21 out of 165 milk samples tested sub-standard: Satyendra Jain

As many as 21 samples of milk, out of the total 165 tested, were found to be of sub-standard quality, said Delhi Health Minister Satyendra Jain, adding that those who failed the tests included prominent brands like Amul and Mother Dairy.

The drive, which started on April 13, also took three samples of ghee for testing, and found one (of a local brand) "unsafe", the minister said.

"The issue was raised in the Assembly and I gave directions to test samples of the milk in Delhi. We have taken a total of 177 samples across Delhi including branded and local products, reports of 165 have come out, and out of this 21 samples (including Mother Dairy and Amul) have failed for their sub-standard quality - which does not mean they are unsafe," Jain told reporters.

Talking about 'sub-standard', Jain said it can mean two things: one is fake(unsafe) and the other one is where it does not meet the prescribed requirement (safe, but falls short of some content, like fats for example).

Most of the failed samples, during this drive, were found adulterated with milk powder, he added.

"All cases will be submitted to the court and the drive will continue to happen and will be extended to all milk products.

"Earlier there were four food inspectors and now 18 of them have joined newly for the drive and will be on the field on daily basis," he said, adding that parameters mentioned by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) were followed in the drive.

On punishment, Jain said that in case of sub-standard milk there would be a penalty ranging between Rs 5,000 and Rs 5 lakh.

However, he said it won't be the case if a product is found to be unsafe.

"If unsafe product - like a sample that was found unsafe in ghee - there can be imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years," he said.

Excess ash content in noodle – what does it mean?

The difference between the two is demonstrated by comparing the characteristics given for macaroni products and seasoning in following tables.

Macroni Products-

S.No. Characteristics Requirements

1 Moisture Not more than 12.5%

2 Total Ash Not more than 1% on dry basis

3 Ash insoluble in dilute HCl (on dry basis) Not more than 0.1%

4 Nitrogen Not less than 1.7% on dry basis

Seasoning-

S.No Characteristic Requirement

1 Moisture % (by weight) (Maximum) 10.0

2 Acid insoluble Ash in dilute HCl % (on dry basis) (Maximum) 2.0

It can be seen from the aforementioned tables that for macaroni products ash content is measured in two ways. First, total Ash basis and second, on ash insoluble in dilute HCL on dry basis. For total Ash basis limit prescribed is 1% and for Ash insoluble in dilute HCL on dry basis it is 0.1%. In contrast to this for seasoning, ash content is measured in only one way i.e., ash soluble in dilute HCL on dry basis for which limit is 2%. So, one can clearly see that there is a marked difference in the limit of ash prescribed for Macaroni products and seasoning. For macaroni products it is 0.1%; whereas for seasoning it is 2%. Therefore, in seasoning 20 times more ash content is allowed than for macaroni products where noodles and pasta are covered.

Recently, FSSAI brought in amendment in under Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2016 to introduce standards for “Instant Noodle” which clearly states that it would not apply to seasoning. This also suggest that seasoning is treated different from noodle and there are no standards for seasoning.

On the other hand, the state food safety authority would argue that they acted on the Advisory by FSSAI in 2015which prescribed 1% limit for tastemaker as well and the same has not been withdrawn till date.

In such circumstances, it appears a small clarification on part of FSSAI would settle the whole dispute. In the past FSSAI has issued a clarification in similar circumstances on the issue of declaration regarding Monosodium Glutamate wherein it had retracted from its earlier interpretation which they later thought to be incorrect. The industry would be eagerly waiting for such clarification.

With single-brand retailing making its way in India, foreign investors are seeing food processing as the next big sunrise sector in India. As more and more international F&B brands would be foraying in to Indian market, the FSSAI and other food regulatory bodies in the country should come up with clear guidelines and standardized norms to adapt with the evolving food market in India.

FSSAI orders FBOs to get Food Handlers trained by 31st December, 2018

The FSSAI has, by an Order dated 25th April, 2018, advised all FBOs to nominate atleast one trained and certified Food Safety Supervisor, for every 25 Food Handlers or part thereof in each of their premises, for carrying out periodic training of all Food Handlers in such premises; and maintaining records for food safety audit and inspections.

The FSSAI also directed the FBOs to get such Food Handlers trained under the Food Safety Training & Certification Program (“FoSTaC”) by 31st December, 2018.

The list of Training Partners, empanelled for the purpose of such training, and other details regarding FoSTaC have been made available on fostac@fssai.gov.in.

The FSSAI, by the above-mentioned Order, has also defined the following terms, in context of food safety training and certification:

Food Handler

Food Safety Supervisor

Drive launched against artificial ripening of mango

Accused face 6 months jail, ₹1 lakh fine

A campaign has been launched by the Krishna district officials to put a check on use of calcium carbide for ripening of mangoes artificially, citing health hazards due to the chemical.

In a recent review meeting with Joint Collector Ms. Vijaya Krishnan, Collector B. Lakshmikantam mooted serious legal action against those who used the chemical for artificial ripening of the mango fruit.

Mango merchants have been warned against violating the ban orders.

“It has been decided to invoke the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 against those caught using calcium carbide for ripening. Up to ₹1 lakh fine and six months imprisonment will be awarded to the accused,” said Mr. Lakshmikantam in an official release.

The public have been asked to report such practices by calling 9515053159 or 9849905226.