View report page

As will be seen from Table 13, a wide variety of foods were
sampled during the year.
Comments on unsatisfactory samples
Of the nineteen samples reported as being "not genuine", five
were in respect of complaints concerning suspected foreign bodies
in foods, on analysis however these suspicions were not confirmed
and no further action was taken.
The following comments are made on the remaining fourteen
samples:—
(a) Meat Products (5)
The public analyst considered that the meat content, ot
five samples of meat products, was below the recognised
standard. Each case was taken up with the manufacturers and
improvements obtained.
(b) Labelling (3)
In three cases the public analyst considered that the labels
on the containers did not give a correct description of the
contents. These were taken up with the respective manufacturers
and, in each case, new labels were produced to meet the
requirements of the Labelling of Food Orders.
(c) Sweets (1)
A sample of sweets, of foreign manufacture, sold as "Sea
Glories" were found to consist of a poor quality toffee inside
real cockle shells. These were considered to be a potential
source of danger and undesirable for sale to children. On being
approach the Agents in this country withdrew them from
sale.
(d) Bread (1)
This consisted of a loaf of "French" bread that was found
to contain rodent excreta. The manufacturer was prosecuted
and fined £5.
(e) Flour Confectionery (1)
This sample was a Raspberry Cream Slice which was
found to be affected with mould growths. The manufacturer
was prosecuted, and the case was dismissed.
(f) Corned Beef (3)
Complaints were received concerning some black stains
Page 70