Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Daisy Jussie Smollett Astronaut


Warning: Authorities prohibit the popular water bottle


the Extra Leaf can today tell, that card combinations that match in July last year, took the drastic step to prohibit a water bottle, as used on a large scale in the Danish sports halls, gyms and on playing fields.

It came to pass, because an analysis showed that the keg degrades 'food organoleptic properties’.

But here nine months after the ban came into force, has fødevaregiganten Orkla, which is behind the Maxim-the keg, still not found it appropriate to warn the high number of children, young people and others who use it.

It has Orkla failed, despite the fact that Orkla on their website claim that ’the excellence and safety is a top priority for all of our branded products’ – and to ’Orkla is committed to the responsible marketing to children and young people’.

in Fact fought Orkla, which in Denmark also stands behind the bl.a. The Old Factory, Glyngøre, and Kim, against the prohibition, showing an action.

Orklas argument, it was peculiar that their own analysis had shown that other water bottles than the blue nothing failed.

But the blue canister deliver so as much plaststiksmag, to the according to the Danish veterinary and food administration is unfit to be a water bottle. It is harmless, but not ’suitable for the use to which the product is intended for,’ considered experts.

the Keg offers drinks a chemical plastiksmag.

So, Orkla lost the appeal and got in the summer ban on selling it.

Anyway, have the Extra Leaf in recent days purchased a number of the banned cans in several Danish webshops.

- the Bottles give off more flavor than the permissible, so therefore there was placed a ban on the bottles, which Orkla had in its stock. But because the bottles were not harmful, had we not permitted to require, that the Orkla made an outright withdrawal, explains According to the head of section, Charlotte Kølln.

Then Orkla was not forced to redevelop the market for the banned cans. And Orkla was not obliged to warn consumers. As Orkla kept your mouth shut for the benefit of consumers.

- You can expect a big professional company like Orkla should spontaneously, and for the sake of argument, to inform its customers, it seems According to the head of section, Charlotte Kølln.

Ekstra Bladet has asked Orkla, why, in the context of the ban chose not to inform consumers that drikkedunken made the unacceptable very taste of plastic.

But Orkla is just as silent as at that time, the authorities forbade the keg.

the Extra Leaf has been invited to Orklas the press and kvalitetsfolk to participate in a tv-feature on Ekstra Bladet TV, where they prøvesmager water from their own cans, but they do not inform Ingri Wangen Ohlsen, Country Manager from Orkla Care Denmark, in an email.

'We would like to emphasize that we adhere to the requirements, which was provided to us from the Danish veterinary and food administration,' she writes.

'Drikkedunken is not harmful to health, and complies with the requirements for the sensory impact that is accepted in other EU countries, but failed to live up to the Danish requirements. It is not our experience that drikkedunken deliver smagsændring by general usage (Test (According to the analysis, red.) made by 40 degrees in 24 hours), or that this is/was a commonly occurring problem with the product among our consumers,' writes Ingri Wangen Ohlsen.

Extra Magazine's research shows that Orkla actually gave his wholesaler M&N-the message that drikkedunken was prohibited.

But the wholesaler informed not the buyer webshop about the ban, then here could dunkene until the other day purchased.

Kim Preuss Petersen from M&N-the explains that he has informed the dealers, but to by mistake not got the message.

Read the case from the Environment and Fødevareklagenævnet.

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.