美國加州販售的超純冷壓橄欖油（Extra-Virgin Olive Oil）的品質分析報告...

【30秒重點】

• 買標示「特級初榨」的進口橄欖油，不一定符合標準。
• 加州報告：美國前5大進口特級初榨橄欖油，有73%的樣本沒通過國際橄欖油協會的感官標準。
• 依品牌和評審小組不同，不合格率從56%到94%。
• 感官缺陷代表油可能已氧化、品質差，或摻了較便宜的精製油。

2013/11/08

Evaluation of Extra-Virgin Olive Oil Sold in California

在上述報告（網路就有）第4頁：

Of the five top-selling imported “extra virgin” olive oil brands in the United States, 73 percent of the samples failed the IOC sensory standards for extra virgin olive oils analyzed by two IOC-accredited sensory panels. The failure rate ranged from a high of 94 percent to a low of 56 percent depending on the brand and the panel.

None of the Australian and California samples failed both sensory panels, while 11 percent of the top-selling premium Italian brand samples failed the two panels. Sensory defects are indicators that these samples are oxidized, of poor quality, and/or adulterated with cheaper refined oils.

All of the oil samples passed the IOC chemistry standards for free fatty acids (FFA), fatty acid profile (FAP) and peroxide value (PV), but several of the imported samples failed the IOC’s ultraviolet absorption (UV) tests.

70 percent of the samples from the five top-selling imported brands failed the German/Australian 1,2-diacylglycerol content (DAGs) test and 50 percent failed the German/Australian pyropheophytin (PPP) test. All of the 18 samples of the California brand passed the DAGs test and 89 percent of the samples passed the PPP 
test. The Italian premium brand failed the DAGs and PPP tests in about one-third of the samples. The Australian brand passed the DAGs test in all cases and failed the PPP test in all cases.

The strongest relationship between chemical analysis and negative sensory results was found in the DAGs test (65 percent), followed by the PPP test (49 percent), UV K268 for conjugated trienes (34 percent), UV K232 for conjugated dienes (12 percent) and UV ∆K (6 percent). The FFA, FAP and PV tests did not confirm negative sensory results. The IOC standards would be more effective in assessing and enforcing olive oil quality by including the DAGs and PPP standards.

Our testing indicated that the samples failed extra virgin olive oil standards according to one or more of the following: 

(a) oxidation by exposure to elevated temperatures, light, and/or aging; 
(b) adulteration with cheaper refined olive oil; 
(c) poor quality oil made from damaged and overripe olives, processing flaws, and/or improper oil storage.

我只翻譯最後一段。報告認為產品會無法通過國際標準，可能原因是：

油品對於溫度、光線、及儲存時間所造成氧化（老化）的程度、雜質添加物、原料（過熟橄欖）、製作過程錯誤、錯誤儲存。

我對此機構的背景不清楚，因此無法從文章就判斷其結論有無商業利益的考量。從報告看來，似乎義大利出產的沒有美國及澳洲製的來得好。

另外，分析項目及方法很多，包含食品檢驗，都不是我專業，因此我無法判斷此報告可信度。會想看，是因為家人有使用橄欖油。

總之，有報告看，至少有個參考。以後若要看橄欖油的門道，至少也略知看哪些項目。