Dangers of sulfur dioxide
The Taipei Times has run articles on a “proposal to legalize sulfur dioxide as a food additive” (“Sulfur dioxide additive plan by FDA criticized,” March 26, page 1 and “Sulfur dioxide plan should consider local habits: KMT,” March 28, page 3).
Such a proposal should indeed be of concern, especially if it is not accompanied by a strict labelling law with stiff penalties if the use of sulfur dioxide or sulfites is not listed as an ingredient.
I had a friend who was allergic to many things, including bee stings and sulfur. She invariably carried epinephrine injectors to prevent serious damage in case of a sting.
About 20 years ago, she was stung by a bee and immediately used an injector. The result was anaphylactic shock, which required emergency attention to save her life, as she basically stopped breathing.
She was a biochemist and upon recovery devoted a fair amount of time to finding out what might have caused the problem. She found out that the company that produced the injectors had changed the formulation to include a sulfite as a preservative to increase the life span of the product.
Anaphylactic shock is a rare reaction to exposure to sulfites, but if a pharmaceutical company can make the mistake of adding a potentially fatal ingredient, is it so important to allow the use of such compounds just so food producers can use sulfur dioxide for whatever purposes they wish and not be held liable for the consequences if the way in which it is used results in the presence of sulfites in food?
It may also be worth asking the question: “Would a rule that permits the use of sulfur dioxide or sulfites help the producers that choose to use it?”
It certainly might, provided the producers that do not use it fail to take the opportunity to label their goods as “free of sulfur dioxide and sulfites.”
Emilio Venezian
New Taipei City
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS