Your Reading List

Prop bottles led to Stella scare: Labatt

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Published: October 3, 2007

A number of Stella Artois bottles filled with concentrated alcohol strictly for display were the cause of a tampering scare in July, the brand’s brewer announced today.

Toronto’s Labatt Breweries said its investigation found that the affected bottles were meant for display purposes and were supposed to be mounted inside Plexiglas casings. For display purposes, concentrated alcohol was substituted for beer.

“It appears that in a few isolated incidents, a bottle was removed from a display, and then later inadvertently placed into the bar fridge and subsequently provided to a customer,” the company wrote. The incidents were accidental with no intent to harm consumers, it added.

Read Also

The Amazon soy moratorium is considered one of the most important forces slowing deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon over the past two decades as it bars signatories from buying soybeans from farmers who plant on land deforested after July 2008. Photo: Paralaxis/Getty Images Plus

Soy trading firms to abandon Amazon protection pact in Brazil

Some of the world’s largest soybean traders are preparing to break their agreement to curb deforestation of the Amazon rainforest to preserve tax benefits in Brazil’s top farm state, two people with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters.

Labatt said it had done two “comprehensive Canada-wide blitzes, plus a third in Ontario,” working with bar owners to find and retrieve bottles meant for the displays. It also said it has imposed “strict, new control procedures related to marketing displays.”

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency had issued a warning of suspected tampering on July 12 after “reported reactions of vomiting” associated with some 330-mL bottles of Stella consumed at restaurants and bars in Kamloops, B.C. and Toronto.

CFIA said at the time that concentrated alcohol had been introduced into the bottles, which were well past their expiry codes of 11.2005 and 12.2005 and shouldn’t have been on the market in the first place.

explore

Stories from our other publications