Recently, the Food and Drug Administration of City A received a report from the public that ready-to-eat fish balls labeled "produced by Company C" sold in Supermarket B within its jurisdiction were suspected of adding the food additive sodium tripolyphosphate beyond the scope. The evidence is that the ready-to-eat fish ball product label marked as "ingredients: surimi, starch, edible vegetable oil, soybean protein isolate, edible salt, white sugar, sodium tripolyphosphate ......", and in accordance with the "GB2760-2014 standards for the use of food additives" (hereinafter referred to as GB2760), the scope of use of sodium tripolyphosphate does not include ready-to-eat fish balls, so the law enforcement authorities are requested to investigate and respond in writing.

After receiving the report, the law enforcement officers of Bureau A, on the one hand, immediately investigated the reported operation of instant fish balls in Supermarket B; on the other hand, they sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration of City D, where Company C, the manufacturer of the products involved, is located, asking it to investigate the relevant situation of the production process of the products involved.

Investigation on the operation link: Through on-site inspection of B- supermarket and its suppliers, and inquiry and investigation of relevant personnel, law enforcement personnel found out that B- supermarket purchased a total of 600 bags of ready-to-eat fish balls marked "produced by Company C". The value of the goods involved was 5247 yuan, 284 bags were sold and 316 bags were returned. In the course of the investigation, Supermarket B provided its own and Company C's business qualifications, production qualifications and inspection reports, certificates, product purchase and sale records and other evidence materials of ready-to-eat fish ball products, truthfully explaining the source of purchase of the products involved. After finding the problem, Supermarket B stopped selling all the products involved and returned them to Company C for processing. During the investigation, law enforcement officers did not find food safety problems in the products involved and misled consumers.

The investigation of the production process: the reply letter from bureau d to bureau a shows that bureau d has inspected the production site of company c and consulted the materials such as food, food additive purchase records, picking records, production records and product storage records. no evidence of direct addition of sodium tripolyphosphate to company c when producing instant fish balls was found. After analyzing the production process of Company C and the composition of the surimi raw materials used, the trace sodium tripolyphosphate in the products involved was brought in through the surimi raw materials, which conforms to the principle of bringing in food additives stipulated in GB2760 and is not added directly.

According to the on-site inspection and the contents of the reply letter, Bureau A determined that the label of the instant fish ball product involved in the case was defective, but it did not affect food safety and did not mislead consumers. According to the second paragraph of Article 125 of the Food Safety Law, Bureau A issued a "Notice of Ordering Correction" to Supermarket B, and at the same time gave a written reply to the whistleblower.

Do food additives brought into food by raw materials need to be marked on the product label?

Sodium tripolyphosphate is a kind of food additive, which is often used as water retention agent, quality improver and pH regulator in food. GB2760 shows that sodium tripolyphosphate should not be directly used in the production and processing of ready-to-eat fish balls, but it can be used in frozen aquatic products and frozen surimi products (including fish balls, etc.), and the large amount of sodium tripolyphosphate is 5.0 g/kg.

The production process of ready-to-eat fish balls in the enterprise standard implemented by Company C is stated as "taking frozen surimi products as the main raw material, starch, edible vegetable oil, soybean protein isolate, edible salt, white granulated sugar and other auxiliary materials, and adding food additives, it is processed by thawing (or not thawing), crushing, chopping, pickling, molding, quick freezing, frying or marinating, mixing, packaging, sterilization and other processes". Among them, the implementation standard of frozen surimi products as composite ingredients is "GB10136-2015 animal aquatic products", and the addition amount accounts for 60% of the total food.

4.1.3.1.3 of the General Principles for the Labeling of GB7718-2011 Prepackaged Foods (hereinafter referred to as GB7718) stipulates: "If an ingredient is a composite ingredient composed of two or more other ingredients (excluding composite food additives), the name of the composite ingredient shall be marked in the ingredient list, and then the original ingredients of the composite ingredient shall be marked in brackets in descending order of addition amount." 4.1.3.1.4 stipulates that food additives contained in compound ingredients with an addition amount of less than 25% of the total amount of food do not need to be marked if they conform to the introduction principle stipulated in GB2760 and do not have a process effect in the final product. In other words, if the amount of compound ingredients added is greater than 25% of the total amount of food, or the food additives brought in play a technological role in the final product, it should be marked.

It can be seen that whether the food additives brought into the food by the raw materials need to be marked on the product label depends on the ratio of the amount of compound ingredients to the total amount of food and whether the food additives play a technological role in the final product. According to Article 26 of the "GB7718 Q & A" (Revised Edition), "the recommend is marked by adding brackets after the name of the compound ingredient, and marking the common name of the food additive in the brackets." In this case, sodium tripolyphosphate is brought into the final product ready-to-eat fish balls from the raw surimi, which is in line with the principle of bringing in food additives. If the amount of surimi added is more than 25% of the total amount of food, it shall be standardized and marked as: surimi (containing sodium tripolyphosphate) in the ingredient list of the final product.

If the label is not standardized, can it be characterized as a "defect" of the label "?

In the practice of law enforcement, it is the discretion of law enforcement personnel to determine whether the food label problem is a "defect", which requires law enforcement personnel to comprehensively consider on the basis of systematic understanding of the legal provisions. According to the second paragraph of Article 125 of the Food Safety Law, the author believes that the connotation of food label defects includes: irregular labeling, no impact on food safety, and no misleading to consumers. Only when these three special conditions are met at the same time, can it be considered as "defective".

The "Shandong Food and Drug Regulatory System Law Enforcement Case Handling Guiding (I)", "Beijing Food and Drug Administration Food Related Case Handling Guiding Opinions (I)" and Shanghai "Prepackaged Food Labeling Related Cases Handling Guiding Opinions" all listed: Although not Standardized labeling, but will not cause consumers to misunderstand the performance, function, origin, use, quality, specifications, ingredients, prices, etc. of food, labeling violations that do not have a material impact on the purchase can be identified as "defects". For another example, mislabeling of sauce meat products and marinated meat products as "sauce and marinated meat products", "edible plant oil" as "edible oil", and "edible salt" as "salt" are not standardized. Labeling violations that do not affect food safety can also be regarded as "defects". On the contrary, for those that should be marked but not marked, the content that should be marked is false or inaccurate, or violates the prohibition of labeling, it should not be identified as a "defect" and should be based on the provisions of Article 125 of the Food Safety Law. Punishment.

In this case, the food additive sodium tripolyphosphate brought into the final product from the raw surimi is not standardized as: surimi (containing sodium tripolyphosphate), but the non-standard label will not cause food safety problems in practice, nor mislead consumers, therefore, can be identified as label "defects".