Advertisement

Bundesgesundheitsblatt

, Volume 40, Issue 5, pp 158–166 | Cite as

Gesundheitsverosorge und Gewässerschutz

Welche Regelungen zu Chemikalien sind für Geschmacks- und Geruchsbeeinträchtigungen angemessen?
  • T. Höfer
Originalien und Übersichtsarbeiten
  • 44 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Beitrag erörtert Themen des Verbraucher- und Umweltschutzes, die im Zusammenhang mit der durch Kontamination mit Chemikalien verursachten Geschmacks- und Geruchsveränderung von Fischen und Krustentieren stehen: «Tainting».

Vorschriften, die dies verhindern sollen, werden vorgestellt. Tainting kann auf Fremdstoffe hinweisen. Sensorische Prüfungen sind jedoch nicht ausreichend empfindlich, um Umweltkontaminanten zu ermitteln. Die chemische Analyse der Verunreinigungen in Fischen, Krebsen und Algen ist wichtiger für die Lebensmitteltoxikologie als jedes organoleptische Inspektionssystem zur Ermittlung abweichenden Aromas. Es sollten keine generellen Prüfungen chemischer Produkte auf ihr Tainting-Potential im Rahmen von Zulassungsverfahren zukünftig verlangt werden. Alternativ sind bestehende Lebensmittelkontrollen und klarere haftungsrechtiche Lebensmittelkontrollen und klarere haftungsrechtliche Verantwortlichkeiten zu gewährleisten. Der Eintrag langsam metabolisierbarer oder schwer abbaubarer Chemikalien in das Wasser sollte aus lebensmittel-hygienischer Sicht unabhängig vom derzeitigen Wissensstand zum toxikologischen Potential solcher Stoffe strenger geregelt werden, um die Kontamination der Meeresfrüchte zu reduzieren.

Precautionary protection of human health and water quality: What type of chemical regulations is appropriate for sensory impairment?

Summary

This paper deals with aspects of consumer and environmental protection concerning chemically via contaminants induced off-odour and off-flavour of fish and shellfish: «Taining».

Regulations to prevent this effect are presented. Tainting may indicate xenobiotics in the food. However, organoleptic tests are not sensitive enough to detect environmental contamination. The chemical analysis of contaminants in fish, crustacea and algae is more important for food toxicology than any organoleptic inspection system for detecting tainting. General pre-emission testing for tainting should not be enforced anymore for chemical products. Alternatively, already existing food quality controls and well defined liability regulations should be ensured. From a food hygiene standpoint, water pollution with slowly metabolizable or not inherently biodegradable chemicals should be regulated more strictly not depending on the actual knowledge concerning toxic effects of such chemicals to reduce seafood contamination.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. [1]
    Rjasanow, W. A.: Sensory physiology as basis for air quality standards. Arch. Environ. Hlth.5 (1962) 480–494.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Schuschke, G.: Sinnesvermittelte Umweltwirkungen, Umweltmed. Forsch. Prax.1 (1996) 93–101.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Petrovitch, A.: Sick-Building-Syndrom. Umweltmed. Forsch. Prax.1 (1996) 143–150.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Fukunda, K, Strauss, S. E., Hickie, J., Sharpe, M. C., Dobbins, J. G., Komaroff, A., and Int. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Study Group: Chronic-Fatigue-Syndrom (CFS). Umweltmed. Forsch. Prax.1 (1996) 221–228.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Sufet, I. H., Corado, A., Chou, D., Mc-Guire, M. J., Butterworth, S.: AWWA taste and oder survey. J. Am. Wat. Works Ass.88 (1996) 168–180.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Wnorowski, A. U.: Tastes and odours in the aquatic environment: A review. Water SA18 (1992) 203–214.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Becher, G., Utkilen, H., Froshaug, M, Naes, H., and Gjessing, E. T.: Volatile and odorous compounds from surface waters. In: Rivera, J., Angeletti, G. (Hrsg.): Organic micropollutants in drinking water (Proc. Workshop 21–22 April). Commission of the European Communities Water Pollution Report9 (1988).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Lovell, R. T.: Off-flavors in pond-cultured channel fish. Wat. Sci. Tech.15 (1983) 67–73.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Paasivirta, J., Klein P., Knuutila, M., Knuutinen, J., Lahtiperä, M., Paukku, R., Veijanen, A., Welling, L., Vuorinen, C., and Vourinen, P. J.: Chlorinated anisols and veratroles in fish. Model compounds. Instrumental and sensory determinations. Chemosphere16 (1983) 1231–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Rogers, I. H.: Environmental effects of terpenoid chemicals: a review. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc.55 (1978) 113A-118A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Heil, T. P., and Lindsay, R. C.: Volatile compounds in flavor-tainted fish from the upper Wisconsin river. Environ. Sci. HealthB23 (1988) 489–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Heil, T. P., and Lindsay, R. C.: A method for quantitative analysis of flavor-tainting alkylphenols and aromatic thiols in fish. J. Environ. Sci. HealthB23 (1988) 475–488.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Paasivarta, J., Knuutinen, J., Tarhanen, J., Kuokkanen, T., Surma-Aho, K., Paukku, R., Kääriäinen, H., Lahtiperä, M., and Veijanen, A.: Potential off-flavour compounds from chloro-bleaching of pulp and chlorodisinfection of water. Wat. Sci. Tech.15 (1983) 97–104.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Whitfield, F. B.: Chemistry of off-flavours in marine organisms. Wat. Sci. Tech.20 (1988) 63–74.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Whitfield, R. B., Shaw, K. J., and Walker, D. I.: The source of 2,6-dibromophenol: cause of an iodoform taint in australian prawn. Wat. Sci. Tech.25 (1992) 131–138.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Ashworth, R. B., and Cormier, M. J.: Isolation of 2,6-dibromophenol from the marine hemichordate, Balanoglossus biminiensis. Science155 (1967) 1558–1559.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Weber, K., and Ernst, W.: Occurrence of brominated phenols in the marine polychaete Lanice conchilega. Naturwissenschaften65 (1978) 262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    King, G. M.: Inhibition of microbial activity in marine sediments by a bromophenol from a hemichordate. Nature323 (1986) 257–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Sheikh, Y. M. and Djerassi, C.: 2,6-Dibromophenol and 2,4,6-Tribromophenols — antiseptic secondary metabolites of Phoronopsis viridis. Experientia31 (1975) 265–266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Chasse, C: The ecological impact on and near shores by the Amoco Cadiz oil spill. Mar. Poll. Bull.9 (1978) 298–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    George, S. G., Wright, J., and Conroy, J.: Temporal studies of the impact of the Braer oilspill on the inshore feral fish from Shetland, Scotland. Arch. Environ. Toxicol.29 (1995) 530–534.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Whittle, K. J., Anderson, D. A., Mackie, P. R., Moffat, C. F., and Shepherd N. J.: The impact of the Braer oil on caged salmon. (unveröffentlicht).Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    The Ecological Steering Group on the Oil Spill in Shetland: The environmental impact of the wreck of the Braer. The Scottish Office, Env. Dep., New St. Andrew's House, Edinburgh EH13TG (1994).Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP): Impact of oil and related chemicals and wastes on the marine environment. GESAMP Reports and Studies50 (1993) 56–61.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Ogata, M., and Ogura, T.: Petroleum components and objectionable malodorous substances in fish flesh polluted by boiler fuel oil. Wat. Res.10 (1976) 407–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Davis, H. K., Geelhoed, E. N., MacRae, A. W., and Howgate, P.: Sensory analysis of trout tainted by diesel fuel in ambient water. Wat. Sci. Tech.25 (1992) 11–18.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Ernst, R. J., Ratnayake, W. M. N., Farquharson, T. E., Ackmann, R. G., Tidmarsh, W. G., and Carter, J. A.: Tainting of Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) by Petroleum Hydrocarbons. In: Engelhardt, F. (Hrsg.): Drilling Wastes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Drilling Wastes, Calgary, Alberta. 1988. Oxford: Elsevier 1989, 827–839.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Whittle, K. J., Mackie, P. R., and Davis, H. K.: Shellfish tainting — a means of monitoring petroleum-contaminated effluents. Proc. of the Royal Soc. of Edinburgh103B (1995) 127–135.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Heras, H., Ackman, R. G., and Macpherson, E. J.: Tainting of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) by petroleum hydrocarbons during a short-term exposure. Mar. Poll. Bull.24 (1992) 310–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Ogata, M., and Fujisawa, K.: Oil-tainted water and fish. Water Qual. Bull.13 (1988) 56–60.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Barinaga, M.: Alaskan Oil Spill: Health Risks Uncovered. Science245 (1989) 463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Stansby, M. E.: Flavors in fish from petroleum pickup. Mar. Fish. Rev.40 (1978) 13–17.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Connell, D. W.: A kerosene-like taint in the sea mullet, Mugil cephalus (Linnaeus) I. Composition and environmental occurrence of the tainting substance. Austr. J. Mar. Freshwat. Res.25 (1974) 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP): The evaluation of the hazards of harmful substances carried by ships. GESAMP Reports and Studies35 (1989) 12–18.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Internationales Übereinkommen von 1973 zur Verhütung der Meeresverschmutzung durch Schiffe und das Protokoll von 1978 zu diesem Übereinkommen (MARPOL 73/78). Veröffentlicht inkl. Anlagen, Anpassungen und Änderungen 1983–1995 in: See-Berufsgenossenschaft. Schiffssicherheitsvorschriften, Hamburg, 1995.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Internationaler Code für den Bau und die Ausrüstung von Schiffen zur Beförderung gefährlicher Chemikalien als Massengut. Veröffentlicht inkl. Anlagen, Anpassungen und Änderungen 1983–1994 in: See-Berufgenossenschaft. Gas und Chemikalientankercodes, Hamburg, 1994.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    Gesetz zu internationalen Übereinkommen über den Schutz der Meeresumwelt des Ostseegebietes und des Nordatlantiks. BGBl. II (1994) 1355–1431.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    Europäische Gemeinschaft (Hrsg.): Richtlinie des Rates vom 22.7. 1991 zur Festlegung von Hygienevorschriften für die Erzeugung und die Vermarktung von Fischereierzeugnissen (91/493/EWG) Anhang Kapitel V. Amtsbl. Europ. Gemeinsch. L268 (1991) 15–34.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    Expert panel on procedures for the evaluation of the hazards of harmful substances carried by ships, report of the meeting 23–25 August, 1995. In: United Nations Economic and Social Council: Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods: Report of the Expert Panel on Procedures for the Evaluation of the Hazards of Harmful Substances Carried by Ships. UN/SCETDG/11/Inf.17 (1995) 7.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    BgVV (Hrsg.): Amtliche Sammlung von Untersuchungsverfahren nach § 35 LMBG, (1995); Allgemeine Grundlagen der sensorischen Prüfung (L00-90-1, DIN 10950), Rangordnungsprüfung (L00-90-4, DIN 10963), Einfach beschreibende Prüfung (L00-90-6, DIN 10964), Dreiecksprüfung (L00-90-7, DIN 10951, ISO 4120), Paarweise Unterschiedsprüfung (L00-90-8, DIN 10954), Bestimmung der Geschmacksempfindlichkeit (L00-90-9, DIN 10959).Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/WHO/ IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP): The evaluation of the hazards of harmful substances carried by ships. GESAMP Reports and Studies 35 (1989) annex 8.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    European Chemical Industry Ecology and Toxicology Centre (ECETOC): Evaluation of fish tainting. ISSN 0773-8072-25, ECETOC Technical. Report No. 25 (1987).Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    Thomas, N. A.: Assessment of fish flesh tainting substances. In: Biological methods for the assessment of water quality. ASTM Special Technical Publ. 528. American Society for testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp ((1973) 178–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [44]
    Howgate, P.: Measurement of taining in seafoods. In: Kramer, D.E., Liston, J. (Eds.): Seafood Quality Determination, Proc. Int. Symp. Anchorage, Alaska, (1986), pp. 63–72.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/WHO/ IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP): Hazard evaluation of substances transported by ships, GESAMP/EHS composite list of hazard profiles, 1996. BLG/Circ.2. (1996) IMO, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    Newton, J. M., Rothman, B. S., and Walker, F. A.: Separation and determination of diesel contaminants in various fish products by capillary gas chromatography. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem.74 (1991) 989–990.Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    Kuusi, T., and Suihko, M.: Occurrence of various off-flavors in fish in Finland from 1969–1981. Wat. Sci. Tech.15 (1983) 47–58.Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    Anderson, H. T.: Fish advisories: The public Dilemma. Health Environ Digest4 10 (1990) 4–5.Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids and Gases: On the inclusion of biological degradability in the risk assessment of liquid bulk chemicals, submitted by Germany. BLG 1/3/18. (1996) IMO, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Evaluation of the Safety of Fishery Products: Seafood safety: Highlights of the executive summary of the 1991 report by the Committee on Evaluation of the Safety of Fishery Products of the Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. Nutrition Reviews49 (1991) 357–363.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Höfer
    • 1
  1. 1.Bundesinstitut für gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz und VeterinärmedizinBerlin

Personalised recommendations