View report page

Of the samples commented adversely upon by the public
analyst 24 related to specimens submitted in support of
food complaints upon which comment has already been
given. The remainder were in the following categories.
Misleading claims and false descriptions
Six samples were considered to have lavels which were
misleading; a sample of shandy was found to contain alcohol
in excess of 2% and yet was sold as a soft drink from
unlicensed premises; a sample of a fruit drink it was stated
was produced only from whole fruit whereas as much as
50% water not derived from fruit was found; a sample
of decaffeinated coffee also claimed to be soluble solids of
pure coffee; a sample of pure lemon juice was found to
contain not more than 13% of pure lemon juice; a packet
of two whole plaice were found to be in fact filleted plaice
and a sample labelled pilchards were found to be herrings.
Legal proceedings were not instituted in any of these
cases as either evidence in the form of formal samples was
not available or immediate action was taken by the
manufacturers or importers to re-label the products
concerned.
Food additives
Ten samples were found to contain non permitted food
additives usually the addition of a preservative which
regulations specifically prohibit in the case of the food in
question. Two cases were taken before the courts where
local butchers had been adding sulphur dioxide to minced
beef and resulted in fines and costs totalling £60.
A series of blackcurrant drinks were examined by the
analyst who, by using a method developed in his laboratory,
found that certain permitted food colours when heated in
the presence of blackcurrant juice broke down and formed
a non permitted additive having the appearance of a coal tar
colouring. This phenomena was detected in most of the
major blackcurrant drinks on the market and following
action by this department revised formulations have been
adopted in each case.
Labelling
Minor labelling irregularities are the commonest fault found
with prepacked foods and 28 labels were altered by the
packers as a result of discussions within the department. In
one case a retailer failed to supply information necessary
to pursue a labelling irregularity and continued to sell the
product. Legal proceedings were instituted and fines and
costs totalling £25.00 were imposed by the court.
Food deficient of standards
Reference to previous annual reports indicates that
incidences of food sold below a legal standard in prepacked
form are decreasing and in the past year 4 such samples
were reported upon. Two samples of a jam imported from
Poland were found to be deficient in soluble solids and a
survey of the products from this manufacturer was carried
out. No further deficient samples were found and the
original samples were treated as isolated cases.
During the year a survey of foods used in the preparation
of Indian and Chinese meals was conducted with particular
reference to colourings and additives. This survey revealed
that a sample of yellow powder (tumeric) was found to
contain an excess amount of lead. The stocks held by the
vendor were destroyed and enquiries through the
distribution chain were started. However much of the
trading in this sector of the market is informal and the
source was never traced. A sample of brandy purchased at
a local public house one evening was found upon analysis to
be deficient by 25% of the declared amount of alcohol.
Legal proceedings were instituted and fines and costs of
£40.00 were subsequently imposed.
Drugs
Only two samples were reported upon adversely, one was
of seidlitz powders where the weights of the
constituents were inaccurate resulting in an incorrect
composition. This was subsequently found to be very old
stock and withdrawn. The second sample was of a
saccharin compound sold as a slimming aid, these were
compositionally incorrect but when investigated it was
found they had been withdrawn from the market.
Others
During the summer there arose the so called "poison bead
scare" which followed articles in the national press. This
resulted in rosary beads and similar jewellery being handed
into police stations and the department. Much of the
concern was unjustified as it was only the "abrus precatorius
seed" which may be dangerous.
The abrus precatorius seed has been in common use
since the sixteenth century and is known by a variety of
names including jequerity bean, rosary pea, crabs eye,
precatory bean, prayer bead. It is a plant seed, red and black
in colour and usually with an elliptic depression in the
black area. Whilst whole, the seeds are not dangerous as
they are protected by a hard natural coat. A seed pierced
for jewellery purposes may have the natural protection
destroyed and they may therefore be dangerous it eaten.
Although the risks were small it was felt that this was a
58