View report page

25
Sorbic acid and nisin are to be permitted in cheese and nisin is also to be permitted in canned foods.
Benzoic acid or sorbic acid are to be permitted in solutions of permitted food colours or in silicone
anti-foam emulsions. It will be difficult for an analyst to say whether a trace of sorbic acid in a food
has been introduced by reason of the inclusion of a small amount of a silicone anti-foaming agent.
Sodium nitrate and nitrite are accepted as preservatives in cured meats and in Gouda and Edam
type cheese. Ortho-phenylphenol may be employed as a preservative on apples, pears, pineapples,
peaches, melons, and citrus fruit, but no such permission is extended to apricots, or to fruit such as
Avocardo pears, which belong to the laurel family and are quite distinct from ordinary pears.
Citrus fruits may also contain diphenyl. The food pattern of civilised countries is changing so
rapidly at the present time that one wonders for how long such legislation can be effective. In
support of the earlier note on the necessity for international collaboration in food legislation it may
be mentioned that during the year W.H.O. issued a press report to the effect that boric acid may be
added to caviar for all countries except Germany and the United States. Great Britain has forbidden
its use since 1925. At the same time it may be mentioned that F.A.O. is now bringing out
a series of monographs dealing with the legal position of food additives in various countries, each
monograph being written by an acknowledged expert of the country concerned. The monograph
on food additives in Great Britain was the second to be issued in the series.
Proposals have been issued by the Food Standards Committee for Soft Drinks Regulations. Your
analyst is greatly concerned that at the present time manufacturers of soft drinks can add vitamins
or other ingredients to make them resemble official nutritional products and describe them by the
official titles so long as letters such as B.P., or B.P.C. are not used. Blackcurrant syrups fall into
this category but, so far, the Ministry has refused to take any action, though now that even broadcasting
has drawn attention to the matter the situation may be changed. Similarly certain drinks
need not comply with the requirements of the Regulations for sugar content if there is a clear and
conspicuous description in writing indicating to the purchaser that the drink has been prepared for
consumption by persons suffering from diabetes. Products have been creeping on to the market
recently which claim the protection of this proviso, but which are intended for slimming purposes
and are not expected to be used primaiily by diabetics. Even the names of the products suggest
that they are intended for slimming. Another provision which your analyst would like to see
introduced is one to prevent claims such as ' made from such and such fruit' for a product, which
complies with the requirement of the order to the extent that it contains 2 lbs. of potable fruit and
4.5 lbs. of sugar in 10 gallons, i.e. 100 lbs. of final drink, over 93 per cent, of the drink being therefore
added water.
Following the issue towards the end of 1960 of the ' Food Standards Committee Report on Bread
and Flour ' proposals for regulations were issued during 1961. Probably the most interesting point
in these proposed regulations at the present time, in view of the interest taken in slimming, is that it
shall be an offence to make any sort of claim, whether by inference or otherwise, that a bread, rusk,
biscuit, or cereal food may be used as a slimming aid unless there is a clear statement indicating that
it may only be so used if it forms part of a diet in which the total intake of calories is controlled.
The Food Standards Committee were also asked to review the use of solvents and flavouring agents
used in foods. Apart from water the number of solvents employed is confined to a small number
of chemical liquids, but the number of chemicals employed for flavouring is very large. Proposals
were also made for regulations to control the use of emulsifiers and stabilisers in food. One of the
difficulties of British law is that if the use of a substance is generally recognised as suitable and safe
for a particular purpose it ceases to be such a substance by legal definition, and these proposed
regulations are no exception to this rule. Thus under the Labelling of Food Order sodium citrate,
sodium tartrate, and sodium phosphates may be described generically as ' emulsifying salts ', but
under the proposed regulations they are not to be considered as ' emulsifiers ' or ' stabilisers '. It
is hardly surprising that exporters from other countries complain that it is difficult to understand
British law.
Thomas McLachlan,
Public Analyst."
Food—Adulterated or Unsatisfactory Samples.
Twenty of the sixty-four unsatisfactory samples referred to in the Analyst's report concerned
technical faults in labelling or description. After consultation with the manufacturers or importers
the labels were revised or corrected. The other samples adversely reported upon were dealt with
informally and no legal proceedings were necessary.