Jul 9, 2016

Old stocks of chocolates confiscated in Erode

CHOCOLATES CONFISCATED
Officials of Food Safety and Drug Administration inspected shops along Kongallamman Koil Street in the city on Friday and confiscated old stocks of chocolates that were unfit for consumption. Chocolates beyond expiry date were found in 12 out of the 20 inspected shops, District Officer for Food Safety and Drug Administration Karunanidhi said, advocating awareness among buyers about ‘use by’ and ‘best before’ dates while making purchase.

400 kg of banned substances seized in raids across Chennai


Officials check items at a shop in Tambaram

Teams search 84 shops near schools, colleges
As many as 300 officials conducted a series of raids to unearth paan masala and gutka across the State on Friday.
In Chennai, the Food Safety Department on Friday seized over 400 kg of banned substance, including from two godowns. Four teams raided 84 shops in areas surrounding 26 schools and colleges in the city. The areas covered included Alwarpet; Tenynampet; Peter’s Road in Royapettah, Gopalapuram; Cathedral Road; Poes Garden area; Mannadi; Sowcarpet; and Koyambedu.
A raid on a godown on Varadamuthaiappan Street in Sowcarpet yielded around 400 kg of the banned substance. “The substance was being transported from North India. We have sent samples to the King Institute in Guindy for testing,” an official said.
Eight bags of chips packets kept in unsanitary conditions were also seized. So far, the raid covered around 100 schools. The raids will continue till all schools were covered, officials said.
Though the department conducted regular raids, it had no provision to fine them. “The raids are only control measures. We forward the results of the sample to the police for further action,” the official said.
In Tambaram, 10 kg of prohibited items, such as paan masala packed in sachets, were seized. More than 350 bottles of cold beverage, which did not bear any details and rotten eggs stored for sale were destroyed.
Officials also found food items that officials described as ‘substandard and injurious to health’.
The raid in Tambaram was conducted by A. Ramakrishnan, designated officer of Kancheepuram district and Tambaram food safety officer R. Velavan.
Results of earlier raid
Police sources said the forensic test on chocolates, said to be laced with some drug, had been completed and the results would be sent to the court as it is confidential. “In the last one week more than 500 people have been arrested for selling banned products in over 12 police districts in the city,” said a senior police officer.
The police have seized more than 175 kg of ganja, 1,292 packets ofmaava and 10,681 packets of other tobacco products.

Drive against sale of banned tobacco products, intoxicant chocolates

Health at stake:Collector S. Natarajan inspecting seized intoxicant chocolates and banned tobacco products at the Collectorate in Ramanathapuram on Friday.
Launching a drive against sale of intoxicant chocolates and banned tobacco products, the District Food Safety wing of the Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department has seized intoxicant chocolates and banned tobacco products worth Rs. two lakh in the district.
After launching the drive on July 6 as part of the State-wide drive, the Food Safety officials have seized products worth Rs. One lakh in Ramanathapuram municipal limit and products worth an equal amount after raiding retail shops at block levels throughout the district, Food safety wing District Designated Officer M. J. C. Bose said.
Inspecting the seized products, including locally-made unbranded and sub-standard chocolates, which had ingredients to stimulate intoxication and banned tobacco products such as ‘Baangu Urundai’ and ‘Cool Lip’ at the Collectorate here on Friday, Collector S. Natarajan said the drive would continue until further orders and advised school children not to buy the chocolates.
Pointing out that retail outlets, especially those located near schools and colleges were flooded with banned products, coated with attractive synthetic colours, the Collector appealed to the students and general public to avoid buying unbranded chocolates and biscuits.
Stern action
The retail and wholesale sellers should avoid selling such products, failing which stern action would be taken against them, the Collector warned. Public could alert the district administration, police or the food safety cell by calling 04567 231170 if they come across sale of such products in their areas, he said.
Dr. Bose said samples of the seized products were being sent to food analysts in Palayamkottai and further action would be taken against the sellers based on the reports of the analysts. The District Revenue Officer (DRO) would be the adjudicating official in case of sub standard and misuse of branded products, he said.
In case of sale of unsafe products, the department would file case before Judicial Magistrate courts, he said.
Dr. Bose was assisted in the drive by Food Safety officers M. Karunanidhi, A. Karunagaran and A. John Peter.

Officials seize banned tobacco products

T. Anuradha, Designated Officer of the Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department, conducting surprise check for banned tobacco products at a shop in Salem on Friday

The officials of the Food Safety Department and State Narcotics Intelligence Bureau (NIB) conducted surprise check in shops in Shevvapet area in the city on Friday and seized banned tobacco products worth more than Rs. 2.5 lakh.
Officials sources said that a team led by T. Anuradha, Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department, conducted surprise check near a school in Kannankurichi in the city on Thursday evening, when they spotted a man selling chocolates without any details on the cover.
Enquiries with him revealed that the chocolates were supplied to him by a shop functioning at Shevvapet. Following this, Dr. Anuradha along with Thangavel, Deputy SP, State NIB, conducted surprise check in the shops in Shevvapet. They seized banned tobacco products worth Rs. 2.5 lakh from the shops.
On spotting the official team, two traders instantly closed their shops and fled the scene. Dr. Anuradha sealed both the shops.
The Designated Officer told The Hindu that the raids were conducted to check the shops selling narcotic-mixed candies. However, banned tobacco products were found in the shops and were seized. She said that the officials were currently focussing on the shops near the education institutions.
During the raids, candies in colourful packing in different shapes and colours luring the school children were found in the shops. These chocolates were without the mandatory details such as manufacturer’s name and date of expiry.
 The samples of the candies have been sent to the Government Food Laboratory at Udayapatti in Salem city for analysis. Action will be taken after the receipt of the laboratory report.

All you need to know about the GM food controversy

Picture shows activists of Greenpeace holding a protest against GM corn and the Monsanto Law on the National Day of Corn , in front of the Judicial Power in Mexico City on September 29, 2015. 


A letter to Greenpeace endorsed by over 100 Nobel Laureates has yet again ignited a debate on whether genetically modified crops are safe or not.
Last week, over a hundred Nobel laureates shot off a letter to NGO Greenpeace calling its campaign against genetically modified (GM) crops “misleading” and “unscientific.” The letter has re-ignited the debate over how safe it is to consume GM food.
What does the letter say?
Addressing Greenpeace, the United Nations, and governments across the world, the letter points to how global production of food will have to double by 2050 to meet the demands of a growing global population. “Organisations opposed to modern plant breeding, with Greenpeace at their lead, have repeatedly denied these facts and opposed biotechnological innovations in agriculture. They have misrepresented their risks, benefits, and impacts, and supported the criminal destruction of approved field trials and research projects,” the letter says. It also urges Greenpeace and its supporters to re-examine the issue in the light of experiences of farmers and consumers worldwide as also new scientific findings. The letter wants Greenpeace to abandon its campaign against GM crop in general and Golden Rice in particular. It says Golden Rice, a genetically modified variety of rice infused with Vitamin A, is a must for curing Vitamin A deficiency in children in Africa who are affected by partial blindness because of the deficiency.
How have opponents of GM crops responded?
Indian environmental activist and anti-globalization author Vandana Shiva.
Environmentalist Vandana Shiva, founder of Navdanya, an organisation promoting organic farming, is clear that GM crops contaminate the environment and the letter by the Nobel winners is merely an opinion, and not an authoritative study to go by. In a written response to The Hindu, Ms. Shiva referred to the backlash the letter had received from several agriculture researchers and experts internationally. She cited Devon G. Peña, an anthropologist at the University of Washington, Seattle, and an expert in indigenous agriculture, who noted how the signatories were “mostly white men of privilege with little background in risk science, few with a background in toxicology studies, and certainly none with knowledge of the indigenous agro-ecological alternatives.” Ms. Shiva further said that the laureates’ letter relied for its impact entirely on the supposed authority of the signatories. Referring to a tweet from Philip Stark, Professor of Statistics at the University of California, Berkeley, she said the signatories comprised: “One peace prize, 8 economists, 24 physicists, 33 chemists, 41 doctors”. She also shared details as to how Greenpeace activists were stalled from attending the Washington press conference where the letter in question was released, as one of the security managers for the event John Bryne was a former head of corporate communications for Monsanto, the GM seeds giant. Thus tracing the entire episode to a GM lobby-driven public relations exercise, Ms. Shiva said the letter should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Further Greenpeace has denied accusations that it is blocking genetically engineered ‘Golden’ rice. Its spokesperson from South East Asia, Wilhelmina Pelegrina, told The Hindu that golden rice has failed as a solution and isn’t currently available for sale, even after more than 20 years of research. “As admitted by the International Rice Research Institute, it has not been proven to actually address Vitamin A Deficiency,” she said, further adding: “Corporations are overhyping ‘golden’ rice to pave the way for global approval of other more profitable genetically engineered crops. Rather than invest in this overpriced public relations exercise, we need to address malnutrition through a more diverse diet, equitable access to food and eco-agriculture.”
What is the science behind GM crops?
A DNA double helix is seen in an undated artist's illustration released by the National Human Genome Research Institute on May 15, 2012. 

Ever since the discovery of the DNA double-helix model by Watson and Crick, scientists realised it was possible to manipulate the DNA features of an organism to create new traits in them by borrowing genes from other organisms and mixing it with theirs. In the case of GM food, scientists insert into a plant’s genome one or several gene from another species of plant or even from a bacterium, virus or animal. This is to inject desired traits such as pest-resistance or Vitamin A (as in the case of golden rice).
Is GM food unsafe?
Most studies on the safety of GM food are heavily debated; with the result that it is hard to conclude they are unsafe. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate, a herbicide that goes with Monsanto’s Roundup Ready product, as “probably carcinogenic” in 2015. However, this has been challenged by food scientists. This ensures that only the weed dies and not the crop itself, as the GM food is modified to resist glyphosate. In a review paper of GMO safety assessment studies, environmental scientist Marek Cuhra has shown that glyphosate-tolerant GM food plants accumulate glyphosate residues at unexpected high levels. Minimum residue levels of glyphosate allowed on GM food has been notched up due to increased use of this herbicide on the glyphosate tolerant GM food crops, said Kavitha Kuruganti, an activist associated with ASHA – Kisan Swaraj Alliance. “The way the plant resists the herbicide has allowed more residues to remain on the plant, so this has increased exposure to glyphosate among GM food consumers,” she said.
Till date the most controversial study around safety of GM food has been on GM corn by French molecular biologist Gilles-Éric Séralini. In a 2012 journal paper, he had shown that rats fed GM corn and the herbicide Roundup developed tumours. But his journal paper was withdrawn after its data was shown to be flawed. A study released by the Japanese Department of Environmental Health and Toxicology, based on a 52-week feeding of GM soybeans to rats, found “no apparent adverse effect in rats” in 2007. In 2012, scientists from the University of Nottingham’s School of Biosciences released a review of 12 long-term studies and 12 multi-generational studies of GM foods, concluding there is no evidence of health hazards from GM food. The European Commission too funded 130 research projects on the safety of GM crops and could not find anything that could prove the risks from GM crops.
Is there more to the GM controversy?
Activists protesting against Bt Brinjal, the first GM food item to be introduced for trial in India. Picture was taken in Hyderabad in 2010. 
It isn’t just about safety. There are arguments against GM food that are economic and social in nature. Advocates of organic farming like Vandana Shiva have voiced serious concern about multinational agribusiness companies such as Monsanto and Bayer taking over farming from the hands of small farmers, which includes several poor women in developing countries like India. This would mean loss of autonomy over the manner in which agriculture itself is practiced, with increased dependence on GM seed companies and herbicides manufactured by them, putting financial strain on farmer households.
There are also concerns regarding loss of food biodiversity if corporate food varieties begin to flood the markets. In a note published on the Navdanya site, Ms. Shiva wrote that Golden Rice is less efficient in providing Vitamin A than the biodiversity alternatives that those grown by indigenous farmers. She also wrote that GMO ‘iron-rich’ bananas have less iron than turmeric and amchur (mango powder). “Apart from being nutritionally empty, GMOs are part of an industrial system of agriculture that are destroying biodiversity, and we are losing access to the food systems that have sustained us throughout time,” she wrote.
However, scientists in the U.S. and elsewhere are firm that GM food can resolve the hunger challenge in the developing world, as the Nobel Laureates’ letter states. They also speak of the benefits of insect-resistant food crops that can increase farm productivity for farmers.
The GM scene in India 
Though India has resisted GM food production till now, Ms. Kuruganti said there have been instances of GM food being imported into the country (including corn, baby food and breakfast cereal, which have been introduced without adherence to relevant labelling laws). While a Directorate General of Foreign Trade notification in 2013 addressed the issue of labelling by requiring those importing GM food to explicitly mention it in their labels, in the case of home-manufactured products like edible oil, there are chances of GM cottonseed oil being mixed with other edible oil without any labelling, she said.
Though no State government in India has permitted commercial cultivation of GM food till now, field trials for 21 GM food crops, including GM vegetables and cereals, have been approved by the government.

Getting compensation for bad food easier said than done


If you furnish proof, of food poisoning, the manufacturer or vendor will, after a prolonged court battle, pay you Rs1 lakh in case of any harm, Rs 3 lakh for grievous harm and Rs 5 lakh for death, according to section 65 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Did you get an upset tummy after eating from a local restaurant? Then you may be eligible to get up to Rs 5 lakh in compensation under the Food Safety Act.
Not so easily, though.
First, you have to preserve some of the food that you ate and get it tested at the city’s food safety lab at the earliest.
Second, you have to preserve the sample of your vomit or stool and get a physician to certify you have had food poisoning.
If you furnish all the proof, the manufacturer or vendor will, after a prolonged court battle, pay you Rs1 lakh in case of any harm, Rs 3 lakh for grievous harm and Rs 5 lakh for death, according to section 65 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
“For claiming compensation, the person has to get the same food that he ate, tested. And, the sample has to be tested within 24 hours, otherwise, the manufacturers may contest that the food went bad because the consumer did not keep it under proper refrigeration,” an official from Delhi’s food safety department said.
“When it comes to compensation, it is a very strict Act and a person will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt in the court of law that he/ she got sick because of the food. This means we have to medically examine whether the food poisoning happened due to the same strain of bacteria or virus found in the food,” the official added.
The official agrees that the conditions for compensation are impractical.
“The onus lies with the consumer to collect the proof. Nobody saves half their sandwich or a little bit of the dal, just in case they fall ill later. And, what if the person gets sick after four days? Then, even if they complain and we find the food to be contaminated, we can only take action against the manufacturer or vendor. They will not receive any compensation as they will be unable to prove the food they had four days ago was contaminated,” the official said.
It may take a couple of hours to two days for an infection to set in. “If the toxin is already present in the food product because of the action of a bacteria, a person will get sick in two or three hours. But, if the person ingests the infection, it will take a little longer. The most common bacteria -- staphylococcus takes 6 hours, bacillus cereus takes 12 to 24 hours and salmonella takes 36 to 48 hours to start acting,” said Dr Srikant Sharma, senior consulting physician at Moolchand hospital.

To date, no case for compensation has been filed under the Act, which came into force five years ago, in 2011. “This clause is beneficial in case of mass outbreaks, where several people fall ill and we can register a stronger case. However, even then the evidence will mostly be circumstantial,” the food safety department official said.

FSSAI’s risk assessment cell for easy food recall to become a centre soon

FSSAI has established a National Risk Assessment Cell at its headquarters here to ascertain risk areas of concern. This has been done to strengthen the food safety ecosystem that would eventually help the apex food regulator to deal with the crisis related to food safety involving situations like food recall.
Pawan Agarwal, CEO, FSSAI, revealed in a statement in a newsletter of FSSAI that this would eventually develop into a National Food Safety Risk Assessment Centre. “A National Risk Assessment Cell has been established to assess risks in areas of concern and I would like to inform that this cell would eventually be strengthened and developed into a full-fledged National Food Safety and Risk Assessment Centre,” he stated.
He pointed out that the body had created a new division for implementation of the GHP and GMP measures by the FBOs. He stated, “FSSAI has also created a new division, Food Safety Management System (FSMS) Division for the consistent implementation of the preventive measures i.e., Good Manufacturing Practices, Good Hygiene Practices & Hazard Analysis & Critical Control Point in various kinds of food businesses.”
Informing about labs, Agarwal stated that 16 new NABL accredited labs were notified by FSSAI recently.
Besides, FSSAI had set up seven new scientific panels to speed up the process of setting standards along with adoption of Codex standards. In order to ensure food safety across the nation, new key regulations relating to recall procedures, traceability, product approval, claims, food fortification, and school canteens are being finalised. “We have recently released nine new manuals of method of analysis of foods,” he said.
Meanwhile, FSSAI Mobile App, launched in March 2016, is receiving citizen’s trust nationwide and to further enhance this, an elaborate system is now being developed such as to directly inform the concerns to the regulatory staff at the field level. Also, the organisational structure of FSSAI has been strengthened and a system of team-based approach has been initiated for seamless flow of information across various divisions, according to him.