Name & trade of the Food product and the List of Ingredients : Module 3

Name of Food and List of Ingredient

Name of Food: The name and trade name of the food shall be mentioned on the label.

List of the Ingredients: The list of all food articles i.e. ingredients added in the manufacture of food products are to be mentioned on the label with the title “Ingredients”.  Any substance including food additives, color, preservatives added in the manufacture of food product shall be added in the list of ingredients.

The name of ingredients shall be given in descending order that means the ingredient used in higher quantity will be mentioned first than the substance used in lower quantities. Specific name of each ingredient shall be mentioned on the label.

However in some cases the class name of the food ingredient is allowed to be mentioned in place of specific name of the ingredient .For example,.if turmeric powder or chilles powder or both or any other single spice or more than one spices in combination have been used in the preparation of any food product then in place of mentioning the names of all spices used ,the class name as “spice and condiments” may be mentioned in the list of ingredients.

The ingredients falling in the respective classes, the class title as mentioned in the table may be used.

Table containing the Ingredients and Class Title

Classes	Class Titles
Edible vegetable oils/Edible vegetable fat Animal fat / oil other than milk fat Starches, other than chemically modified starches All species of fish where the fish constitutes an ingredient of another food and provided that the labelling and presentation of such food does not refer to a species of fish	Edible vegetable oil/ Edible vegetable fat or both hydrogenated or Partially hydrogenated oil Give name of the source of fat. Pork fat, lard and beef fat or extracts thereof shall be declared by specific names Starch Fish
All types of poultry meat where such meat constitutes an	Poultry meat
ingredient of another food and provided that the labeling
and presentation of such a food does not refer to a specific
All types of cheese where cheese or mixture of cheeses	Cheese
constitutes an ingredient of another food and provided that
the labelling and presentation of such food does not refer to
a specific type of cheese
All spices and condiments and their extracts		Spices and condiments or mixed spices/ condiments
		as appropriate
All types of gum or preparations used in the manufacture of	Gum Base
gum base for chewing gum
Anhydrous dextrose and dextrose monohydrate	Dextrose or Glucose
All types of Caseinates		Caseinates
Press, expeller or refined cocoa butter		Cocoa butter
All crystallized fruit		Crystallized fruit
All milk and milk products derived solely from milk	Milk solids
Cocoa bean, Coconib, Cocomass, Cocoa press cakes,	Cocoa solids
Cocoa powder (Fine/Dust)

If the ingredient used in the product, itself is the product of one or more ingredients then such a compound ingredient shall be mentioned in the list of ingredients with a list of its ingredients in descending order within the brackets.

In some cases percentage of the ingredients added has to be mentioned. Where a food product is a mixture of two food products or the ingredient of food product, is shown as present on the label or through words or pictures then the percentage of the ingredients shown in the picture have to be mentioned.

The ingredients need not to be mentioned in a single ingredient food.

To summarize, the brand name should clearly appear on the label along with the information about all classes of ingredients and their percentage quantity used in the manufacturing of the product.

How the past gives food for thought about quality

During the French period, government doctor would inspect the kitchen and the staff

At a time when the Government of India is encouraging food business owners to register with the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India till 1973, the eateries in Puducherry had a completely different set of rules to abide by to ensure food quality.

The municipality permit issued by the French still hangs on the walls of the Café Lune on Suffren Street, almost 50 years after it was issued.

In those days, the rules were different and the people were willing to obey them. Now, very few of the restaurants and cafes that were run during the French time are still open, and even if they are, the original owners have passed away and the people who run it now do not remember how things were back then, owner of the café G.M. Anwardeen says. 

Until 1973, the Pondicherry Municipality under the mayor was in control of the issue of licences to the various restaurants, bars and cafes. It was only after 1973 that the Union Territory started following the Indian Government’s rules, retired municipality official Rajkumar Gupta said. 

Medical certificate

Unlike what is required today, during the French period, if one wanted to run a hotel establishment, they would have to get a medical certificate from a Government doctor who would not only inspect the kitchen but also the staff.

These doctors would check the eyes, finger and toe nails, hair and skin of the employees. If anyone on the staff had filariasis, which was very common during the time, the entire premises would be sealed. 

Similarly, the establishment would not get a permit if the employees had skin problems, and many times if the nails of the employees were too long, the doctors would have to conduct another visit before issuing the permit. 

According to Ramani, who used to run a tea stall during the French period on M.G. Road said, the rules were different for roadside stalls and for restaurants. 

For roadside restaurants, even if they served food, they would only have to pay tax for the area and there were no special inspections, he said.

Keep your kids away from nicotine gums

BANGALORE: Padma M (name changed), a resident of Koramangala and banker by profession, was shocked to see some children from her son's school walk with a nicotine chewing gum packet, which they had bought from a small shop near the institution. She later checked with her son studying in class 6, and to her horror, learnt that he too had consumed it once. It tasted like any other gum, the 11-year-old said.

Padma further asked some parents who said that their children had complained of dizziness after consuming the gum and had been warned not to have it again. Later, Padma took the help of a few child rights activists and lodged a complaint with the food safety commissioner.

After authorities banned the gutka, manufacturers are now pushing nicotine in the form of chewing gum. This despite food safety laws in India clearly prohibiting the sale of nicotine or tobacco in the form of food products. And the most vulnerable consumers of these illegal products happen to be kids.

Various brands of gum with attractive packaging are being sold in malls, super bazaars and even paan shops. Many such outlets are in the vicinity of schools. Gums are available at Rs 30 for a pack of 6 and Rs 50 for a pack of 10 chewing gums. And since they look similar to normal chewing gum, unsuspecting kids get hooked to them.

In fact, food authorities have received six such public complaints and related memoranda by child welfare activists seeking to keep nicotine-based chewing gum away from children. Following such complaints, the public health institute (a body under the directorate of health and family welfare) on March 3 issued an order to field officers to collect samples of such products and take necessary action against those violating the law.

The department order, dated March 3, 2014, a copy of which is with TOI, says they have received complaints against some organizations about the sale of chewing gums containing nicotine. "There is possibility of children consuming it and getting addicted to this food substance, resulting in ill-effects on children's health," adds the order.

Speaking to TOI, Dr Jaya Kumar, joint director (public health institute), said they have already warned the manufacturers against production. "We will also do random raids on shops and other outlets to ensure there is no sale of such products," he added.

A reality check by TOI in and around MG Road areas showed that nicotine gums were easily available in most shops. Also, shop owners had no idea that it could not be sold to kids.

Turning kids into addicts

Sindhu Naik, member, Karnataka State Council for Child Welfare, an NGO, said, "Consumption of nicotine gums can push children to nicotine addiction. Long-term use of such products can lead to regular cold, flu, shortness of breath, lung diseases and heart problems as well. Since gums don't emit the cigarette smell, parents or teachers may not be able to detect that the child is using it," she added. Dr S Raghu, a nutritionist, said parents should closely monitor what children eat outside school. "Effects of nicotine gum differ from one kid to another and age factor also matters. If the children complain about dizziness, vomiting sensation and so on, more questions should be asked about what they eat. Awareness among teachers and school authorities about the sale of such products within school zones is also a key factor," he added.

Banned but blatantly sold

Chewing gum is considered as food material under Column 3 j of Food Safety and Quality Act 2006. As per Sections 2.3.4 of the Rules of the said Act 2011, any food material containing nicotine and tobacco is banned in the state. Pramodini K, a child welfare activist, says the problem is with monitoring. "A single department like health can't implement such rules. A multi-departmental approach, including education and police wings, is the need of the hour. And manufacturing companies too have found many ways to violate the law. In case of nicotine gums, even though the literature inside some packets warn of the adverse effects on children, there are no statutory warnings and pictures on these chewing gum packs unlike on cigarette packs.

TIMES VIEW

Children are most vulnerable to substance abuse and addiction. It's appalling that after the gutka ban, manufacturers are resorting to seemingly innocuous methods to trap kids by selling nicotine-laced chewing gum. The health department's move to conduct regular raids on manufacturers and shops selling such products in the vicinity of schools is welcome but not enough. Schools must team up with parents and alert children on such negative influences. Authorities must also realise that without strong deterrents in place, manufacturers will find more inventive methods to make and peddle their products.

Govt regulator paves way for field trials of GM food crops including wheat, rice and maize

NEW DELHI: Taking a major step forward to scientifically assess 'risk' and 'safety' aspects of transgenic crops, the government's top regulator — Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) — on Friday revalidated 10 varieties of GM crops including wheat, rice, maize and cotton and allowed multi-national seed companies to go for "confined field trials" of these varieties. 

Companies like Monsanto, Mahyco and BASF whose applications got revalidation will, however, be able to go for field trials only after getting the state's mandatory nod. 

Revalidation of these varieties was required as their "validity period" lapsed due to state government's stand of not allowing them to go for field trial. The GEAC had given its clearance in those 10 cases way back in 2011 and 2012. 

The committee, which met under the chairmanship of additional secretary in the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) Hem Pande, however, did not take decision on any new cases in its meeting on Friday. It will meet again on April 25 to take a call on the fate of 70 fresh applications. 

The revalidation of 10 cases on Friday would allow the seed companies, which developed these varieties, to go for "confined field trials" (called Phase-II trial) in bigger area as compared to their tests in a very small tract of land during Phase-I. 

The move comes barely a month after the ministry had given its nod to "confined field trials" of over 200 transgenic varieties of GM crops which got GEAC's clearance in its 117th meeting in March last year. 

Though the regulatory body had given its go ahead to those 200 varieties, the then environment minister Jayanthi Natarajan had kept this in abeyance. The ministry had then felt that the companies should not be allowed to go for field trials unless the Supreme Court takes a final view on a pending PIL on the contentious issue of GM crops. 

The MoEF had, however, under the present minister M Veerappa Moily, last month allowed the GEAC to hold its 118th meeting on Friday, taking in view demands of scientist community from across the country. 

Agriculture scientists from research institutions including IARI, ICAR and various Universities have been demanding "field trials" for GM crops for long, arguing that "confined field trials are essential for the evaluation of productivity performance as well as food and environmental safety assessment". 

A group of prominent scientists had met under 'father of green revolution' MS Swaminathan here at National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NASA) in February and issued a 15-point resolution in favour of GM crops. 

Pitching for the field trials, the resolution said, "The non-conductance of regular field trials is a handicap as well as disincentive in harnessing the benefits of a wide array of transgenic material available with different research organizations". 

Anti-GM activists have, however, taken strong objection to the GEAC's decision on Friday to revalidate those 10 cases of transgenic varieties which will pave the way for their field trials. 

Protesting field trials, convenor of Coalition for GM Free India, Rajesh Krishnan said, "The bio-safety tests can be done in a greenhouse or glass house. The field trials are mostly for agronomic purposes. The industry wants to reduce the period of regulation and hence wants to run these things simultaneously". 

He said, "It is, in fact, ridiculous to simultaneously do assessment of risks and open up the experiment for contamination, which often happens in the case of a field trial, before the risk assessment is done". 

The coalition as well as Greenpeace India had also requested the ministry not to take any decision on field trials of GM crops unless the Supreme Court takes its final call on the matter. The apex court is scheduled to hear the matter on April 14. 

The industry body — Association of Biotech Led Enterprises- Agriculture Group (ABLE-AG) — has, however, welcomed the GEAC's move, calling it "a progressive push to the march of GM technology in India". 

"We welcome this and hope that the rest of the applications too shall be expeditiously cleared," said Ram Kaundinya, chairman of the ABLE-AG.

European Food Safety Authority declares aspartame safe for consumption

Aspartame, one of the most commonly used artificial sweeteners in the world, has been declared totally safe for human consumption at the current levels of exposure by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

The Authority based its findings on one of the most comprehensive risk assessments of aspartame and its breakdown products ever undertaken. It involved a rigorous review of all the available scientific research, including both animal and human studies.

After a detailed analysis and taking into consideration all available information, EFSA experts concluded that the current acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 40mg/kg of body weight daily does not pose any long- or short-term health concerns for people.

The ADI level is an estimate of the amount a person can consume each day over a lifetime without risking their health.

EFSA experts firmly ruled out the possibility of aspartame causing damage to genes and inducing cancer. They also concluded that the substance neither harms the brain or nervous system nor affects behaviour or cognitive functions in adults.

Dr Rajeev Chawla, senior consultant diabetologist and director North Delhi Diabetes Centre, New Delhi, said, “Safety concerns have been aired on and off about the consumption of aspartame in the 25 years since it was approved as a food additive.” 

“It has proved to be a boon to people who need to avoid table sugar. I hope that this comprehensive review of aspartame by EFSA experts would finally put the controversy about its safety to rest,” he added. 

“This should also strengthen the consumer confidence in the aspartame based products,” Dr Chawla said.

Aspartame is an intense low-calorie, non-saccharide sweetener, which is used in yoghurts, chewing gum, diet foods, soft drinks and other low-calorie or sugar-free foods across the globe. It is a white, odourless powder, approximately 200 times sweeter than sugar.