The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically in relation to adulterated food, defines adulteration in Section 25-2-2 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA). This section outlines various conditions under which food is considered adulterated. One key provision, NMSA 25-2-2(a)(5), states that food is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Another relevant provision is NMSA 25-2-2(a)(7), which addresses contamination with filth or that it has been rendered injurious to health by disease-producing organisms. In the scenario presented, the discovery of live insect larvae within packaged pastries, coupled with evidence of unsanitary processing conditions such as poorly maintained equipment and inadequate pest control, directly indicates that the food has been contaminated with filth and potentially rendered injurious to health. The presence of live larvae is a clear indicator of filth, and the unsanitary conditions create a strong presumption of potential health hazards. Therefore, the pastries would be classified as adulterated under these provisions of the New Mexico Food and Drug Act. The act’s intent is to protect public health by ensuring food is free from contaminants that could cause illness or harm. The specific details of the infestation and the environmental factors contributing to it are crucial in determining the adulterated status.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, outlines several conditions under which a food product is deemed adulterated. One such condition, as detailed in NMSA 1978, § 25-3-2, relates to the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances. Specifically, if a food bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health, it is considered adulterated. This prohibition extends to substances that are added, or naturally present, if they exceed permissible levels or make the food unsafe. The Act focuses on the potential for harm to consumers. Therefore, a food product containing a quantity of sodium benzoate that exceeds the maximum allowable level as established by federal regulations, which New Mexico often adopts or aligns with for consistency and consumer safety, would be considered adulterated under this provision, even if the sodium benzoate itself is a common preservative. The key is the *quantity* and its potential to be injurious to health.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, is detailed in the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) Chapter 76, Article 2. Section 76-2-2 of the Act defines adulterated food broadly. One key provision, NMSA 76-2-2(A)(1), states that a food is considered adulterated if it “has in it any poisonous or deleterious substance, or any added substance which may render it injurious to health.” This includes substances that, while not immediately toxic, could cause harm over time or under specific conditions of consumption. The Act also addresses contamination with filth or decomposed matter, or if it has been prepared, packed, or held under unsanitary conditions where it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. The question tests the understanding of what constitutes an adulterant under New Mexico law, focusing on the potential for harm rather than immediate toxicity. For instance, a food containing a pesticide residue exceeding the tolerance level established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which New Mexico often aligns with, would be considered adulterated because that residue is a deleterious substance that may render the food injurious to health. Similarly, a food item found to have been stored in a facility with significant rodent infestation, leading to potential contamination with rodent droppings or pathogens, would also fall under this definition due to unsanitary conditions and potential contamination. The core principle is the potential for the food to cause harm to consumers’ health.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the regulation of food additives, mandates that any substance intended for use in food that becomes a component or otherwise affects the characteristics of food must be approved prior to its marketing. This approval process is designed to ensure the safety of the food supply. The act requires that a petitioner demonstrate through scientific evidence that the proposed additive is safe for its intended use. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under federal law which New Mexico largely aligns with, typically requires extensive toxicological studies, including chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, and reproductive toxicity studies, to evaluate the safety of a food additive. The New Mexico Department of Health, through its Food and Drug Bureau, enforces these provisions. If a substance is found to be unsafe or is used in violation of the Act, the department has the authority to take regulatory action, which can include condemnation, seizure, and injunctions. The core principle is the pre-market approval of substances that may affect food safety and quality.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, defines adulteration in various ways. One key aspect is when a food product contains or is mixed with any substance that renders it injurious to health. Another is when a valuable constituent has been wholly or in part abstracted or substituted. Furthermore, damage to the food, such as by decomposition, decay, or infestation, also constitutes adulteration. The presence of added poisonous or deleterious substances that are not naturally present in the food and are not permitted as additives also renders it adulterated. The scenario describes a batch of artisanal cheese from a New Mexico producer that, upon inspection, is found to have a significant portion of its fat content replaced with a cheaper vegetable oil. This substitution of a valuable constituent (milk fat) with a cheaper one (vegetable oil) directly aligns with the statutory definition of adulteration under New Mexico law, as it involves the abstraction and substitution of a component. Therefore, the cheese is considered adulterated.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, outlines several conditions under which a food product is deemed adulterated. One critical aspect is when a food product contains or is mixed, subjected to, or packed with any substance that may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that are poisonous or deleterious. Furthermore, if a food product has had any valuable constituent removed wholly or in part, or if any substance has been substituted wholly or in part therefor, it is considered adulterated. The presence of a disease-producing organism or toxin, or contamination with filth, is also a direct violation. The scenario describes a batch of artisanal chili powder where a portion of the ground Hatch chili peppers, which contribute to the product’s characteristic flavor and color, were substituted with a cheaper, visually similar but flavorless red pepper powder. This substitution directly falls under the provision where a valuable constituent has been removed in part and a substance substituted therefor, rendering the product adulterated under New Mexico Food and Drug Law. The intent of the producer, while potentially to reduce costs, does not negate the adulteration status if the substitution compromises the identity or quality of the food.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the provisions related to adulterated food, outlines the conditions under which a food product is deemed adulterated. New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) 7.7.2.14 defines adulterated food to include any food that bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance in a quantity sufficient to render it injurious to health. Furthermore, NMAC 7.7.2.15 specifies that a food is adulterated if it has been produced, prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. In the scenario presented, the discovery of insect larvae within the packaged chili powder, even if the larvae themselves are not inherently toxic, signifies a violation of these sanitary production and holding standards. The presence of insect infestation directly indicates that the food was produced, prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions. This contamination, by its very nature, suggests a breakdown in the preventive controls necessary to ensure food safety and wholesomeness. Therefore, the chili powder is considered adulterated due to the insanitary conditions under which it was handled, irrespective of the immediate toxicity of the larvae. The focus of the law in such instances is on the potential for harm and the failure to maintain sanitary practices throughout the food’s lifecycle.

New Mexico’s Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the powers granted to the Secretary of the Department of Health, outlines the authority to conduct inspections. The Act empowers the Secretary or their duly authorized representative to enter any establishment where food or drugs are manufactured, processed, packed, or held, or where food or drugs are kept for distribution or sale, at any reasonable time for the purpose of inspection. This authority is crucial for ensuring compliance with the state’s food and drug safety regulations, which are designed to protect public health. The scope of this inspection power extends to examining relevant records and facilities to verify adherence to standards. The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, in alignment with federal principles, mandates that such inspections are conducted to safeguard consumers from adulterated or misbranded products. The Act provides for access to premises and information necessary to fulfill this protective mandate.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, defines adulteration in various ways. One key provision relates to food containing any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Another critical aspect is food that consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance or that which is otherwise unfit for human consumption. Furthermore, food is considered adulterated if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. The Act also addresses intentional contamination with poisonous or deleterious substances. In the scenario presented, the discovery of insect larvae and rodent feces in a batch of bulk flour intended for sale within New Mexico directly falls under the definition of containing “filth” and being “decomposed” or “otherwise unfit for human consumption” as per the New Mexico Food and Drug Act. Such contamination renders the food adulterated, necessitating regulatory action to prevent its distribution and protect public health. The presence of these contaminants indicates a failure to adhere to basic sanitary practices during preparation, packing, or holding, making the product adulterated under the Act’s provisions.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, defines adulteration in relation to various contaminants and conditions that render food unfit for consumption. Section 76-5-1 NMSA 1978 outlines these criteria. A food is considered adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes naturally occurring toxins, pesticides, or heavy metals above permissible levels. Furthermore, if a food has been prepared, packed, or held under unsanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health, it is also deemed adulterated. This covers situations involving pest infestation, improper storage, or cross-contamination. The presence of insect fragments, rodent hairs, or other extraneous matter, if found in quantities exceeding established tolerances, also classifies food as adulterated. The Act also addresses economic adulteration, such as the addition of cheaper ingredients to increase bulk or weight, or the substitution of a valuable constituent with an inferior one, though the primary focus of this question is on safety. Therefore, a food product found to contain rodent hairs in a quantity that exceeds the tolerance levels established by the New Mexico Department of Health would be classified as adulterated under the Act due to contamination with filth and potential health risk.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically in relation to adulterated food, defines adulteration based on various conditions that render a food product unsafe or unfit for consumption. One such condition, outlined in statutes analogous to the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, pertains to the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances. If a food product contains any added poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health, it is considered adulterated. Furthermore, if the substance is not an added substance, but the food contains a naturally occurring poisonous or deleterious substance in quantities that may render it injurious to health, it is also deemed adulterated. The Act also addresses contamination with filth or decomposition, and the potential for infestation by insects or other vermin. The core principle is to ensure that food sold within New Mexico is safe for the public, free from harmful contaminants, and has been prepared, packaged, and stored under sanitary conditions. Understanding these definitions is crucial for compliance by food manufacturers, distributors, and retailers operating within the state, as well as for regulatory oversight by the New Mexico Department of Health. The question focuses on identifying a scenario that directly aligns with the statutory definition of adulteration due to the presence of a harmful substance, regardless of whether it was added or naturally occurring, if it poses a health risk.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, defines adulteration broadly to encompass situations where a food product contains any poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that, while not immediately toxic, can cause harm over time or through cumulative exposure. The Act also addresses economic adulteration, where a food’s quality or value is diminished by the addition of a substance or by the abstraction of a valuable constituent. In the scenario presented, the misrepresentation of the “organic” status of the chili powder, when it was demonstrably grown using conventional pesticides and fertilizers, directly violates the principle of preventing deception regarding the character or identity of a food product. While the presence of conventional pesticides might also render the food adulterated under the “deleterious substance” clause if present in harmful quantities, the core violation in this case, as per the New Mexico Food and Drug Act’s emphasis on truthful labeling and preventing economic fraud, lies in the false claim of organic certification. The Act aims to protect consumers from both health hazards and deceptive commercial practices. Therefore, the chili powder is considered adulterated because its labeling misrepresents its true nature and origin, thereby deceiving the consumer about its composition and production methods, which is a direct contravention of the Act’s provisions against misbranding and deceptive practices in the food industry within New Mexico.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, outlines several conditions under which a food product is deemed adulterated. One such condition, as detailed in the Act, is when a food product contains or is mixed, filled, or packed with any substance that increases its bulk or weight, or reduces its quality or strength, or makes it appear better or of greater value than it really is. This is often referred to as “economic adulteration” or “deception.” For instance, if a vendor in New Mexico were to add excessive amounts of water to ground beef to increase its weight before sale, or to dilute a premium olive oil with a cheaper vegetable oil to make it appear as a higher-value product, these actions would render the food adulterated under the statute. The intent behind such an action is typically to deceive the consumer and gain an unfair economic advantage. The Act’s provisions are designed to protect consumers from such fraudulent practices and ensure that food sold in New Mexico is what it purports to be, both in terms of quality and composition. This principle is fundamental to maintaining consumer trust and ensuring fair trade practices within the state’s food supply chain. The specific focus here is on the act of misrepresentation through composition, not necessarily on immediate health hazards, though such practices can sometimes overlap with safety concerns.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, outlines several conditions under which food is deemed adulterated. One such condition, detailed in statutes similar to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, pertains to the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances. New Mexico law, like federal law, prohibits the addition of any poisonous or deleterious substance to any food, except where such addition is unavoidable or cannot be avoided by good manufacturing practice. If such a substance is added and it may render the food injurious to health, the food is considered adulterated. Furthermore, if the food contains a substance naturally occurring which may render it injurious to health, it is also considered adulterated under specific circumstances, often requiring regulatory action to determine the threshold of harm. The core principle is to protect public health by ensuring food is free from harmful contaminants, whether intentionally added or present due to processing or natural occurrence, and that such presence does not pose a risk to consumers. The scenario describes a situation where a naturally occurring toxin, while present in a product from a New Mexico farm, exceeds a level that could be considered safe or unavoidable through standard agricultural practices, thus potentially rendering the food injurious to health. This aligns with the statutory definition of adulteration related to poisonous or deleterious substances.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the regulation of adulterated or misbranded drugs, outlines the responsibilities of the Secretary of the Department of Health. When a food or drug is found to be adulterated or misbranded, the Secretary has the authority to issue a formal notice to the person responsible. This notice serves as a warning and an opportunity for the recipient to present their views or correct the violation. The Act empowers the Secretary to take further action, such as condemnation, seizure, or injunctions, if the violation is not rectified or if public health is at immediate risk. However, the initial step in addressing such violations, before resorting to more stringent enforcement measures, is the issuance of a written notice, providing due process to the affected party. This process ensures fairness and allows for voluntary compliance before escalating to legal or administrative penalties. The concept of due process is fundamental in administrative law, and in this context, it means providing adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard before adverse action is taken. Therefore, the issuance of a written notice is a prerequisite for further enforcement actions under the New Mexico Food and Drug Act when dealing with adulterated or misbranded drugs.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the powers granted to the Secretary of the Department of Health, outlines the authority to conduct inspections. Section 77-1-10 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) generally provides for the inspection of establishments and vehicles where food or drugs are manufactured, processed, packed, or held. The Act emphasizes that these inspections are for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Act and preventing violations. When a food establishment is found to be in violation, the Secretary has the authority to issue a written notice of violation. This notice typically details the specific violations observed and may prescribe a period for correction. If the violations are not corrected within the specified timeframe, or if the violations pose an immediate public health risk, further administrative actions can be taken, which may include suspension or revocation of permits or licenses, or even condemnation of adulterated or misbranded food. The Act does not, however, grant the Secretary the power to unilaterally seize and destroy property without due process, such as a court order or a specific administrative hearing process outlined in the statutes, unless it presents an imminent hazard and is explicitly permitted by statute for immediate destruction in such cases. The primary mechanism for addressing violations involves notice, opportunity for correction, and then escalating administrative or legal action. The authority to condemn and destroy is a consequence of failure to correct or an immediate public health threat, not an initial discretionary action without a documented process.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, outlines several conditions under which food is deemed adulterated. One such condition, as detailed in the Act and its implementing regulations, relates to the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances. When a substance, even if not inherently poisonous, is present in quantities that may render the food injurious to health, the food is considered adulterated. This principle is applied regardless of whether the substance was intentionally added or occurred as a result of contamination during processing, storage, or transportation. The focus is on the potential for harm to the consumer. For instance, if a batch of artisanal New Mexican chili powder is found to contain elevated levels of naturally occurring mycotoxins due to improper drying and storage conditions, exceeding established safety thresholds, it would be classified as adulterated under this provision. The Act emphasizes the responsibility of the food producer or distributor to ensure that food products are safe for consumption and free from harmful contaminants, whether naturally occurring or introduced through negligence or intentional acts. This proactive approach aims to safeguard public health by preventing the distribution of unsafe food products within the state of New Mexico.

New Mexico’s Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the authority granted to the Department of Health under the New Mexico Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, outlines the procedures for handling adulterated or misbranded food products. When a food product is found to be adulterated or misbranded, the Secretary of Health, or their authorized representative, has the power to issue a cease and desist order. This order is a crucial administrative tool that immediately halts the sale, distribution, and manufacturing of the offending product. The legal basis for such an action is typically found within sections of the Act that empower the department to protect public health and safety by preventing the circulation of unsafe or improperly labeled food. The process often involves an initial inspection or sampling that reveals the violation, followed by the issuance of the order. While due process requires that the affected party has opportunities to contest the order, the immediate issuance of a cease and desist is a primary mechanism for rapid intervention to safeguard consumers. This action is distinct from a recall, which is a voluntary or mandated removal of products already in the market, though a cease and desist order may precede or accompany a recall effort. The power to issue such an order is a key component of the state’s regulatory authority over food safety and consumer protection.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically in relation to adulterated or misbranded food, outlines the responsibilities of manufacturers and distributors. When a food product is found to be adulterated or misbranded, and it has been distributed in commerce, the New Mexico Department of Health has the authority to issue a stop sale order. This order legally prohibits the further sale or distribution of the affected product within the state. The purpose of such an order is to prevent potential harm to consumers by removing non-compliant products from the market. The Act emphasizes proactive measures and consumer protection, making the immediate cessation of sales a critical enforcement tool. Failure to comply with a stop sale order can result in further legal penalties, including fines and potential injunctions, underscoring the seriousness of regulatory compliance in New Mexico. The department’s actions are guided by the principle of ensuring that all food products available to New Mexico residents meet established safety and labeling standards, thereby safeguarding public health.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically under the provisions related to the adulteration of food, defines adulteration in several ways. One key definition pertains to the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances. New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) 7.1.10.11(A) clarifies that a food is deemed adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. However, if such substance is not an added substance, the food is not considered adulterated under this provision unless the quantity of such substance in the food exceeds the tolerance, if any, prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Environment. In this scenario, the presence of a naturally occurring toxin in a New Mexico grown chili pepper, even if at a level exceeding a federal tolerance (which New Mexico often adopts by reference or establishes similar standards), would be evaluated against New Mexico’s specific regulatory framework. The question hinges on whether the substance is “added” or naturally present and if a tolerance has been established. Without an added substance, the focus shifts to whether the naturally occurring substance exceeds an established tolerance. If no specific tolerance is established by New Mexico for this particular naturally occurring toxin in chili peppers, the food is not automatically deemed adulterated under the “deleterious substance” clause unless it can be proven to render the food injurious to health in its current form, independent of a specific tolerance limit. However, the most direct application of the law concerns substances that are *added* or naturally present exceeding established tolerances. Given the context of food safety regulations, the absence of an “added” substance and the lack of a specific New Mexico tolerance for a naturally occurring toxin in a common agricultural product like chili peppers would mean the food is not adulterated *under that specific clause* unless it can be proven injurious to health in a broader sense. The question is designed to test the understanding of the nuances of “added” versus “naturally occurring” and the role of established tolerances in adulteration definitions under New Mexico law. The most accurate interpretation based on typical food law principles, and likely NMAC 7.1.10.11(A), is that a naturally occurring substance not exceeding a tolerance is not adulterated. If a tolerance exists and is exceeded, it is adulterated. If no tolerance exists for a naturally occurring substance, it is only adulterated if it is injurious to health. The question implies a scenario where a naturally occurring toxin is present, and the critical factor for adulteration under the primary clause is whether it’s an added substance or if it exceeds a tolerance. The provided options focus on the presence of a substance without explicitly stating it’s an added substance. Therefore, the most precise legal determination under the relevant statutory framework for adulteration due to poisonous or deleterious substances involves the nature of the substance (added or natural) and the existence and level of any established tolerance. The scenario implies a naturally occurring substance.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically under provisions related to adulterated or misbranded food, empowers the Secretary of the Department of Health to issue emergency permit control to a food establishment if there is a reasonable belief that any food therein is adulterated or misbranded and that the continued operation of the establishment poses an imminent hazard to the public health. This emergency measure is a critical tool for immediate public protection. The Act outlines a process that requires the Secretary to provide written notice to the establishment, detailing the specific reasons for the emergency permit control and the conditions under which it will be lifted. This notice must also inform the establishment of its right to a hearing. The hearing must be held as soon as practicable, not exceeding ten days from the date of the notice, unless the establishment requests a postponement. The Secretary then issues a final order based on the hearing. This process underscores the balance between swift action to protect public health and the due process rights of the food establishment. The authority to seize and destroy adulterated or misbranded food is also granted, but the emergency permit control is a distinct, albeit related, regulatory action focused on the operational status of the establishment itself to prevent further distribution of potentially harmful products. The concept of a “stop sale” order is also relevant, but emergency permit control is a more severe and comprehensive measure targeting the entire operation.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the definition of “adulterated” food, outlines several conditions under which food is deemed adulterated. One such condition, as detailed in the Act, is when food bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This is a fundamental principle of food safety regulation, aimed at protecting public health by preventing the distribution of contaminated or harmful food products. The Act also specifies other grounds for adulteration, such as if it consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. Furthermore, it includes provisions related to pesticide residues, animal food contamination, and intentional contamination with the intent to cause harm. The core principle is to ensure that food available for consumption in New Mexico is safe and wholesome.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, outlines several conditions that render a food product unfit for consumption. One such condition, as detailed in the Act and consistent with federal standards adopted by many states, pertains to food that has been exposed to radiation. While radiation can be used for preservation, if the radiation levels exceed those deemed safe and established by regulatory bodies, or if the food is irradiated without proper authorization or labeling, it can be considered adulterated. The specific threshold for safe irradiation is typically defined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and incorporated into state law. If a food product, such as artisanal cheeses produced in Santa Fe, New Mexico, is found to have been subjected to ionizing radiation at a level that is not permitted by regulation or without the required disclosure on its packaging, it would be classified as adulterated. This adulteration classification is not dependent on whether the radiation level is immediately toxic, but rather on whether it deviates from established safety standards and disclosure requirements. The absence of a declared irradiation process or exceeding permissible levels, even if not acutely harmful at the time of inspection, signifies a violation of food safety regulations designed to protect public health and ensure consumer transparency. Therefore, any food product found to have undergone unapproved or excessive irradiation is deemed adulterated under New Mexico law.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the authority granted to the New Mexico Department of Health (NMDOH) under Chapter 26, Article 3, NMSA 1978, outlines the powers and duties of the department concerning the regulation of food and drugs. When a food establishment is found to be in violation of the Act, the department possesses a range of enforcement tools. These tools are designed to address immediate public health risks and ensure future compliance. Among the most direct and immediate actions the NMDOH can take to prevent the distribution of adulterated or misbranded food is to issue a “stop sale, use, or distribution” order. This order legally prohibits the movement or sale of the implicated food products until the violation is corrected or the product is otherwise disposed of according to law. Other potential actions, such as seizure and condemnation, typically follow a failure to comply with a stop sale order or are pursued when the violation is so severe that immediate removal from commerce is warranted and documented. Fines can be levied, but a stop sale order is the primary mechanism for preventing ongoing public health hazards from contaminated or improperly labeled food products. Therefore, in the scenario described, the most appropriate and immediate action to prevent further distribution of potentially unsafe food is a stop sale, use, or distribution order.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing provisions concerning adulterated and misbranded food, outlines stringent requirements for food products sold within the state. When a food product is found to contain a poisonous or deleterious substance, or if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health, it is considered adulterated. Furthermore, if a food’s labeling is false or misleading in any particular, or if it fails to bear a label showing the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, and an accurate statement of the quantity of the food, it is deemed misbranded. In the scenario presented, the artisanal jerky, despite being labeled as “all-natural,” was found to contain undeclared sodium nitrite, a preservative. This undeclared ingredient directly violates the misbranding provisions because the labeling is not accurate regarding the product’s composition. Moreover, if the undeclared sodium nitrite, even in small quantities, could render the food injurious to health or if its presence was not disclosed as required by federal or state regulations for food additives, it could also be considered adulterated. The core issue here is the discrepancy between the “all-natural” claim and the presence of a chemical preservative, leading to a misbranding violation. The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, aligned with federal standards, mandates accurate ingredient disclosure for consumer safety and informed purchasing decisions. The absence of sodium nitrite on the ingredient list, coupled with the “all-natural” claim, creates a misleading impression of the product’s formulation and processing.

New Mexico’s approach to regulating food additives and their labeling is primarily governed by the New Mexico Food and Drug Act, which often aligns with federal standards set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but may include state-specific nuances. When a food manufacturer introduces a novel food additive not previously recognized or approved, the burden of demonstrating its safety for intended use falls upon the manufacturer. This typically involves submitting scientific data and evidence to the relevant state agency, which in New Mexico is often the Department of Health, or a designated division within it, for review. The review process assesses potential health risks, toxicity, and the efficacy of the additive in its intended application. Without prior approval or a recognized exemption, introducing such an additive into the state’s commerce would constitute a violation of the Act, potentially leading to enforcement actions such as seizure of adulterated food, injunctions, or penalties. The core principle is consumer protection, ensuring that any substance added to food meets established safety benchmarks before widespread consumption. The Food and Drug Act mandates that food shall be deemed to be adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health, or if it bears or contains any food additive which is unsafe within the meaning of Section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or its implementing regulations, or if such food additive has not been approved by the appropriate regulatory body.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically under its provisions concerning adulterated and misbranded food, outlines strict requirements for food labeling and composition. When a food product contains a poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health, it is considered adulterated under the Act. Furthermore, if a food product’s labeling is false or misleading in any particular, it is deemed misbranded. Section 76-5-11 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) defines adulterated food, and Section 76-5-12 NMSA defines misbranded food. A food is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. A food is misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. In the given scenario, the imported “Sunstone” brand dried apricots, upon laboratory analysis in New Mexico, were found to contain trace amounts of sulfites, a preservative, which were not declared on the product’s packaging. While sulfites are permitted in certain food products in New Mexico, their absence of declaration on the label, especially when they are present, constitutes a violation of the misbranding provisions because the labeling is misleading by omission, implying the absence of such a common allergen and preservative. The presence of undeclared sulfites, even if permitted in other contexts, makes the labeling false or misleading concerning the product’s composition, thus rendering it misbranded under New Mexico law. The core issue is the lack of accurate information provided to the consumer on the label, which is a direct violation of misbranding statutes.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, is guided by the principle that food is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) 1978, § 25-7-2 defines adulterated food. This statute is largely based on the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The presence of any toxic chemical, such as a pesticide residue exceeding the established tolerance levels, or a microbial toxin, would fall under this definition if it poses a risk to public health. For instance, if a batch of chili powder produced in New Mexico were found to contain aflatoxin levels significantly above the regulatory limit, it would be considered adulterated under this provision. The focus is on the potential for harm to the consumer, regardless of whether that harm has actually manifested in any individual. The New Mexico Department of Health is responsible for enforcing these regulations. The act aims to prevent the distribution of unsafe food products within the state, thereby protecting consumer well-being and maintaining public confidence in the food supply.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning adulterated food, defines adulteration in various ways. One critical aspect is when a food product contains or is mixed with any substance that is poisonous or deleterious to health. This includes intentional addition of such substances or contamination. For instance, if a food product is found to contain a pesticide residue above the permissible tolerance level established by federal or state regulations, it would be considered adulterated under this provision. Similarly, if a food product is manufactured in unsanitary conditions, leading to contamination with harmful microorganisms or chemicals, it also falls under the definition of adulteration. The Act also addresses economic adulteration, such as when a valuable constituent has been in whole or in part omitted or abstracted, or when any substance has been substituted wholly or in part. However, the scenario presented focuses on the presence of a harmful substance, making the direct contamination or addition of a poisonous or deleterious ingredient the primary basis for adulteration. The New Mexico Department of Health has the authority to enforce these provisions, which are aligned with federal standards under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Understanding these specific definitions is crucial for manufacturers and distributors to ensure compliance and protect public health within New Mexico.

The New Mexico Food and Drug Act, specifically concerning the adulteration of food, focuses on preventing the sale of food that has been contaminated or altered in a way that renders it injurious to health. The Act defines adulterated food broadly, encompassing substances that have been mixed with or substituted, wholly or in part, with any other substance, or that have had any valuable constituent wholly or in part abstracted. It also covers food that has been damaged, deteriorated, or prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. Furthermore, it includes food where the container itself is injurious. In the scenario presented, the imported artisanal cheese, “Queso del Sol,” is found to contain a level of Listeria monocytogenes exceeding the permissible limits established by New Mexico’s food safety regulations, which are often aligned with federal guidelines. While the cheese may not have had a valuable constituent abstracted or been mixed with a foreign substance in the traditional sense, the presence of a pathogen at a level deemed unsafe makes it injurious to health. This directly falls under the definition of adulteration because the food has been rendered injurious to health due to microbial contamination. The absence of a specific declaration of the Listeria presence does not negate the adulteration status; rather, it highlights a failure in quality control or a lack of compliance with safety standards that ensure food is not injurious to health. Therefore, the cheese is considered adulterated under the Act.