12 Nov 2010 DoH responds to claims on non-safe food
Following a written question in Parliament by the DA recently, it has emerged that a large number of food samples tested by government authorities are harmful to consumers or not what manufacturers claim on the labels.
DA spokesperson on health, Mike Waters, is calling for an investigation into the unacceptable number of food samples failing safety tests. Read the full story here.
Subsequently the Department of Health has responded to this story with the following comment by Dries Pretorius, director of the Directorate: Food Control.
The information provided by the DA to the media resulting from a reply to a Parliamentary Question by the Minister of Health, relates only to samples analysed by the Forensic Chemical Laboratory of the Department in Cape Town of samples submitted by the Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) of the Western Cape and Eastern Cape Provinces.
It is important to note that information such as brand names, as well as individual results, is managed by the laboratory on a client confidentiality basis, in this case, the clients of the laboratory are the metro and district municipalities submitting the samples as well as the Port Health authorities of the provinces related to imported foodstuffs, and it is therefore recommended that the permission of the mentioned authorities, where applicable, be obtained in the event of the brand names in question being made public.
It should further be noted that details of brand names are not in all instances provided to the laboratories, (in some instances the samples can only be identified by means of a sample number), and it is therefore not possible for the laboratories to clearly identify and list frequently failing brands.
The reasons for the non-compliance of the majority of the samples mentioned in the statement by the DA can be summarised as follows: Aflatoxin in peanut butter exceeding 10mg/kg; colourants in extruded maize snacks exceeding 200mg/kg; presence of the illegal colourant Sudan Red in the product of one processor; absence of prescribed micro nutrients in fortified foodstuffs; and, preservatives in sauces exceeding the permitted amount.
It is the opinion of the Directorate: Food Control that the DA erroneously reported that ‘one third’ of foodstuffs on the shelves in South Africa is harmful, based on the information provided in the Minister’s reply. If calculated, based on the non-compliance percentages provided in the contents of the reply document, as per category of foodstuffs for the period 2009/10, this Directorate found the figure to be approximately 19%. In the event of the results of the samples which did not comply in respect of fortification requirements being excluded, (these results should not be included when reference is made to foodstuffs being ‘harmful’), the figure drops to approx 14%.
It should further be noted that it is normal practice for the laboratory in Cape Town to also evaluate the contents of the labels of samples received as pre-packaged foodstuffs, and that although the analysis of the contents might comply to the relevant regulatory requirements, the laboratory includes the final result under ‘failed’, in the event of the label not complying. If these samples are excluded from the results, the figure of samples as reported by the DA as being ‘harmful’ will even further drop.
Third of SA food harmful, misleading (from Media24)
There should be an investigation into the high number of food samples failing safety tests, the Democratic Alliance said on Friday (22 October 2010).
“The high number of food samples that failed safety tests by the Forensic Chemistry Laboratories suggests that there are major problems with quality control over food in South Africa,” DA spokesperson on health Mike Waters said in a statement.
“The DA will be writing to the minister of health to ask what steps he is taking to investigate this problem and ensure that South Africans are better protected from harmful products or misleading claims.”
The food division of the Forensic Chemistry Laboratory was responsible for testing random food samples to ensure that they complied with the Foodstuff, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, Waters said.
“In reply to a DA parliamentary question, the minister of health recently revealed an alarmingly high number of these samples failed.
“Overall, 33.6% of food samples taken this year did not comply with the act (compared to 29.3% last year), and a range of other products that South Africans consume every day failed.”
According to Waters in 2009 to 2010, 34.8% of chips failed, 10.6% of meat tested, 25.9% of drinks and 12.5% of the dairy tested.
In the same period 66.6% of the fortified food tested failed.
“The reasons that the products could have failed vary, from ones that could have serious implications for health (such as a product being contaminated with a toxin or being decayed), to ones that are not necessarily harmful but amount to deception on the part of the seller or manufacturer,” said Waters.
Waters said the figure for fortified foods was “particularly alarming”.
“Whatever the reasons for the failures, it is clear that a large number of products are being sold to the public on the basis of false claims.
“The extent of this problem clearly warrants a thorough investigation.”