[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Coulsdon] page 55

Coulsdon and Purley 1960

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Coulsdon]

This page requires JavaScript

Table: Continued from previous page...

Download table as:

Continued from previous page...

Sample No.	Nature of adulteration or irregularity	Action taken
Formal Sample No. 241 DEVONSHIRE DAIRY CREAM	Consisted of ordinary cream containing 36-5 per cent of milk fat. In the opinion of the Public Analyst the term Devonshire Cream suggests Clotted Cream which should contain not less than 48 per cent of milk fat.	Considerable correspondence ensued and representatives of the Company concerned were interviewed by Officers of the Council with the object of modifying the label if possible but without success. The producers however decided to discontinue the existing polystrene (carton) container and paper capping and pack future supplies in a new cream bottle with foil capping which it was suggested would automatically convey to purchasers the idea of a liquid cream as distinct from the solid pack of their Devonshire Clotted Cream.
Formal Sample No. 248 LUNCHEON MEAT LOAF	This article contained only 65 per cent of meat whereas in the opinion of the Public Analyst, Luncheon Meat or any meat product which includes the words "Luncheon Meat" in its description, should contain not less than 80 per cent of meat. Also the ingredients were not specified on the label in the correct order.	This was an Australian product and consultations ensued between the Council's officers and the Company concerned. The question of labelling was resolved to the satisfaction of the Public Analyst but negotiations with a view to amending the description of the article were unsuccessful in the absence of any definite legal standard for this type of product. The company concerned were of the opinion that Luncheon Meat Loaf and Luncheon Meat were two separate and distinct descriptions with two different retail price units. In the absence of a legal standard the Council decided to take no further action in the matter. The Commonwealth Veterinary Officer in the office of the High Commissioner for Australia was kept informed on this case and a representative of the Food Standards Committee of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food was consulted.