Following the recent discovery of maleic anhydride-modified industrial starch in some processed foods, there has been a lot of clamor about sensational issues, such as the suggestion that “toxic starch is the main culprit that has made Taiwan a ‘kingdom of kidney dialysis.’”
Next, the media touted unproven remedies such as that people could metabolize maleic anhydride by including rice wine in their recipes.
In addition, some reports indiscriminately portrayed all businesses — from upstream to downstream suppliers — as equally guilty accomplices.
Later on, government departments produced scientific evidence to show that maleic anhydride is not very toxic and can be metabolized by drinking plenty of water, but by that time the public had already lost confidence in the government.
Instead of accepting these assurances, many people suspected that the authorities were trying to cover up business malpractices.
The outcome is that businesses, government and the public have all lost out. This shows how important it is to establish a system that meets scientific standards while ensuring sufficient communication of information and weighing up all the pros and cons.
In this respect, the General Food Law Regulation No. 178/2002 adopted by the EU in 2002 established a set of food safety control mechanisms centered on risk analysis, which includes carrying out risk assessment on a scientific basis, weighing the pros and cons in order to select suitable means of prevention or control to implement risk management, and ensuring risk communication through the exchange of information and opinions from various parties.
In the US, the Food Safety Modernization Act signed into law by US President Barack Obama on Jan. 4, 2011, established a similar system. Like the EU regulations, its purpose is to establish food safety policies that meet scientific principles, serve to balance the interests of all parties and maintain the predictability of public authority.
As to Taiwan, the recent maleic anhydride affair prompted the legislature to pass amendments to the Act Governing Food Sanitation (食品衛生管理法), adding a chapter devoted to food safety risk management.
These amendments firmly establish food safety policies centered on risk assessment and, through the formation of a food safety risk assessment consultative committee, incorporate the weighing up of pros and cons and risk communication into the risk assessment process.
Although the issue was not a happy experience, the one good thing about it is that it has prompted the passage of this piece of legislation.
Some may say that this is a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, but better late than never.
Let us hope that the relevant central government departments move quickly to set up the food safety risk assessment consultative committee.
Hopefully, this committee will be able to handle food safety incidents in accordance with the law and based on more rational and objective viewpoints than in the past. If that can be achieved, we can all feel a lot more confident about the food we eat.
Lee Shen-yi is honorary chairman of the Consumers’ Foundation. Howard Chen is a partner at Chien Yeh Law Offices.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath