ReviewBMC public health2024
Unlocking food safety: a comprehensive review of South Africa's food control and safety landscape from an environmental health perspective.
Review in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Food Fraud Implications and Regulatory Challenges in South Africa: A Review.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From data collection to action: environmental health information management practices in eleven municipalities in the east coast of South Africa.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Food Safety in Informal Markets: How Knowledge and Attitudes Influence Vendor Practices in Namibia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Chemical Toxicants Used for Food Preservation in Africa. Is it a Case of Ignorance or Food Fraud? A Review.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial resistance and genomic characterization ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food fraud (often called fake food in South Africa) the deliberate misrepresentation or adulteration of food products for financial gain, is a growing problem in South Africa (SA) with severe public health and financial consequences for consumers and businesses. The recent public outcry against food fraud practices especially in communities that have lost loved ones due to the consumption of allegedly adulterated foodstuffs, highlights the grave danger that food fraud poses to consumers and the potential for significant reputational damage to food manufacturers. Despite the risks, food fraud often goes undetected, as perpetrators are becoming increasingly sophisticated. The precise magnitude of food fraud remains obscure, as incidents that do not cause consumer illnesses are frequently unreported and, as a result, are not investigated. Food fraud costs the global economy billion annually. This cost is borne by consumers, businesses, and the government. Food fraud can occur at any stage of the food supply chain, from production to processing to retailing or distribution. This is due in part to the limitations of current analytical methods, which are not always able to detect food fraud. This review of food fraud in SA looks at several factors that may be contributing to epidemic of food fraud, including inadequate penalties, inadequate government commitment, a complex labelling regulation, emerging threats such as e-commerce, and shortage of inspectors and laboratories. The review recommends establishing a single food control/safety authority, developing more food safety laboratories, and adopting innovative technologies to detect and prevent food fraud. SA faces a serious food fraud crises unless decisive action is taken.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.