View report page

12
Clean food sampling
Food and Drugs Act, 1955
The Middlesex County Council is responsible for taking samples and for supervising the control of
food adulteration (Table 39). The Chief Officer of the Public Control Department has kindly supplied the
following information.
Of the 12 firms concerned in the 17 samples found to be unsatisfactory, three were prosecuted and
no action was taken against the other nine.
Six of the unsatisfactory samples of meat were minced beef containing a preservative, which is not
permitted. Two butchers were involved and both were prosecuted. One was fined £10 with £7 7s. Od. costs,
and the other was fined £28 with £8 10s. Od. costs. Another butcher who sold best end of neck of lamb as loin
of lamb was prosecuted and given a conditional discharge on payment of £3 3s. Od. costs.
A sample of whole lemon drink contained sugar and saccharine but the label suggested that the only
sweetening matter present was pure cane sugar. The reference to sugar on the label is now omitted.
No action was taken in the case of a sample of whisky found to be below 65° proof spirit as subsequent
samples from the licensed premises were found to be correct.
The four samples of vinegar and non-brewed condiment were deficient in acetic acid due to prolonged
storage causing loss of strength. Advice was given as to precautions to be taken to prevent such losses.
A sample of cheese spread made from cheese and butter was labelled "Cream and Cheese Spread"
and the importer agreed to correct the label. Two samples of raspberry juice were found to be artificially
flavoured and to contain no fruit juice. The syrup was produced in a private dwelling by an immigrant who
was unaware of the requirements of the Food and Drugs Act and Labelling of Food Order. Production was
stopped. A sample of vegetarian mincemeat was deficient in soluble solids. The retailer, who made the mincemeat
on his premises was advised as to the revision of his recipe.
Emulsifiers and Stabilisers in Food Regulations, 1962; Preservatives in Food Regulations, 1962
The effect of these Regulations is to define and limit the additives which are permitted and (in the
case of preservatives) to extend the range of food and the type of preservatives allowed, but nevertheless closely
controlling the quantity of such preservatives. No infringements were reported.
The Merchandise Marks Acts, 1887-1953
355 premises were inspected and 1,025 displays of articles of food were examined. Minor infringements
were dealt with by verbal warnings but official cautions were given to a retailer who marked Yugoslav
bacon as "Danish," and to the packers of two samples of imported potatoes for failing to indicate the country
of origin.
Labelling of Food Order, 1953
441 premises were visited and 1,646 articles of pre-packed food were examined. A caution was sent
to the packers of rice found to be on sale in plain bags bearing none of the information required by the Order.
Labelling and Advertising Infringements
The Public Control Department also carried out a considerable amount of work in the County,
which indirectly protected the residents of Willesden, by challenging labelling and advertising claims made in
respect of nationally retailed articles of food.
Several manufacturers and importers were reminded that the name and address of the packer or
labeller and a declaration of ingredients must appear on labels. An ice-cream manufacturer who put the
statutory declaration on the base of the carton was reminded that it must be conspicuous and prominent.
Two advertisers of honey were required to declare that it was of foreign origin. The packers of lamb chops
were required to declare in half-inch letters that the chops were of foreign origin. The manufacturers of five
cake mixes amended their labels to indicate that egg or milk must be added before the mixes could be used.
A manufacturer who claimed "slimming properties" for lemon juice deleted the claim from his labels.
Corrective action was secured for the description applied to cream cheese, tinned rice, tinned cream,
canned meat, breakfast cereals, ice lollies, chopped pork and butter mintoes.
Cautions were given to the manufacturers of sodium fluoride tablets deficient in the stated amount
of the chemical, although this did not impair the efficiency of the tablets; to the manufacturers and importers
of instant coffee because it contained sulphur dioxide, a preservative not permitted at the time; and to the
manufacturers of dried apricots containing an authorised preservative which was not declared.
Milk and Dairies Regulations and Milk (Special Designation) Regulations
131 samples of milk were obtained to ensure that heat treatment was properly carried out; all were
satisfactory. 141 inspections were made of premises where milk was processed to ensure compliance with the
Regulations. 48 milk bottles from a processing dairy were tested to ensure the efficient operation of the
bottle-washing plant; they were found to be satisfactory. A sample of pasteurised milk was found to be sour
on testing but no action was taken as there was no evidence whether the milk was sour when sold or subsequently
became sour. Subsequent samples were satisfactory.
Cautions were issued to a dairyman who supplied milk to a school with fly puperia adhering to the
inside of a bottle, and to another who also supplied milk to a school with a stain on the inside of a bottle
similar to that made by wax crayons.
Milk and Dairies Regulations—Other Provisions
Milk sales are regulated by the Food and Drugs Act, 1955, the Milk and Dairies (General) Regulations,
1959, and the Milk (Special Designation) Regulations, 1960.
Willesden has been a specified area since October, 1951; all milk sold by retail is sterilised, pasteurised,
or tuberculin tested; the sale of raw milk is prohibited.