Regulatory science, as defined by Sheila Jasanoff, a professor of science, technology and social studies, refers to the scientific basis and principles that drive regulatory policies in various industries, and in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. Taiwan is currently debating how administrative and regulatory departments can reduce the number of scandals over the use of industrial chemicals as food additives.
Industrial chemicals are raw materials used in chemical industries, while food additives are natural or synthetic substances are added to foods to preserve their flavor or improve their texture or enhance their appearance and color. China and Taiwan have both been hit by scandals over plasticizers in food, and Taiwan is now coping with a new scare over the use of chemical substances to make starch.
From the point of view of regulatory science, it would appear that these scandals have a number of threads in common.
The first common feature is proactive inspection. In the plasticizers case, a Department of Health researcher was searching for fake medicines using thin-layer and gas chromatography. Abnormal wave patterns in the test results confirmed that a probiotic product contained plasticizer.
In the starch case, the Consumers’ Foundation tested some rice noodles and found that they did not contain any rice. This finding led manufacturers to study their lists of additive ingredients. Then laboratory tests confirmed that there was a problem with the sources of some ingredients, namely the presence of maleic anhydride, which is not suitable for human consumption.
The second common thread to the scandals is the time lag before information was made public. In the case of plasticizers, a month-and-a-half elapsed from the initial detection of the substance until the primary supplier was traced and the information was announced. In the starch case, it took about a month from the time the authorities were notified until the manufacturer was traced, and a further month until the public was informed.
The third common feature is that secondary chemical businesses sold industrial chemicals to firms outside the chemical industry sector. Health authorities found the reason plasticizers had been used as food additives was a chemicals dealer had intentionally misrepresented these substances as food additives in marketing them to foodstuff manufacturers. In the present maleic anhydride case, the substance followed a similar path when it was sold into the foodstuff industry as “synthetic starch.”
The fourth commonality is that these two industrial chemicals introduced into the food industry originated from the same major chemicals manufacturer. Plasticizers and maleic anhydride are subject to different levels of regulation under the Toxic Chemical Substances Control Act (毒性化學物質管理法). Companies that produce and sell plasticizers are obliged to keep a record of whom they sell them to.
Although maleic anhydride is toxic and harmful to human health in that short-term exposure may lead to serious temporary or sustained injury, the law does not classify it as a toxic chemical or require a sales record to be kept.
In both cases, which occurred about one year apart, the authorities’ investigations found that the two questionable substances were both sold and delivered by the UPC Group, one of Taiwan’s main chemicals manufacturers.
The toxic flour scare arose close to the anniversary of the plasticizer incident, and it may serve as a reminder that the previous scandal did not prompt authorities to actively improve the regulation of sales channels for industrial chemicals. Proactive food tests and notification and regulation of toxic substances have their limitations, and appear incapable of preventing the malicious misuse of such substances beforehand, or of establishing regulatory procedures based on the concept of regulatory science. Instead, the authorities are using them as grounds to explain how the failure to notify them about maleic anhydride sales was not actually illegal.
In 1998, US authorities held discussions based on scientific evidence about whether to add maleic anhydride to the list of substances subject to export notification requirements under Section 12(b) of the US Toxic Substances Control Act. Although in the end it was not included in the list, at least the US authorities made the necessary efforts.
However, in Taiwan, it seems that we can only respond to incidents of the misuse of industrial chemicals in food manufacturing after they happen. This is done by tests carried out by government departments or the Consumers’ Foundation, which can be like looking for a needle in a haystack, rather than starting out by figuring out who is responsible at the head of the supply chain.
Regulatory science should be incorporated into society. Only if it is understood how industrial chemicals find their way from chemical factories into food processing plants can those responsible for such things happening be identified.
We must make a connection between scientific knowledge and principles and the day-to-day transactions in the chemicals and foodstuffs industries, and assess the practicability of applying regulatory science beyond the limits of existing laws. If this is not done, there is no knowing how many more chemical substances may turn up in our food chain.
Wong Yu-feng is an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine and the Center for Society, Technology and Medicine at National Cheng Kung University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder