ArticleFood science & nutrition2024
Identification of meat adulteration in minced meat samples labeled as beef and mutton in Tehran stores using duplex PCR.
Article in Food science & nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identification of meat adulteration in minced meat samples labeled as beef and mutton in Tehran stores using duplex PCR.Food science & nutrition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food fraud and profiteering are becoming increasingly common in the meat industry. Therefore, it is essential to identify such practices to prevent consumer deception and maintain food safety. This study aimed to determine the contents of minced meat samples labeled as beef and mutton in retail stores across Tehran province, Iran, to identify instances of meat adulteration. To this end, this study randomly collected 300 minced meat samples labeled as beef and mutton from Tehran stores over 4 years (2018-2022) and analyzed them using duplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The results revealed that more than 95% of the samples only contained beef, while only 5% of the samples matched the label and contained a mixture of beef and mutton. This discrepancy between the label and actual contents could be attributed to the price difference between beef and mutton, providing a financial incentive for producers to maximize profits. Given the potential for meat adulteration, increased monitoring of meat products is necessary, including detailed tests such as PCR, which is a fast, easy, sensitive, specific, and highly effective method for detecting meat adulteration. The findings of this study can assist in developing effective strategies to prevent meat adulteration and maintain consumer confidence in the meat industry.
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.