Written question – Soy leghemoglobin – E-002948/2025

Question for written answer  E-002948/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Martin Häusling (Verts/ALE)

Following the Commission reply that ‘the data submitted concerned the actual strain used for producing this soy leghemoglobin (MXY0541)’[1], I have further questions.

• 1.The European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) explicitly states that it evaluated 14- and 28-day rat feeding studies on LegHPrep derived from the GM yeast strain MXY0291 – not the strain intended for commercialisation (MXY0541). Why did the EFSA’s Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) and GMO Panel analyse studies from an irrelevant strain and derive favourable safety conclusions?
• 2.The findings in Impossible Foods’ peer-reviewed 90-day study[2], which used the strains MXY0291 and NRRL Y-11430 rather than MXY0541, appear to be the same as the findings in the study analysed by the FAF Panel. Therefore, it seems that they are the same study and that the 90-day study that EFSA evaluated used an irrelevant strain. Will the Commission release the full details of the 90-day study that EFSA evaluated, including details of the GM yeast strain that was used, and if it is a different study from the 90-day peer-reviewed one, will it state that and explain how two different studies on LegHPrep that found similar adverse effects are not an indication of food safety risk?

Submitted: 17.7.2025

• [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-001090-ASW_EN.html.
• [2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10581837/.