A Comparative Assessment of the Quality of Milk-Validation of Standard Brands versus Local Milk Sold in Market
Nuha Rasheed*, Abdul Saleem Mohammad and Hajera Hafeez
Department of Pharmaceutics, Nizam Institute of Pharmacy, India
Submission: November 1, 2017; Published: March 01, 2018
*Corresponding author: Nuha Rasheed, Department of Pharmaceutics, Nizam Institute of Pharmacy, Tel: 9866358723; Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
How to cite this article: Nuha R, Abdul S M, Hajera H. A Comparative Assessment of the Quality of Milk-Validation of Standard Brands versus Local Milk Sold in Market. Glob J Pharmaceu Sci. 2018; 5(1): 555654. DOI: 10.19080/GJPPS.2018.05.555654
Adulteration is defined as an act of intentionally debasing the quality of food offered for sale either by the admixture or substitution of inferior substances or by the removal of valuable ingredient. Milk is an essential commodity of life as it is a source of calcium and other essential nutrients required by the body. It is available in the market both locally and as a branded commodity. The study was carried out keeping in view the recently emerging concern of adulteration of natural milk with various illegal substances to increase its marketability. The aim of the study was to compare and validate the quality of milk sold locally by vendors against the brands available in market. 5 samples each of FSSAI approved brands and local vendor sold were collected and subjected to various standard tests. A standard milk adulteration kit manufactured by Nice Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Cochin and India was used to carry out the quality analysis on various samples procured. Thus the comparative analysis of milk samples proved that milk procured from local brands was adulterated when compared to standard.
Milk in its natural form has high food value. It supplies nutrients like proteins, fat, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals in moderate amounts in an easily digestible form. Due to its nutritive value, milk is significant to young and old people. Milk contains more than 100 substances that are either in solution, suspension or emulsion in water, the important being casein - the major protein of milk, lactose - milk sugar, whey and mineral salts [1-3]. A national survey in India has revealed that almost 70% of the milk sold and consumed in India is adulterated by contaminants such as detergent and skim milk powder, but impure water is the highest contaminant. According to National Survey on Milk Adulteration conducted by FSSAI (India) in 2011, water is the most common adulterant followed by detergent in milk. A survey by FSSAI in 2012, 68% milk samples was found to be adulterated in which 31% were from rural areas. Of these 16.7% were packet or branded milk and rest were loose milk samples from dairies. In the urban areas, 68.9% milk was found to be adulterated with water, detergent, urea and skim milk powder. In Uttarakhand, 88% milk was found to be adulterated. Despite the laws governing the quality and sale of milk existing in India for decades, the adulteration of milk has not been checked completely .
In order to keep milk temporarily fresh, some unethical activities are usually adapted to prevent the financial losses due to the spoilage of milk during its transportation and sale. For instance, the addition of water to increase volume of milk, thickening agents like starch, flour, skimmed milk powder, whey powder or other ingredients to counter the dilution and extend the solids content of the milk, vegetable oil, sugarcane or urea to compensate the fat, carbohydrate or protein content of diluted milk. Some chemicals such as hydrogen peroxide, carbonates, bicarbonates, antibiotics, caustic soda and even the most lethal chemical formalin to increase the storage period of milk, ice to enhance the shelf life of milk; detergents to enhance the cosmetic nature of milk which diminishes foamy appearance and whitening of milk or calcium thioglycolate/potassium thioglycolate/calcium salts of thioglycolic acid and urea for whitening of milk and giving it a genuine look .
From the view point of protecting the health of the consumer, the Government of India promulgated the 'Prevention of Food Adulteration Act' (PFA Act) in 1954. The Act came into force from 1st June, 1955. It prohibits the manufacture, sale and distribution of not only adulterated foods but also foods contaminated with toxicants. Despite food legislation, adulteration remains uncontrolled, furthermore legal steps laid down in the PFA
Act are extremely difficult to maintain due to inadequate and untrained man power and laboratory facilities . Such is the state in the country where we are one of the largest nations of milk producers. In the year 2010-2011, India was ranked among the top 5 countries in the world producing 121.8 million tones of milk .
Here are a few examples of what adulterants can be added to milk in order to maintain its freshness and market value which in turn is harmful to the consumer leaving them clueless of what direct effect these adulterants have on them. Water is an adulterant in milk which is often always added to increase the volume of milk which in turn decreases the nutritive value of milk which if contaminated poses a health risk especially to infants and children. Detergents are added to emulsify and dissolve the oil in water giving a frothy solution, the characteristic white colour of milk. Detergents cause gastro-intestinal complications. Urea is added to milk to provide whiteness, increase the consistency of milk and for leveling the contents of solid-not- fat (SNF) as are present in natural milk. The presence of urea in milk overburdens the kidneys as they have to filter out more urea content from the body .
Hydrogen Peroxide is also added to milk to prolong its freshness, but peroxides damages the gastro intestinal cells which can lead to gastritis and inflammation of the intestine. Starch is also used as an adulterant and if high amounts of starch are added to milk this can cause diarrhea due to the effects of undigested starch in colon. Its accumulation in the body may prove very fatal for diabetic patients. Carbonates and bicarbonates are added to milk too, this can cause disruption in hormone signaling that regulate development and reproduction . Keeping in view the above facts, the present study was conducted to detect various common adulterants in milk samples obtained from public and educational institutions.
A standard milk adulteration kit was obtained from Nice Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Cochin and India. 5 milk samples from various vendors in Hyderabad were collected in sterilized glass containers. Similarly 5 samples of FSSAI approved brands of milk were purchased. Both the locally procured samples and branded samples were subjected to quality tests. The milk samples were subjected to a total of 12 tests for various adulterants.
Detection of urea, starch, neutralizers, hydrogen peroxide, formaldehyde and nitrate nitrogen: All the samples tested negative for presence of urea, starch, neutralizers, hydrogen peroxide, and formaldehyde and nitrate nitrogen.
Detection of detergents: Sample 2 tested slightly positive for the presence of detergents while sample 1, 3, 4 and 5 tested negative.
Detection of sugar: All samples tested positive. Sample 1 tested negative for sugar content.
Detection of glucose-dextrose: Sample 1 and 3 tested negative. Sample 2 and 4 tested slightly positive for presence of Glucose-Dextrose while sample 5 tested positive.
Detection of sodium chloride: Sample 1, 2 and 5 tested negative while samples 2 and 3 tested slightly positive.
Detection of mastitis: All samples except sample 1 tested positive.
Detection of maltodextrin: Samples 3 and 4 tested slightly positive while all other samples tested negative.
Discussion of results for branded samples (Table 2):
Detection of urea, neutralizers, detergents, glucosedextrose, hydrogen peroxide, formaldehyde, maltodextrin and nitrate nitrogen: All brands tested negative for the presence of urea, neutralizers, detergents, glucose-dextrose, hydrogen peroxide, formaldehyde, maltodextrin and nitrate nitrogen.
Detection of starch: Brand 4 tested slightly positive. All other brands tested negative.
Detection of sugar: Brand 2 tested negative. All other brands tested slightly positive.
Detection of sodium chloride: Brand 1 and Brand 5 tested positive. Brand 2, 3 and 4 tested negative.
Detection of mastitis: Brand 1, 2 and 5 tested negative. Brand 3 and 4 tested slightly positive for presence of mastitis.
The results clearly suggest that most of the samples collected from local sellers were adulterated with sugars, sodium chloride and mastitis. Sample 1 among all the locally procured samples was devoid of all the adulteration. Few other samples also showed presence of maltodextrin and glucose-dextrose. Sample 2 indicated slight presence of detergent. On the other hand most of the branded samples purchased conformed to the FSSAI
standards. Few of the brands indicated presence of starch, sugar,
sodium chloride and mastitis. Among all the brands, Brand 2
conformed to the quality standards.