Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Destoned Cherries - Acceptable Number and Size of Stones


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,361 posts
  • 992 thanks
263
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:50 AM

I recently had to deal with a few issues with cherry stones in a cherry sauce. I would like to hear from members who have had similar experiences.

Views on:
What is an acceptable level of cherry stones in a cherry based product?
What is an acceptable size of cherry stone in a cherry based product?

I know some products contain warnings 'may contain cherry stones'

I believe the stones could be a choking hazard. Anyone have any related complaints or stories?

Regards,

Tony



#2 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,464 posts
  • 4856 thanks
949
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 19 November 2012 - 08:34 PM

I recently had to deal with a few issues with cherry stones in a cherry sauce. I would like to hear from members who have had similar experiences.

Views on:
What is an acceptable level of cherry stones in a cherry based product?
What is an acceptable size of cherry stone in a cherry based product?

I know some products contain warnings 'may contain cherry stones'

I believe the stones could be a choking hazard. Anyone have any related complaints or stories?

Regards,

Tony


Hi Tony,

Some input on safety/size context, sort of predictable i guess -
Attached File  cherry pit hazard1.doc   27KB   57 downloads

Attached File  cherry pit hazard 2, AIB food safety.pdf   458.92KB   65 downloads
(pg 16)

Rgds / Charles

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,361 posts
  • 992 thanks
263
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 20 November 2012 - 04:53 PM

Hi Tony,

Some input on safety/size context, sort of predictable i guess -
Attached File  cherry pit hazard1.doc   27KB   57 downloads

Attached File  cherry pit hazard 2, AIB food safety.pdf   458.92KB   65 downloads
(pg 16)

Rgds / Charles


Thank you Charles

Yes I was thinking of the 7mm guideline from the FDA. The stones I was seeing were 10 - 11mm.

'These items can become hazards depending on their size and hardness; for example, olive or cherry pits in the range of 7 to 25 mm can damage teeth or bone, injure the mouth, or constitute a choking hazard. As such, it is a good idea to have an inspection program for these types of materials if you make them as finished products or use them as ingredients. '

I presume the FDA are implying nil tolerance whereas cherry suppliers may specify 1 stone per 100kg.

There was an inspection program in place, however, I am thinking that X-ray may be the only effective way of detecting and removing stones.

Regards,

Tony

#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,464 posts
  • 4856 thanks
949
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:56 AM

Dear Tony,

But do note that a (possible) exception was also indicated, eg -

They [Physical hazards] are materials that are not part of the product or expected by the consumer to be found in the product.


This kind of distinction also turns up in other fields IMEX. For example, pure haccp usually focuses on "dangerous" bones in processed fish fillets. However in commercial practice, a separation can occur between retail products which are defined/labelled as "deboned" as compared to, often non-retail, product simply labelled fish fillets. "Bones" in the latter is often a contractual spec., eg assessed by a scoring method. Although if an incident actually occurred, one wonders ....

I suppose the infamous "may contain" is almost irresistable where not specifically forbidden. Especially if product is distributed in a litigious-prone vicinity perhaps. :smile:

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users