Foo d and feed industries urged to guard against fraud

Companies that manufacture animal feed and other foodstuffs should conduct regular food fraud vulnerability assessments to identify those foodstuffs or ingredients that are vulnerable to adulteration, and implement measures to mitigate such risks.

This was according to Dr Adriaan du Toit, principal consultant at Advance Management Consulting, speaking at a recent Animal Feed Manufacturers’ Association symposium in Pretoria. He said food fraud could be defined as “the deliberate and intentional substitution, addition, tampering or misrepresentation of food, ingredients or packaging, or false, misleading statements made about a product for economic gain”.

“Origin verification, in particular, will become important in future,” Du Toit said.

In terms of the Consumer Protection Act of 2008, the first accused in a food fraud case would be the producer, then the importer (local or foreign), then the distributor, and lastly the retailer, he explained.

Du Toit stressed that animal feed manufacturers’ control measures needed to include strategies for monitoring and testing, and product origin verification. Supplier audits also needed to be undertaken and anti-counterfeit technology could be used to identify problem areas.

Manufacturers also needed to ensure that labelling on feed products adhered to the relevant standards and regulations, so that end users were fully informed about all ingredients in specific feed formulations.

Fraud often occurred at the labelling stage when it came to animal feed products. For example, the incorrect status of genetically modified organisms (GMO) was often declared, or false declarations were made about mycotoxin levels, while organic certification could be forged, incorrect claims made about dosage in medicated feeds, or expired medicine could be used. Protein replacements such as cheaper grains were often also used, as were non-food fillers such as dust, straw, wood and even stones, Du Toit said.

“This is only illegal if feed is [incorrectly] labelled. However, the feed industry has better regulations than the food industry,” Du Toit said.

In the food industry, fraud included adulteration of food products, tampering, theft, diversion to alternative outlets or grey market sales, and counterfeiting. Some examples included fruit juice that had been mixed and not indicated on the label; mislabelled olive oil or misrepresentation of the method of processing; honey mixed with maple syrup; and milk mixed with rennet or reconstituted from milk powder, among others, he said. – Gerhard Uys