Mar 16, 2018
Closure of cafeteria: GTech lauds CM’s intervention
Thiruvananthapuram: A day after the cabinet decided to replace Veena N Madhavan from the post of food safety commissioner, Group of Technology Companies (GTech), the industry body of IT companies in the state, lauded the government’s intervention in handling the difficult situation that followed food safety department closing down the dry pantry of an IT company at Technopark.
On Wednesday, food safety officers reopened the cafeteria at the IT firm Thoughtline functioning in phase III campus of Technopark. The area was sealed on Friday citing that the company did not have a license to operate the facility.
“The swift corrective action by the government, especially by the office of the chief minister, has sent out a positive message to the industry. This will restore the confidence of existing companies with regard to the government’s commitment towards ensuring an environment best suited for businesses,” said GTech chairman K Nandakumar.
Office bearers of GTech had met the CM earlier this week and apprised him on the action by the food safety officers.
Sources said that CM took a decision to replace Madhavan after she refused to attend a meeting convened by health secretary Rajeev Sadanandan with GTech office bearers and CEO of Thoughtline on Wednesday. The cabinet appointed M G Rajamanickam as the new food safety commissioner.
“The space closed down was a dry pantry. Nobody cooks or sells food there. Employees used this space to eat food they brought from home or outside. The manner in which the inspection was conducted and arbitrary closure of the facility did not go well with the business environment Technopark provides. Timely intervention by the departments of IT and health ensured corrective steps,” said GTech secretary P Vijay Kumar.
“Listing the IT company among eateries that the department claimed to have found working in unhygienic conditions, and publishing that in the media, was most unfortunate. Claims of company personnel obstructing the duty of food safety officers and holding them hostage were false. We were able to convince the government by handing-over supporting CCTV visuals,” he added.
Founding CEO of Technopark G Vijayaraghavan and IBS chief V K Mathews also praised the government for its intervention.
Food safety dept asks vendors not to wrap food in newspapers
Puducherry: The department of food safety has directed those who own or operate food businesses (small hoteliers and vendors), not to use newspapers to wrap, cover or serve food items, as it contains harmful chemicals.
Deputy food safety commissioner G L Upadhyaya sought them to use alternatives such as plantain leaves, aluminium foils and organically sourced disposable plates (made of plant origin).
He said newspapers, and cardboards made of recycled paper might contain traces of metallic contaminants, mineral oils and harmful chemicals like phthalates that can cause digestive issues and lead to severe toxicity. People with compromised vital organs and immune system are at a greater risk of acquiring cancer-related health complications if they are exposed to food packed or served in such materials, he said.
“Food contaminated by newspaper ink raises serious concerns since the ink contains multiple bioactive materials with known negative health effects. Printing inks may also contain harmful colours, binders, additives and preservatives. Besides chemical contaminants, the presence of pathogenic microorganisms in used newspapers also poses a potential risk to human health,” Upadhyaya explained, asking vendors to avoid their use.
FSSAI regulates certain food definitions
The Food Saferty and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has defined certain food products which are used on regular basis.
FSSAI found it significant to spread the correct information of the food products that are easily available in the market to the consumers. As they say half knowledge is always dangerous, its always beneficial to give the correct food facts.
The food products covered are wheat protein, wheat atta, wheat glutten, fruits and vegetables, oils and fats, organic food products, spices and insecticides. The regulations and compliances regarding these products are also presented.
Erring traders fined Rs 160000 in Budgam
Budgam:
District Administration Budgam have realized a fine of Rs 1.6 lakh from various shopkeepers, wholesale dealers, distributors and manufacturers for selling adulterated, sub-standard and misbranded food items in different markets across the district, against the Food Safety and Standard Act-2006 (FSSA).
ADC Budgam Mohammad Farooq Dar said that the fine of Rs 1.6 lakh has been realized from the erring businessmen during last nine months after the food item samples collected from the market were found in contravention of the FSSA-2006.
He said the samples include tea, sweets, suji, milk, bakery, spices and other food products, which were collected from the different markets by the food safety officers.
Taking immediate action against the erring shopkeepers, fine was imposed against each shopkeeper and manufacturer for failing to live up to the food safety standards and selling food items in breach of FSS Act-2006.
The penalties on the erring businessmen were imposed by Additional Deputy Commissioner, Budgam Mohammad Farooq Dar as Adjudicating Officer of FSSA Budgam under section 51/52 of FSS Act-2006.
Meanwhile, Adjudicating Officer directed FSS officers to conduct regular checkups and continue collection of samples from the markets for lab testing to ensure that no sub-standard or adulterated food items are being sold anywhere in the market at the risk of the life of consumers.
Besides, Adjudicating Officer also said that no shopkeeper or manufacturer would be allowed to indulge in such illegal practices, selling food products harmful for the human consumption.
He said that action would be taken against the shopkeeper for failing to maintain hygienic sale of food items.
Authorities further imposed a penalty of suspension of license as recovery of the amount as arrears of land revenue as per Section-96 of the Act on the erring shopkeeper incase he fails to deposit the penalty amount within the specified time. Besides, the accused is also directed not to repeat the practice of selling misbranded food items and comply the provision the provision of FSSA-2006.
Study finds plastics in bottled water from Mum, 2 other cities
Companies Say Strict Quality Control Ensured
Mumbai: A study by scientists from the State University of New York has found that more than 90 per cent of bottled water worldwide, including India, contains tiny pieces of plastic.
The researchers tested 259 individual bottles across 11 brands sold in nine countries including Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and the US. Samples in India were drawn from 19 locations in Mumbai, Delhi and Chennai. Top global brands including Aquafina, Evian as well as the Indian brand Bisleri were tested. A Bisleri sample from Chennai showed over 5,000 microplastic particles per litre, according to the research team’s data.
Although bottling companies reacted to the study saying they enforce strict quality control, the findings indicating presence of carcinogenic substance in the water raise concerns about the long-term implications for public health.
Polypropylene, used to make plastic bottle caps, was the most common polymeric material (54%) found in the samples while nylon was the second most abundant (16%). After accounting for possible laboratory contamination, 93% of bottled water showed some presence of microplastics. Researchers found an average of 10.4 microplastic particles per litre of bottled water using spectroscopic analysis. This is twice as much as what was found in a previous study on tap water by the same team. The data indicated the contamination is at least partially coming from the packaging or bottling process.
Densities of microplastic contamination varied from zero contamination to one bottle with an excess of 10,000 microplastic particles per litre.
Packaged drinking water is a loosely regulated industry in India with hundreds of big and small brands vying for a share of the metro and small town market. Bottling units are regulated by state and central agencies in India including the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA officials were not available for comment on Thursday on the study despite repeated attempts.
The Indian Institute of Packaging (IIP) is instrumental in checking water bottle samples for ‘quality of plastic and related contamination inside the bottle’ on behalf of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). Officials with the IIP lab in Mumbai said preventive action is taken by the BIS only if residual monomers, heavy metals or residual (chemical) catalysts are found beyond acceptable limits. However, such cases are rare, they said.Among leading companies, PepsiCo India contested the study’s findings saying, “Aquafina maintains rigorous quality control measures, sanitary manufacturing practices, filtration and other food safety mechanisms which yield a reliably safe product for enjoyment anywhere in the world. The science of microplastics and microfibers is in its infancy. Microplastic particles are found across our environment, including soil, air and water.”
The study specifically mentions the batch number and location of purchase for all the 27 lots of samples containing 259 bottles tested. Only 17 individual bottles “showed no microplastic contamination in excess of possible laboratory background,” said the study.
Chemicals found in plastic bottles are also known to have affected newborn children. A 2013 study by Dr Arbinder Singal, a paediatric urologist with MGM Hospital in Navi Mumbai, found a growing incidence of genital abnormality among newborn boys due to increasing exposure to endocrine disruptor chemicals found in plastic bottles, food wraps, cosmetics and toys. The study noticed a 200% rise in the incidence of undescended testicles.
The bottled water industry faced tough questions earlier when studies indicated high pesticide residue in the water. This resulted in a crackdown and more scrutiny on the processes. The distinction between “natural mineral water” and “bottled water” also came in through awareness campaigns and consumer activism which questioned the widespread use of the term “mineral water” for packaged water which had not been fortified with minerals. Most companies then switched to describing their product as “bottled water”.
‘Any kind of plastic is alien, so it could be harmful’
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)