Could augmented reality help us be better food shoppers?

As Katinka has pointed out some free range eggs are produced under conditions with high stocking levels. I would like to know what I was buying.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

Katrinka refers only to Australia, presumably.

I would like animal husbandry regulations to be established in the UK that are acceptably good, that producers are monitored against them and products labelled accordingly, including those imported. I have no expertise to assess whether a stocking rate or other criteria is good so can only, if I choose, compare it with an established standard.

It seems from what I found that British Lion eggs that are free range should come from compliant producers. Is there sound evidence to the contrary?

Duncan – I’m not sure where we can find information about stocking levels in the UK. I have a friend who is involved with Red Tractor certification and he might know. This page about the growth of intensive farming in the UK shows the rapid increase in intensive poultry farming in recent years: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2017-07-17/megafarms-uk-intensive-farming-meat

Malcolm – Production of free range eggs in the UK now represents about half of those sold and from looking at what is on sale in supermarkets: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/704779/eggs-statsnotice-3may18b.pdf The growth in intensive production (see my reply to Duncan, above) suggests that there is likely to be a focus on meeting the current UK requirement for Lion branding, which is hardly impressive in my view.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

My figure came from Defra – see Figure 2. I forgot to put in a link: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/704779/eggs-statsnotice-3may18b.pdf

I expect that the percentage of free range eggs sold (rather than used for catering, ready meals, etc) is higher because it has been a good selling point. Unfortunately standards are minimum standards and if we had access to information about how our food was produced at least some of us would be selective about what we bought.

One of the links provided by Katinka explains that effectively the standards have been reduced in Australia, but at least the stocking density appear to be accessible to the public.

Most standards are “minimum” meaning criteria that you must equal or exceed.

I don’t know how many people shopping for free range eggs would have a clue about what stocking density to accept. Many probably won’t know what a hectare is (2.471 acres, 10000m² – and I do not mean this to sound disparaging).

A standard that is accepted is what most concerned people will want to see met (in my view, anyway). So if the British Lion standard for free range eggs is a reasonable standard then the simple way is to buy eggs marked accordingly. Hopefully the standard will be policed. One of the major problems with standards fraud is if we do not have means to check against them – we need a proper Trading Standards to deal with that, and we haven’t. Back to reputable retailers.

If people are sufficiently concerned about animal welfare then buying free range eggs will be the choice over barn reared.

There is no need for the public to understand what a hectare is, though it is easy to find out. Most people are aware of intensive farming and the photos in the introduction provide a simple visual indication that no-one could fail to understand. Rather than waiting for Trading Standards to deal with problems, I think it is better to set standards based on our understanding of animal welfare and carry out independent assessment to endure that the law is being complied with.

These are recommendations – a code of practice. I favour legislation. Several days ago I met a former butcher who whose more recent experience is environmental health and accreditation schemes in the meat industry. He is appalled by what goes on nowadays and the public knows nothing about.

On another matter he reminded me that meat can be imported and legally branded as UK produced. He gave me the examples of Romania and Yorkshire. My friend who works in policing under the Red Tractor scheme confirmed this and since then I have met someone who actually worked in a plant where imported eggs were sold as UK produce.

The problem with legislation is how it gets watered down by vested interests, and the farming community has huge influence. It would currently have to be done by the EC as we are part of Europe. Another problem is how it is properly policed – the problem with all legislation. Maybe in an ideal world where only people with knowledge and integrity were responsible for it.

Many eggs are imported and I don’t know how you properly police that, least of all with liquid egg.

I presume the British Lion code is a sensible one and if it is properly observed and monitored should yield a decent standard of welfare. We need to be encouraged to only buy such eggs.

If major retailers publicise their policy on the production of eggs they sell then I’ll stick with one of those (unless I find otherwise). They have the resources to ensure that where they purchase from will comply with their own standards.

duncan, nothing worse than a very liquid spready egg. If they were not out of date (old eggs, I believe, do this) and it was not a one off, I’d buy your eggs elsewhere. May cost a bit more – ours cost £1.33 for 10 – but I think they are still good value.

I’d be more concerned at present with dealing with the battery production of eggs and poultry meat.

This seems to be what has happened in Australia, Malcolm: https://www.choice.com.au/food-and-drink/meat-fish-and-eggs/eggs/articles/egg-standard-260417 Presumably the industry has applied pressure on the government to allow lowering of the minimum standard or whatever you would prefer to call it.

Could the same happen in the UK? I hope not, but perhaps we should push for information about stocking density for the stocking densities used for eggs sold by the large supermarkets. I wonder if Which? could provide us with any information.

I realise that we are probably being expected to discuss the virtues of augmented reality to help engage with the public. We had a society event yesterday and visitors had the opportunity to experience virtual reality at its simplest, using headsets including a mobile phone. I suggested using swivel chairs next time to encourage viewers to turn round and look at what’s going on behind them. It’s worth experiencing what innovations in technology have achieved.

I’m not sure what augmented reality is in the context of free range eggs. Is it “information”? I haven’t the time to check all appropriate products in a supermarket with a mobile phone before I decide to buy. I’d rely on the retailer’s standards.

The British Lion scheme gives stocking density. I gave a link earlier.”a maximum stocking density of 2,000 birds per hectare.“.

Katinka has outlined how it works and there is other information online. At least Australia seems to have publicly available information about stocking densities so if we are interested we can use an app in the shop or maybe check on a website.

I used to think that phone apps were of limited use but soon learned that the phone is analogous to a workshop and the apps are the tools we choose to use.

Maybe we could find a suitable Convo to discuss this, Malcolm. I would like to speak to people with some involvement first.

There are (were):
– https://conversation.which.co.uk/food-drink/time-to-sort-out-origin-labelling/
– https://conversation.which.co.uk/food-drink/origin-meat-labelling-wheres-my-food-from/
– https://conversation.which.co.uk/food-drink/british-beef-food-origin-labelling-meat-european-parliament/
They didn’t generate a lot of interest at the time.

I agree Sophie. However, we are where we are and I think the public needs to learn more about how our food is produced and hopefully more of us will push for higher standards and certainly oppose moves that could allow them to be reduced.

A few years back the Food Standards Agency shamed the supermarkets because they were selling chicken that was so contaminated with campylobacter (the most common food poisoning bug) that the public was advised not to eat raw meat. With most retailers this has resulted in a significant improvement that might not have happened without this intervention. Unfortunately the companies are now largely self-policing the problem and I wonder how much progress will be made.

The second paragraph should read: “A few years back the Food Standards Agency shamed the supermarkets because they were selling chicken that was so contaminated with campylobacter (the most common food poisoning bug) that the public was advised not to wash raw chicken before cooking.”

I have added a correction, thanks Malcolm.

On the basis that all the supermarkets and other retailers were selling raw chicken that was heavily contaminated (>1000 cfg/g) and that following press publicity, standards have shown improvement (but not enough) I do believe that companies are not capable of self-policing. I’m looking at facts and not using ‘wicked villains’ or other emotive terms.

This page has a video showing undercover investigation in processing plants that supply chicken for retailers: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/27/dirty-chicken-scandal-campylobacter-eight-out-10-uk-birds-supermarkets-asda Subsequent to release of this video, contamination figures were released for most supermarkets.

We have plenty of other Conversations to discuss the continuing campylobacter problem.

The investigation is 4 years old.
https://conversation.which.co.uk/food-drink/campylobacter-food-poisoning-chicken-supermarket-tests-food-safety-week/
Latest data (Oct 2017) https://www.food.gov.uk/news-updates/news/2017/16629/final-results-third-annual-retail-survey “In the last period of the third annual survey, April – July 2017, based on a total of 1,437 chicken samples 5.9% of chickens had high levels of campylobacter (over 1,000 cfu/g) down from 20.1% for the same period in 2014. ”

Perhaps more relevant to eggs is salmonella.
“New FSA advice on eating runny eggs
11th October 2017

The expert group found that the presence of Salmonella in UK eggs has been dramatically reduced by the British Lion scheme, and the risks are now very low. More than 90% of UK eggs are produced under this food safety scheme, identifiable by the familiar Lion mark.”

“The British Egg Industry Council
Since its formation in 1986, the British Egg Industry Council has been committed to representing the UK egg industry on matters ranging from breeding, hatching and rearing of hens, to egg production, packing, processing and marketing. The BEIC’s prime objective is to act as a voice for its members, representing their interests and expressing their concerns in discussions with Government, the European Commission, European Parliament and other important bodies.

Composed of 11 major industry trade associations, the BEIC is primarily funded by voluntary levies from those within the industry that together produce around 90% of the UK’s eggs. The BEIC is further responsible for the formation and running of the British Egg Information Service to provide the public with information concerning egg recipes, egg nutrition, egg safety and egg production.

The Lion Mark
By subscribing to and supporting the British Egg Industry Council, its subscribers adhere to the Lion Code of Practice, a system which maintains the highest standards of egg safety and egg production throughout the UK.

The Lion Quality Code of Practice ensures greater standards of food safety by requiring the vaccination of British Lion hens against Salmonella as well as implementing higher standards of animal welfare, feeding and traceability.”

I’m well aware that the Guardian undercover investigation is four years old and I posted the link because you made an unfair criticism directed at me. High level campylobacter contamination is the greatest risk and while standards have improved, the contamination levels for the supermarkets and other retailers tested still show a significant proportion of chicken is contaminated. Not all retailers have done as well as others. Marks & Spencer have managed to reduce high level contamination from 10% to 9% in the past four years according to the most recent data on their website: https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/campylobacter/campylobacter-oct-dec-17.pdf

The recommendation to avoid eating runny eggs was thanks to Edwina Currie who was heavily criticised for warning the public of the small risk to certain members of the public. This led to the vaccination of birds to largely eliminate the risk.

I admire M&S for publishing their own results. The average among producers was 20.1% in 2014, when M&S was half that. And their other degrees seem to be also reduced. It is a difficult bacterium to deal with. Ideas to do so? I could buy deep frozen, chlorinated in future, but I’d prefer to take chicken from a decent retailer and stick to the long-standing advice to cook it properly. Meanwhile supermarket “interventions” are still ongoing and hopefully will reduce the natural organism still further.

Perhaps we should return to eggs, the subject of this topic?

I believe that retailers are obliged to publish data. If there is any new information, we can discuss it in a relevant Convo.

You are an expert witness in the field of biological contamination, are you not, Wavechange?

As far as the methodology for measurement of contamination goes then yes, it’s simple. What I’m not sure about is the practicality of producing chicken free from high level contamination with campylobacter and the extent to which intensive farming and processing are factors. My impression is that everything gets covered in faeces and some of this remains at the point of sale.

Looking at your recent comments in another Convo I’m very glad that we agree on independent assessment. It’s only internationally recognised I suppose.