Greetings, Brian!

I really enjoyed reading your fascinating letter. I cannot believe the
abuse to which olive oil has been subjected! You would think it would be
ultimately contrary to the IOOC's very mission (and even prosperity). At
this rate, this type of dilution of the product, once discovered, will only
lead to product avoidance by the public, as there are other oils (perhaps
canola, for example) that can step into its shoes (a less exciting
alternative, but no less adequate for the ultimate goal of leading the
masses away from butter and hardened fats).

Hopefully, this trend of "buttering your bread" in the West will cease!

Fond regards,
Anna


>From: tn7685@orvienet.it (Brian Chatterton)
>Reply-To: OliveOil@onelist.com
>To: OliveOil@onelist.com
>Subject: [OliveOil] Labels
>
>
> One of the major problems is the International Olive Oil Council,
>based in Madrid, which represents the olive oil producing countries and
>controls labelling. They allow labels such as "Pure olive oil" which is one
>of the least "pure" olive oils you can buy. It is commonly found in English
>speaking countries and is third grade oil below extravergine and vergine.
>It has been treated with chemicals to reduce the acidity so is not "pure".
>For those not familiar with the labels for olive oil it may seem to be
>"more pure" than extravergine or vergine while in fact the opposite is the
>case. It is a disgrace that such misleading labels are allowed.
>
> Another misleading label sanctioned by the IOOC is "Light olive
>oil". Elsewhere in the food trade "light" has come to mean less calories
>per unit of product. This is usually achieved by adding some so called
>"stabilisers" which then allow the manufacture to add heaps of water
>without the product collapsing into a liquid or otherwise changing its
>character. Olive oil has not been treated in this way (fortunately) and
>"light" does not mean less calories but means light in colour and less
>flavour. This is hardly surprising as it is third grade oil which has been
>chemically treated. The chemical treatment removes all the subtle flavour
>and the colour in any case. I have seen chefs on British TV cooking
>programs solemnly advising people to use "light" olive oil with the clear
>implication that it is even more health because it has less calories. This
>is just untrue and a fraud on the consumer.
>
> A third example is Olivia the margarine that is trying to pretend
>it is based on olive oil and is promoted on the health properties of olive
>oil. In fact the small print on the back admitts it is mostly canola (rape
>seed oil) and has had all the ususal treatment and addition of water
>commonly found in margarines. If there are any health properties left after
>the treatment and the chemicals it would be a miracle!
>
> I know that northern Europe, north America, Australia and NZ have
>a
>deep cultural need to have a "fat" of some sort on their bread but why not
>olive oil direct without the mixing with other oils, water, chemicals and
>expensive packing and advertising.
>
>Cheers Brian Chatterton.