Synthetic Milk

judicial decision of synthetic draw exposure to children of selected commonwealth in Uttar Pradesh, India Shuchi R. Bhatt1, Dr. Anita Singh2 and S. M. Bhatt3 (Abstract) The present contain was carried out keeping in view the recently emerging concern of the adulteration of the congenital draw with the synthetic draw. Synthetic milk is prepared by emulsifying vegetable oils with appropriate amount of detergent and carbamide. Samples of the natural milk with synthetic milk were analyzed for concentration of urea and detergent and their load is assayed through survey in diametrical population in Uttar Pradesh, India.Childrens had different range of intake of milk. Children of age stem 1-5 years consumes about 50-250 mg of milk daily, while of age group 6-18 years of children consumes about 250-1000 ml milk/day and childrens of age group 19-22 consumes milk about ergocalciferol-1000 ml milk /day. Addition of synthetic milk is on large scale in Meerut district of U. P. and most ly urea in such milk creating colossal problem of headache, eyesight and diarrhea in children. Keywords take out adulteration Synthetic milk, sensing, urea 1.Research Scholar, Faculty of H. Sc, Sri. A. K. A. P. G. montage Varanasi. 2. Head, Department of Food & Nutrition, Sri. Agrasen Kanya Autonomous P. G. College. Parmanandpur, Varanasi. 3. School of Bio chemic Engineering, Institule of Technology B. H. U. Varanasi. Corresponding Author Email emailprotected co. in 1 Introduction Liquid milk is an essential nutritional food for infants as well as the aged. Adulteration of natural milk with a chemically synthesized milky liquid (synthetic milk) is a matter of expert concern.The dairy industry employs various checks these tests commonly include determination of eke out and fall solids by chemical or physical analyses estimation of sediment by forcing milk through filter pads and noting the residue leave determination of Bacterial count and determination of freezing point etc . (Dean, 1985 Fox, 1992). However, most of these measurements are costly and time consuming like measurement of conductance (Mebrook & Petty 2003 a and b Willard et al 2003). Synthetic milk is an excellent imitation of natural milk.Milk fat is mimicked by vegetable oil the nitrogen component in milk is mimicked by urea detergents are added to make it frothy. This mixture is so expertly prepared that the peculiar(prenominal) gravity of the concocted milk is the same as natural buffalo milk. This mixture is then mixed with natural milk in varying proportions. Such milk domiciliate be processed into value added products which remove in a bigger profit. A recent Indian Council of Medical research (ICMR) report has suggested that such adulterated items have a cancerous effect on the human system and can atomic number 82 to gradual impairment of the body.Milk is a complex mixture of water, lactose, fat, protein, minerals, and vitamins distributed throughout colloidal and soluble phas es. Although the cow is the principal(prenominal) source of milk for human consumption in the United States and many other parts of the valet (DePeters 1992). In India most milk is 2 obtained from the buffalo. The composition of milk from buffalo is water (82. 14%), fat (7. 44%), protein (4. 78%), lactose (4. 8%) and ash (0. 83%) (Rangappa & Achary, 1973).On average milk has optimum direct of urea and other chemicals but due to habit of making huge profit there is on going malpractice of using synthetic milk in the original milk. Therefore there is need to race out regularly in different region of India to expose such malpractices and to check such malpractices commensurate ignoring health concerns of people. The effect of urea on animal reproductive system has been carried out by Ropstad etal 1987. They account that reproduction system and reproductive cycle in animals get badly affected by juicy concentration of urea.This work is carried out to expose and to increase the aw areness among people to decline such malpractices adapted, since it is problematical to detect such harmful adulterants in dangerous amount in family unit. One quick manner acting describe in the article is to check the pH of the milk by pH paper (red turns moody) that is operable freely and cant be adjusted quickly at large scale. Material and method Survey Preschool (1-5 years) and school going (6-18 years) children in urban and rural battlefield from different district of U. P. had been surveyed.A total of 365 household were surveyed in which 70 childrens were of age group 1-5 years, 150 childrens were of age group 6-18 years, and cxlv childrens were of age group 19-22 years. Since it was household survey, the homemaker of the household was interviewed for intake of milk. The region of study selected was Varanasi, Bulandsahar, Meerut and Mathura. Thus, 365 individuals in urban nation and 365 in rural area were surveyed. The milk were 3 collected from the household and tes ted for presence of urea and detergent. The frequency method was employed for calculation.The survey includes consumption of milk/day, their effect on health such as headache, eyesight problem, and diarrhea. Also, 160 model of the milk were collected from different local market, vendors, and stalls of Bulandsahar, Mathura, Meerut, and Varanasi. Qualitative compendium for urea detection Qualitative analysis for urea detection were done by the method describe below 1. Took 5 ml of milk in a test furnish 2. Added 20 mg of Soya bean powder & 2 drops of 0. 5 % aqueous firmness of purpose of Bromothymol blue. 3. Mixed the sample well. 4. The development of Blue colour after 10 min indicates the concomitant of urea the sample. 5.For confirmatory test was done by adding five ml of milk with 5 ml paradimethyl amino benzaldehyde (16%). If the issue turns yellow in colour, then the given sample of milk is added with urea. Quantitative analysis for urea detection A quantitative estimate of urea was carried out by preparing standard of urea and their pH variation and by utilizing urease enzyme. For this we took 5 ml of milk in a test tube and added 0. 2 ml of urease (20 mg / ml) and centrifuged it well at room temperature. Now added 0. 1 ml of bromothymol blue solution (0. 5%). The appearance of blue colour after 10-15 min indicates the adulteration milk with urea.Urease can be obtained by adding 4 soybean slurry (source of urease prepared by soaking soybeans overnight or for 12 hours in water and grinding to prepare a slurry). (Dean J. A 1985) The OD of sample was taken in UV-Vis Spectrophotometer (ELICO double beam) at 420 nm. And pH was measured by pH meter using buffer sample set at pH 4. In the presence of urea the red litmus paper turns blue. Urea Standard Solution was prepared by following method (a) Stock solution concentration was 5 mg / ml. Dissolved 50 gm reagent grade urea in water and dilute to 1 litre with water. b) Working solution was prepared by P ipetting 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20 ml stock solution into 250 ml volumetric flask and dilute to volume with phosphate buffer. (c) Reference solution standard solution was containing 1. 0 mg urea / 5 ml as reference standard. Figure caption Fig. 1 showing variation of pH with different concentration of urea Fig. 2 showing variation of urea and detergent in different region of Uttar Pradesh India Fig. 3 showing children affected by synthetic milk in different age group (a) Headache (b) Eyesight and (c) Diarrhea. 5 Figures Urea 5 4 Urea % (w/v) 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 pH Fig. 1 showing variation of pH with different concentration of urea 60 urban Rural % of Urea and detergent adultrants 50 40 30 20 10 0 Bulandsahar Mathura Meerut Varanasi Fig. 2 showing variation of urea and detergent in different region of Uttar Pradesh India 6 Headache 40 35 30 urban Rural 60 50 Eye sight problem Urban Rural % of sample 25 20 15 10 5 0 1-5 6-18 19-22 % of sample 40 30 20 10 0 1-5 6-18 19-22 a ge group Age group (a) (b) % of children affected by problem of Diarrhea 60 50 Urban Rural % of total sample 40 30 20 10 0 1-5 6-18 19-22 Age group (c) Fig. showing children affected by synthetic milk in different age group (a) Headache (b) Eyesight and (c) Diarrhea. 7 Tables Table-1 showing different constituents of milk CONSTITUENTS Water Lipid in emulion phase ( mixture of mixed triglecerides) Phospolipids ( lacithine, Cephaline, ) STEROLS carotenoids vit. A, D. E. K Protiens (Casein) B- Lactoglobulin Lactoalbumin Albumin, Psuedoglobulin etc Enzymes ( Catalase, Peroxidase, Amylase, Lipase, Protease) DESSOLVED MATERIALS Carbohydraetes Lactose Glocose ORGANIC AND inorganic ION & SALTS Calcium Phosphate Citrate Chloride, Sodium, Pottasium, Magnesium etc.Water soluble Vitamins Thiamin APPROX.. CONCENTRATION / LIT 860 TO 880 gms 30-50gms 0. 30 gms 0. 10 gms 25 gms 3 gms 0. 7gms 40-50 gms 50 mgs 1. 25 gms 2. 10 gms 2. 0 gms 1. 00 gms 0. 4 mg 1. 5 mg 8 Riboflavin Niacin Pyridoxin Pento thenic Acid Biotin Folic acid Chline (Total) Vit B12 inositol Ascorbic acid Nitrogenous material ammonium hydroxide Amino Acids Urea Creatine and Createnine Uric acid Gases Carbon dio Oxide Oxygen Nitrogen 0. 2 -1. 2 mg 0. 7mg 3. 0 mg 50 mg 1. 0 mg 150 mg 7. 0 mg 180 mg 20 gm 2-12 mg 3. 5 mg 100 mg 15 mg 7 mg Milk exposed to air 15 mg 7. mg 15 mg Copper, Iron, Rb, Trace element Li, Ba, Mn, Al, Zn, B, Co, I Occasionally Present Mc, Cr, Ag, Sn, Ti, 9 Table 2. medium Composition of milk Item Water Lactose Fat True Protein Crude Protein Casein ash tree Other Average milk composition % 87. 00 4. 90 3. 70 3. 00 3. 10 2. 60 . 80 . 50 Table -3 showing average milk consumed by different age group Mean of Milk age (years) 1-5 years 6-18 years 19-22 years children consumed 70 150 145 156. 428 SD range 53. 78 50-250 500 274. 77 250-1000 800 224. 22 500-1000 10Table-4 Effect of urea on different age groups in urban area No. of Age group 1-5 years 6-18 19-22 children Headache Eye problem 70 150 145 nil 42 56 8 86 76 Digestion /diarrhea 32 86 76 normal 38 60 69 Table-5 Effect of urea on different age groups in rural area (365 samples) No. of Age group 1-5 years 6-18 19-22 children Headache Eye problem 70 150 145 nil 6 16 2 25 18 Digestion /diarrhea 16 25 18 normal 54 125 127 Table-6 Sample tested in rural area (sample tested 160) No. of sample 40 38 32 50 City 5% urea 5% urea