E for Additives

—isinglass (made from the swim-bladders of fish)

—casein and potassium caseinate (milk proteins)

—animal albumin (egg albumin and dried blood powder)

—bentonite (clay) (558)

—silicon dioxide as a gel or colloidal solution (551)

—kaolin (a clay) (559)

—tannin (from wood)

—pectinolytic enzymes.

The use of sorbic acid (E200) or potassium sorbate (E202) is permitted. This stops the growth of yeasts and moulds. The final sorbic acid content of the treated product on its release to the market for human consumption must not exceed 200mg/l.

Tartaric acid (E334) for acidification purposes is permitted, but if there is too much acid, the following may be added under certain conditions:

—neutral potassium tartrate (E336)

—potassium bicarbonate (no E number)

—calcium carbonate (E170) which may contain small quantities of the double calcium salt of L(+)tartaric (E334) and L( – )malic acids (296).

The addition of Aleppo pine resin is permitted, the purpose being to turn wine into retsina, the typical Greek wine.

L-ascorbic acid (E300) can be added up to 150mg/l and as well as the vitamin C, citric acid can be added for wine stabilization provided that the final content does not exceed lg/1.

Potassium ferrocyanide (536) can be added to white and rosé wines, as can zinc sulphate heptahydrate (which does not seem to appear on the permitted list) which are used together for ‘blue finings’. Red wines can also use calcium phytate (no E number) with up to 100mg/1 of metatartaric acid (E353).

Gum acacia (E414) is another permitted additive. DL tartaric acid (E334) precipitates excess calcium, and ion and cation exchange resins can be employed in certain conditions.

Some countries permit the use of discs of pure paraffin impregnated with allyl isothiocyanate (no E number) to create a sterile atmosphere in containers holding more than 20 litres, but there may not be any trace of allyl isothiocyanate in the wine.

Potassium bitartrate (no E number) can be used to assist the precipitation of tartar. The wine can also be treated with up to 20mg/l of copper sulphate (no E number), provided that the copper content in the treated product does not exceed lmg/1.

So you see that there is more to wine than the simple product of the fermentation of grape juice.

Beer

German beer has traditionally been made from just four ingredients—hops, malt, yeast and water. This was the result of the Reinheitsgebot, which was a consumer protection law issued by Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria in 1516.

Germany’s annual beer consumption is currently 146.5 litres for every man, woman and child. On 12 March 1987 the European Court in Luxembourg overturned the country’s decree banning imports of additive-containing beers from other countries. Even Bonn’s claim that beer makes up a quarter of the average German man’s diet so that the additives could be dangerous to health, did not move the court. It was counter-claimed that when the Germans exported their beer to other countries they were known to put in additives that are not permitted in Germany.

The Germans will go on producing their pure beers for home consumption and it is quite likely that the many undeclared additives in British beers will effectively deter the German beer drinker from buying them.

In particular, we need to be worried about the substantial additions of caramel (E150), which is the most widely used of all food colours and gives many beers, especially mild, stout, premium bitters, and strong ales, their colour. The 1987 Food Advisory Committee report on colours recommends that there be a maximum content not exceeding 5,000mg/kg, which seems rather high, as the same committee’s recommendation for brown bread is a maximum of 2,000mg/kg. Additives in use in beer include agents which keep a good head of froth on the beer and, as in wine, many technical aids, but there is no way of knowing just how ‘real’ is real ale, let alone the beverages which do not have such honest pretentions. An interesting and effective alternative to caramel is a refined malt. This might be classed as an ingredient rather than an additive.

Other Alcoholic Drinks

Look around any good off-licence and you will see that there must be a very wide variety of colours and additives in use ranging from caramel in whisky to goodness knows what in certain of the more exotic aperitifs and liqueurs. Effectively, there is no regulation whatsoever other than the general provisions of the Food Act.

Unless there is the safeguard of ingredient labelling on alcoholic drinks, disastrous and dangerous episodes such as the Austrian wine scandal—which proved to involve many more countries than just Austria—are certain to happen again. In July 1984 diethylene-glycol was found in Austrian wine in as many as 82 different brands, both in Germany and in Britain. Diethyleneglycol can be used as an anti-freeze, but when added to wine it improves the flavour, so that cheap wines can be sold as superior, more costly products. The expert view is that a consumption of 0.3ml of this contaminant daily is a potential health hazard to the kidneys and that 100ml can be fatal.

A bottle tested in Barnsley was found to contain 1.5ml, and so a heavy drinker could be endangered not only by the alcohol but also by the additive. It is ironic that the only reason the Austrian wine scandal was discovered was that one of the companies using diethylene-glycol in the wine requested a refund of the Value Added Tax. A sharp VAT inspector questioned the large volume of anti-freeze being used in the summer and the scandal was uncovered!

However, the fact is that food inspectors do not generally look very closely at the products which do not have lists of ingredients. Therefore, as things stand, we have very little protection against abuse.

Until public pressure and government action puts this situation to rights there is no reason at all why responsible manufacturers should not voluntarily tell us what is in their drinks. There will be a free, signed copy of this book and a place in history for the first three producers of alcoholic drinks who change their policy by listing all those additives and processing aids in all their products.

Fruit Juices and Fruit Nectars

The 1984 Labelling of Food Regulations seem at least reasonably clear but when you look back to other and earlier regulations concerning a specific food then, either through design or oversight, worms begin to creep out of the woodwork or, to be more specific, the two ingredients need not be declared in fruit juices and nectars when they are below certain levels.

Without making any declaration you can add up to 15 grammes per litre of added sugar and have present up to 10 milligrammes per litre of the preservative sulphur dioxide (E220).

These are both small amounts but it would not surprise me if products labelled pure or natural did sometimes contain these additions, so misleading the consumer as to the true nature of the product.

Chocolate and Fancy Confectionery

If you had picked up a Mars bar in the middle of 1987 you would have found no list of ingredients although the percentage of cocoa butter was given. This is still true of the majority of chocolate confectionary made in the UK. For reasons which are not stated by MAFF and cannot be logical or helpful, chocolates do not have to list ingredients. That this protection is not necessary and should be abandoned was made very clear by Mars who have since had the honesty and courage to list their ingredients in full. Have certain other manufacturers something to hide?

How can it be that the manufacturers of chocolates with brightly coloured centres that are almost certainly coloured artificially should be allowed to conceal this information? The vast majority of such manufacturers have nothing to hide and everything to gain by telling us all about the good wholesome ingredients that they may be using.

The same lack of information is permitted on fancy confectionery products packed as single items in such forms as a figure, an animal, cigarette, egg, or any other fancy form. Again, some manufacturers tell you what the product is made from. Let us hope the rest follow suit.

Additives in Ingredients and Some Other Exemptions

If an additive has been used in an ingredient which is part of a product containing a number of different ingredients, then the additive does not have to be declared if it serves no significant technological function in the finished product. So, if you buy a breakfast cereal containing apple flakes and the apple flakes look white, this could be because they were carefully processed or it could be because they have an added preservative. There is no way of knowing the difference unless the producer volunteers the information. The same considerations apply to a wide range of foodstuffs.

Bread and Other Fresh Foods

Fresh unwrapped bread carries no list of ingredients simply because there is nowhere to put it. The same applies to cakes and pastries. But when the product is wrapped and sold in an off-the-shelf form, then certain ingredients have to be listed, and you may well find that your wholemeal bread and, even more probably, your brown bread, contains added caramel and numerous other ingredients that are not necessary in the kitchen.

There is no good reason why the foods in the baker’s or the butcher’s that have been prepared on the premises have no list of ingredients. It would be easy to do and it would help us make an informed choice.

In addition to the unnamed additives on unwrapped bread there are also additives which do not have to be declared even when the product is wrapped. Chief among these must be the flour bleach, benzoyl peroxide (no E number). It is certainly very puzzling that we in Britain need to use a bleach at all when most leading European countries have either banned bleaches or found them completely unnecessary. Another area of contamination is the lingering presence of pesticides and fungicides applied not only to the growing crops but also in the storage silos to prevent insect infestation and fungal growth.

Ham and other meat products on the delicatessen counter have to show the amount of water present (at any rate to some extent, see page 25) but the other additives only need to be identified by their category name, a throw-back to the 1970 regulations. So a ham description may say ‘maximum 25 per cent added water, added preservative and colour’, unless it is in a packet.

Such loopholes are a negation of all the progress made in other areas of food labelling. The largest part of all food sold in this way is produced by manufacturers who are perfectly able to provide a label for the point of sale giving, in a legible size of lettering, the same information that would be required if the same product were sold in a packet instead of loose, or else it is produced by the shop itself, who must know the recipe.

Even the present very limited regulations are being openly abused in large numbers of shops where no ingredient information at all is supplied about the loose foods on sale. Our Trading Standards Officers, who should be enforcing the rules, have limited resources but are usually most helpful when apparent breaches of the regulations are drawn to their attention. It is a courtesy, however, to first warn the shop management of any likely problem so that they can put things right.

Medicines

A licensed medicine has only to state the details of the active ingredient or ingredients. All the other components of the product are exempt from labelling requirements.