In last week’s issue, we misstated some information from the Pew Charitable Trusts’ new paper on data gaps (see FCN Aug. 16, 2013, Page 5). Through the course of their research, Pew looked at 8,100 additives including all types of additives, not just those submitted to FDA through its generally recognized as safe (GRAS) or Food Contact Notification procedures. Information on all 8,100 additives were compared with information collected in the FDA’s Priority-based Assessment of Food Additives (PAFA) system and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s Accelrys databases, but only a random sample were compared with the National Library of Medicine’s Toxicology Literature Online (TOXLINE). Finally, only direct food additives are recommended to have a concern level, and FDA recommends all direct additives have feeding studies included in their publicly available research. We apologize for the mistakes.