Trends and current food safety regulations and policies for functional foods and beverages containing botanicals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, the demand for functional foods and beverages has significantly increased due to socioeconomic changes, particularly in health consciousness to enhance their functionality. Functional ingredients derived from botanicals are widely used because of their phytochemical properties with health benefits. This study aims to (1) review the capabilities and challenges of botanical addition in functional foods, (2) review current policies and regulations for functional foods containing botanicals in the European Union (EU), Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand, and (3) provide recommendations on effective food safety control measures for better consumer trust and trade facilitation. This critical review was analyzed from online publications and available guidelines, regulations, and control measures published by food industries and governments in the EU and the four selected countries. The result confirmed that potentialities of botanicals arise from numerous bioactive compounds with varieties of sources. However, the usage may potentially raise health risks through hazardous substances in different species or plant parts, contaminants from environments and uncontrolled processes. Inadequate knowledge of botanical formulation and the maximum limit for daily consumption may elevate health risks through food-drug interaction or adverse effect incidents. Current policies and regulations show that varieties of measures are implemented influencing both economic growth and consumer awareness. The novel finding is that countries that provide a comprehensive national food control system influence not only the growth of the functional food subsectors but also build trust in food safety among trade partners and consumers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".