View report page

23
Reports have been issued on Arsenic (Revised Report, 1955), Copper (1956), Lead (Revised Report,
1954), Tin (1952), and Zinc (1954), but no further action has ensued although it is believed that an
Order controlling the quantity of arsenic in food may not be long delayed now.
The Food Standards (Soft Drinks) Order was last revised in 1953 and it was immediately pointed
out that the definition of drinks made from 'whole fresh oranges' was ambiguous and needed
clarification, but no revised order has yet appeared.
When delays of two years or more occur after the issue of Reports of the Food Standards
Committee without any administrative action being taken by the Government, it places food
administration by Local Authorities in a difficult position and manufacturers are left in a quandary.
Reputable manufacturers hesitate to act merely on the recommendations of the Food Standards
Committee, whilst others are prepared to take a risk. Public Analysts on the other hand are loath
to condemn products, which comply with the proposals of a Standing Government Committee,
because of the risk of caustic comments from the Courts. In spite of the continual pressure of
Local Authorities and public analysts no order has yet been made to control the meat content of
sausages, though one would have expected more regard to have been paid to the comments of the
Lord Chief Justice on this point. Other products, such as stewed steak, stewed steak in gravy and
luncheon meat show a continued deterioration in the quantity of meat present, but the Courts are
unwilling to lay down standards when the Government seems unable to do so. There is much
so-called chocolate on the market at the present time containing large quantities of hardened palm
kernel oil instead of cocoa butter and milk chocolate containing separated milk powder.
The year 1960 will mark the centenary of the passing of the first food and drugs act and the
inaction of the Government at the present time reminds one strongly of the inertia shown by
Governments of that time and the efforts made by Dr. Wakeley, in setting up the Lancet Commission,
and others in order to force their hands. It is difficult to know to what extent the present position
has arisen from the frequent changes taking place at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food,
where food administration appears, at the present time, to be a training ground for higher office
either in the political field or in the administrative service.
Looking to the future, Public Analysts are deeply concerned by the need to safeguard the public
against the effects of radioactivity. The recent incident at Windscale brought the matter into
prominence, but even before that a good deal of preliminary work had been done by Public Analysts.
The task of monitoring pastures, crops, etc., in the vicinity of atomic installations is vested in the
Ministry of Agriculture by the Atomic Energy Act, but the ultimate responsibility for the protection
of the public must rest on the Public Analyst. Many foods are imported from abroad, from regions
which may be affected by 'fall-out' from test explosions, or canned fish may come from seas into
which radioactive effluents flow. Fish may concentrate radioactive elements up to two million times
the amount in the sea water in which they live.
As the complexity of the work has increased so has equipment of the analyst's laboratory. The
crude adulteration of the earlier years demanded only the simplest equipment, but the tasks of
today require the use of complex physical instruments such as absorptio-meters, flamephotometers,
polarographs, etc. Without these instruments the determination of many essential factors, such
as vitamins, would be impossible. As an example, your analyst has recently purchased a
spectrophotometer which, with the ancillary equipment cost over £800. Not many years ago a
large laboratory could have been equipped for such a sum. The use of such equipment moreover
requires highly skilled staff, who are difficult to obtain when the demand for scientists exceeds the
supply, and more lucrative fields are open to them. How the situation can best be handled is
difficult to foresee, but it is one to which considerable thought must be given in the near future.
Thomas McLachlan,
Public Analyst."
Food—Adulterated or Unsatisfactory Samples.
The majority of the unsatisfactory samples referred to in the Analyst's report were in respect of
technical faults in labelling or description. After consultation with the manufacturers concerned,
in all cases the labels were revised or corrected. The remainder, which involved no very serious
contraventions, or showed evidence of intended fraud, were dealt with informally, the goods being
either withdrawn from sale or surrendered. It was in no case necessary to institute legal proceedings.
Unsound Food.
The total quantity of food surrendered as being unsound and unfit for human consumption was
nearly 31 tons. The greater part again related to canned goods including a large proportion of imported
boneless cooked ham and shoulders. Contamination of the meat often occurs during butchering but