Food Fraud Mitigation
Hello there, my name is Chris McDonald at Crepe Cuisine. We are a small/medium sized bakery making crepes, pancakes and blinis. I was hoping one of you could help with our raw materials and say which ones an auditor will be looking for for us to be testing for adulterants. Any advice will be very much appreciated particularly on mitigation.
They are as follows:
Whole Milk
Liquid free range hen whole egg and free range hen whole egg powder
Sunflower oil
Rapeseed oil
Sugar
Plain flour
Salt
Unsalted butter
Vanilla flavour
Cornflour
Glycerine
Apple concentrate
Buttermilk powder
Whey powder
Skimmed milk powder
Chocolate chips
Infused wild blueberries
Lemon infused sunflower oil
Cracked black pepper
Butterscotch sauce
Dairy milk chocolate sauce
Spelt flour
Sodium bicarbonate
Chlorophyllin
Potassium sorbate
SAPP 15 (Diphosphates)
Wheat starch
At the moment I would say milk is the most at risk of being adulterated due to the high number of reported cases and have been seeking labs that offer High profile thin layer chromatography for routine testing of adulterants in milk with little joy. As mentioned any help on this will be greatly appreciated.
Most indebted,
Chris
From a safety POV, The first thing the auditor will probably be interested in is which of the ingredients is adequately documented as Food-Grade.
I would hope that this should eliminate the majority of the items in yr list ?
I don't quite understand the interpretation of the "mitigation" aspect. Sorry.
Is there some reason why the auditor should expect the ingredients to be fraudulent ?
Hi Chris,
You can use the database at www.foodfraud.org to receive info about the risk linked to your ingredients.
Mathieu Colmant
Director
Hi Chris,
You can use the database at www.foodfraud.org to receive info about the risk linked to your ingredients.
Mathieu Colmant
Director
It's an interesting database, Thks.
But there appears to be no relative ranking/prioritization assessment which is presumably of interest to user/auditor.
Charles,
I suppose that, as for everything, things of interest for the auditor will depend on what he has already seen, read or heared before the audit...
Charles,
I suppose that, as for everything, things of interest for the auditor will depend on what he has already seen, read or heared before the audit...
I agree, IMO it is reasonable to expect them to know the "Headlines" but I fear very few are Chemists.
Salt is salt but Food Grade is "OK salt". Hopefully with a genuine COA.
I'm expecting to soon see a requirement for the receiver to validate COAs. :smile:
I'm expecting to soon see a requirement for the receiver to validate COAs. :smile:
That is funny but true.
Is see you have milk powder in your list. I would ask your supplier (if relevant in NZ) for copies of Aflatoxin M1, pesticides reports etc
With the oils, id be asking for results that rapeseed is indeed rapeseed; sunflower is sunflower.
Do you specify that the sugar you purchase is from beet or cane? ask for documentation to prove this. Does your salt make any Claims? (Kosher or sea salt?)
Get the gist?
It's an interesting database, Thks.
But there appears to be no relative ranking/prioritization assessment which is presumably of interest to user/auditor.
Charles,
The database is just the starting point. The way I have done my VA is to look up our ingredients in the fraud database and see if there are large numbers (pick a threshold) of reported incidents of fraud.
If there are, those ingredients get looked at more closely (see http://www.ifsqn.com/forum/index.php/topic/26109-vulnerability-assessment-template/?p=94149
I used the database as a way to prioritize ingredients during the VA.
Marshall
Charles,
The database is just the starting point. The way I have done my VA is to look up our ingredients in the fraud database and see if there are large numbers (pick a threshold) of reported incidents of fraud.
If there are, those ingredients get looked at more closely (see http://www.ifsqn.com/forum/index.php/topic/26109-vulnerability-assessment-template/?p=94149
I used the database as a way to prioritize ingredients during the VA.
Marshall
Hi Marshall,
Thanks for comment. TBH i was just speculating.
Indeed, I have noticed during browsing that many (fraud) RAs focus on the individual contributory scores rather than the cumulated ranking (VCCPs perhaps ) but not all. More like the USP presentation.
I guess this also relates to the VA table you posted recently. And maybe suggests a limitation in Ulrich's Formula.
Interesting to see if BRC follow yr earlier prediction and only desire a VA, so that a minimalist, Standard-literal, approach like Ulrich presented is acceptable. Sort of defeats the overall objective though maybe ? :smile: