[Supply of glyceryl monostearate] “Monoglyceride” is the abbreviation of “glyceryl monostearate”, does it violate the food law?

“Monoglyceride” means “glyceryl monostearate” The abbreviation of “ester” is controversial

City B Food and Drug Administration received a complaint from Mr. and filed an application for administrative reconsideration. After review, the following facts were found: The ingredient list of XX brand peanut butter sold in the reported supermarket contains “monoglyceride”. This ingredient cannot be found in the “National Food Safety Standard for the Use of Food Additives” (GB2760-2014) , is not a common name for food additives. After investigation, the Food and Drug Administration of District C determined that according to the provisions of Article 29 (3) of the “General Principles for Labeling of Prepackaged Foods” (GB7718-2011) Questions and Answers (Revised Edition) (hereinafter referred to as the “Questions and Answers”), The “monoglyceride” used in the label of this product is the abbreviation of “glyceryl monostearate”. The product labeling does not comply with the provisions of the “General Principles for Labeling of Prepackaged Foods” (GB7718-2011) and falls into the category of “labels and instructions are defective but not “Affected food safety and will not mislead consumers”, in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 125 of the “Food Safety Law”, an order to make corrections will be given. The applicant for administrative review believes that the “monoglyceride” in the ingredient list of the food involved does not use the common name of the food additive, and that “monoglyceride” is the abbreviation of “glyceryl monostearate” without any legal basis, and the abbreviation violates the Food Article 67 of the Security Law stipulates that the case should be investigated and dealt with in accordance with the law, so we applied for administrative review.

Law enforcement officials have a big dispute over how to characterize this case. The focus of the dispute is whether the food label involved in the case constitutes a food label defect. In this regard, law enforcement officials have two different opinions. The first opinion is that although the “monoglyceride” in the ingredient list of the food involved does not use the common name of the food additive, after investigation, it can be determined to be “glyceryl monostearate”, which is an irregular labeling name, so it can be determined For label defects. The second opinion is that the “monoglyceride” in the ingredient list of the food involved does not use the common name of the food additive. Judging from the label, its true attributes cannot be determined, and it does not meet the situation of “not misleading consumers”. It should be determined as a label defect and should be punished in accordance with Article 125, Paragraph 1, Item (2) of the Food Safety Law.

Judgment of the intrinsic quality of food mainly depends on whether the use of food additives complies with regulations. As far as this case is concerned, after investigation, it was found that the food additive “monoglyceride” marked in the ingredient list of the food involved was actually “glyceryl monostearate”. This kind of food additive can be used in appropriate amounts in all types of foods according to production needs. food additives. In addition, the food involved is a semi-solid compound seasoning and does not belong to the list of food categories excepted for food additives used in appropriate amounts according to production needs in Table A.3 of Appendix A of GB2760-2014. Accordingly, the applicable food types and usage limits of the food additives involved in the case are in compliance with regulations.

Food label defects mainly refer to the character spacing, font size, punctuation, simplified and traditional Chinese, rounded intervals, etc. in the labels and instructions of food and food additives. . Accordingly, in this case, the content of the food label involved was not marked with the common name of the food additive, which was not covered by the above regulations and violated the mandatory requirement of Article 67, Item (7) of the Food Safety Law. Sexual regulations do not fall within the scope of food label defects.

“Monoglyceride” and “glyceryl monostearate” cannot establish a one-to-one correspondence

In this case, after investigation and verification by the Food and Drug Administration of District C, the “monoglyceride” added to the food involved was actually “glyceryl monostearate”. However, its common name is not used. Moreover, “monoglyceride” and “monoglyceride” are not the same substance or semantics. This is mainly because: “fat” refers to the oil in animals or oil plant seeds, and “ester” refers to acid (carboxylic acid or inorganic acid). A class of organic compounds produced by the reaction of oxygen-containing acids) and alcohols. More importantly, even if “monoglyceride” and “monoglyceride” are considered to have the same meaning, the types of food additives containing the words “monoglyceride” in GB2760-2014 include “mono- and diglyceryl fatty acid esters” (Oleic acid, linoleic acid, palmitic acid, behenic acid, stearic acid, lauric acid, linolenic acid)” (function: emulsifier), “glyceryl monocaprylate” (function: preservative), “succinic acid monoglyceride” “Glyceride” (function: emulsifier), etc. The functions of the above food additives are different. Therefore, “monoglyceride” and “glyceryl monostearate” cannot establish a one-to-one correspondence. The food and drug regulatory authorities still need to assist in the investigation to determine the true properties of “monoglyceride”. As an ordinary consumer, it is not possible to establish a one-to-one correspondence. May be judged from food label information. To sum up, the food labels involved in the case indicate “monoglycerides”, which cannot reflect the true attributes and names of food additives in the food. Even rational and cautious ordinary consumers’ right to know cannot be guaranteed, and it cannot be determined that it does not mislead consumers.