A survey carried out by the Food Standards Agency to look at the levels of colors in sweets has found that in "small number of cases" limits are not being observed.

"Five out of 196 retail samples of packaged sweets contained levels of either sunset yellow FCF or carmoisine in excess of the maximum permitted limit of 50 mg/kg in confectionery. A maximum permitted limit of 300 mg/kg for some others singly or colors in combination was not exceeded in any of the samples." So begins a survey commissioned by the British Food Standards Agency (FSA) of colorants in sweets (300 mg/kg = 300 ppm).

"Fourteen of the samples of sweets contained colors that were not listed on the label. The FSA considers that consumers should be fully informed about the presence of ingredients in food, and is pressing for all ingredients, including all additives, to be indicated on food labels. This is part of the FSA's Food Labelling Plan." VEGA supports and welcomes this earnest of intentions ranging wider than this single report can exemplify.

The FSA is working with local authorities to "ensure that the law on colors in sweets is fully observed. Although industry has apparently taken action in the majority of cases where the survey found problems, there is some uncertainty remaining. Local enforcement authorities have been informed and are taking action as part of their own programs to test sweets for colors."

The FSA Information Sheet is number 23/02, dated April 2002. Most of the samples were collected from 4 localities or districts in England: London, Sevenoaks (Kent), Blackpool (Lancashire), and Peterborough (Cambridgeshire). Samples were chosen that were "distinctly colored" (i.e. products that were white or brown, e.g. chocolate or toffee that might be "enhanced" with chemicalized caramels, were excluded), from the following categories: jellies and jelly foam sweets; hard gums; mallows; liquorice; and a miscellaneous (mixed bag) sort. The samples were sold in packaging; in many the country of origin was not declared.

Purchases were made from shops of various types: supermarkets, grocers, department stores, newsagents, corner stores, petrol stations, kiosks, cinemas, and cafes. All products had more that 6 weeks to run before their expiry date.

The following colors were included in this survey:

• E102 (tartrazine)
  
• E104 (quinoline yellow)
  
• E110 (sunset yellow FCF)
  
• E122 (azorubine carmoisine)
  
• E124 (ponceau 4R, cochineal red A)
  
• E127 (erythrosine)
  
• E128 (red 2G)
  
• E129 (allura red)
  
• E131 (patent blue V)
  
• E132 (indigo carmine)
  
• E133 (brilliant blue)
  
• E142 (green S)
  
• E151 (brilliant black)

Except for cochineal, which may be derived from extracts of insects, these are all coal-tar dyes deemed suitable, after tests on animals, for "restoring" color to processed foods and for coloring pills, tablets, capsules, and toiletries. They may be used singly or in combination in confectionery up to a maximum limit of 300 mg/kg; the quantities of 3 of the above colorants - E110, E122, and E124 - may not exceed 50 mg/kg. The names give clues to the hues augmented (and exaggerated).

No samples contained red 2G nor erythrosine. In 5 samples the levels of sunset yellow or carmoisine were "clearly above" the respective legal limit of 50 mg/kg.
(See Table 1 below)

The FSA comments that "consumer health should be adequately protected provided that the limits in The Colors in Food Regulations 1995, as amended, are observed. If the law is observed, intakes of sunset yellow FCF and carmoisine should be within the respective Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs) set by the Scientific Committee on Food. This is true for both children and adults. Intakes calculated for samples containing the highest levels of sunset yellow or carmoisine were still within the respective ADIs for adults and children." This approach adopts EU procedures for comparing intakes of additives and ADIs. "If the limits in law are not observed, this will push intakes close to or possibly above the respective ADIs for sunset yellow FCF and carmoisine," states the FSA report.

Colors not listed on the label were found in the FSA survey in 14 samples of sweets. Pre-packaged sweets, like other pre-packaged foods, are required to list all their ingredients in accordance with regulations 12 to 18 of the Food Labelling Regulations 1996 (as amended). Additives added to or used in a food to serve the function of a color must be identified by that category name ('color') followed either by the specific name of the additive or its serial number. If an ingredient of a food is a compound ingredient (i.e. it contains other ingredients, including additives), its ingredients do not have to be listed if they perform a technological function in the final food. It is generally an offence to sell any food which is not marked or labelled in accordance with these and other provisions set out in the regulations.

The results for the 5 samples containing levels of colors above the respective legal limit and for those samples containing colors not listed on the label were sent to the respective companies for their comments. These comments showed that although industry has apparently taken action in the majority of cases where the survey found problems, there is some uncertainty remaining. One of the suppliers of a sample with illegally high level of carmoisine did not provide comments on this result. Some of the companies whose samples containing colors not listed on the label also failed to reply to the Agency's letter about the survey. Local enforcement authorities have been informed by the FSA and are taking action as part of their own programs to test sweets for colorants.

Responses from companies informed by the FSA of the results of the analyses include the following extracts:

From Tootsie Roll Industries Inc, Chicago, Illinois
".....It is true, FD & C Yellow 6 is in the ingredients legend, but will be removed as new packaging is produced. In any event FD and 6 Yellow is not in the product. Therefore, the level of FD and C in the product should be less than 50 ppm or below detection. It is hard for us to comprehend finding sunset yellow in some of the Fluffy Stuff Cotton Candy unless the product the FSA evaluated was old."

From Safeway Stores plc, Hayes, Middlesex
"....Although these results are not a concern for consumer safety, they have identified a weakness in the manufacturing practices of our supplier. As a consequence, a number of products from this factory have been withdrawn from sale. Further production has been stopped until improved practices and controls have been put in place."

From Storck, Winchester
"....We were alerted to an issue of uneven distribution of the orange and cream mix that resulted in slightly high levels of sunset yellow (E110) in some of the sweets produced at the early production stages of this product and took immediate action to compensate for the dosing fluctuations. The extent of the dosing fluctuations exceeded our initial preproduction calculations. These samples analysed during this FSA survey were from product produced at the very early stages of production."

From Chelsea Foods Ltd, Rainham, Essex
".....Firstly, I wish to make it clear that we do not manufacture confectionery. This particular product is purchased from an importer.....I can confirm that the printing plates for ingredients contained in this product were produced in accordance with the information we were supplied with by the importers (a copy of their fax is enclosed). We are now producing a revised ingredients list and will ensure that any further stock we sell is printed with the correct ingredients list." (The fax disclosed these ingredients in the named products:
Raspberries ¡X corn syrup, sugar water, gelling agents, modified starch, gelatin acid, citric acid, flavorings, colors E104, E122, E131. Peaches ¡X sugar, corn syrup, water, gelatin acid, citric acid, flavors, colors E104, E122, E124).

From Dunhills (Pontefract) plc, Pontefract, West Yorkshire
"......There was no risk to the health of our valued customers. Tartrazine is not used in our products intended for the European market, but is permitted for use in Canada. Our records show that in May 2000 an order was produced and packed for Canada, leaving a small remainder of confectionery after packing. We believe this surplus was mistakenly packed into the European product. Controls on export material have since been tightened and we are satisfied that this error could not happen again..."

From Ginni Enterprise, Southall, Middlesex
"......Strawberry Bricks: We as a packer usually check all the information given by the supplier prior to overprinting them on the label. In this instance it seems this item was missed in printing. Further, it was only a small quantity (0.5MT max) of the product packed as a trial, but our salesmen found it very unpopular, thus we discontinued the item since 2001. Marshmallow:....we would like to ascertain you that the printing for the next batch would be complete and compiled. Meanwhile we are also waiting for our supplier's updated information. I am sure you appreciate the time scale we need for the present batch....(we) would like to assure you that we are exercising our due diligence and taking all reasonable precaution to ensure the safety and quality including labelling information of all our products."

From Leaf United Kingdom Ltd, Southport, Merseyside
".....I have attached a copy of the analysis report from Leatherhead Food Research Association in which they found no evidence of E151 in any of the coloring materials or products that were submitted including the reference samples. This is obviously in contradiction to your findings from Reading Scientific Services Ltd but would seem to further substantiate our initial disbelief a the allegation, i.e. the fact that we do not use the material in question E151......and (we) are quite willing to assist in any further work that you feel would assist in clarifying the situation."

Interpreting the Evidence

VEGA has been involved with the Food Standards Agency, even before Tony Blair commissioned Professor James, several months before the election in which the Labour Party saw their chance of ousting the Tories, to propose a plan for a plow-to-plate agency to redress the consumers' disadvantage against the MAFF's partiality to producers and the trade. VEGA was involved in consultations throughout the stages of the Bill and final Act in what came to be named the Food Standards Agency, given authority, funds, and staff to muscle in with good effect. The FSA's gestation was expected, with little demur from what had become the official Opposition.

Other countries within the EU, as well as the EC itself, have set up agencies with similar responsibilities, which bid fair to collaborate without too much bureaucracy.

Stakeholdership

VEGA has become a stakeholder in appropriate projects that the FSA is tackling. The tide of correspondence has changed to civil servants bombarding stakeholding NGOs, such as VEGA, for information, research, and comment. These are demanding responsibilities; in some respects the FSA is overestimating the talents and resources the NGOs, being independent non-commercial bodies, can command. This is a matter for continuing consideration, in which VEGA strives to keep the veggie constituency in the picture.

VEGA is pleased to congratulate the FSA on ploys such as the survey we have reviewed as an educative example for parents, teachers, and children to engage in an informed and critical involvement in their choices and enjoyment of food. The food industry resorts to barrages of advertising likely to excite sales of comestibles bulked with a baleful trio of cheap temptations¡Xsugar, fat, and additives (notably colorings). The industry is irresponsible in stimulating pester-power by children on parents. VEGA joins with other NGOs tackling this problem of 'junk-foods', with special emphasis on health matters. The survey on confectionery throws a light on wider issues that parents and teachers, setting their own examples, can engage children in an instructive discussion on their choices in food and drink. The S in FSA is well chosen for Standards rather than for a blanket assurance of Safety.

The Safety Catch

The survey tells us that

• Safety is an interpretation of experiments on animals tested cruelly in procedures of doubtful relevance and in limitations of circumstances (e.g. in cocktails of additives and dietary variations).
• Even chemical analyses performed by approved scientists are open to question.
• Labelling may be faulty or unreliable (e.g. incomplete or omitting components such as fats, oils and gelatin of concern to Jewish, Muslim, and veggie customers).
• Monitoring is difficult because components may be imported through undisclosed brokers and merchants; traceability is laborious and assurances based on 'science' cannot be easily scrutinized.
• Bad manufacturing and marketing practice is still revealed: the customer needs the constant attention and services of the FSA and EHOs and TSOs to assert some checks and openness on the industry. Most of the cost of such surveillance has to be met from taxes paid by the public.
• Control by these authorities is still inadequate.
  
  

Color-Blindness

Pester-power from customers with superficial concepts of risks and safety may drive the FSA to commission further experiments on animals. This pressure must be resisted: such tests are a political sop and engender undue reliance on fatuous and cruel experimentation. Most children care for animals and like to express their concern by demonstrating it personally and by example. The bright colors and lurid enhancements and restorations hide unpalatable facts. Enjoy cruelty-free foods unsullied by cosmetics with cruelty.

<< PAGE TOP >>

VEGA News