Mills Inc. | Craig S.A.,DuPont Company | Bridges A.R.,AACC International
Cereal Foods World | Year: 2013

Currently there are multiple Type I methods for dietary fiber analysis, which conflicts with the principles of the Codex Procedural Manual (2). While not ideal, CCMAS is using the most recent scientific evidence to simplify and aid those involved in dietary fiber testing. At times, scientific understanding may outpace the rate at which information can be collected, reviewed, and disseminated, but the Codex Alimentarius is progressing using input from world experts in dietary fiber method research. Harmonizing an internationally accepted definition for dietary fiber was a large undertaking that spanned 16 years. Some national authorities have openly accepted this fairly recent definition, whereas others have not commented on the topic for a number of years. To ensure the most appropriate test method is used, analysts, laboratory managers, and others analyzing foods for dietary fiber need to understand how and where the results from the testing will be used and any legal implications that may arise. While CAC is working toward a single analytical method commensurate with its concise definition, there may not be a procedure that accounts for all possible situations. In the interim, CAC and its communities can aid analysts worldwide by providing guidance and information when possible. This report is intended to capture the concerns and issues raised by the electronic working group and during the meetings of CCMAS 33 and can be used to provide guidance and additional information to that supplied in a Codex standard. © 2013 AACC International, Inc. Source

McCleary B.V.,Megazyme International | DeVries J.W.,Medallion Laboratories General Mills Inc. | Rader J.I.,U.S. Food and Drug Administration | Cohen G.,Kraft Foods Inc. | And 4 more authors.
Journal of AOAC International | Year: 2010

A method for the determination of total dietary fiber (TDF), as defined by the CODEX Alimentarius, was validated in foods. Based upon the principles of AOAC Official MethodsSM 985.29, 991.43, 2001.03, and 2002.02, the method quantitates high- and low-molecular-weight dietary fiber (HMWDF and LMWDF, respectively). In 2007, McCleary described a method of extended enzymatic digestion at 37°C to simulate human intestinal digestion followed by gravimetric isolation and quantitation of HMWDF and the use of LC to quantitate low-molecular-weight soluble dietary fiber (LMWSDF). The method thus quantitates the complete range of dietary fiber components from resistant starch (by utilizing the digestion conditions of AOAC Method 2002.02) to digestion resistant oligosaccharides (by incorporating the deionization and LC procedures of AOAC Method 2001.03). The method was evaluated through an AOAC collaborative study. Eighteen laboratories participated with 16 laboratories returning valid assay data. Source

Wehling P.,General Mills Inc. | DeVries J.W.,Medallion Laboratories General Mills Inc.
Journal of AOAC International | Year: 2012

The quest for optimum methodology for any analyte often includes a study of the method in multiple independent laboratories. Evaluation of the results of these studies is typically subjective; however, various attempts have been made to increase the objectivity of the evaluation. Among the objective propositions is the use of the Horwitz Ratio (HorRat) as applied to collaborative study statistics. A historical review of fiber method validation studies performed since 1940 shows that the Horwitz curve does not effectively predict the results of dietary fiber collaborative studies, either retrospectively or prospectively. Consequently, use of the HorRat as a criterion for accepting or rejecting dietary fiber methods is contraindicated. An alternative, objective statistical approach is proposed that may also apply to collaborative studies of other empirical analytical methods in general. Source

Moore W.R.,Sustain Inc. | DeVries J.,Medallion Laboratories General Mills Inc. | MacDonald J.,Organic Laboratory | Hare L.,Statistical Strategies LLC
Journal of AOAC International | Year: 2010

Two multilaboratory investigations were conducted by SUSTAIN to assess variability in the measurement of vitamin A, the marker used to verify levels of vitamin premix addition to enriched/fortified food aid products, including the widely distributed corn-soy blend (CSB). CSB specifications identify AACC Approved Method 86-06 or equivalent methods for vitamin A analysis, however there is no requirement to demonstrate equivalency. CSB samples with known and blinded levels of vitamin A and a reference standard were analyzed by 16 laboratories using their respective methods. Calculated coefficients of variation across all laboratories and methods for unknown samples and reference standard were 35 and 7.1%, respectively, suggesting the largest source of variation is the vitamin extraction procedure. Laboratories generally overestimated low levels and underestimated high levels of vitamin A within the range of 6000 and 16 000 lU/lb. Only two laboratories demonstrated excellent internal precision (±300 IU vitamin A/lb) and reported values within 95% confidence interval for all blinded samples. Results of this study have implications both for quality control in food aid products (due to the use of vitamin A as a marker) and for regulatory oversight of vitamin A content in commercial food products. Source

DeVries J.W.,Medallion Laboratories General Mills Inc.
Journal of AOAC International | Year: 2012

During the "Standards Development and International Harmonization: AOAC INTERNATIONAL Mid-Year Meeting," held on June 29, 2011, an Expert Review Panel (ERP) reviewed the method for the "Determination of Vitamins A (Retinol) and E (alpha-Tocopherol) in Foods by Liquid Chromatography: Collaborative Study," published by Jonathan W. DeVries and Karlene R. Silvera in J. AOAC Int. in 2002. After evaluation of the original validation data, an ERP agreed in June 2011 that the method meets standard method performance requirements (SMPRs) for vitamin A, as articulated by the Stakeholder Panel on Infant Formula and Adult Nutritionals. The ERP granted the method First Action status, applicable to determining vitamin A in ready-to-eat infant and adult nutritional formula. In an effort to achieve Final Action status, it was recommended that additional information be generated for different types of infant and adult nutritional formula matrixes at varied concentration levels as indicated in the vitamin A (retinol) SMPR. Existing AOAC LC methods are suited for specific vitamin A analytical applications. The original method differs from existing methods in that it can be used to assay samples in all nine sectors of the food matrix. One sector of the food matrix was powdered infant formula and gave support for the First Action approval for vitamin A in infant and adult nutritional formula. In this method, standards and test samples are saponified in basic ethanol-water solution, neutralized, and diluted, converting fats to fatty acids and retinol esters to retinol. Retinol is quantitated by an LC method, using UV detection at 313 or 328 nm for retinol. Vitamin concentration is calculated by comparison of the peak heights or peak areas of retinol in test samples with those of standards. Source

Discover hidden collaborations