search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
30 May / June 2017 How Safe is Safe?


Analytical Tools for Tracing Contaminants in Food


by Uwe Oppermann, Anja Grüning, Gesa Schad, Carola Schultz Shimadzu Europa GmbH, Albert-Hahn-Straße 6-10, D-47269 Duisburg, Germany


A growing world population up to 9.7 billion by 2050 will increase the demand for food. This will require higher crop production globally, by enhancing productivity through optimised methods, fertilisers, agrochemicals and pesticides. In order to comply with regulations on food safety, manufacturers of food and beverages must carefully control contaminants such as pesticides, mycotoxins and heavy metals. Protection against fraudulent products and improper food ingredient labelling is also essential. Analytical instrumentation technologies and methods such as mass spectrometry coupled with liquid chromatography (LC), gas chromatography (GC) and inductively coupled plasma (ICP) provide the tools to support and guarantee food safety with consumer, animal and plant protection.


Introduction


Food safety is a major concern for the European population, with many food scandals being reported in the past few years, such as the horsemeat scandal in 2013 when traces of horsemeat were found in products sold in supermarkets. Deep frozen lasagne claiming to contain beef was found with no declaration of horsemeat or improperly declared horsemeat content – whereas the actual horsemeat content was up to 100%. In another case, mineral oil and plastic parts were detected in chocolate products. In spring 2016 an environmental institute in Munich found elevated concentrations of glyphosate in beer, Europe´s favourite alcoholic beverage.


To strengthen confidence in food products the European Commission aims to assure a high level of food safety and animal & plant health within the EU through the farm-to-fork principle. This strategy implements effective system controls and evaluates compliance with EU standards as well as evaluating EU imports from third party countries.


European citizens are entitled to know how their food is produced, processed, packaged, labelled and sold. The central goal of the European Commission’s Food Safety policy is to ensure a high level of protection of human health regarding the food industry — Europe’s largest manufacturing and employment sector.


Food Control is a Fundamental Issue


Over the last century, the global population has quadrupled, in 1915, there were 1.8 billion people, today there are 7.3 billion people and by 2050 it is estimated that the world population will reach 9.7 billion. This growth, along with rising incomes in developing countries (which causes dietary changes such as eating more protein and meat) increases the global demand for food with food demand expected to grow anywhere between 59% and 98% by 2050 [1]. This will require higher crop production on a global scale by enhancing productivity through optimised methods, fertilisers, agrochemicals and pesticides.


The use of herbicides, insecticides and fungicides reduces crop losses, both before and after harvest, however, residues resulting from the use of plant protection products may pose a risk to human health and require a legislative framework to monitor food contamination. National programs for pesticide monitoring in the US, Europe and Japan have set Maximum Residue Levels (MRL’s) or tolerance information (EPA) for pesticides in food products. A default value of 0.01 mg/kg is applied for MRL enforcement, requiring highly sensitive and specific analytical


Table 1: Analytical conditions for LC and MS


Figure 1: MRM chromatograms of 646 pesticides spiked into a mint extract at 0.01 mg/kg (Up to 3 MRMs per compound and 5 msec polarity switching time).


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68