Caballero B. (ed.) Encyclopaedia of Food Science, Food Technology and Nutrition. Ten-Volume Set

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

current dietary levels of CLA have been shown to

have little or no direct effect on various conditions,

enhanced levels in food are hoped to lead to a pro-

tective effect against conditions such as cancer.

0029 Most studies that aim to increase CLA levels have

been conducted with cows. Feeding of mixes contain-

ing unsaturated lipids such as vegetable or marine oils

leads to increases in CLA levels of up to fivefold.

Increasing CLA, however, generally causes a concur-

rent increase in the level of other trans fatty acids, in

particular the trans-10 octadecenoic acid, which has

negative effects in both cows and humans. The levels

of this fatty acid have been suppressed by feeding a

buffer.

0030 Feeding CLA to chicks has also shown an effect on

their immune response, such that less tissue wasting

occurs on immune stimulation, thus reducing the

need for antibiotic treatment and improving meat

quality.

0031 CLA is present in human milk, but not infant for-

mula, and it has been suggested that this is a factor in

the lower levels of food allergies, immune deficiency,

and diabetes in children that are breast-fed. This,

however, has not been tested in sufficiently large

data sets.

0032 Enhancing CLA in dietary components is only one

way of increasing CLA intake. Other methods include

supplementation and production of a functional

food. CLA supplements are already available in the

USA and Europe, and currently are mainly targeted at

the body building population and at slimmers. These

products are either liquid or encapsulated CLA, of a

composition similar to that of the commercial prod-

ucts described above.

0033 A functional food is defined as a food product

that has been enhanced to give specific, beneficial,

biological effects. Examples include margarines con-

taining stanol esters, which have demonstrated a

cholesterol-lowering effect in humans. These prod-

ucts are designed to be available on supermarket

shelves to the average consumer. CLA would be an

ideal candidate for incorporation into a food item

such as a dairy product, if it could be shown to

have specific biological effects in humans at reason-

able (i.e., non-toxic) levels.

Safety Issues

003 4 There are few data available upon the toxicological

effects of CLA. Most of the information comes from

animal models, and the data are contradictory. Al-

though few effects have been seen in rats and ham-

sters, experiments conducted with a variety of mouse

models have shown increases in liver weight, trans-

aminase levels, and steatosis. Insulin resistance has

also been reported. These effects may be relevant

purely to the mouse model. In humans, in a study

on overweight or obese volunteers undergoing CLA

supplementation, at levels of 3.4g of CLA per day,

blood lipids, liver factors, and other hematological

end points, as well as physical parameters such as

blood pressure, were examined, but no differences

were found between the supplemented and control

groups.

0035This is an area requiring urgent review, particularly

with the prospect of CLA incorporation into a

functional food and considering the lack of data

on specific CLA isomers.

Summary

0036Conjugated linoleic acid shows potential as a treat-

ment for a variety of human ailments, as well as a

means towards obtaining meat products with a fat-to-

lean-meat profile closer to that which we currently

regard as healthy. However, the data available so far

come mostly from animal studies and show conflict-

ing results in some cases. A lack of consistent

analytical methodology has further complicated the

situation. There is a need for clinical trials in humans

with specific CLA isomers, in order to elucidate the

mechanisms by which these compounds show their

effects, as well as to ascertain the appropriate dosage

levels, with no significant side-effects.

Seealso: Analysis of Food; Fats:ProductionofAnimal

Fats; Fatty Acids:Properties;Metabolism;Dietary

Importance;Trans-fattyAcids:HealthEffects; Food

Fortification; Functional Foods; Immunology of Food;

Obesity: Fat Distribution; Treatment; Spectroscopy:

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance; Triglycerides: Structures

and Properties; Vegetable Oils: Oil Production and

Processing; Dietary Importance

Further Reading

Banni S and Martin J-C (1998) Trans Fats in Human Nutri-

tion. In: Se

dio JL and Christie WW (eds) Conjugated

Linoleic Acid and Metabolites, from Trans Fatty Acids

in Human Nutrition. Dundee, UK: The Oily Press.

Christie WW, Se

dio JL and Juaneda P (2001) A practical

guide to the analysis of conjugated linoleic acid. Inform

12: 147–152.

Food Research Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison,

http://www.wisc.edu/fri/clarefs.htm

Gna

dig S, Rickert R, Se

dio JL and Steinhart H (2001)

Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA): physiological effects

and production. European Journal of Lipid Science and

Technology 103: 56–61.

Jahreis G, Kraft J, Tischendorf F, Scho

ne F and von Loef-

felholz C (2000) Conjugated linoleic acids: physiological

effects in animal and man with special regard to body

1586 CONJUGATED LINOLEIC ACID

composition. European Journal of Lipid Science and

Technology 102: 695–703.

Sæbø A (2001) Commercial production of conjugated lino-

leic acid (CLA). Lipid Technology Newsletter 7: 9–13.

Yurawecz MP, Mossoba MM, Kramer JKG, Pariza MW

and Nelson GJ (eds) (1999) Advances in Conjugated

Linoleic Acid Research, vol. 1. Champaign, IL: AOCS

Press.

CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION

IN THE UK

J Carton, Manchester Metropolitan University,

Manchester, UK

Background

0001 We are all consumers throughout our lives. Every

member of society is a consumer in one form or

another, whether they consume goods, services, or

intangibles such as gas or electricity. For the purposes

of this article, it is assumed that a consumer is some-

one who buys or uses such goods or services for

private use or consumption. What we consume may

depend upon the amount of disposable income that

we possess and what stage we have reached in our

lives. Factors such as availability and price will also

play an influential role. Food is a particularly import-

ant consumable, since we all need it to survive.

0002 Protecting the consumer is usually something which

political parties agree upon as being a good thing to

do, but how they go about achieving it differs. There

are also various ways of trying to ensure that con-

sumers are protected, such as education, advice, and

industry self-regulation. The emphasis here will be on

legislation as a means of protecting consumers and on

food as a major consumer product. In addition, only

the main pieces of legislation will be addressed. Dis-

cussion will also be mainly confined to the laws which

apply in England and Wales, although other countries

throughout the world will have similar consumer pro-

tective measures.

0003 Consumer protection legislation has only really

developed in the UK since the 1960s, and three

government-initiated reports have assisted with this

development. They are the Final Report of the Molo-

ney Committee on Consumer Protection (Cmnd

1781, July 1962), the Crowther Committee (Cmnd

4596, March 1971), and the White paper, modern

markets: confident consumers (July 1999).

The Legal System

0004 Both criminal and civil law play a role in protecting

the consumer, and much of the current legislation

emanates from the UK’s membership of the EU.

Sometimes, the aim is not necessarily to protect con-

sumers: it could be to ensure fair trading in the busi-

ness environment with the protection of consumers as

a side-effect.

0005Criminal law aims to protect the public at large and

creates criminal offenses for which penalties, such as

fines and even imprisonment, can be invoked by the

courts. Action is normally taken by public bodies

such as local authority trading standards or environ-

mental health departments. Civil law, however, seeks

to settle disputes between two private parties, provid-

ing a remedy for someone who has been injured or

harmed in some way.

0006The nature of much legislation in this field is strict

liability, which means that it need not be shown that

the perpetrator knew or intended to commit an of-

fense or breach a provision, only that they did so. This

is illustrated in criminal law by the case of Parker

v Alder (1889) 1 QB 20 in which the seller was found

liable for the adulterated milk he was selling even

though it was satisfactory when it left his control. In

civil law, the case of Frost v Aylesbury Dairy Co

(1905) 1KB 608, in which milk infected with typhoid

germs was sold, demonstrates the strict liability

nature of the legislation. It is unlikely that either seller

was at fault in any way but both were nevertheless

held to be in breach of the relevant legal provisions.

Criminal Legislation

The Food Safety Act 1990

0007This is the main piece of criminal legislation which

specifically regulates food. It is concerned with both

the safety of food and hygiene of premises as well as

the quality, description, labeling, and composition of

food.

0008There are four main offense sections within the Act

which between them cover the areas mentioned

above. In addition, there are a great many sets of

regulations, orders and codes of practice made

under the Food Safety Act which provide detailed

requirements to supplement its provisions.

CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK 1587

Food Not of the Nature, Substance or Quality

Demanded by the Purchaser

0009 Selling food which is not that which was demanded

by the purchaser is an offense contrary to section

14(1) of the Act. In fact, there are three separate

offenses, selling food which is not, first, of the nature

demanded, second, of the substance demanded, and,

third, of the quality demanded. Examples of cases

prosecuted serve to illustrate what these phrases

mean, although it is generally accepted that there is

some overlap between the three.

0010 It is generally accepted that ‘nature’ would refer

to foods not being of the variety requested by the

purchaser, e.g., where cod is requested, and haddock

is supplied as a substitute. In Shearer v Rowe (1985)

149 JP 698, butchers were convicted of selling

‘minced beef’ and ‘minced steak,’ which were not of

the nature demanded since they contained 10% pork

and 10% lamb. Prosecutions relating to ‘substance’

are often taken when a food contains a foreign body or

mold as in Southworth v Whitewell Dairies Ltd

(1958) 122 JP 322, in which a bottle of infants’ school

milk contained a small sliver of glass which the child

drinking it was able to suck up the straw being used to

drink the milk. Allegations of food not being of the

‘quality’ are generally made when there is a failure to

meet standards set by regulations or when there is a

shortfall in what an ordinary consumer would expect.

In TW Lawrence & Sons Ltd v Burleigh (1981) 146 JP

134, a regular consumer made a telephone order for

mince and, when it was delivered, was shocked at the

appearance of the product, in that she felt that there

was too much visible white fat. The mince was found

to contain 30.8% fat, and the court was satisfied that

this was in excess of what the purchaser expected.

Food Which Does Not Meet the ‘Food Safety

Requirements’

0011 Section 8 of the Act deals with the safety of food. It is

an offense, contrary to section 8(1), to sell food which

fails to comply with food-safety requirements. In fact,

the offense is wider than that in section 14, since it is

not restricted to a sale. The offense is committed if

such food is offered, exposed, advertised, or in pos-

session for sale [s.8(1)(A)], or has been deposited

with, or consigned to, someone else in preparation

for sale. This thereby ensures that the whole supply

and distribution chain is regulated.

0012 Consumers are further protected in that there is a

presumption in section 3 that food is for human

consumption. Therefore, if the trader wishes to

argue that the food was not ready for consumers,

e.g., because it had been rejected or had not yet been

checked, then the onus is on him prove so.

0013There are three ways in which food may fail to

comply with food-safety requirements. First, the

food may be ‘unfit for human consumption’

(s.8(2)(b)), e.g., because it is putrid or decomposed.

This is illustrated by the case of Chibnall’s Bakeries

v Cope Brown (1956) Crim LR 263, in which a used,

dirty bandage was found in a loaf of bread. Second,

the food may fail to comply with the food-safety

requirements if ‘it is so contaminated that it would

not be reasonable to expect it to be used for human

consumption in that state’ (s.8(2)(c)). Food could be

contaminated in a number of ways, e.g., by mold,

heavy metals, mites, foreign bodies, radioactive sub-

stances, or unauthorized additives. In Kwik Save

Group plc v Blaenau Gwent Borough Council

(1995), unreported (CO/2246/95), a packet of crum-

pets was found to breach this provision when the

crumpets contained mold spots 5 hours after being

purchased. Third, the food may have been rendered

injurious to health (s.8(2)(a)) as in Cullen v McNair

(1908) 72 JP 376, in which the addition of a particu-

lar preservative to cream rendered the product injuri-

ous to the health of a substantial portion of the

community, namely invalids and children. To create

the offense, the food must have been rendered injuri-

ous to health by one of the operations detailed

in section 7(1) with the intention that it would be

sold for human consumption. The operations are

‘(a) adding any article or substance to the food;

(b) using any article or substance as an ingredient in

the preparation of the food; (c) abstracting any con-

stituent from the food; and (d) subjecting the food to

any other process or treatment.’

Food Rendered Injurious to Health

0014As well as supplying, etc. such food, the actual act of

rendering the food injurious to health in one of these

ways is an offense contrary to section 7(1). This is one

of the few consumer protection offenses which does

not require the perpetrator to be acting in the course

of a trade or business. Generally, this provision is not

used as a consumer protection measure but poten-

tially could be used to deal with those who deliber-

ately sabotage food products.

0015There are many sets of regulations made under

the Food Safety Act 1990 which also help to ensure

that consumers receive safe food. The Food Hygiene

Regulations 1995 regulate the cleanliness of food pre-

mises and the use of practices within the food industry.

There are specific regulations for the meat, dairy, and

egg industries. In addition, there are requirements for

the registration and or licensing of certain premises

and a prohibition or restriction on the use of certain

processes, ingredients or additives.

1588 CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK

Food Falsely Described or Presented

0016 Consumers are not only concerned about their food

being safe but also require it to be accurately de-

scribed and presented. Section 15 of the Food Safety

Act creates a number of criminal offenses to cover this

area. Labels and adverts which depict or describe

food must not be false or mislead as to the nature,

substance, or quality of the food (see above), other-

wise an offense may be committed contrary to section

15(1), (label) or 15(2), (advert). There have been

many cases alleging false descriptions of food, al-

though most of them have been taken under other

legislation, e.g., Henderson and Turnbull v Adair

(1939) JC 83 in which a product was falsely described

as ‘Scots Whisky’ when it was a blend of 33% Scotch

‘pot-still’ and 67% Irish ‘patent still’ spirits. An

example of a misleading label is illustrated by

the case of Van den Berghs & Jurgens Ltd v Burl-

eigh (1987) unreported. The products in question

were cream substitutes ‘Elmlea Whipping’ and ‘Elm-

lea Single.’ The use of cream type cartons, the words

‘single’ and ‘whipping,’ the coloring of the words, and

the rural scene on the carton were considered to be

misleading. It was felt that an ordinary consumer

would think that that the products were real cream.

This is an example of labels, which, when examined

in their entirety, were considered to be misleading

even though all the information on them was fact-

ually correct. The cartons were clearly labeled ‘the

real alternative to cream.’ There is also the possibility

that the food can describe itself, and to that end, it is

an offence to sell, etc. ‘any food the presentation of

which is likely to mislead as to the nature or sub-

stance or quality of the food’ (s.15(3)).

Food Standards Regulations

0017 Again, there are various sets of regulations requiring

specific labeling and even the composition of certain

foods. Consumers can only make informed purchas-

ing decisions if they know what is in the product.

What has to be on a food label depends on what the

food is, how it is packed (prepacked or loose), and

where it is sold (retail, wholesale, or from a catering

establishment). The Food Labelling Regulations

1996, which implement EC Directive 79/112 (now

consolidated as Council Directive No. 2000/13/EC),

require most prepacked foods, by virtue of regulation

4, to be marked with the general labeling requirement

(r.5), i.e., the name of the food, its ingredients, (in-

cluding the percentage quantity of certain ones) ‘best

before’ or ‘use by’ date plus the name and address of

the manufacturer. In addition the origin of the food

and instructions for use must also be indicated if the

consumer would be misled without them. Consumers

are also interested in knowing whether foods contain

any irradiated or genetically modified ingredients, and

so there are requirements relating to such processes.

0018Some regulations lay down compositional stand-

ards for certain products as well as additional or

alternative labeling requirements, e.g., the Meat

Products and Spreadable Fish Products Regulations

1984 require declarations of minimum amounts of

meat and fish (regulations 7 and 8) and also declar-

ations of water content on certain sliced products

(regulation 9). Regulation 4 and Schedule 4 prescribe

minimum meat contents for products such as burgers

(80%), pork sausages (65%), cooked potato and

meat pies and fish pate.

The Trade Descriptions Act 1968

0019This piece of legislation can be used as an alternative

to section 15(1) or (2) of the Food Safety Act 1990 to

deal with falsely described food. It also covers oral

descriptions which section 15 does not. The offenses

are contained in section 1, and whereas the Food

Safety Act is obviously restricted to food, this Act

covers ‘goods’ generally, including food. The offenses

within section 1 are for actually applying a false trade

description (defined in s.2) to goods (s.1(1)(a)) and

for supplying and offering to supply goods to which a

false trade description has been applied. Section 14

also contains offences of recklessly or knowingly

making false statements in relation to accommoda-

tion, services or facilities which could include refer-

ences to food services such as hotel meals.

The Agriculture Act 1970

0020Since our food products are derived from crops and

animals, it also necessary to control animal feeding

stuffs and fertilizers so that what ends up in the

human food chain is nutritious and not harmful in

any way. There is a great deal of legislation in this

area and two of the most relevant pieces are the

Feeding Stuffs Regulations 2000 and the Fertiliser

Regulations 1991.

The General Product Safety Regulations 1994/SI

2328

0021These Regulations cover the safety of consumer prod-

ucts generally and are supplemented by Part II of the

Consumer Protection Act 1987 and various specific

sets of Regulations governing particular products.

The General Product Safety Regulations implement

those parts of Council Directive 92/59/EEC on

general product safety not already covered by the

Consumer Protection Act.

0022The main requirement is that producers (defined

in r. 2(1)), should only place safe products on

the market. This is known as the ‘general safety

CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK 1589

requirement’ and is laid down in r.7. A breach of this

provision may amount to an offence contrary to

Regulation 12. Product is also defined in r.2(1) and

is confined to consumer products. Whether or not a

product is safe depends upon its presenting no or only

minimum risk (r.2(1)). The labeling, presentation,

packaging, and instructions, as well as its actual

design and construction can all be taken into account

when trying to assess whether a product is safe. There

are various standards available against which safety

can be measured as detailed in r.10. These include

specific UK laws, European Standards, British Stand-

ards, Industry Codes of Practice, and the current

practises within a particular industry. As well as

these guidelines, the ‘safety which consumers may

reasonably expect’ should also be borne in mind. It

is unlikely that these regulations would be used to

take a prosecution in relation to a food product,

although food clearly falls within the definition of a

product in r.2(1). The Food Safety Act 1990 will

almost inevitably be a more appropriate act to use,

and in any event, it is arguable that the Food Safety

Act, or more specifically Council Directive 89/397/

EEC which implements it, falls within the exemptions

detailed in regulation 3 of the General Product Regu-

lations 1994: ‘These Regulations do not apply

to . . . .(c) any product where there are specific provi-

sions in rules of Community law governing all aspects

of the safety of the product.’ If it could be argued that

there is some aspect of the safety of food which is not

covered by the Directive then presumably the General

Product Safety Regulations could be used to deal with

that aspect.

The Weights and Measures Act 1985

0024 Legislation in this area covers goods, equipment,

marking, and units. In addition, there are specific

provisions regulating packers and importers and the

average quantity system which is used for most pre-

packed goods throughout the European Community

(Part V, Weights and Measures Act 1985 and the

Weights and Measures (Packaged Goods) Regula-

tions 1986). Consumers are protected by the creation

of offenses in relation to supplying short-weight prod-

ucts, including food, and using suitable and accurate

weighing and measuring equipment. Certain foods

are required to be sold in prescribed quantities, e.g.,

bread in multiples of 400 g, so that consumers can

make meaningful comparisons between producers

(Weights and Measures (Miscellaneous Foods)

Order 1988). Also, certain units have to be used in

the sale of food (Units of Measurement Regulations

1986, 1994, and 1995). This is well illustrated by

the case of Thoburn and others v Sunderland (2002)

3 WLR 247, in which a prosecution was mounted

against Mr Thorburn who had continually refused to

sell his fruit and vegetables in metric quantities.

The Prices Act 1974

0025Consumers need full and accurate price information

to be able to make informed purchase decisions and

compare prices between traders. The legislation in

force goes some way towards ensuring that this

happens.

0026Regulations made under this act require price indi-

cations to be given, and the Consumer Protection Act

1987 creates an offense of giving a misleading price

indication (Part III, s.20). The Price Indications (Food

and Drink on Premises) Order 1979 requires written

price indications to be given in premises supplying

food and drink for consumption on those premises.

The Price Marking Order 1999 requires written indi-

cations of unit prices, e.g., price per 100 g, as well as

the selling price, to allow for comparisons to be made

by consumers. Finally, in the area of pricing, the Price

indications (Method of Payment) Regulations 1991

require it to be made clear to consumers if there is

a charge made for different methods of payment, e.g.,

a surcharge for using a credit card.

0027Loosely connected to the area of pricing is the

issue of buying on credit. This may be relevant,

for example, if consumers buy food hampers on credit

terms or pay for a restaurant meal using a credit card.

This area is covered by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

and various detailed regulations. Provisions are

both criminal and civil in nature requiring certain

information in advertisements (Consumer Credit

(Advertisements) Regulations 1989) and also in the

documentation containing the agreement (s.61 and

the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations

1983). There are also important provisions imposing

liability on the creditor as well as the supplier in

certain circumstances (sections 56 and 75). This

could be particularly relevant in relation to some of

the civil provisions discussed below.

The Trade Marks Act 1994

0028This act implements Directive 89/104/EEC and

allows traders to register their trade mark to prevent

it being used by anyone else. This is very important in

the food industry where brand loyalty is a big issue.

Any discrete sign capable of being represented graph-

ically and which is distinguishable may be registered

as a trade mark (s.1(1)). This may be the shape of a

container, or a sound, or a smell. Company names can

also be trade marks, e.g., Coca-Cola and Kelloggs.

Although the provisions are mainly about traders

protecting their brands and their products, it could

be argued that there is a consumer protection angle in

that consumers come to expect a certain quality and

1590 CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK

safety from a particular trader, which they may not

receive from someone using the trade mark without

the authorization of the holder. The act contains both

criminal and civil provisions, and in addition there is

a civil tort of ‘passing off’ which ‘is concerned with

the protection of marks that identify the goods as

emanating from a particular trade source and yet

have not necessarily been registered as trade marks.’

An example is the case of J Bollinger v Costa Brava

Wine Co Ltd (1961) RPC 116, in which the latter

company was prevented from calling sparkling wine

(now known as Cava) ‘Spanish Champagne’ as it did

not originate from the Champagne region of France

(Edenborough M (1995) Intellectual Property Law,

Cavendish Publishing Ltd.)

Reasonable Precautions and Due Diligence

0029 The vast majority of the offenses described above are

strict liability. This could be considered necessary to

protect the consumer thoroughly, particularly when it

comes to issues such as safety. However, it does seem

a little unreasonable to attach criminal responsibility

to someone when they have done all they can to try

and avoid committing the offenses in the first place.

Thus, to counteract the strict liability nature of the

offenses, most of them will be subject to a reasonable

precautions and due diligence defense (s.21(1) Food

Safety Act 1990). The exact wording and nature of

the defense provision will vary between the acts, but

broadly speaking, they are based on the trader being

able to demonstrate that they have set up a system

(reasonable precautions) and ensuring that the system

works (due diligence). There is much case law in this

area illustrating what the courts will accept as satis-

factory, although it must be remembered that this is a

question of fact, and every case will turn on its own

circumstances. However, generally speaking there are

a number of principles which can be extracted from

the cases as guidelines for the setting up and execu-

tion of a suitable system. This will include areas such

as staff training (Knowsley MBC v Cowan (1991)

156 JP 45), sampling (P & M Supplies (Essex) Ltd

v Devon (1991) MR October 20), documented checks

(Ellis v Price & Company Bakeries Ltd (1968) MR

Aug 183) and specific warranties from suppliers

(Amos v Melcon (Frozen Foods) Ltd (1985) 149 JP

712). It is important to carry out some form of risk

assessment, identifying where problems are likely to

occur and putting in place systems to deal with them.

This is known as Hazard Analysis of Critical Control

Points and forms the basis of any worthwhile quality-

assurance program.

0030 Any system must be preventative, all-encompassing,

open to review and amendment, and under the direc-

tion of the controlling minds of the company.

Although, obviously, the resources of the company

will be taken into account, what is necessary for a

large retail or manufacturing organization is not -

necessarily appropriate for a small company (Garrett

v Boots Chemists Ltd (1980) (unreported)).

Civil Provisions

0031Civil law deals with situations between affected

parties, as opposed to issues affecting the public at

large. It is concerned more with remedies, usually

monetary, for damage or injury rather than punish-

ment. The tort of ‘passing off’ has already been dis-

cussed, and there are several more areas which would

be relevant for food. First, the law of negligence is

also a tort and is one of the few areas which is fault-

based. The person making a claim is not restricted to

the purchaser. Second, the law of contract governs,

amongst other things, the terms which may be im-

plied into a contract. The nature of a contract is such

that usually only the purchaser will have a remedy.

Third, the area of product liability aims to make

the producer of a product liable for damage it causes

if it is deemed to be a defective product. As with

negligence, this is not restricted to purchasers.

Contract Law

0032The Sale of Goods Act 1979 is the principal piece of

legislation which implies terms into contracts. There

are in fact several pieces of legislation which imply

similar terms depending on the type of contract

formed. The references given are for the Sale of

Goods Act 1979. The common terms which are im-

plied into consumer contracts are that the goods, in-

cluding food, will be fit for their purpose (s.14(3))

(Frost v Aylesbury Dairy Co mentioned earlier), will

be of satisfactory quality (s.14(2)), will conform to

their description (s.13(1)) or sample (s.15(2)), and

can be sold (s.12(2)). A further consumer protection

measure is contained in the Unfair Contract Terms Act

1977, which prohibits the exclusion of these implied

terms in consumer contracts by virtue of section 6(2).

0033Contracts for consumer services must be carried

out with reasonable care and skill, within a reason-

able time and for a reasonable price. These three

terms are implied into consumer contracts by virtue

of sections 13, 14, and 15 of the Supply of Goods and

Services Act 1982.

Law of Negligence

0034This can be best explained by the case of Donoghue

v Stevenson (1932) AC 562, which revolved around a

decomposing snail found in a bottle of beer, not by the

purchaser but by a friend for whom it had been

CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK 1591

bought. There was therefore no contractual liability

by the retailer to the ultimate consumer. The principle

of law established, which can make the producer liable

to the ultimate consumer, whether or not the pur-

chaser, can be found in the well-quoted passage from

Lord Atkin’s speech:

0035 A manufacturer of products, which he sells in such a

form as to show that he intends them to reach the

ultimate consumer in the form in which they left him

with no reasonable possibility of intermediate examin-

ation, and with the knowledge that the absence of

reasonable care in the preparation or putting up of the

products will result in an injury to the consumer’s life or

property, owes a duty to the consumer to take that

reasonable care.

The consumer of course has the burden of proving the

lack of care and also that the damage suffered was a

result of the lack of care.

Product Liability

0036 If goods are defective, they may now come under the

remit of Part I of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

This makes a producer (s.1(2)) liable for the damage

caused by a defective product (s.2(1)). Damage to the

actual item cannot be claimed, although damage to

other consumer items is recoverable, as is personal

injury or loss, providing they are in excess of £275

(s.5). This legislation can be used to take action in

relation to food-poisoning incidents, without the

need to prove negligence and where the ultimate con-

sumer was not the purchaser and therefore may not

have contractual rights.

Conclusion

0037 It can be seen that there is a significant amount of

legislation which deals with consumer protection

issues. Only the main areas have been indicated, and

there are many more, e.g., the Misrepresentation Act

1967 and the Fair Trading Act 1973 Furthermore,

none of the areas mentioned have been covered in

any depth, and to appreciate the full application of

the law and the way in which it is interpreted, it is

necessary to read the actual legislation and cases per-

taining to it as well as some texts which comment on

it. It should be emphasized that prosecutions under

the criminal provisions are often seen as a last resort.

Officials are keen to prevent offenses being commit-

ted in the first place and therefore offer advice and

guidance to traders to help them understand their

obligations to consumers. Similarly, many potential

civil problems can be sorted out by negotiation,

mediation, and arbitration without the need to sue a

trader. It is important to note that the achievement of

consumer protection aims can often be met, in both

criminal and civil areas, without recourse to the

courts.

See also: European Union: European Food Law

Harmonization; Food Labeling (Labelling): Applications;

Food Safety; Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point;

Irradiation of Foods: Legal and Consumer Aspects;

Legislation: History; International Standards; Additives;

Contaminants and Adulterants; Codex; Quality

Assurance and Quality Control; Risk Assessment;

Weighing

Further Reading

Butterworth’s Trading, Consumer and Food Safety Service.

London: Butterworths.

Harvey BW and Parry DL (2000) The Law of Consumer

Protection and Fair Trading. London: Butterworths.

Howells GG and Weatherill S (1995) Consumer Protection

Law. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.

Lasok KPE (2001) Law and Institutions of the EEC.

London: Butterworths.

Miller CJ, Harvey B and Parry DL (1998) Consumer and

Trading Law: Text, cases and Materials. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Oughton D and Lowry J (1997) Consumer Law. London:

Blackstone Press.

Scott C and Black J (2000) Cranston’s Consumer’s and the

Law. London: Butterworths.

Thompson K (1996) The Law of Food and Drink. Cray-

ford, UK: Shaw & Sons.

Contact Plate Freezing See Freezing: Principles; Operations; Blast and Plate Freezing; Cryogenic

Freezing; Storage of Frozen Foods; Structural and Flavor (Flavour) Changes; Nutritional Value of Frozen Foods

1592 CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE UK

CONTAMINATION OF FOOD

E Todd, Michigan State University, East Lansing,

MI, USA

Introduction

0001 Contaminants in foods can be grouped according to

their origin and nature. Essentially, these are micro-

biological (bacteria, viruses, parasites), extraneous

matter (biological, chemical, physical), natural toxins

(seafood toxins, mycotoxins), other chemical com-

pounds (pesticides, toxic metals, lubricants, veterin-

ary drug residues, undesirable fermentation products,

radionuclides), packaging materials, and poisons

introduced through tampering. Most of the agents

found in food are natural contaminants from environ-

mental sources, but some are deliberate additives,

including those used for tampering. Cooking can

increase or decrease the toxicity of some of these

contaminants but has little effect on most chemicals.

Consumers have specific concerns about food con-

taminants but often lack the means to make appro-

priate judgments on what is high risk and what is

not. Additives were at one time a major concern,

but today, microbiological issues are the greatest,

followed by pesticide and animal drug residues and

antimicrobial drug resistance.

Microorganisms

Foodborne Disease Bacteria

0002 Bacteria that cause foodborne disease occur world-

wide, the most common being Salmonella, Staphylo-

coccus aureus, Clostridium perfringens, and Bacillus

cereus. These bacteria can multiply rapidly in moist,

warm, protein-rich foods, such as meat, poultry, fish,

shellfish, milk, eggs, and most food after it has been

processed. Infectious organisms such as Salmonella

and C. perfingens can multiply in the digestive tract

and cause illness by invasion of the cell lining,

production of toxins, or both. Other organisms pro-

duce enterotoxins, e.g., S. aureus and B. cereus,or

neurotoxins, e.g., C. botulinum, in the food during

their growth and metabolism. The staphylococcal

and Bacillus enterotoxins are heat-resistant, as are

the spores of Clostridium and Bacillus species.

Spores, therefore, can survive cooking and germinate

into vegetative cells which can grow in the food

if it is left at room temperature. Three other patho-

gens, Listeria monocytogenes, Vibrio vulnificus and

Escherichia coli O157:H7, have caused severe ill-

nesses leading to deaths. Listeria is widespread in

the environment and is associated with processed

food that has become contaminated. Most illnesses

have resulted from consumption of contaminated

smoked fish, delicatessen meat products, milk and

soft cheese. Escherichia coli O157:H7 has been

responsible for meat (mainly hamburger)-associated

outbreaks, sometimes causing hemorrhagic colitis

and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Cattle appear to be

a major source of this organism. However, illnesses

have resulted from contaminated sprouts, lettuce, un-

pasteurized apple juice, unpasteurized milk, yogurt,

cheese, and water. In the last decade, Salmonella

enteritidis has been the source of many outbreaks

involving egg products through transovarian

infection from hen to egg. In the last few years, S.

typhimurium DT 104 and other antibiotic-resistant

salmonellae have also recently become a concern.

Vibrio spp. naturally occur in seawater, and out-

breaks have been associated with molluscan shellfish,

especially when the ambient temperatures have been

high enough in the water to allow rapid growth of the

organisms within the molluscs. More foodborne ill-

nesses are caused by bacteria than any other group of

agents. There are several specific qualitative detection

methods for most pathogens, but their detection

in food is usually more difficult than in clinical

specimens. Quantitative methods exist for only

some pathogens. Refer to individual organisms;

Food Poisoning, Tracing Origins and Testing; Food

Poisoning, Statistics. (See Gums: Food Uses; Dietary

Importance.)

Viruses and Prions

0003Viruses are difficult to detect in food, and historically,

few viral foodborne diseases have been confirmed,

but these agents are probably major causes of food-

borne and waterborne disease from epidemiological

investigations. Hepatitis A virus and Norwalk-like

agents (within the small round structured virus

group) are typical foodborne enteric viruses. Enteric

viruses typically arise from infected food handlers or

sewage. Shellfish can accumulate viral particles if

they are present in the water and cause infections

following their ingestion. Although the foot-and-

mouth disease virus is not a human pathogen, it can

be transmitted through food to animals, as is believed

to have occurred in the large UK outbreak in 2001.

(See Viruses.) Another area of concern is the trans-

missible spongiform encephalopathies caused by

CONTAMINATION OF FOOD 1593

prions, notably the bovine form, which has been

responsible for over 100 deaths in the UK. Since

there is no control of the disease, eradication of

infected animals, including sheep with scrapie, and

removal of bovine brain and spinal tissues from the

food chain are currently being pursued in Europe.

Parasites

0004 A limited number of parasites are foodborne (water-

borne or person-to-person spread is more frequent),

and illnesses are usually mild. Trichinella is found in

garbage-fed pork and wild carnivores, including bears

and walruses, which are eaten by hunters. Taenia

saginata and T. solium are widespread in beef or

pigs, respectively, and up to one-third of human infec-

tions of Toxoplasma gondii arise from contaminated

meat. Since Cryptosporidium can cause infections in

humans and animals, and the parasite can be spread

through sewage and cattle feces into water systems. It

is resistant to standard chlorination procedures and

needs to be filtered out during water treatment. Over

half of the tested public water supplies that use sur-

face water have been found to have small amounts of

Cryptosporidium in the potable water supply. Pro-

duce sprayed or washed with contaminated water or

ice made with it are potential vehicles for this agent.

People at risk for severe cryptosporidiosis include

people with weakened immune systems, including

AIDS patients and those who take drugs that suppress

the immune system. Cyclospora is another coccidian

parasite associated with consumption of water, but

also produce such as raspberries, basil, and lettuce.

Other parasites, such as Anisakis, Pseudoterranova,

and Diphyllobothrium are relatively frequent in fish

but rarely invade gastrointestinal tissues to cause ser-

ious illnesses. All parasites can be destroyed by thor-

ough cooking of raw meat or fish, or freezing for

several weeks. (See Parasites: Occurrence and Detec-

tion; Illness and Treatment.)

Natural Toxicants

Seafood Toxins

0005 Seafood may contain natural toxins that are of con-

cern in many parts of the world. These are paralytic

shellfish poison (saxitoxins), diarrhetic shellfish

poison (okadaic acid and related compounds), neuro-

toxic shellfish poison (brevetoxin), amnesic shellfish

poison (domoic acid), pufferfish poison (tetro-

dotoxin), ciguatera poison (ciguatoxin and other

toxins), and scombroid poison (histamine). All but the

last are accumulated in shellfish or fish through the

food chain from dinoflagellates, diatoms, or bacteria.

All these organisms are phytoplanktonic or benthic

forms of life, naturally occurring in specific areas of

the marine environment. Scombroid poison is pro-

duced through the decarboxylation of the histidine

to histamine in certain fish, notably tuna, mackerel,

mahi mahi, and marlin, through bacterial spoilage.

All these seafood toxins are resistant to normal

cooking practices and are not detectable by organo-

leptic means. Shellfish in potentially toxic areas can

be controlled by preventing harvesting until the

causative dinoflagellate and diatom blooms have di-

minished. However, because of their sporadic occur-

rence and difficulty in detection, it is more difficult to

prevent toxic fish from reaching the consumer. Except

for histamine, there are few chemical analytical tests

for regulatory purposes, and for most toxins bio-

assays are used. (See Shellfish: Contamination and

Spoilage of Molluscs and Crustaceans.)

Mycotoxins

0006Mycotoxins are widely produced on moist crops by

a variety of fungi. Poultry and livestock have been

poisoned, with both acute and chronic toxic effects.

However, acute poisonings, including deaths, have

rarely been documented for human beings; examples

of potential problems include ergotism from Claviceps

growth on rye, alimentary toxic aleukia from Fusar-

ium on cereal grains, and aflatoxicosis from Aspergil-

lus contamination of maize and other grains. Less

conclusive are links to chronic illness from aflatoxins

in peanuts, other nuts and grain crops, citreoviridin in

moldy rice, fumonisins, ochratoxin, and zearalenone

in grain, trichothecenes (vomitoxin) from winter

wheat, and patulin from apple juice, although epi-

demiological data would support a link between liver

cancer and aflatoxin in parts of China. Milk and meat

from animals feeding on moldy crops may contain

mycotoxins and are potential sources of carcinogens

and teratogens. There are chemical and analytical

methods for most mold toxins, and some crops are

monitored and advisory levels set for specific toxins.

There is also an indication that mild gastroenteritis can

arise from beer and soft drinks in containers contamin-

ated with adventitious molds penetrating through

small holes, e.g., punctured cans and faulty bottle

tops. These have not been thoroughly investigated.

(See Mycotoxins: Occurrence and Determination.)

Plant Toxins

0007Several naturally occurring secondary metabolites

from plants can cause illness, e.g., neurolathryism

from a-aminoproprionic acid in Lathyrus species

(wild peas), cyanide poisoning from cyanogenic glyco-

sides in almonds, cherries, etc., solanine poisoning

from a-solanine in potatoes. Novel foods used from

1594 CONTAMINATION OF FOOD

plant species that have not been used for food before

need to be evaluated carefully to avoid the potential

for adverse effects. (See Plant Antinutritional Factors:

Detoxification.)

Extraneous Matter

0008 Extraneous matter is foreign material entering a food

during its production, storage or distribution, and can

be (1) biological matter, such as insect parts, rodent

excreta, animal hair, mites, nematodes, and mold, (2)

chemical compounds, such as oil or tar, or (3) physical

materials, such as glass, metal, and stones. These are

undesirable from an esthetic point of view, but injuries

and gastroenteritis after their consumption have also

been reported. In addition, psychosomatic illnesses

have been documented from people observing disgust-

ing objects in their food. Manufacturers receive more

complaints about extraneous matter than all other

food-related problems combined, and usually install

metal or glass detectors on plant lines to minimize

these types of contamination.

Other Chemical Compounds

0009 Environmental contaminants of food-safety concern

to both scientists and consumers include trace elem-

ents, organometallic compounds, and organic sub-

stances such as halogenated hydrocarbon pesticides.

These compounds have several characteristics in

common: (1) they tend to be stable and persistent in

the environment; (2) they tend to accumulate in the

food chain; and (3) they can be biotransformed with

increased toxicity. Analytical chemistry has made us

aware of the presence of agents in foods that have the

potential to cause chronic illness, but the adverse

effects generally cannot be directly demonstrated in

human populations. However, the causes of most

cancers are not known, and the number of cases of

stomach, colon, bladder, and kidney cancers that

might be expected to reflect exposure to environmen-

tal chemicals are not increasing. Testicular cancer and

brain cancer, however, may be on the rise but are not

necessarily related to chemical contaminants in foods.

Some chemicals, including pesticides, have been

shown in animal studies to disrupt the endocrine

system and affect reproductive development in the

fetus; however, it is not known whether consumption

of food containing small amounts of chemical con-

taminants has any effect on the human population.

Pesticides

0010 Pesticides include insecticides, herbicides, fungi-

cides, rodenticides, insect repellants, weed killers,

antimicrobials, and algaecides, that are designed to

prevent, destroy, repel, or reduce pests (animal, plant,

and microbial). Some are selective, impacting only

target organisms, whereas others have a broad-range

toxicity. These may be applied in solid, liquid, aerosol,

or gaseous form. Spraying in one area may result not

only in contamination locally but, depending on wea-

ther conditions and patterns, contamination up to

thousands of kilometers away because particles can

be carried into the upper atmosphere. Some residues

may remain in both fresh produce and processed foods.

Metabolically stable lipophilic pesticides tend to accu-

mulate infat deposits in exposed farm animals,and this

can lead to biomagnification in animals higher up the

food chain, including humans, but today, with better

control of the use of chemicals in the environment, this

is a diminishing concern in developed countries.

0011Disorders of the nervous system, liver, and kidney

and various types of cancer typically have a long

latency period. The critical parameters which deter-

mine whether or not a pesticide will cause any adverse

effect are (1) the intrinsic biochemical properties of

the chemical, (2) the level of exposure to the chem-

ical, and (3) the duration of exposure to the chemical.

The severity of illness ranges over a wide spectrum

of effects, depending on the duration and extent of

exposure and on the susceptibility of the person

exposed. Chronic pesticide exposures in the parts per

billion and trillion range through the diet are thought

to pose at most a very low risk. However, there are

many organochlorine, organophosphate, carbamate,

pyrethrin, and arsenical pesticides that alter the

immune system in wildlife and laboratory animals.

More recently, more selective chemical and biological

pesticides have been developed, e.g., spores of Bacil-

lus thuringiensis; these are not known to have any

adverse affects against humans or domestic animals.

(See Pesticides and Herbicides: Toxicology.)

Organochlorine Pesticides

0012Organochlorine insecticides were widely used,

and many persist in the environment today.

Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and cyclo-

dienes, such as aldrin, endrin, and heptachlor, have

been used worldwide for over four decades against

insects of public and veterinary health significance.

Because of their stability, metabolites of these and

other organochlorine compounds have now reached

all parts of the world’s surface. The most toxic insecti-

cides, such as endrin, have also caused acute human

illness from contaminated food products, e.g., tor-

tillas, and even deaths from consumption of flour in

contact with the insecticide during transportation in

Pakistan. (See Pesticides and Herbicides: Types of

Pesticide.)

CONTAMINATION OF FOOD 1595