At an international food safety conference in Beijing in May, EU Director-General for Health and Consumer Protection Robert Madelin argued that Chinese food products are of dubious quality, putting the health of consumers at risk.
Last week, a US couple filed a lawsuit with the Indiana state court against a food manufacturer, Robert's American Gourmet, after their one-year-old son died of severe diarrhea three days after eating the company's Veggie Booty snacks. The hospital diagnosed him with salmonella poisoning. As a result, the company was forced to recall Veggie Booty and Super Veggie Tings, which both contained the same additives imported from China. The additives tested positive for salmonella.
In light of contaminated Chinese food and ingredients, Food for Health International, a US health food company, has already launched a "China-free" campaign. The company says in its advertisements that its products do not contain any ingredients from China and has begun labeling its packages with a "China-free" sticker.
The Food and Drug Administration requires that seafood companies specify the origin of the food on packages, while meat and agricultural products must meet similar regulations. Although the US industry, government and academics have actively discussed how to improve food labeling, the "China-free" stickers are the first concrete sign of change.
As for Taiwan, the clearest example of labeling is Taiwan Salt Industrial Corp's "Contains Taiwan salt" certification label. To distinguish its products from Chinese ones, the company has used a Taiwan-shaped label on its packaging so as to reassure consumers that foods and restaurants with the label are using its salts.
We must be more aware of where our food comes from. At the hospital where I work, the head of the nutrition department once told me that she never bought any imported Chinese foods and always paid careful attention to food safety. There has not been a case of food poisoning at the hospital in more than 10 years, which puts patients and colleagues well at ease.
Janice Chen is an administrative member of the Taiwan Society.
Translated by Eddy Chang
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS