FOOD ADULTERATION AND SAFETY REGARDING DETECTED MARKET CASES AND CONSUMER OPINIONS

Food fraud is one of the long-standing causes of scandals attracting particular attention for a long time. This study aimed to monitor food fraud in the European Union and to identify the relationships among the countries where the cases were reported, adulterated commodities (seafood, eggs, milk, meat, fish, and their products) and types of fraud. The secondary data were covered by the survey focused on consumer knowledge about fraudulent activities, ingredient substitution, masking of origin, mislabeling, placing on the market of foods not fit for human consumption within Slovak inhabitants. Primary and secondary data were used to achieve this aim. Primary data were obtained from the Food Fraud and Quality Knowledge Center (KCFFQ) and secondary data from the questionnaire survey from 354 respondents. During the period from 2017 to 2019, 163 cases of food fraud were reported, most of which originated from Italy and mainly concerned fish and fish products. Based on primary data and one-way ANOVA statistical tests, we confirmed five hypotheses. There was found no statistical impact of the country on the type of food fraud (p = 0.0067), but the significant effect was determined on which food was adulterated (p = 0.000001). There was no statistical correlation among years and countries where the cases were reported (p = 0.110), but the statistically significant correlation was confirmed among years and commodities (p = 0.0043) and types of fraud reported (p = 0.009). Based on the processed secondary data from the questionnaire, we can conclude some information or public interest in food fraud problems.


INTRODUCTION
Adulteration in food has been a concern since the beginning of civilization, as it not only decreases in the quality of food products but also results in several ill effects on health. Authenticity testing of food and adulterant detection of various food products is required for value assessment and to assure consumer protection against fraudulent activities. Concerns about food safety and regulation have ensured the development of various techniques such as physical, biochemical/immunological, and molecular techniques, for adulterations detection in food (Bansal et al., 2017). Food fraud, the intentional misrepresentation of the true identity of a food product or ingredient for economic gain, is a threat to consumer confidence and public health and has received increased attention from both regulators and the food industry (Everstine et al., 2018). Every European citizen has the right to know how the food he eats is produced, processed, packaged, labelled, and sold. The implementation of this integrated Food Safety policy in the EU involves various actions, namely to assure effective control systems and evaluate compliance with EU standards in the food safety and quality, animal health, animal welfare, animal nutrition and plant health sectors within the EU and in non-EU countries in relation to their exports to the EU; to manage international relations with non-EU countries and international organisations concerning food safety, animal health, animal welfare, animal nutrition, and plant health; to manage relations with the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and ensure science-based risk management (European Commission, 2020a). Rapid alert system for the notification of a direct or indirect risk to human health deriving from food or feed was established in the EU. It involves the Member States, the Commission, and the EFSA (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002). Starting from November 2015 a dedicated IT application known as the Administrative Assistance and Cooperation System (AAC) has been made available for the Member States. After a successful period of testing dealing with fraudulent practices in the agri-food chain, in 2016 the system was also opened to liaison bodies based on official controls. The AAC and RASFF (Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed) are working together in synergy to keep the high EU standards for food and feed (EU, 2017; RASFF, 2018).
The Knowledge Centre for Food Fraud and Quality provides and shares up-to-date scientific knowledge on food fraud and food quality issues. It coordinates market surveillance activities and operates early warning and information system for food fraud. Collectively is operated by the European Commission's science and knowledge service, the Joint Research Centre (JRC), and the Departments regulating the feed-food chain and protecting consumer rights. The Centre complements the activities of the EU Food Fraud Network, which is operated by the European Commission Department for Health and Food Safety (European Commission, 2020b).

Scientific hypothesis
The first objective of this study was to monitor the food fraud focused mainly on the food of animal origin in member states of the European Union and to identify the most common reasons for these cases. The following hypotheses concerning food fraud were set up as follows: Hypothesis 1: We assume no statistical evidence of the country's impact on food frauds, which were reported. Hypothesis 2: We assume statistical evidence of the country's impact on counterfeit foodstuff. Hypothesis 3: We assume no statistical evidence between the countries and year when the food fraud cases were reported. Hypothesis 4: We assume statistical evidence between adulteration of food and the year of its occurrence. Hypothesis 5: We assume statistical evidence between the type of food fraud and year of its occurrence.
The second objective was to find out consumer awareness in Slovakia regarding their knowledge and opinion on food fraud.

MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY
The objective of this paper was achieved by using and processing of primary and secondary data. Primary data were obtained from the Knowledge Centre for Food Fraud and Quality (KCFFQ) which is hosted by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), during the period 2017 -2019. The records were obtained using the portal contained information about: • the reporting country, • the food commodities, • categories of food fraud, • accurate case information. The data obtained became the basis for confirming or rejecting hypotheses.
Secondary data were obtained using the survey focused on identifying consumers' awareness of food fraud in the Slovak Republic. The questionnaire was performed at a sample of 354 respondents in the 2019 year, using the Google Forms platform. The respondents were diversified into 2 categories in terms of gender and age. Women were represented by the amount of 278 (78.5%). The men were represented by 76 respondents (21.5%). Group was also divided into four groups based on their age. The age structure consisted as follows: from 16 to 21 years (13.3%), from 22 to 30 years (41.2%), from 31 to 45 years it was 27.1% and from 46 to 70 it was 18.4%. Questions about which commodities are most often adulterated, which types of food fraud occur most often, in which countries they think food fraud is the most commonly reported, and from what media they get this information was given to respondents.

Statistical analysis
The collected data were processed using the statistical program XLSTAT (Addinsoft, version 2019.1.2) The formulated hypotheses were tested using the one-way ANOVA statistical test. Hypotheses were tested: if the pvalue is less than a significant level (0.05) the invalid hypothesis was rejected and an alternative hypothesis was confirmed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Analyzes of primary data from KCFFQ
Food safety is one of the crucial issues of public health protection (Cieslik and Cieslik, 2012). If food is misdescribed, i.e. the information about the origin, composition, etc. provided to customers is not true and if this misdescription is done to deceive the customer for financial gain, food fraud, also known as economically motivated adulteration, is committed. Economically motivated adulteration of food is estimated to cause damage of around €8 to €12 billion per year (Vaqué and Vidreras, 2018). By evaluating food fraud notifications at KCFFQ during years from 2017 to 2019, we found 163 notifications reported to the KCFFQ system (Table 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, and 1f). We evaluated the ten most common types of fraud, 12 reporting countries, 5 commodities that were most commonly adulterated. There were found 60 notifications in 2017, where in Slovakia was reported only one case. This notification involved meat originating from Brazil contaminated with Salmonella.
The next year 2018, showed the highest amount of notifications for the whole observed period, namely 72. In 2019 there were found 31 reports. In Slovakia, no notification of food fraud was reported in the year 2018 and 2019. Reports of food fraud in each country from 2017 to 2019 in Europe are shown in Figure 1. Within this period, 92 reports were received from Italy, of which 37 concerned fish and fish products. Spain received 25 reports, also related to fish and fish products. 12 reports originated from the UK and 8 of them related to meat and meat products. 7 reports were reported from Belgium and Portugal, in both countries 6 cases related to meat and meat products, together 6 cases originated from France and 4 related to fish and fish products. 5 cases were reported from the Netherlands with 3 concerning the eggs. 3 cases from Ireland related to meat and meat products, Malta, Poland, and Slovakia reported one case of meat fraud and Germany reported one case of egg fraud.
Čapla et al. (2019) published a review on different types of foreign matter detected in food, reported by the RASFF during the period from 2016 to 2018. The presence of foreign bodies in food from different European regions showed differences. Plastic, glass, and metal were the most commonly reported in Western Europe, pests, and rubber in Northern Europe. As far as food commodities are concerned, bakery and confectionery products, fruit and vegetables, and convenience foods were the most frequently reported and the notifications originated often from Western Europe. Notifications from this part of Europe were made concerning other monitored commodities as well. Regarding the notification type, the most frequent one was an alert, and, in the case of a risk decision, serious risk constituted the largest part. Following updates to food safety certification standards and publication of new U.S. regulatory requirements, Everstine et al. (2018) undertook a project to develop a scheme to classify food fraud-related adulterants based on their potential health hazard and apply this scheme to the adulterants listed in a database of 2,970 food fraud records. The classification scheme was developed by a panel of experts in food safety and toxicology from the food industry, academia, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Results reinforce the importance of including a consideration of food fraudrelated adulterants in food safety systems.
Regarding the particular problems found in our evaluation, we can see several kinds of foods reported as the problem with traceability (from Italy, Spain, Portugal, France, etc.). For example, Italy reported at 3.5 mil. eggs, that they were found to be untraceable.      Italy seafood mislabelling lacked appropriate information to trace the product United Kingdom meat and meat products mislabelling some species were declared on the label but in reality were not present in the product, for instance, ham without pork Belgium meat and meat products substitution meat conventionally produced, and originating from the Netherlands was labelled and sold in Belgium as organic meat Spain meat and meat products products not fit for consumption meat was contaminated with Listeria Spain meat and meat products mislabelling meat producer sold contaminated meat to a second company, which in turn sold it without indicating on the label the name of the producing company France meat and meat products dilution fraudulent increase of the weight of chicken meat with water Spain meat and meat products origin masking meat sold as lamb in Burgos is from other countries Italy eggs mislabelling organic eggs were from hens in cages Italy food products not fit for consumption found rotten fish not fit for human consumption Italy meat and meat products counterfeit butcher sold regular beef as Japanese Kobe beef Portugal meat and meat products products not fit for consumption meat not fit for human consumption was sold Portugal meat and meat products mislabelling products that lacked traceability information and did not fulfil administrative requirements Portugal meat and meat products products not fit for consumption meat was not stored at the right temperature Portugal meat and meat products artificial enhancement samples contained sulphite, a substance which addition to meat is forbidden Italy fish and fish products mislabelling fish did not fulfil the legal traceability requirements Italy food mislabelling some items had a PDO labelling although they did not fulfil the required criteria France meat and meat products products not fit for consumption rotten meat without traceability Italy fish and fish products mislabelling sale of food commodities fraudulently labeled as organic Food or feed which is launched to the market shall be adequately labelled or identified to facilitate its traceability, through relevant documentation or information in accordance with the relevant requirements of more specific provisions. By the Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 it is the ability to trace and follow a food, feed, food-producing animal or substance intended to be, or expected to be incorporated into a food or feed, through all stages of production, processing, and distribution.
In samples of eggs, fipronil contamination was reported from several countries. Fipronil is an insecticide of the phenylpyrazoles class and an active ingredient of one of the popular ectoparasiticide veterinary products. Fipronil is also formulated as insect bait for roaches, ants, and termites; as a spray for pets. In humans, poisoning is mainly due to accidental ingestions or suicidal attempts. In agriculture, fipronil is widely used for soil treatment, seed coating, and crop protection (Ramesh and Milatovic, 2014). EU Regulation (EC) 396/2005 set up the maximum levels for fipronil (0.005 mg.kg -1 in chicken eggs) in several raw materials and foods. As consumers pay extra for perceived benefits of free-range eggs, this market sector presents profitable opportunities for producers with expertise in managing hens with enhanced behavioral freedom (Newberry, 2017). According to the labels, some of our samples of eggs came from a farm that produced "freerange" eggs but this information turned out to be false. Several countries reported dyeing low-quality tuna to sell it as fresh fish or case of sulphite addition to meat. Unprocessed foods belong to the food in which the presence of a food dye may not be permitted (Regulation EC no. 1333/2008). Conventional meat and other foods were sold as organic in several cases. Demand for organic meat is partially driven by consumer perceptions that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods (Średnicka-Tober et al., 2016).
The increasing consumer demand for organic products caused the organic food market has expanded in all continents of the world. Organic foods represent a specific segment of the food market (Kozelová, Vietoris, and Fikselová, 2013b). By our results found at the market, we can agree with the statement of Vaqué and Vidreras (2018) that common types of food fraud include the substitution of an ingredient with a similar, cheaper ingredient, the inclusion of undeclared ingredients, adulteration of foods to improve some of their characteristics; non-declaration or false declaration of processes and false declaration of the origin or geographic region of production of a food item.
There were reported several problems regarding the PDO label. EU quality policy aims at protecting the names of specific products to promote their unique characteristics, linked to their geographical origin as well as traditional know-how. By the JRC Food Fraud Monthly Report (2019) the inspectors that grant the Prosciutto di Parma and San Daniele PDO labels have resigned the irregularities that have recently been affecting the certification body responsible for the mentioned PDOs. In May 2019, inspectors revealed that 2.5 million hams did not comply with the requirements to bear the PDO labels.
Hypothesis 1 did not assume a link in the country's impact on food fraud. Based on the one-way ANOVA test, this hypothesis was confirmed (p = 0.0067). Hypothesis 2 assumed the influence of the country on which commodities were adulterated. Based on the one-way ANOVA test (, this hypothesis was confirmed (p = 0.000001). Hypothesis 3 did not assume the link among the countries and the years in which the cases were reported. Based on the result of the one-way ANOVA test, this hypothesis was confirmed (p = 0.110). Hypothesis 4 assumed that there was a link between foods that were adulterated and the years that occurred. Based on the result of the one-way ANOVA test, this hypothesis was confirmed (p = 0.0042). Hypothesis 5 assumed that there was a link between the type of counterfeiting and the years that occurred. Based on the result of the one-way ANOVA test, this hypothesis was confirmed (p = 0.009).  F r a n c e G e r m a n y I t a l y N e t h e r l a n d P o r t u g a l S l o v a k i a S p a i n U K I r e l a n d M a l t a P o l a n d

Number of casses
Country eggs fish and fish products food meat and meat products milk and dairy products seafood Analyzes of secondary data from the questionnaire Food scandals that happened in recent years have increased consumers' risk perceptions of foods and decreased their trust in food safety. A better understanding of consumer trust in food safety can improve the effectiveness of public policy and allows the development of the best practice in risk communication (Kozelová et al., 2013a). Among 354 respondents who participated in our questionnaire survey, 221 respondents (62.4%) replied to the first question concerning the commodity, that they believe to be the most adulterated is meat and meat products, which is partially in agreement with our results. Some respondents (26.02%) decided on milk and dairy products. Other commodities represented less than 10% (Figure 2). The safety of milk has always been challenged due to the illegal use of preservatives and adulterants such as hydrogen peroxide, salicylic acid, benzoic acid, water, neutralizers, melamine, and so on (Parminder and Gandhi, 2015).
At the question of which of the following causes of food fraud occur most often, respondents could select two options. 226 people (63.7%) decided for substitution, 142 people (40%) for mislabelling and 136 people (38.3%) for origin masking. Also, these results are partially in agreement with our results. Other types of adulteration received less than 100 votes (Figure 3). The question in which of these countries are food frauds reported mostly, they could also select two options. 310 people (87.6%) decided for Poland, 105 people (29.6%) voted for Slovakia and 43 people (12.1%) for Spain. Other countries received less than 10% (Figure 4). By the RASFF-Annual report (2018) there were 47 notifications on Salmonella in poultry products originating from Poland, most often (34 notifications) concerning Salmonella Enteritidis in fresh poultry. Two operators were identified as recurrent. EU citizens have the right to be protected from fraudulent practices and to receive accurate information about the food they choose to purchase (Vaqué and Vidreras, 2018).

Figure 2
The answer to the question "which commodities are mostly adulterated?".

Figure 3
The answer to the question "which of the following causes of food fraud occur most often?".

CONCLUSION
The present work was focused on the current problems related to food fraud in the European Union countries. We have established hypotheses and confirmed their correctness. Of the total number of 163 cases during the period from 2017 to 2019 registered in KCFFQ, the most reported cases were in Italy and Spain. The most common commodities covered by these reports were fish and their products and meat and meat products. As the most common cause of food fraud was mislabelling. Based on confirmed hypotheses, we conclude that it is not statistically conclusive that the country has an influence on what type of fraud was performed but it has shown the link between the country and the food that has been adulterated. Also, there was no statistically confirmed correlation between countries and years when cases were reported, but a statistically significant correlation between years, commodities and the types of fraud that were reported. The results achieved in the evaluation of the responses from the individual questionnaires and the KCFFQ data indicate some level of information about food fraud topics. These results can be used as a basis for further investigation.

Figure 4
The answer to the question "in which of these countries are food frauds reported mostly?"

Figure 5
The answer to the question "from which media do you often receive information about food fraud"