Sun, Oct 12, 2008 page8

• Focus on food safety fundamentals

  • By Perry Chiu 丘志威
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  THE MELAMINE-CONTAMINATED milk powder scandal has shaken Taiwan’s food industry and has scared the living daylights out of the public. However, prior to this incident, there were many warning signs such as poor quality starch, poisonous hairy crabs and grouper fish as well as pork containing ractopamine, an additive used in pig feed to tenderize pork. But what have our authorities learned from these incidents?

  The commotion surrounding the contaminated milk powder will subside sooner or later, but will we ever be able to trust that our food is safe after this? I have been teaching food safety for more than 20 years in university and am active in issues related to the Department of Health (DOH) and the health bureau in several cities and counties.

  Taiwan still lacks a complete system for managing food safety and with all the questionable Chinese products, similar incidents will continue to occur if we cannot establish a thorough system for managing food safety.

  Can the establishment of a food and drug administration really resolve the problem? If there is no change in the attitude or the way our senior officials think, nothing will ever change. I want to share some observations made over the years in the hope they may be a useful reference.

  First, it was wrong of legislators and the public to solely blame the health department for the melamine scandal. The Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection (BSMI) is responsible for controlling food imports, while the department is responsible for food safety after products reach stores.

  Testing for melamine was not part of the regular food-safety tests, and this was the same in other countries worldwide. Now that there has been melamine contamination, all the health department can do is prepare itself to guard against future occurrences, although officials there have seemed confused and erratic about their plans.

  Second, the Bureau of Food Sanitation (BFS) is severely underfunded and the least respected agency in a system that emphasizes medicine and medical treatment. In addition, apart from BFS and BSMI staffers, most employees of health bureaus nationwide have backgrounds in veterinary science, public health or nursing.

  The lack of staff with a background in food safety is widespread. This situation has not improved for more than 20 years. The BFS has had five directors, two whose backgrounds were in pharmacology. With non-specialists leading specialists, how are we supposed to draw up effective policies for national food safety?

  Third, although some DOH managers have administrative ability, many have become arrogant and incapable of listening to advice, not to mention the public’s concerns. Each year, the health department, the Council of Agriculture and the Industrial Development Bureau allot huge sums to private organizations for national technology development programs. However, it is not clear who is in charge of assessing the effectiveness of these programs.

  There are also senior officials who take on health-related managerial positions in the private industry after they retire. This leads to the question of how effective our “revolving-door” restriction has been.

  Fourth, in the past few years, government restructuring has resulted in the merging of health bureau food and drug departments into a food and drug division, where most directors have pharmacology backgrounds. This is proof that food safety has been neglected to the point of nonexistence.

  Finally, food inspections by health authorities are mostly focused on inspection, sampling and doling out fines. But what good has this done? More and more products are found violating the limits on hydrogen peroxide, additives, coloring and chemical pesticides.

  Three years ago, Taoyuan County’s Bureau of Food Sanitation came up with a breakthrough strategy to establish certifications for local brands to encourage them to improve their practices. This strategy was reportedly praised by a head of the DOH.

  Taiwan’s food industry is not very large, and lacks specialized technical knowledge. We do not need idealistic slogans for food safety policies.

  If we are unable to solve the fundamental problems in our system, what use are strict punishment and more legislation?

  We need to focus our attention on the fundamentals. The general public do not need to be told about parts per million this or that. What they want is to be able to eat their food without having to worry about negative side effects.

  Perry Chiu is a food science professor at Fu Jen Catholic University.

  TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Investors diversify from TSMC to other winners of AI boom

  • 2

    HSR malfunction causes delays, reduced service

  • 3

    Taiwan eyes 100,000 drones a month

  • 4

    Japan ‘mystery illness’ not new: CDC

  • 5

    Taiwan, China coast guards argue in South China Sea