FOOD PRESERVATIVES.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18265, 26 December 1924, Page 17

FOOD PRESERVATIVES.

SPECIAL COMMITTEE'S

REPORT.

PRESERVATION OF BUTTER

(rSOU OTTK OWN COBHESPOXDIST.)

LONDON*. October"^?,

The long-awaited report of the Departmental Committee on the use of preservatives and colouring matters in food is a document of some eighty pages. Its effect is to condemn strongly the use of preservatives except m special cases and in certain specified quanties, and to suggest the prohibition of the use of copper salts to colour or preserve peas and other vegetables.

As regards colouring matters copper is prohibited in green vegetables in the United States of America, and in Australia ~ Canada, and New Zealand; undir the laws of other countries which deal with the subject the amount permitted is generally limited to one part in ten thousand, equivalent to 0.7 grain per pound. Switzerland and Japan have published lists of prohibited colours, and Belgium lists both of prohibited and of permitted colours. Other countries, including the United States of America, L'ruguay, Sweden, Canada, Italy, Spain, France,l>enmark. the Australian States, and New Zealand, have issued lists of permitted colours with power to add to the lists. The number of synthetic colours permitted vanes between the ten permitted by New Zealand and twenty-one allowed under the French law.

The Committee state that they have approached the subject from the basis of three propositions, which they consider are generally accepted: — (1) That it is undesirable to add to articles, of food any niatexial not of the nature, substance, and quality of food. (2) That if for commercial or other reasons the addition is necessary, if should he limited to t.hr> minimum required to effect its purposo. (3) That if it can be shown that some of these materials are less undesirable than others, preference should be given to the employment of the less undesirable materials.

We have given a groat deal of consideration (the Committee states) to th? question whether preservatives are necessary in the case of butter which i 3 sent to this country from Australia, New Zealand, and the Argentine. It is clear that some butter comes from all these countries without, preservative. The annual reports of the Government Chemist for the years 1901 and 1918 give- particulars of the examination of the samples taken by Customs officials at the port of entry into this country, from which it appears that 10 per cent, of the samples taken from Australian and 20 per cent, from New Zealand consignments were free from preservative, and that some consignments without boric acid arrive from the Argentine. More recent figures show that in 1922-3 samples representing 5766 boxes of Australian butter, and 9695 of New Zealand butter, wera free frOin horic acid, these being 21 per cent, and 27 per cent, respectively of the total amount sampled. Confirmation of the New Zealand figures was obtained from the Department of Agriculture in that country, who informed us that out of 60.000 tons of butter exported in 1923, 12,730 tons came from factories using no preservatives. Jn addition, creameries using preservatives sometimes sent out butter without pres?pvatives in response to specific orders for such butter. The representative from the Hieh Commissioner's Office stated that of the 350 butter factories in New Zealand, thirty-five, or 10 per cent., useß no preservative whatever, and he gave it as his opinion, as a dairy expert, that the addition of preservative to New Zealand butter was not necessary. Furthermore, there is a considerable exportation of butter from both Australia and New Zealand to the United States of America, which is required bv United States law to be free from preservatives. 'Evidence was given to us that factories forming part of an imnortant grouo under one management in New South "Wales export considerable ouantities of butter, and dispense entirely with preservatives.. Protest from Traders.

From these facts it would seem reasonable to infer that it would be possible to dispense with preservatives m all consignments of butter from Australia and .New Zealand; and t&e position would presumably not be more difficult with rtspect to butter from the Argentine, Canada, and other exporting countries. On the other hand, the witnesses engaged in the Australian and New Zealand butter trade, who appeared before us?, were in the main strongly opposed to any prohibition of preservatives in butter, and no doubt there is a considerable feeling in these countries in favour of the use of preservatives. The witnesses, argued that preserved butter was more palatable than unpres?rrved. that the latter showed a quicker rate of deterioration than the formor when removed from cold storage, that the circumstances of the trade rendered it necessary to keep large stocks In hand at various times of the year; and that a certain proportion of the butter supplies came from up-country stations difficult of access and so situated that a considerable time must elapse between the making of the butter and its receipt at the exporting depot. On this last point it was argued that prohibition would be a great hardship to many new settlers. As regards the other points raised, the evidence of these witnesses, though no doubt honestly given, was discounted by the fact that all of them seemed to be quite unaware of the comparatively larg? amounts of unpreserved butter which are already being sent from Australia and New Zealand. Butter, preserved and unpreserved. is shipped and treated in precisely the same way and it appears that importers, distributors, and retailers in this country are quite commonlv unaware of the difference between the two classes. Preserved and unpreserved New Zealand and Australian butter may l>? sold by the same retailer at the same price, and without his knowing which is preserved and which is unpreserved. It wa.s stated that an expert taster can tell the difference, but we could not obtain any evidence to show that the verdict of the taster was confirmed by analvsis.

Two Tears' Grace Suggested. Certain -witnesses urged that a maximum limit of 0.5 jrer cent, of boric acid shonld be permissible, on the ground that this quantity was necessary for preservative purposes, whilst others stated that they would be content with 0.*20 per cent. The results of the analyses jnade by the Government chemist show, however, that even in the case of the preserved butter coming from Australia and New Zealand, the amount of boric acid present is usually below 0.25 per cent., and frequently below 0.1 per cent. These figures were supported by results given in a paper in tho Journal of the Department of Agriculture of Victoria for 1913, produced in evidence by one of the witnesses, showing, from the analyses of 2640 samples for boric acid, that 606 samples (20.6 per cent.) contained less than 0.1 per cent., and 959 samples (32.6 per cent.) more than 0.1. but less than 0.2 per cent. There

was no evidence as to the use of other preservatives in place of boric and. The conclusion at which we arrive after consideration of ail the evidence before us is that a period of two years' grace should be ample to enable such adjustments of methods to bo made as would enable all butter to be prod-iced and sold without preservatives. The Australian and New Zealand trade, and possibly that of the Argentine, seemed to be the only cases in which any difficulty was to be apprehended. From both the former countries a considerable quantity of butter is alreadv l>eing sent without preservatives. The requirement, of compulsory pasteurisation which has been recently imposed in Australia will, it is behoved, help to improve the keeping quality of the butter, and we have little doubt that such a regulation as we suggest would stimulate improvements in other directions. Vie therefore recommend that after a period such as we have suggested, the addition of any preservative to butter should be prohibited.

Colouring Matters. As to the use of colouring matters, it is observed: We have no hesitation in asserting, in view of the present state of knowledge, that the addition of copper salts to foods is highly undesirable. It has been represented to us by importers and packers in this countrr of ocas greened wit.li copper, that r-rohibftion «'' addition of copper to neas would result in the destruction of the canned pea industry. Other firms, however, who pack peas without the use of copper, assert that they have no difficulty in selling their product in this country, and have no fear that prohibition of the use of cooper would have any permanent adverse effect uwrn the industry. In the case of other colouring matters, it is cuggested that a list of permitted colours should be prepared, and that no colours other than tho.se in such a list should be allowed to be used in the preparation of articles of food or of substances entering into the composition of food. The list should be prepared by the Minister of Health and issued bv him. provision being made for the consideration of claims advanced by traders for the recognition and aoproval of additional colours on satisfactory evidence of their, harmlessness. It is recommended that the maximum permissible quantity of arpenie in anv colouring substance. of whatever class used for food purpose*, nhould be 1-lf)oth of a grain per pound. We have further arrived at the contusion that the total amount rjf lead, copper, tin. and z'-nc in any colourincr matter should not, in aggregate, exceed 20 parts per million.