View report page

(d) Wine and Beer Finings.
This sample was found to contain sulphur dioxide to the extent of 5860 parts per
million. Although sulphur dioxide is a permitted preservative its presence in wine and
beer finings is contrary to the Preservative in Food Regulations, 1962. The firm concerned
were informed and, as they considered that the article could not be prepared
without using the preservative, they withdrew it from their range of products.
(e) Concentrated Grape Juice.
This sample contained an amount of sulphur dioxide in excess of that permitted
by the Preservative in Food Regulations, 1962. The Public Analyst also considered
that the title on the label was not the common or usual name for this article as required
by the Labelling of Food Order, 1953. The manufacturers were informed and replied
to the effect that their process is continually checked by chemical analysis and that the
excess of sulphur dioxide was accidental in that a particular batch had slipped through
their control. The remaining stocks at the retailer's shop were withdrawn from sale.
The manufacturers also arranged to have new labels with an appropriate title printed.
(f) Kaolin and Morphine Mixture.
This mixture was found to contain dark particles in which were found to be
particles of calcium carbonate crystals aggregated on particles of kaolin. It was considered
that the presence of the particles was unlikely to affect the efficiency of the
medicine and would have had no harmful effect. The medicine was also found to be
deficient in the quantity of sodium bicarbonate as prescribed by the British Pharmaceutical
Codex. The retailer was advised and the matter taken up with the manufacturers
of the powder mix.
(g) Long Grain Rice.
A statement on the carton of this product made a claim for the presence of
vitamins and minerals, but there was no declaration of the minimum amounts present
as required by the Labelling of Food Order. The manufacturers were informed and
subsequently it was ascertained that they had introduced a new carton and deleted the
references to vitamins and minerals.
(h) Low Fat Spread.
The Analyst considered that this sample conformed to the definition of margarine
laid down in the Food Standards (Butter and Margarine) Regulations, 1955. These
Regulations specify the margarine shall not contain more than 16 per cent of water but
this sample contained 352 per cent water in excess of this maximum. The appropriate
legal opinion was sought and it was considered that this product did not come within
the scope of the Food Standards (Butter and Margarine) Regulations, 1955 and that
no further action should be taken.
(i) Biscuits.
A statement on the packet made the claim "the digestive biscuit with the butter
in it". The Public Analyst considered that the small amount of butter fat found in
the sample did not justify this claim. The manufacturers were notified and it was
found that a new recipe had been introduced by increasing the amount of butter fat
in the product and declaring its percentage quantity on the wrapper. After further
consultation with the Public Analyst this was considered to be acceptable. Existing
stocks made with the former recipe were withdrawn from sale at the retailers' shop.
(j) Violet Colour.
This product was found to contain a colour not included in the permitted list of
colours in the Colouring Matters in Food Regulations, 1966 which came into operation
in June, 1967. It was ascertained that the articles had been made and distributed
before that date. Remaining stocks of the product at the retail shop were voluntarily
surrendered and destroyed.
71