Food Quality Magazine October 2014 | Page 19

Food Quality Magazine ISSUE 02 | AUTUMN 2014 be employed by the food fraudster including the misrepresentation of freshness by falsifying catch dates, freezing, processing, use of coloring and/or flavoring agents and or the falsification of labels. Other means and methods for committing fish fraud are outlined in Table 4, below. The Countermeasures There are three important questions to consider about food fraud countermeasures. First, is how do you identify them? Second, after you’ve identified them, how do you select the right ones? And third, how do you determine which ones are the most effective in counteracting the food fraudster’s chosen means and methods? The fact is there are literally thousands of questions we could ask that relate in one way or another to the issue of food fraud. And, in fact, the major standards organizations have produced literally thousands of questions on food safety, food defense and even some on food fraud. But the questions we use today to prevent food fraud are almost exclusively based on the intuition of security subject matter experts. For example, a review of over 1500 standards issued by the major industry and government standards organizations found over four hundred and fifty different questions that relate in one way or the other to the issue of food fraud. All of the food fraud standards we analyzed were based on subjective opinion rather than science-based analysis. Let us look at how to derive countermeasures using honey as an example. In Table 5, below, column one represents the commodity type, in this case honey. Column two identifies the different segments of the supply chain, i.e. growers (G), transporters (T), processors (P), storage facilities (S) and retailers (R). The color red signifies high risk. The color yellow signifies medium risk. Green signifies low risk of a food fraud event of the type indicated occurring at that point along the supply chain. In columns three and four we identify perpetrator means and methods. In column five we detail examples of some of the specific actions that, if taken, will deter, detect and prevent honey fraud. These we call countermeasures. All countermeasures are the result of correlating the means and the methods with the specific actions necessary to thwart a successful act of fraud against a specific commodity at a specific point along the food supply chain. Table 5: Deriving Food Fraud Countermeasures Commodity Segment Means G T P S X X X X Countermeasures R X Methods Cutting and adding Add water to increase volume; add sugar syrups Laboratory tests for water content and sugar types Viscosity testing Organoleptic testing X Honey X X X X X X X X X Chemical, physical and biological treatment to change flavor, texture and appearance Disguise flora Add water/thickeners/ coloring agents; use clouding/clarifying agents; add chemicals, filtration to remove pollen; avoid testing for heavy metals; falsify bee foraging zones in contaminated areas Laboratory tests for water content, thickeners and coloring agents Add flavoring agents Laboratory tests for taste additives Laboratory tests for pesticides Laboratory tests for pollen type and content Laboratory testing for heavy metals Strong chain of custody certification Organoleptic testing Laboratory tests for pollen type and content X X X X X Disguise spoiling Mask crystallization of sugars; misrepresent harvest date Laboratory tests for water content to mask crystallization of sugars Organoleptic testing Strong labels program X X X X X Mislabeling of finished product Apply falsified labels at the time of filling X X X X X Relabeling Relabel containers X X X X X Accept mislabeled and/or relabeled products Continue to misrepresent and sell product Strong labels program Supply and demand price correlations 19