News

The Government Chemist undertakes quarterly reviews of developments in food and feed law and related scientific and regulatory issues. The reports track changes in food and agricultural legislation, concentrating on legislative changes that relate to chemical measurement and the role of the Government Chemist.

They cover food safety, food authenticity, food labelling, and also include general issues in food and feed to ensure contextual awareness.

The collection of quarterly review reports can be found at: Food and Feed Law: legislation review - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). 

A link to this collection has also been added to the 'Legislation' part of our 'Policy-Guidance-Law section'.

The latest in the series, the June update is now available.

Food Standards Scotland (FSS) has this week launched its Food Crime Risk Profiling Tool, an online programme which allows companies to assess their vulnerabilities to criminality.

Using the tool allows businesses to assess themselves against a series of statements on topics, such as how they source materials and their supply methods, before being given an individual report at the end which will highlight areas of good practice as well including specific guidance on areas they may wish to improve on.

To support businesses through this process, FSS will be holding several free online workshops later this year to help develop opportunities to increase authenticity and improve food crime resilience – those who sign up to the tool will receive an invite to the workshops.

For more information and to sign up to the tool, visit: https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/food-crime-risk-profiling-tool

The tool has also been added to the Tools_Guides_Reports part of our Food Fraud Prevention section.

Different sources of animal feed have different profiles of natural stable isotopes.  For example, C3 plant-driven feeds (including natural pasture, grass silage, soybean silage) have a significantly different carbon-isotope ratio to C4 plant-driven feeds (including maize silage).  These differences can underpin tests to verify premium claims such as “grass fed beef”.  Similar price premiums apply to yak meat.  In this paper (purchase required) the authors bult a multivariate model which discriminated between grass-fed and maize-fed yak meat by stable-isotope ratio analysis (C, N, S, O, N) of the muscle and stable-isotope ratio analysis (C) of six selectively extracted fatty acids.  As with all such models, its use is restricted to the species, geographic regions and husbandry practices included in the reference database but it proves the concept.

Photo by Jasper Garratt on Unsplash

The authors of this study (purchase required) used an untargeted chemometric screening approach,  LC-Q-Orbitrap MS analysis,  to identify discriminatory markers between organic and conventional milks.  Putative markers were then verified by targeted analysis.  In the targeted strategy, they used UPLC-MS/MS to quantify three markers. They propose the peptide of Thr-Ala-Val and D-biotin as distinguishing markers for organic, vs conventional, Jersey milk.  They propose trimethylamine N-oxide as a metabolite marker for organic, vs conventional, Yak milk.  They do not state which aspect of husbandry differences might be responsible for differences in these markers.

Photo by Kim Gorga on Unsplash

The report for a project (FA0197) funded by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) on the Implications of emerging novel proteins for food authenticity and labelling has been published.

The project focused on potential emerging risks regarding authenticity and labelling of alternative protein products, how these products may fit under the current regulatory framework for food labelling and how current testing capability can support product authentication and detection of emerging fraud risks in this sector.

The report has been added to the Research section of this website.

Key findings

Authenticity and fraud
According to the sources consulted for this review, little consideration has been given to potential food fraud in the alternative protein sector, especially by innovators and producers. However, the developments in the field inevitably will carry associated risks of food fraud. Situations that might act as drivers of food fraud such as the alternative protein being more expensive or harder to source than the equivalent animal protein can be envisaged, especially with new technologies/sources that may not yet be well established and require pre-market regulatory approval. Ingredient substitution can occur in any
category and direction, alternative for conventional and vice versa.

For some novel products, the supply chain may be more complicated and fragmented, and this may make them more vulnerable to fraud. Adulteration of proteins in powder forms has been identified as high risk, and verification of recombinant animal proteins produced by precision fermentation (as distinct from animal-derived proteins) as a challenge.

Analytical tools
Current analytical methods for food authentication will face issues such as a lack of genome data for novel species, the effect of novel processing techniques on biomolecules, identification of animal proteins produced by precision fermentation or identification of cell lines used for cultivated meat products.

Since the extent of processing can affect the efficacy of analytical methodologies, some existing methods may require updating to be effective on materials due to the more highly processed nature of many novel foods. Genomic information for the species used as sources of protein is required along with proteomics and metabolomics databases and bioinformatics tools to support analytical methods. Spectroscopy techniques and orthogonal methods that integrate data from different technologies are regarded as powerful tools that will support verification of alternative protein products.

Additional tools to support authenticity of alternative proteins
In addition to analytical methods, the wider food supply chain control systems must evolve to accommodate emerging complexities. Areas identified as potentially promising to mitigate food fraud risks include:
• Computational solutions: block chain, big data, artificial intelligence
• Integration of computational tools with analytical technologies such as sensors or molecular markers
• Standards and certification schemes

Labelling of alternative proteins
There are two main points of debate around labelling of alternative proteins globally: (i) the concern about the use of descriptors traditionally used for animal-derived products to label and market substitutes made of non-animal protein, and (ii) the question of transparency about the methods of production. Regarding names, as well as imagery used on labels, the regulations vary across countries and, with the fast development of novel products, the issue is a current topic of debate. In the UK, food information and labelling are governed by the Food Information to Consumers Regulation 1169/2011. This regulation outlines the general requirement for labelling to be clear, easy to understand, visible and not misleading as to the characteristics and nature of the food. Additionally, the Common Market Organisation (CMO) regulations, retained from EU legislation dealing with sales descriptions for dairy, reserves the term milk, and various milk product terms exclusively for dairy. However, meat terms do not have the same degree of protection, and descriptors such as ‘burger’ or ‘sausage’, as well as related imagery are used in the alternative protein sector.

Regarding methods of production, in some cases, there may be a conflict between providing transparency and the technical complexities of the methods. Using terminology that is clear for consumers may be difficult, for example, there is debate about the most appropriate name for meat produced in vitro, as terms like ‘cultured’, ‘cultivated’, ‘synthetic’, ‘lab-grown’, etc, may be viewed by consumers as unclear or negative. The evidence found during this project (stakeholder interviews, early consumer research found in literature, comments from conference) mostly supports the use of terms that refer
to the format of the product (burger, sausage, etc) as long as the label clearly states the non-animal source, although further research into consumer perceptions of APs is needed to fully understand this emerging area.

Future research needs

Short-term (0 – 3 years)
• Impact of new processing technologies on performance of existing authenticity tests.
o Survey of existing AP products for which DNA or protein-based speciation methods exist to assess performance.
o Studies on products and techniques under development, e.g, 3-D printing, new extraction methods.
• Identify and address points of vulnerability in the supply chain.
• Methods for detection of adulteration with nitrogen compounds.
• Investigate biomarkers to support authenticity testing of APs (plant-based, mycoproteins, precision fermentation).
• Support databases as tools for authenticity testing – genome, proteome, metabolome, spectral data, isotope ratios. Collaboration and data sharing are essential.
• Research into allergenicity potential and allergen detection in APs. Although this falls under the safety assessment of foods and therefore outside Defra’s remit, it is tightly linked to food authenticity and labelling, and the ability to verify food composition.

Medium-term (3-5 years)
• Build on learnings and develop new detection methods using biomarkers identified, new databases, knowledge of how new technologies may alter biomolecules.
• Develop reference materials to support testing of AP.
• Validate testing methods across laboratories.
• Build on biomarkers and methods to cover other categories of AP such as insect protein, algae protein.
• Continue to work on databases expanding to new sources of proteins - genome, proteome, metabolome, spectral data, isotope ratios.
• Engage with big data, artificial intelligence, block chain initiatives and research into application to food authenticity.
• Identify and address points of vulnerability in the supply chain.
• Analyse fraud in the AP sector to inform improvements to control and development of testing tools to support risk mitigation.

Long-term (5+ years)
• Continue to build on biomarkers and methods to cover other categories of AP such as cultivated meat and seafood, novel microorganisms grown for biomass.
• Continue to assess the AP food supply chain to adapt to increasing complexities (new sources of raw materials, novel technologies, sourcing ingredients from different countries, etc). Additional research on traceability and authenticity of new ingredients.
• Continue to develop big data and computational tools and integration with testing methodologies.

Photo by Deryn Macey on Unsplash

The latest blog post by Prof John Spink describes the output of an EU Joint Research Centre exercise to map the honey supply chain.  He concludes that it is an exemplar model of how this should be done; it is a systematic picture of nodes, links, vulnerabilities at each point, "guardians" at each point, vulnerability "hot spots" and countermeasures.  John also lists some training resources on how to conduct supply chain mapping and vulnerability assessment.  You can sign up to receive e-mail notifications of his blogs through the same link, above.

Abstract

This paper (purchase required) describes the development of an easy-to-read point of use DNA test for beef, pork and chicken.  It is based on a Nucleic Acid Lateral Flow Strip (LFS) coupled with multiplex PCR. The read-lines on the LFS develop within 10 minutes.  The coloured lines are produced by triplex colour latex microsphere labels, enabling a different colour for each species.  The authors report that, if the lines are read by a smartphone imager, the quantitation compares favourably with electrophoresis and detection limits of 0.1% w/w in adulterated meats can be achieved. Specificity analysis revealed no cross-reactivity with meat derived from beef, pork, chicken, duck, mutton, rabbit, goose, ostrich, camel and horse. The assay was successfully employed for adulteration identification in 28 commercial beef and lamb products.

Photo by John Cameron on Unsplash (And, yes, this is a Covid LFD.  Just for illustration.)

One of our Partners, Tenet Compliance & Litigation, has published issue 8 of its newsletter, the Secret Ingredient - Improving Your Fraud Prevention Planning.

The Secret Ingredient is Tenet's quarterly newsletter focused on preventing fraud and financial crime in the food and beverage sector.

This issue includes articles on:
👉 Managing fraud investigations: an in-house perspective
👉 Brexit: Have we lost control?
👉 Investigative tools provided by the civil courts: Part 4
👉 Counterfeiting: what to do if your brand is the target.

The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) is a bicameral body in the UK Parliament. POST has published a note (POSTnote) on measuring sustainable enviroment-food system interactions.

This POSTnote describes environmental impact metrics for food systems, which are complex networks of decision-makers, natural processes and human activities.

Overview

• Food systems are built from the complex activities, interactions and networks of decision-makers, natural processes, human processes and infrastructure. They span all processes and activities involved in food production, processing, packaging, storage, distribution, consumption, and food loss and waste.
• These systems generate economic and nutrition benefits and interact with the environment in multiple ways.
• Achieving international and domestic climate change and environmental targets will require transformative change of global and UK food systems.
• Studies exploring options for reducing environmental impacts suggest that an integrated and coordinated systems approach is needed. This will require sound data, metrics and models to track progress towards transforming food systems. 
• Metrics on environmental impacts of food across the whole supply chain could incentivise producers and retailers to improve product environmental sustainability. However, there are significant data collection challenges, as well as metric, method and modelling limitations. 
• The UK Government’s Food Data Transparency Partnership will develop a mandatory methodology for food labels and sustainability claims. A public consultation is planned.

This POSTnote has also been added to the Policy-Guidance-Law section of this website.

Indicator Displacement Array (IDA) is a rapid on-site test technique based upon a panel of different colourimetric indicators (e.g. different types of pH indicators, and/or different colour-labelled receptor binding sites).  It gives a multi-component data set which can be read using a smartphone.

In this study (here – purchase required) the authors applied IDA to authenticating Longjing tea.  Longjing is a legal Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) in China and has a premium retail value.  The name cannot be used for teas from the same botanical species, using the same production methods, if they originate from other regions.  There has been a history of fraudulent “Longjing” labelling.  The authors report that they have developed and validated a chemometric identification model for Longjing tea using IDA.  They have also designed a panel of IDA sensors that are food-contact safe, meaning that their design is suitable for routine use within the tea supply chain.  They conclude that IDA sensors could be similarly developed and applied to other applications where the origin of food or ingredients needs to be verified at point-of-use.

Photo by Bluesea Tea on Unsplash

The authors of a recent study (here – purchase required) report on the use of biogenic amines to characterise honeys from different regions of Brazil.  They found that the pattern of amines in honey, including serotonin, melatonin, dopamine, histamine, putrescine and cadaverine, varied depending upon the geographic region, foraging flora and production year.  The study did not report that this variation was distinctive enough be a basis for identity verification but it does give another set of data parameters that could be added into a multi component analysis panel of identification characteristics.  The authors propose that amines could be used as a quality specification parameter for some honeys, as many of these compounds have perceived health benefits for consumers.

Photo by Art Rachen on Unsplash

A customs operation in Greece led to the siezure of 21 tonnes of untaxed ethanol intended for the production of contrabrand drinks.  The consignment was carried by a Serbian distribution company and had originated in Bulgaria.  This was an intelligence-led operation started by the Bulgarian customs authorities.  The cover load was nominally windscreen wash but investigation revealed that the destination company was fictitious.

Read a report here

A new vacancy for a Senior Intelligence Analyst has arisen at the Food Standards Agency's National Food Crime Unit (NFCU).

The role will be focussing on the delivery and assurance of NFCU's tactical and strategic intelligence analysis to better understand and communicate the food crime threat, as well as the support and development of NFCU's analyst and researcher cadre.

You'll be playing your part in keeping food safe and what it says it is, and protecting UK consumers from deceptive practices in the food sector. 

Home or hybrid working is available for this post.

The deadline is 6th August 2023.

For further information / to apply: Senior Intelligence Analyst - Civil Service Jobs - GOV.UK

This 52 minutes documentary "The Criminals Running Our Food Chain - Food Fraud: An Organised Crime? ", published in 2021, is now publicly available - see below.

The documentary covers some well known food fraud issues encountered in recent years and includes an account of some of the food fraud prevention activities that have been deployed to combat food fraud.

We are delighted that the Food Authenticity Network (FAN) has been shortlisted for supporting business resilience in the FDF Awards 2023!

The winners will be announced at the FDF Awards ceremony in September 2023 at the Roundhouse, London. Further information on the ceremony and registration can be found here.

Wish us luck! 

Thanks again to FAN member Bruno Sechet of Integralim (www.integralim.net)  who has formatted the JRC monthly food fraud report as this pictorial infographic.  The original report, along with those from previous months, can be found here.  Remember that you can sign up on the JRC website to be notified when each report is published. 

A comprehensive review has been published which covered the drivers of food fraud in Ghana, reviewed incidents and case studies, and discussed mitigation steps and potential future actions.  Drivers were categorised as supply pressures, consumer preferences, supply chain complexities (including globalisation and technology), low probability of detection and low penalties.  Many of the case studies involved enhancing the colour (and, hence, apparent quality) of processed food or spices.  Adding red dye to palm oil is the most widely known example, but the authors also reported similar cases involving powdered vegetables and spices.  Bixa was the most widely reported adulterant used for this colour enhancement.  The authors describe mitigation steps such as the FDA’s intervention against palm oil adulteration and capacity-building programmes in analytical forensic science.  They stress the need for a co-ordinated response between universities and different government agencies.

Read the full article here.

A recording of the recent BRCGS "Ask the Experts" session on Food Fraud has been posted here.  Hear from John W Spink at the Food Fraud Prevention Academy and Selvarani Elahi, UK Deputy Government Chemist and Executive Director of the Food Authenticity Network, as they share their insights.

The US Department of Agriculture approved the sale of “cultivated” or lab-grown meat to American consumers late last month, paving the way for what manufactures say is a new avenue for food sourcing and distribution.

Two companies, Upside Foods and GOOD Meat, were both given approval to begin manufacturing and selling their “cultivated chicken” products, also known as “cultured” chicken, which are produced using animal cells grown in a laboratory to create meat without directly slaughtering an animal.

Read full story.