Food Fraud Advisors

You are here: Home / Archives for Adulteration

by

Food authenticity is my passion… death from inauthentic coconut drink

Why am I passionate about authenticity in our food supply? Because when we get things wrong horrible tragedies can happen; in December 2013 an allergic child died from anaphylaxis because of undeclared dairy ingredient/s in his coconut drink.   His parents knew of his dairy allergy and checked the label to make sure that the ‘natural coconut drink’ did not contain cow’s milk before they gave it to him. Unfortunately the label was wrong.

Tragedies like this are preventable.  It has taken almost two years and the near death of another child under similar circumstances for widespread action to be taken by the local food regulatory authorities here in Australia.

The importer of the drink has pleaded guilty to charges of labelling in a way that falsely describes food and will be sentenced later this month.

Coconut beverages are being tested and recalled right now, but I’m sad that it has taken such a long time for this to become a high priority for food law enforcement.

For a full report  on this incident click here.

by

How much does a recall cost?

Here in Australia one of the best publicised food scares we have had in recent years was a large-scale recall of frozen berries that were apparently contaminated with Hepatitis A.  The recall was prompted after a string of cases of the virus in New South Wales and Victoria were blamed by health officials on the well known Nanna’s brand of mixed berries.

The recall is reported to have caused direct costs of $4.4 million, including the loss of $3.8 million worth of berries that had to be disposed of, compensation payments to people who contracted Hepatitis A, public relations and social media costs and the cost of advertising the recall to consumers.

Indirect costs were much higher: the owner of Nanna’s brand and manufacturer of the berries, Patties Foods, posted a profit decline of 90%.  The chairman Mark Smith blamed the decline saying “The frozen berries recall had a significant impact and was the primary reason for the approximate $14.6m reduction in net profit,”

Patties later sold their frozen berry business and in the process lost a part of their business that had generated 13% of their sales in previous years.  More on the sale

Not one sample of Nanna’s berries tested positive for the virus.

Larger brands:  more to lose

Mars Galaxy and Teaser brand chocolates were recalled from markets in the United Kingdom and Ireland in June 2017 after the company found evidence that Salmonella could have been present in ingredients used to make the products.  Mars reportedly filed a product recall insurance claim of $50 – $60 million in November 2017.

So to answer the question posed by the title of this blog – how much does a recall cost? – the answer is A LOT.

pics 019

 

by

Food fraud only affects expensive food, right?

Wrong!  While it’s pretty obvious that you could make an economic gain by bulking out an expensive food like caviar with something less expensive, it’s also possible to make economic gains by making tiny alterations to big-volume commodities.  Even switching just one or two percent of a bulk item like beef mince or rice with something cheaper can create a huge economic gain when sales are counted in the thousands or tens of thousands of tonnes.

Ground meat is one commodity that has been frequently affected by this kind of food fraud.  The adulterants are typically lower grade meat or offal from the same species or meat from a cheaper species.  This kind of adulteration is difficult, if not impossible for consumers to detect.

Rice is another commodity that, despite being relatively cheap, is also affected by economically motivated adulteration. The adulterants are reported to be plastic pieces, including thermal insulation materials, potato starch mixed with polymer resins and even pieces of paper rolled to look like grains.  This type of fraud relies on transient and poorly documented supply chains; the person who ultimately tries to eat the rice will detect the fraud in most cases – although there are reports of people suffering digestive problems after consumption – however the source of the adulteration usually proves impossible to trace.

If rice adulteration was occurring on a big scale in Europe I suspect that increasing the requirements for paperwork and trying to improve supply chain transparency would be the chosen strategy for those tackling the issue.  In the Philippines they have taken a more direct and – for now at least – more feasible approach.  They have developed a hand-held scanner that uses Raman spectroscopy to detect ‘fake’ rice by distinguishing between starch and styrene acrylonitrile copolymer.  Fast, cheap, easy and no paperwork needed.