Skip to main content

Vitamin B6

Volume 593: debated on Thursday 3 September 1998

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether the Written Answer by the Baroness Jay of Paddington on 29 June

(WA 57) signifies that the Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment, in considering the safety limit for vitamin B6, concluded that there were no risks of underdosage for vulnerable subpopulations, or alternatively that the consideration of such risks was outside their remit. [HL3245]

The Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT) was not asked to consider the risks of underdosage of vitamin B6 for vulnerable subpopulations as it was outside their remit. The issue of nutritional requirements of vitamins is a matter for the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy (COMA). The COT was aware of COMA's advice that 1.4mg of vitamin B6 is sufficient or more than sufficient to meet the nutritional needs of practically all healthy people. Surveys show that average intakes of vitamin B6 in the United Kingdom from food (excluding supplements) are well above the Reference Nutrient Intake of 1.4mg. The COT recommended that the maximum daily intake of vitamin B6 from dietary supplements should be 10mg, which is more than seven times the nutritional requirement.