Poisoning response strange
Doubts about the Taipei City Department of Health’s response to the Polam Kopitiam (寶林茶室) food poisoning are growing. It started on March 24 on the day of the poisonings when the bureau began its investigation. When inspectors arrived at the restaurant, they did not collect food for testing. They missed their chance to secure valuable evidence. The department said that the guidelines did not require inspectors to collect food samples during an investigation’s first stage, but is this true?
Article 4 of the Food and Drug Administration’s “Key handling procedures for suspected food poisoning incidents” (疑似食品中毒事件處理要點) states that if there are divisions of sampling labor for specimens in suspected food poisoning incidents, local health departments bear responsibility for collecting food samples, as well as conducting environmental testing on cutlery, chopping boards, potable water, dishwashing water, etc.
When Taipei’s health department was taking samples, they sooner or later would have discovered that there were no food remnants left to be collected. The procedural guidelines include the collection of grain and noodle products, black wood ear mushrooms, cabbage, bean sprouts, hongxi mushrooms and pandan leaves, as well as all the restaurant’s sauces suspected of causing the poisoning.
How could the department say that current guidelines do not require inspectors to collect samples in an investigation’s first stage?
More ridiculous is that Department Commissioner Chen Yen-yuen (陳彥元) said that the Food and Drug Administration did not stipulate that the city health department has to take samples of all food items, and that central and local government specialists could discuss amending the procedural guidelines.
Does the city health department really need to take samples of all the food items in the first stage of the investigation? If this is true, then more inspectors would need to be on the case.
The problem with their excuse is that in the collection of “suspected food products,” inspectors only need to take samples from “suspected problematic ingredients” used in the affected dishes consumed by food poisoning victims. What does this tell us about Chen’s explanation? What reason is there to expand the number of inspectors on the case?
The more the city health department says, the worse off it looks.
Yu Meng-tie
Taipei
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS