Academic mockup

Reg. (EU) 2015/2283A food not consumed to a significant degree in the EU before 15 May 1997 is a novel food. It needs EU authorisation before it can be sold.

Know which safety evidence you need before you commission studies.

Regulatory toxicology and an evidence platform for EU novel food applications. Every finding source-linked, every result signed off by a named expert.

Request a novelty screening
IThe problem

The EU procedure is thorough. It is also long, and much of the time sits with the applicant.

Every application has to document composition, production process, stability, nutrition, toxicology and allergenicity before EFSA can assess it.

  • 2.56years

    mean time from submission to published authorisation.

  • 2.7

    additional data requests per application, on average.

  • 47%

    of the evaluation time is attributable to the applicant's responses.

Studies at the wrong time. In our survey, all four companies named working out the required safety and toxicology evidence as their main challenge. Three saw the greatest value before committing budget to safety studies. The sample is small and exploratory.

The EU food and drink industry has about 309,000 companies, and 99% of them are SMEs. Most have no regulatory toxicology team of their own.

IIPackages P0 to P4

Fixed scope, fixed price. Start small, go further only when the evidence says so.

P0 and P1 run in our fast lane: standard templates, a platform pre-screen and one reviewing scientist, delivered in days rather than weeks. P2 to P4 are scoped individually, led by a named expert and billed by milestone.

CodePackageWhat you getEffortPrice
P0 Novelty ScreeningEntry · fast lane Is your ingredient a novel food under EU law? A documented classification with evidence: consumption records before 15 May 1997, comparison with the Status Catalogue and the Union list, assessment of new production techniques. ≈ 4 expert days €4,500Request
P1 Evidence Gap AssessmentEntry · fast lane Evidence gaps identified before you commission studies. Your existing data mapped against current EFSA requirements, missing studies and endpoints flagged, with study recommendations. ≈ 10 expert days €12,000Request
P2 Safety-Readiness PackageProject lane The gap assessment taken further: prioritised next studies and a draft safety narrative before you commission expensive work. ≈ 22 expert days €30,000
P3 Regulatory Action PackageProject lane Precedent analysis, submission strategy and drafted dossier sections, including a reserve for answering EFSA data requests. ≈ 45 expert days €55,000
P4 Full Dossier ProgrammeProject lane A complete, submission-ready dossier under Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, approved by our toxicologists, including responses to EFSA data requests. ≈ 120 expert days €120,000

Post-approval retainer €12,000 / year

Ongoing compliance after authorisation: conditions of use, specification and label changes, post-market surveillance.

Professional licence €9,000 / year

Access to the ToxiCore platform for in-house regulatory teams.

Prices exclude VAT. Toxicology studies are subcontracted to accredited contract research organisations; study costs and authority fees are passed through separately. We do not guarantee an authorisation outcome or a shorter EFSA assessment.

III How we work

Four stages · every package
  1. 1 Intake and scopingIngredient characterisation, novelty triage, fixed-price quotation.Regulatory lead + platform
  2. 2 Evidence compilationLiterature, toxicology data, study summaries, exposure, data gaps. Every statement linked to its source.Platform, expert-supervised
  3. 3 Expert review and challengeScientific judgement, gap-closure strategy, likely EFSA data requests anticipated.Toxicologist
  4. 4 Sign-off and handoverNamed expert sign-off, submission support, client briefing.Named signatory

What AI does and does not do

The platform handles retrieval, extraction, mapping, gap detection and first drafts. Judging sources and uncertainty, scientific judgement and regulatory relevance stay with named experts, who sign off every deliverable.

IVThe people who sign
CEO · Regulatory advice and risk assessment

Dr. Andrea Haase

Biochemist and toxicologist with more than 15 years in regulatory toxicology and human health risk assessment, mainly for industrial chemicals under EU REACH and consumer goods. National scientific expert in the EFSA network on nanotechnologies in food and feed.

CTO · Platform and AI models

Dr. Felix Kohler

Physicist who has applied machine learning in academic and industrial settings for more than 15 years, leading knowledge-informed AI projects. Built point-of-care instruments under strict regulatory requirements at Abbott. PhD in cellular biophysics, University of Freiburg.

COO & CFO · Operations and service delivery

Julian Zarges

Engineer with more than ten years in manufacturing and operations leadership at Robert Bosch GmbH, including building a greenfield plant in China through to stable serial production. M.Sc. Production Systems Engineering, TU Braunschweig and University of Waterloo.

CSO · Science and customer relations

Dr. Payam Ghiaci

Industrial biotechnologist with 15 years in strain development and entrepreneurship. Precision fermentation and novel foods have been his research focus for five years, including single cell oils and single cell proteins.

Data location
All client data is hosted in the EU, in a separate workspace for each client.
No AI training
Your data is never used to train third-party models.
Confidentiality
Unpublished characterisation data is treated as confidential, under an NDA before the first data exchange on request.
Liability
Professional indemnity cover, a documented sign-off procedure and clearly agreed contractual liability. We do not warrant an authorisation outcome.
Conflicts of interest
Each founder declares potential conflicts before an engagement is accepted. Declarations are recorded, and a founder with a conflict recuses. We do not act on matters involving institutions our founders work with, and we do not use non-public information.
VSample result

See what you get before you order.

An anonymised P0 report shows the structure and depth: novelty triage, evidence gaps, prioritised studies and traceable sources.

Request the sample report
P0 Novelty Screening · contentsAnonymised sample
  1. 1
    Classification and rationaleNovel food or not, with the uncertainty and the decisive evidence.
  2. 2
    Consumption evidence before 1997Databases, literature and trade records searched, with references.
  3. 3
    Catalogue and Union list checkComparison by description, taxonomy and processing steps.
  4. 4
    Evidence gap mapWhat exists, what is missing, and which next studies come first.
  5. 5
    Source list and sign-offEvery statement with its source, signed off by a named toxicologist.
Contents of the sample report. We send the full anonymised PDF on request.
VIRegulatory Copilot
Pilot phase · closed

Regulatory questions, answered with a source.

An AI assistant on a curated, versioned knowledge base, starting with EFSA and EU requirements. We are looking for three to five pilot partners. There is no price list yet.

Join the waitlist
  • Every answer links to its source.
  • Flags ingredients that exceed regional limits or need a specific assessment or labelling.
  • Later: UK FSA, US FDA and Codex Alimentarius compared.
  • Supports decisions. Not legal advice and not a prediction of approval.