EFSA could not set a daily intake limit
When EFSA re-evaluated E304 in 2015, the panel found the available toxicology studies too limited to calculate a reliable acceptable daily intake. This is unusual and means the usual safety margin calculation was not possible. The panel's conclusion of no safety concern at current use levels rested mainly on the assumption that ascorbyl palmitate breaks down fully into ascorbic acid and palmitic acid before entering the bloodstream, supported by one in vitro study and limited human data.
EFSA concluded that the available toxicological data were too limited to establish an ADI for ascorbyl palmitate; no numerical acceptable daily intake was set.
2015Regulatory reviewEFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources, Scientific Opinion on the re-evaluation of ascorbyl palmitate (E 304(i)) and ascorbyl stearate (E 304(ii))
The safety conclusion relied on the assumption of near-complete pre-systemic hydrolysis to ascorbic acid and palmitic acid, supported by one in vitro study and limited human pharmacokinetic data.
2015Regulatory reviewEFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4289
Infants below 16 weeks: vitamin C overshoot
A 2020 EFSA follow-up opinion specifically addressed infants under 16 weeks, a group excluded from the 2015 review. At the maximum permitted levels in infant formula and foods for special medical purposes, the ascorbic acid released from ascorbyl palmitate could push total vitamin C intake to around 266% of the adequate intake for very young infants. EFSA concluded this did not raise health concerns, but noted the evidence base was weak: only six clinical studies were available, five of which were rated as high risk of bias.
At maximum permitted levels, ascorbic acid intake from ascorbyl palmitate in infant formula could reach approximately 266% of the adequate intake for infants below 16 weeks.
2020Regulatory reviewEFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources, Opinion on the re-evaluation of ascorbyl palmitate (E 304i) as a food additive in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age
Of six studies reviewed for the infant population, five were rated as high risk of bias and none included a proper control group unexposed to ascorbyl palmitate, limiting the strength of the evidence base.
2020Regulatory reviewPMC7448004 (EFSA Panel, EFSA Journal 2020)
Specification impurities flagged
EFSA recommended tightening the purity specifications for commercially manufactured ascorbyl palmitate to limit potential residual heavy metals (lead, arsenic, mercury) and residual solvents used in its manufacture (acetone, petroleum ether). This is a manufacturing quality concern rather than a dietary hazard from the additive itself.
EFSA recommended that specifications for ascorbyl palmitate should include limits for lead, arsenic, mercury and residual solvents including acetone, petroleum ether and mesityl oxide.
2015Regulatory reviewEFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4289