Analysis drawn from published EFSA opinions, additional data requests, and official guidance. No speculation — just what the record shows.
EFSA's register tells you what happened last month. It does not tell you what each new applicant is walking into. Our first monthly roundup: May's novel food activity, every dossier read against the bar its category has to clear.
Read article →The guidance tells you what to submit. It does not tell you how good your data has to be. We measured that bar from 239 published opinions — and a handful of deficiencies double the odds of failure.
Read article →Most applications succeed — but almost all get stopped along the way. A data-driven look at outcomes, delays, and what they mean for applicants.
Read article →Every novel food dossier is assessed against the same ten mandatory sections. Here is what each one covers and why it matters.
Read article →91% of post-2018 dossiers received at least one additional data request. What drives these clock stops and what can applicants do about it.
Read article →Section 3 generates the largest variety of additional data requests. What EFSA expects, what most applicants get wrong, and how to avoid the common gaps.
Read article →Two pathways to the EU market under Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. How they differ, which one applies to your product, and what each requires.
Read article →The toxicology section is the longest in the average novel food opinion. What studies are required, when waivers apply, and where applicants most often fall short.
Read article →What is different about precision fermentation applications. GMM characterisation, host organism safety, and the specific requirements that catch applicants off guard.
Read article →Paste a dossier section and get structured findings in under ten minutes.
Try a section →