Adulterated Foods: What Food Service Operators Need to Know

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Adulterated Foods: What Food Service Operators Need to Know Under the New York City Health Code, food service operators cannot add substances that may be harmful to health to food. This is called adulterating food and these substances are known as adulterants. Who decides which substances are adulterants? A substance is considered an adulterant if the New York City Health Department, New York State Health Department, New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets or the U.S. Food and Drug Administration determines that adding it to food may be harmful to health. How does the Health Department enforce this part of the Health Code? During an inspection, the Health Department will check ingredients, labels and menus. If the inspector identifies adulterated food, the food may be embargoed — it will need to be discarded or returned to the supplier. Will I receive a violation if I adulterate food? Yes, you may receive a summons subject to fines, as well as violation points that count toward your letter grade. What substances are considered adulterants? There are many substances that cannot be added to food or drink. See the Food and Drug Administration’s Food Additive Status List for more information. The Health Department also recently identified these prohibited substances during inspections: ▪ Activated charcoal [Note: activated charcoal can be used as a filtration device] ▪ Cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) ▪ Dietary supplements for humans or animals ▪ Liquid nitrogen* ▪ Dry ice* ▪ Kava-Kava ▪ Kratom What should I do if I am not sure whether a substance is an adulterant? If you are unsure whether you can add something to food, please call the New York City Health Department’s Office of Food Safety and Community Sanitation at 646-632-6001 or email [email protected]. * Liquid nitrogen or dry ice may be added to food if allowed to evaporate or vaporize completely before it is served to customers. No fog or smoke should be present when served or eaten. .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Identification and Quantification of Adulterants in Coffee
foods Communication Identification and Quantification of Adulterants in Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Using FT-MIR Spectroscopy Coupled with Chemometrics Mauricio Flores-Valdez 1 , Ofelia Gabriela Meza-Márquez 2 , Guillermo Osorio-Revilla 2 and Tzayhri Gallardo-Velázquez 1,* 1 Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas-Santo Tomás, Departamento de Biofísica, Prolongación de Carpio y Plan de Ayala S/N, Col. Santo Tomás, Alcaldía Miguel Hidalgo, Ciudad de México C.P. 11340, Mexico; [email protected] 2 Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas-Zacatenco, Departamento de Ingeniería Bioquímica, Av. Wilfrido Massieu S/N, Esq. Cda, Miguel Stampa, Col. Unidad Profesional Adolfo López Mateos, Zacatenco, Alcaldía Gustavo A. Madero, Ciudad de México C.P. 07738, Mexico; [email protected] (O.G.M.-M.); [email protected] (G.O.-R.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +52-(55)-5729-6000 (ext. 62305) Received: 24 May 2020; Accepted: 28 June 2020; Published: 30 June 2020 Abstract: Food adulteration is an illegal practice performed to elicit economic benefits. In the context of roasted and ground coffee, legumes, cereals, nuts and other vegetables are often used to augment the production volume; however, these adulterants lack the most important coffee compound, caffeine, which has health benefits. In this study, the mid-infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy (FT-MIR) technique coupled with chemometrics was used to identify and quantify adulterants in coffee (Coffea arabica L.). Coffee samples were adulterated with corn, barley, soy, oat, rice and coffee husks, in proportions ranging from 1–30%. A discrimination model was developed using the soft independent modeling of class analogy (SIMCA) framework, and quantitative models were developed using such algorithms as the partial least squares algorithms with one variable (PLS1) and multiple variables (PLS2) and principal component regression (PCR).
[Show full text]
Medical Review Officer Manual
Department of Health and Human Services Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Medical Review Officer Manual for Federal Agency Workplace Drug Testing Programs EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2010 Note: This manual applies to Federal agency drug testing programs that come under Executive Order 12564 dated September 15, 1986, section 503 of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C. section 7301 note dated July 11, 1987, and the Department of Health and Human Services Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (73 FR 71858) dated November 25, 2008 (effective October 1, 2010). This manual does not apply to specimens submitted for testing under U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (49 CFR Part 40). The current version of this manual and other information including MRO Case Studies are available on the Drug Testing page under Medical Review Officer (MRO) Resources on the SAMHSA website: http://www.workplace.samhsa.gov Previous Versions of this Manual are Obsolete 3 Table of Contents Chapter 1. The Medical Review Officer (MRO)........................................................................... 6 Chapter 2. The Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form ................................................ 7 Chapter 3. Urine Drug Testing ...................................................................................................... 9 A. Federal Workplace Drug Testing Overview..................................................................
[Show full text]
1589361321Unit V Food Adulteration.Pdf
~oodMicrobiology and the PFA Act, a trader is guilty if he sells milk to which water has been added Safety (intentional addition) or the cream of the milk has been replaced by cheap vegetable or animal fat (substitution) or simply the cream has been removed and the milk is sold as such, with a low fat content (abstraction). Unintentional contamination of the milk, due to carelessness on part of the trader is also considered as adulteration under the law. For instance, if the cans in which the trader is transporting or storing the milk, had been earlier treated with the chemicals like washing soda or boric acid or some detergent and not been washed thoroughly with water, residues of the chemicals may get mixed with the milk. Such milk would Ire considered adulterated. In addition, food is also considered to be adulterated, if it does not conform to the basic quality standards. For instance, the maximum amount of moisture allowed in a milk powder sample is 4%. If a sample is found to have greater moisture levels, it is considered to be adulterated. The malpractice of food adulteration is still widely prevalent in our country. There are very few studies on the extent and nature of food adulteration in the country. Whatever sFdies are available, are restricted to a select few cities and hence are not adequate to give a true picture for the country as a whole. The only data that are available are the reports from the food testing laboratories of the Central and State Government. According to these official reports, the extent of food adulteration in India bas been gradually diminishing from 3 1% in 1960s to less than 10% in the 1990s.
[Show full text]
Levamisole: a Toxic Adulterant Found in Illicit Street Drugs
July 2020 Levamisole: A Toxic Adulterant Found in Illicit Street Drugs. GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT Substance abuse treatment providers, clinicians, outreach workers, public health clinics, etc. need to be aware of the following information. A dangerous drug adulterant, levamisole, is appearing with increasing frequency in illicit cocaine powder and crack cocaine, and to some extent in heroin and fentanyl. Levamisole can cause severe adverse health effects, including a reduction in the patient’s white blood cell count, a condition called agranulocytosis. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS ILLNESS THAT NEEDS TO BE TREATED IN A HOSPITAL. SEE ATTACHED TREATMENT AND DIAGNOSIS PLAN. Background: Levamisole was initially developed in the mid-1960s as a veterinary and human anti-worming drug. In 1990, it was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a therapy for the treatment of colorectal cancer, however, by 2000 it had been withdrawn from the market due to severe adverse effects described below. Since the early 2000’s, levamisole has been in widespread use as an adulterating agent for illicit street drugs, especially cocaine, heroin, and fentanyl. Although its prevalence varies over time and geographically, LEVAMISOLE HAS AT TIMES BEEN DETECTED IN UP TO 79% OF THE COCAINE STREET SUPPLY AT VARYING PERCENTAGES, UP TO 74% BY WEIGHT. Frequent Indicators of Levamisole Recommendations for MEs & Coroners Toxicity • Test for common adulterating agents in • Unexplained fever and agranulocytosis suspected stimulant- or opioid-related • Unexplained vasculitis with purple skin death cases where levamisole related lesions over ear lobes, legs and thighs findings, such as leukopenia or necrosis, Levamisole are identified.
[Show full text]
The Food and Drug Administration and the Economic Adulteration of Foods
Indiana Law Journal Volume 41 | Issue 3 Article 2 Spring 1966 The oF od and Drug Administration and the Economic Adulteration of Foods Wesley E. Forte Member, Pennsylvania Bar Follow this and additional works at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Food and Drug Law Commons, and the Law and Economics Commons Recommended Citation Forte, Wesley E. (1966) "The oodF and Drug Administration and the Economic Adulteration of Foods," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 41 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol41/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AND THE ECONOMIC ADULTERATION OF FOODS WESLEY E. FORTEt PART I: THE HISTORY OF OUR ECONOMIC ADULTERATION LAW The economic adulteration of foods is an ancient cheat and scholars have found references to it in the laws of Moses and the early literature of China, Greece and Rome.1 The reported economic adulterations of foods increased unmistakably in the 1800's and early 1900's' and it was in this period of public indignation resulting from reports of milk diluted with water, coffee diluted with chicory and other roasted vegetable products, maple syrup diluted with cane sugar or glucose, and spices diluted with ground wheat and corn that Congress first passed prophylactic legislation preventing the debasement of foods.3 This legislation was part of the 1906 Food and Drugs Act.4 The provisions of the 1906 Act dealing with economic adulteration were t Member of the Pennsylvania Bar.
[Show full text]
Food Safety and the Law Food Safety Webinar Series 2014 First Nations Development Institute May 2014
Native Communities, Food Safety and the Law Food Safety Webinar Series 2014 First Nations Development Institute May 2014 Presented by: Janie Simms Hipp, J.D., LLM and A-dae Romero, J.D., LLM (anticipated 2014) Sections of Discussion • General Food Safety Legal Issues • Traditional Foods and Food Safety • Retail Food Safety • Food Donation and Food Safety • Additional Resources Food Safety Law Distinguished • There is a legally defined “food safety” body of law • At the international, federal, state and local levels • Quite comprehensive area of the law • But still developing • For Tribes, the idea of “food safety” also implies the protection of our “own” foods from misuse or exploitation outside of the Tribe or community • Legally speaking these issues fall under the body of law of Intellectual Property-Trademarks- Patents Recognition • Some Food is more than a physical item, some consider food a “relative” • Some Food has historical roots in and of the community • Tribes have highly developed processes and behavior regarding food that pre-date food safety law talked about here • Some Food is culturally significant • Some Food is vital to maintenance of community, culture, and physical health of people • Some Food is not always a choice • Talking about some food is intimate, but not so in the legal food safety context Before we begin… • There are two approaches: • Participate in the US legal schematic regarding food safety • Not participate in the US legal schematic regarding food safety • Both approaches have consequences for a Tribe
[Show full text]
Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals in Domestic and Imported Foods Completion Date
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION COMPLIANCE PROGRAM GUIDANCE PROGRAM 7304.004 MANUAL CHAPTER 04 – PESTICIDES AND CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION DATE June 27, 2011 PESTICIDES AND INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS IN DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED FOODS COMPLETION DATE Continuing DATA REPORTING PRODUCT CODES PRODUCT/ASSIGNMENT CODES REPORT SAMPLE COLLECTIONS/ANALYSIS UNDER THE FOLLOWING PACS: INDUSTRY CODES: 02-41; 45-47; 50; 52; 54 04004A Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals in Domestic and Imported Foods 04004D Dioxin and furans DO NOT report activities relating to Drug Residues in fish against these PACs. Separate assignments and reporting have been issued for these activities. Note: Material that is not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has been redacted/deleted from this electronic version of the program. Deletions are marked as follows: (#) denotes one or more words were deleted; (&) denotes one or more paragraphs were deleted; and (%) denotes an entire attachment was deleted. FIELD HARD COPY REPORTS TO HEADQUARTERS A. End of Year Summary of Accomplishments Program information is still needed by headquarter units for planning and evaluation of the pesticides. Each district/region is requested to submit a summary report covering their prior year’s pesticide plan. This summary will be due October 31 after the conclusion of the fiscal year. Submit the summary to Program Monitor, Shannon Ingram, HFS-615. The Summary Report should cover the following types of information: 1. A summary of the import and domestic district/regional plan accomplishments including: results of district initiated surveys; a summary of actionable samples; significant State and DATE OF ISSUANCE: 6/27/11 PAGE 1 FORM FDA 2438 (7/92) PROGRAM 7304.004 State/District joint activities and accomplishments; and other program-related highlights or special issues encountered during the year; 2.
[Show full text]
Adulterated Food Sec. 402
ADULTERATED FOOD SEC. 402. [21 U.S.C. 342] A food shall be deemed to be adulterated— 1 (a)(1) If it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance such food shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in such food does not ordinarily render it injurious to health; 2 (2)(A) 3 if it bears or contains any added poisonous or added deleterious substance (other than a substance that is a pesticide chemical residue in or on a raw agricultural commodity or processed food, a food additive, a color additive, or a new animal drug) that is unsafe within the meaning of section 406; or (B) if it bears or contains a pesticide chemical residue that is unsafe within the meaning of section 408(a); or (C) if it is or if it bears or contains (i) any food additive that is unsafe within the meaning of section 409; or (ii) a new animal drug (or conversion product thereof) that is unsafe within the meaning of section 512; or (3) if it consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or if it is otherwise unfit for food; or (4) if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health; or (5) if it is, in whole or in part, the product of a diseased animal or of an animal which has died otherwise than by slaughter; or (6) if its container is composed, in whole or in part, of any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render the contents injurious to health; or (7) if it has been intentionally subjected to radiation, unless the use of the radiation was in conformity with a regulation or exemption in effect pursuant to section 409.
[Show full text]
FDA Regulations for Poisonous Or Deleterious Substances Before These Raw Materials Or Other Ingredients Are Incorporated Into Finished Food
What You Need to Know About the FDA Regulation: Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food (21 CFR Part 117): Guidance for Industry Small Entity Compliance Guide Additional copies are available from: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Food and Drug Administration 5001 Campus Drive College Park, MD 20740 (Tel) 240-402-1700 http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/ucm253380.htm or http://www.regulations.gov You may submit either electronic or written comments regarding this guidance at any time. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the Docket No: FDA-2011-N-0920 listed in the notice of availability that publishes in the Federal Register. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition October 2016 1 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 4 II. WHO MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULE? ........................................................................... 6 III. KEY TERMS USED IN PART 117 ......................................................................................... 6 IV. WHO IS EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS FOR HAZARD ANALYSIS AND
[Show full text]
Redalyc.A REVIEW on EXISTING DATABASES RELEVANT FOR
Archivos de Zootecnia ISSN: 0004-0592 [email protected] Universidad de Córdoba España Álvarez, B. M.; Pascua, M.; Rusu, A.; Bogason, S.G. A REVIEW ON EXISTING DATABASES RELEVANT FOR FOOD FRAUD AND AUTHENTICITY Archivos de Zootecnia, vol. 62, 2013, pp. 73-91 Universidad de Córdoba Córdoba, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=49558826006 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative BIBLIOGRAPHIC REVIEW A REVIEW ON EXISTING DATABASES RELEVANT FOR FOOD FRAUD AND AUTHENTICITY REVISIÓN DE BASES DE DATOS EXISTENTES Y RELEVANTES EN EL FRAUDE Y AUTENTICIDAD ALIMENTARIAS Álvarez, B.M.1*; Pascual, M.1; Rusu, A.1 and Bogason, S.G.2 1Biozoon Food Innovations GmbH. Bremerhaven. Germany. *[email protected] 2Applied Supply Chain Systems Research Group. University of Iceland. Reykjavík. Iceland. ADDITIONAL KEYWORDS PALABRAS CLAVE ADICIONALES Food adulteration. Food safety. Food composition. Adulteración Alimentaria. Seguridad alimentaria. Food consumption patterns. Food properties. Composición alimentaria. Patrones de consumo Toxicology. Food contaminants. Traceability. de alimentos. Propiedades de los alimentos. Toxi- Molecular information. cología. Contaminantes alimentarios. Trazabilidad. Información molecular. SUMMARY RESUMEN Food fraud and authenticity is a growing issue El fraude y la autenticidad alimentaria es un with a global impact that affects all steps in the problema global que va en aumento y afecta a food chain. Consumers demand safe foods that todas las etapas de la cadena alimentaria. Los meet the specifications on the label claim while the consumidores demandan que los alimentos cum- role is to implement measures to ensure safe food.
[Show full text]
USDA Should Take Further Action to Reduce Pathogens in Meat and Poultry Products
United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters March 2018 FOOD SAFETY USDA Should Take Further Action to Reduce Pathogens in Meat and Poultry Products Accessible Version GAO-18-272 March 2018 FOOD SAFETY USDA Should Take Further Action to Reduce Pathogens in Meat and Poultry Products Highlights of GAO-18-272, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The U.S. food supply is generally To help ensure the safety of our nation’s food supply, the U.S. Department of considered safe, but the Centers for Agriculture (USDA) has developed standards limiting the amount of Salmonella Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Campylobacter—pathogens that can cause foodborne illness in humans— estimate that Salmonella and permitted in certain meat (beef and pork) and poultry (chicken and turkey) Campylobacter in food cause about 2 products, such as ground beef, pork carcasses, and chicken breasts. However, million human illnesses per year in the the agency has not developed standards for other products that are widely United States. In 2014, GAO identified available, such as turkey breasts and pork chops. Further, its process for challenges USDA faced in reducing deciding which products to consider for new standards is unclear because it is pathogens in poultry products, not fully documented, which is not consistent with federal standards for internal including standards that were outdated or nonexistent and limited control over control. For example, USDA has informed stakeholders that it will take into factors that affect pathogen account factors including consumption and illness data, but the agency has not contamination outside of meat and documented this process going forward.
[Show full text]
Dietary Supplements Stakeholder Forum Michael Mcguffin, Chair Summary Discussions Wednesday, June 1, 2016
Dietary Supplements Stakeholder Forum Michael McGuffin, Chair Summary Discussions Wednesday, June 1, 2016 What We Heard USP Updates and Discussions—Adulterants Database Stakeholders —consumers, marketers, regulators—will work together to solve the problem caused by adulterated products that masquerade as dietary supplements (DSs). USP should make more clear that tools to detect adulteration by drug spiking are not meant as standards for manufacturers, but rather as tests for regulators in enforcement/forensic actions. There is sensitivity in the industry about screening methods being required as regular tests for GMP compliance. The adulterants database was well received, but stakeholders emphasized that adulteration by ingredient substitution, dilution, and spiking with botanical chemical markers are areas more relevant for the manufacturers than adulteration by drug spiking. 2 What We Heard USP Updates and Discussions—Adulterants Database USP must make the planned database comprehensible, segregating the drug/drug analog tainted products of interest to regulators from the economically motivated adulteration of interest to dietary supplement ingredient purchasers. – Confusion can arise because the adulterants database is perceived as a tool for industry, but in reality it is a tool for regulators, enforcement agencies and forensic laboratories. – Separate section on authentication would highlight the function of the database as a product and ingredient integrity tool manufacturers can use to protect themselves against Economically Motivated Adulteration. Action Item: Attendees interested in participating in beta-testing the USP database will contact Mr. Anton Bzhelyansky ([email protected]). 3 What We Heard USP Updates and Discussions—DNA-based Methods for Botanical Identification DNA testing is an emerging tool of indisputable value.
[Show full text]