Aug 18, 2012

Adulterated Food Items


As per information received from some States/U.Ts, state-wise details of the number of samples of food articles examined and found adulterated during the year 2011-2012, are Annexed.
Random samples of various food articles including fruits, vegetables, and pulses are drawn regularly by the State/U.T Governments and penal action is taken against the offenders, in cases where samples are found not conforming to the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The Food Safety and Standards Act, (FSSA) 2006 was passed by the Parliament establishing the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to lay down science based standards for the articles of food and to regulate their manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import, and to ensure availability of safe and wholesome food for human consumption. This Act has replaced the erstwhile the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and multiple food orders regulations. Rules and Regulations, setting various standards, under the FSSA have been notified with effect from 5.8.2011. Provisions and graded penalties have been made in the new Act. The food regulatory framework has now moved from limited prevention of food adulteration regime to safe and wholesome food regime. Under the new Law, the States have been requested to strengthen their food regulatory enforcement mechanisms.
The above information was given by the Minister of State for Health & Family Welfare Shri Sudip Bandyopadhyay in the Lok Sabha today.

Comparative Statement on percentage of adulterated food articles
during 2011-12
Sl. No.Name of StateNo. of samples examinedNo. of samples found adulterated
1.Meghalaya
23
4
2.Jammu & Kashmir
589 (PFA)
816 (FSSA)
98(PFA)
197 (FSSA)
3.Bihar
1779
292
4.Arunachal Pradesh
62
-
5.Andhra Pradesh
7681 (PFA)
2232 (FSSA)
339 (PFA)
419 (FSSA)
6.Punjab
6946
588
7.Goa
224
13
8.Dadra & Nagar Haveli
7
Nil
9.Assam
N.A
N.A
10.Chandigarh
N.A
N.A
11.Chhattisgarh
N.A
N.A
12.A & N Islands
N.A
N.A
13.Daman & Diu
N.A
N.A
14.Delhi
N.A
N.A
15.Gujarat
N.A
N.A
16.Haryana
N.A
N.A
17.Himachal Pradesh
N.A
N.A
18.Jharkhand
N.A
N.A
19.Karnataka
N.A
N.A
20.Kerala
N.A
N.A
21.Lakshadweep
N.A
N.A
22.Madhya Pradesh
N.A
N.A
23.Maharashtra
N.A
N.A
24.Manipur
N.A
N.A
25.Mizoram
Nil
Nil
26.Nagaland
N.A
N.A
27.Orissa
N.A
N.A
28.Puducherry
N.A
N.A
29.Rajasthan
N.A
N.A
30.Sikkim
N.A
N.A
31.Tamil Nadu
N.A
N.A
32.Tripura
N.A
N.A
33.Uttar Pradesh
N.A
N.A
34.Uttarakhand
N.A
N.A
35.West Bengal
N.A
N.A
Total
20359
1950
Indication
N. A= Not Available
Nil=0

States asked to strengthen food regulatory enforcement mechanisms

MUMBAI: Out of the total 20,359 samples of food articles which were examined across states during 2011-12, 1,950 were found to be adulterated, as per information provided by theMinister of State for Health & Family Welfare in the Lok Sabha today. The Ministry has collated the information from the various states and union territories (U.T) across India. 

As per the information, in states such as Bihar, where 1,779 samples were examined during the year, 292 were found to be adulterated. While inPunjab, out of 6,946 samples, 588 were adulterated. In Goa, on the other hand, 13 out of 224 samples were found to be adulterated. In Meghalaya, 4 out of 23 samples were adulterated, while in Dadra & Nagar Haveli no adulteration was found in the 7 samples that were examined during the period. 

"Random samples of various food articles including fruits, vegetables, and pulses are drawn regularly by the State/U.T Governments and penal action is taken against the offenders, in cases where samples are found not conforming to the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006,'' the ministry informed. 

The Food Safety and Standards Act, (FSSA) 2006 was passed by Parliament establishing the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to lay down science based standards for the articles of food and to regulate their manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import, and to ensure availability of safe and wholesome food for human consumption. This Act has replaced the erstwhile the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and multiple food orders regulations. Rules and Regulations, setting various standards, under the FSSA have been notified with effect from August 5, 2011. Provisions and graded penalties have been made in the new Act. 

The food regulatory framework has now moved from limited prevention of food adulteration regime to safe and wholesome food regime. The ministry said under the new Law, the states have been requested to strengthen their food regulatory enforcement mechanisms.

Delhi HC orders panel to submit report on banned pesticides


New Delhi : Delhi High Court Friday directed an experts' committee to submit a status report before Oct 10 suggesting guidelines to prevent rampant use of banned pesticides in vegetables and fruits.
The division bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Vipin Sanghi sought the report from the committee for framing a policy for periodic checks to detect pesticide residue in vegetables that pose health threats to people.
"There has been hardly any progress on the status report. In two months, only two meetings have been held. It's not acceptable to us. We expect meetings of the committee to be held more frequently. A status report must be filed positively before two days of the next date of hearing. Post the matter on Oct 10," the bench said.
The court was informed by the state government that committee members held two meetings since May 2, "On Aug 30, they (committee members) are meeting again and probably some action would be taken," said government counsel Meera Bhatia.
The court had earlier directed the government to constitute the committee after it took suo motu cognizance of a media report alleging use of banned pesticides.
The court observed that matters of this nature cannot be delayed and also expressed its displeasure that the committee had met only twice in the last three-and-a-half months.
The seven-member expert committee includes Sandhya Kulshrestha, secretary, central insecticide board and registration committee and Sarita Bhalla, joint director of agriculture ministry as committee's chairperson.
Other members are Dhir Singh, director of Food Safety and Standards Authority of India; N.K. Sharma, principal scientist in the agriculture ministry; S.M. Bhardwaj, food analyst at Delhi's Department of Food Safety; Vipin Bhatnagar, joint director at plant protection quarantine and storage, and senior advocate V.K. Rao.
NGO Consumer Voice's report found that 35 varieties of vegetables and fruits, picked from Delhi markets and tested for pesticide content, had toxins beyond permissible limits.
It told the court that vegetables and fruits sold in the city's markets contained poisons capable of causing cancer and harming the nervous system and liver.
The NGO said that the amount of pesticides used by farmers in India was as much as 750 times higher than European standards.
The court earlier formed a panel of lawyers to examine the pesticide content in various vegetables samples at laboratories.
The panel has so far examined over 10 types of vegetables.
 HC grants more time to committee to frame guidelines
The Delhi High Court today gave an expert committee time till October 8 to frame its guidelines to prevent the rampant use of banned pesticides in vegetables and fruits and submit its report to it by then.
The division bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Vipin Sanghi sought the report from the committee for framing a policy for periodic checks to detect pesticides' residue in vegetables and fruits.
Expressing displeasure over the committee for not holding its meetings frequently to decide the guidelines, the bench said, "There has been hardly any progress to the status report. In two months, only two meetings have been held. It's not acceptable to us.
We expect the committee to convene meetings more frequently. Status report be filed positively two days prior to the next date of hearing," said the bench, while posting the matter for October 10.

The court had earlier directed the Union government to constitute the committee after taking suo motu cognisance of a media report alleging use of banned pesticides in vegetables and fruits.
The court also observed that "the matters of these nature cannot be delayed" and said the committee needed to meet more frequently.
The bench had ordered forming of the seven-member expert committee, headed by Union agriculture ministry's Joint Director Sarita Bhalla with the Central Insecticide Board and Registration Committee Secretary Sandhya Kulshrestha and others as its members.
The other members are Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) Director Dhir Singh, Principal Scientist N K Sharma of the agriculture ministry, Food Analyst S M Bhardwaj of Delhi's Department of Food Safety, Joint Director (Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage) Vipin Bhatnagar and senior advocate V K Rao.

Cancer risk: Panel to examine soft drinks


Days after the US mandated that the drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens will have to bear a cancer warning, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has asked its scientific panel to study the content of the beverages in India to see if the same warning is required here as well.

Recently, the state of California added to its list of cancer causing chemicals a commonly used in flavoured soda beverages, mandating containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label.
While the ingredients modifications were made by the beverage companies in the USA caramel colouring using ammonia-sulfite in their sodas after the state of California added ammonia sulfite or 4-MI to its list of known carcinogens. The FSSAI has asked their experts to study the same. “This is a recent warning being put out. The matter has already been referred to the scientific panel of the FSSAI. If panels finds it necessary, we will take action in this regard,” FSSAI chairperson K. Chandramouli said.
The step in the US was taken after a study revealed that the chemical is linked to cancer in mice and rats. However, there is nothing to panic as the US FDA claims that a person will have to drink more than 1,000 cans of the soft drink a day to take in the same dose of the chemical that was given to the animals in the lab test.
Even the beverage powerhouses PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have already declared that they will modify the carmel colouring in their sodas to avoid a cancer warning label that the new California law requires.

Gutkha warriors


Eight states have banned gutkha. Others are following suit. Veenu Sandhuon the people who have brought this powerful industry to its knees
Last month, policemen in Naxal-infested Gadchiroli carried out a dramatic exercise to show that they were serious about enforcing the Maharashtra government’s ban on gutkha or flavoured tobacco. They seized gutkhasachets worth Rs 30,000 from the market, piled them up in the main square and set the lot on fire. States have declared war on gutkha. Starting April 1, eight have banned the manufacture, sale and storage of this mixture of tobacco, catechu, areca nut, slaked lime and food additives: Madhya Pradesh took the lead; Kerala, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Haryana followed. Three days ago, in his Independence Day speech, Narendra Modi announced that gutkha will be banned in Gujarat from September 11 to “save the youths of Gujarat from the dreaded evil of cancer.” Himachal Pradesh has also announced a ban but deferred it till October. And Uttar Pradesh has upped the value-added tax on gutkha from 12.5 per cent to 50 per cent. Some villages in Uttar Pradesh have banned the sale of gutkha.
In India, 206 million people, including women and children as young as 13, use smokeless forms of tobacco which are known to cause cancer. Thegutkha market could be between Rs 15,000 crore and Rs 20,000 crore in annual sales. Sachets are sold through paan shops where you can find hundreds of brands; it clearly takes little to get started in gutkha. In the North-East, gutkha factories have been found to operate out of trucks. They could scoot at the sight of an excise inspector. And the gutkha lobby is strong and moneyed — so much money that the underworld got involved. Cashing in on the rivalry between two gutkha tycoons, Dawood Ibrahim’s brother, Anees, started the popular Fire brand of gutkha in Pakistan, says S Hussain Zaidi in his recent book Dongri to Dubai. For years, the gutkha makers have resisted crackdown. But now the wheels appear to be suddenly spinning against them at dizzying speed.
A group of people, inside and outside the government, as well as some organisations have been working hard to bring this powerful industry to its knees. Among them are Pankaj Chaturvedi, head and neck cancer surgeon at Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai, Ashwini Kumar Rai, former food safety commissioner of Madhya Pradesh, Keshav Desiraju, special secretary of health in the Union ministry of health and family welfare, Amal Pushp, director of the National Tobacco Control Programme, Voluntary Health Association of India (VHAI), a non-profit society, and Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), a public-private initiative.
* * *
The foundation stone for the battle was laid in 2004 when the Supreme Court, while hearing the Ghodawat Paan Masala case, ruled that “since paan masalagutkha and supari are eaten for taste and nourishment, they all come under the category of food”. Until then, those in the business had always succeeded in challenging bans on the ground that gutkha is not a food item. The ruling had come in a case filed by gutkha manufacturers after the Maharashtra administration enforced a ban. The apex court, however, struck that ban down and said that only the Central government had the power to ban a food item. The Centre did nothing of that sort. The battle seemed lost. But hope soared again when, while hearing another case, the Supreme Court asked the ministry of health to study the impact of gutkha on health and submit a report. This case, filed by the Jaipur-based Indian Asthma Care Society, also led to a ban on the sale of tobacco, gutkha andpaan masala in plastic pouches — an environmentally hazardous business.
The apex court’s order for a health report was the opportunity which the anti-gutkha campaigners had been desperately hoping for. Bhavna Mukhopadhyay, the executive director of VHAI, and K Srinath Reddy, the president of PHFI, were among those who stepped up their advocacy campaigns with the government. The National Institute of Health & Family Welfare was preparing the report. On its panel of experts providing guidance and scientific proof of the havoc gutkha causes on a person’s health was Chaturvedi, the cancer specialist. Having seen his patients, gutkha addicts, suffer and die of oral cancer, he had set up an organisation called Voice of Tobacco Victims in 2009. He had realised that rattling off statistics about the ill-effects of gutkha had no impact on policy-makers; but human agony moved everybody and almost assured action. So, he had started getting cancer patients to tell their story to bureaucrats and policy makers in Maharashtra — an exercise he would later take to the national level.
The gutkha health report was finally submitted to the Supreme Court in February 2011. It was damning. Smokeless tobacco products, such asgutkha and khaini, it was found, have 3,095 chemical ingredients, of which 28 are proven carcinogens. It was time for action. The health ministry called for a national consultation on smokeless tobacco. Mukhopadhyay and members of PHFI were among the 80-odd tobacco control experts from across India who participated. Also present was Desiraju, who is the grandson of the country’s second president, Sarvepalli Radha-krishnan. “We asked the ministry, if this is so toxic then how come there’s no mention of this in the Food Safety and Standards Act,” says Mukhopadhyay. “Restrictions and regulations aren’t good enough. gutkha manufacturers always find ways around them,” she says. A ban was the only solution. Economic implications of a total ban, loss of revenue and livelihood, all came under discussion.
On August 1, four months after this national consultation, a new rule was notified under central government’s Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA). It said: “tobacco and nicotine shall not be used as ingredients in any food product”. This was that critical Central government order which gave the state governments the legal standing to act against gutkha. But it wasn’t over yet. Dharampal Satyapal Group (DS Group), the Rs 2,200-crore conglomerate which manufactures and sells Baba and Tulsi brands of gutkha, and some others went to court. In December, the director of Food Safety and Standards Authority of India submitted a counter affidavit in court on the “allegations/averments made by the petitioners”.
* * *
Desiraju waited no more. The FSSA rules in hand, he acted immediately and this January onwards, started sending out letters to states he “thought would act”. One such state was Madhya Pradesh. Its then food safety commissioner, Ashwini Kumar Rai, was waiting for something like this. He would have liked to crack down on gutkha earlier but decided to hold on just a few months before the licences of the 18 existing manufacturers expired on March 31. On April 1, not only did he issue the order banning the sale ofgutkha and barring new licences to be given out for its manufacture, he also started the raids on Day One. “All 18 went out of business in one day,” he says. He did not wait for the state cabinet to order the ban.
Though the FSSA rules empower the food safety commissioner to take such action, in every other state, the ban has gone through the cabinet. “This is a politically sensitive issue,” says Rai. “But my chief minister (Shivraj Singh Chouhan) was on board.” In less than two weeks, Rai had conducted over 1,000 raids in more than 50 districts. In four months, till July 25 when he became secretary (personnel), Rai had seized 4 million pouches of gutkhaworth Rs 1 crore. “The trade has now gone underground,” he says. “Pouches which were available for as little as Rs 1 now cost Rs 10.” It’s both good and bad. “Enforce-ment has become tougher. But then, gutkha is no longer easily available to women and children who would turn to it because they didn’t have to fear the stigma of lighting up.”
While Rai went after gutkha makers and sellers, Chaturvedi and VHAI took advocacy to the highest level. They held MLA sensitisation programmes in the state assemblies with the help of tobacco-related cancer victims and their families. “Six victims, including a widow and a 17-year-old boy who had lost his father to tobacco, told their stories to the chief minister and the MLAs in the Madhya Pradesh Assembly in March,” says Chaturvedi. Similar sessions were held in Chhattisgarh which banned gutkha, Maharashtra (banned bothgutkha and paan masala and increased taxes on bidi — “a highly politically sensitive issue”), Bihar (ban) and Kerala (Chief Minister Oommen Chandy increased the no-tobacco zone around educational institutes from 100 yards to 400 metres). “In Jammu & Kashmir, a patient who had lost his voice and was speaking through the hole in his neck told the MLAs how this was a trade of death and destruction,” says Chaturvedi. As a result, the state’s food commissioner has ordered that random samples of gutkha and paan masala be tested for tobacco and/or nicotine. In Uttar Pradesh, where Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav was not present, the session with cancer patients was held with the chief secretary and health, education and finance ministers. Uttar Pradesh has since scaled up VAT on gutkha four times. On a plea filed by the Uttar Pradesh chapter of the Indian Dental Association, the Allahabad High Court has served a show cause notice on the government asking it “why the FSSA regulation cannot be implemented in the state”.
In the health ministry, Desiraju has been writing to more and more states, mentioning in his letter the FSSA rules, the Supreme Court order which saysgutkha is a food item, Madhya Pradesh’s ban and the Allahabad High Court’s direction on the Indian Dental Association’s plea. With him in this is Amal Pushp, who took over as director of tobacco control in January. Between the two, they are responding to every query coming in from the states. “This is a central legislation,” says Pushp. “The states don’t have a choice but to act on it.”
“Why are they just targeting gutkha?” asks C K Sharma, the business head of DS Group’s tobacco division. “There is clearly the cigarette lobby working here. An addict will not give up tobacco just like that. Freeze the gutkha supply and he will turn to cigarettes,” he says. “And why target paan masala which is just dried paan with no tobacco?” he asks. Pushp says gutkha is just the beginning. “The ultimate aim,” he says “is to reduce the consumption of all tobacco products.” He has been participating in some sensitisation programmes against cigarettes as well. In July, he was in Bihar where officers of the rank of deputy superintendent of police have been nominated in districts as nodal officers of the task force to enforce the Cigarettes and Other Products Act — a regulatory act to control the consumption of cigarettes and other such products.
The gutkha industry is, meanwhile, fighting the ban tooth and nail, going to court in practically every state where it’s being targeted. But the Patna and Madhya Pradesh high courts have dismissed their petitions saying that the food safety commissioner has every authority to exercise the power to bangutkha. “This time,” says Pushp, “we are on strong footing.”

Aug 17, 2012

QUICK TEST FOR SOME ADULTERANTS IN FOOD






























Food safety norms do not apply for haleem

Next time you step out to have a plateful of haleem, you had better think twice. For, a majority of the outlets are not registered with the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) notwithstanding the fact that it is mandatory. What more, the civic body itself hasn’t issued any food safety norms or guidelines for these outlets.
“We had asked all the roadside outlets and establishments with a turnover of less than Rs 12 lakh to complete registration by August 4 but most of them have not done the same. Also we have not set any food safety norms or guidelines as it is a festive affair,” said a GHMC official with the health and sanitation wing on condition of anonymity.
The medical wing of the corporation receives one complaint in 15 days on an average. “There is a definite need to create awareness among people as most of them don’t know that such roadside establishments need to be registered. The general public too don’t know that they can approach the corporation for their grievances,” said the official.
However, the GHMC authorities had conducted surprise raids at various establishments in the city in the last few days and found many were operating in un-hygienic conditions. They had also issued  show-cause notices to Pulla Reddy Sweets and Main Land China in Somajiguda.
When contacted, L Vandan Kumar, additional commissioner (health & sanitation) GHMC, said, “the raids will continue. But we don’t have information on how many establishments are actually registered.” The official felt the Food Safety Commissioner ought to be keeping tabs on these outlets. While the GHMC keeps count of such establishments through HMC (Hyderabad Municipal Corporation) Act, the Food Safety Commissioner is entitled to penalise establishments under the Food Safety Standards Act (FSSA).
For the officials, there’s also the problem of shortage of manpower. “We currently have five food safety officers (FSOs) for 18 circles of the GHMC. But in the erstwhile Muncipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) area, eight FSOs were sanctioned for seven circles. Going by that, we need 13 more FSOs and we had also submitted our representation to the government regarding this,” the official said.

Gutkha makers ask HC to let them take product outside state

The five companies that had challenged the Maharashtra government’s ban on gutkha on Thursday urged the Bombay High Court to allow them to take the product outside the state. The court had on August 7 directed the government not to destroy the seized packets of gutkha and paan masala till the dispute is resolved.
The companies that have challenged the state government’s decision are Dhariwal Industries Pvt Ltd, Ghodavat Paan Masala Products, Rajnandini Foods Pvt Ltd, SDD Agencies Pvt Ltd and Hira Enterprises. The ban was came into effect through a notification issued by the government on July 19 under the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006.
The companies claimed that gutkha is not consumed for nutritional value and questioned if it could be classified as “food”. They said their business has come to a standstill due to the ban.
Arguing for the petitioners, senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas said such a ban needs to brought in through a legislation. Dwarkadas also contended that gutkha and paan masala were earlier regulated under the Control of Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), 2003, and that the Maharashtra government, through this notification, is invoking the FSSA regulation for these products.
Appearing for the state government, Advocate General Darius Khambata defended the decision, citing health concerns. Khambata said the state government was “completely justified” in putting the ban in place through the FSSA and that the authority had taken the decision in public interest. “Millions of people throughout the country, including youngsters below 15, are addicted to such products,” he said.
Meanwhile, a group of doctors from the Tata Memorial Hospital sought to intervene in the matter in favour of the state government. Their counsel Rajni Iyer on Thursday opposed the demand to allow the packets to be taken outside the state, saying this would amount to “exporting misery”.
The case will now be heard on September 12.

Canned Food from J&K

With an annual turnover of fresh fruits and dry fruits of the order of Rs. 3500 crores, horticulture plays a significant role in the economy of Jammu and Kashmir. An estimated 25 lakh people are connected directly or indirectly with the horticulture sector. Horticulture production has increased from 17.13 lakh metric tonnes in 2009-10 to 22.21 lakh metric tonnes in 2010-11 recording an increase of 29.65%. Accordingly, the scope of export of the horticulture products in various forms viz., fresh & dry fruits, fruit concentrates, processed and packaged food is increasing day by day. The processing of fruits into pulp and juice has proven to be a huge market. Apart from this, since last few years J&K state has been witnessing a spurt in local consumption as well as export of processed & packed mutton food especially Kashmiri Food items. Wazwan recipes preferred over generations are now available in cans, expanding market potential and meeting national and even international demands. Processed/value-added products have tremendous scope due to changes in life style; Urbanization; Better returns from Marketable surpluses; Increase in per capita income; Increase in working Women population; Price stabilization and Scarcity of household labourers. These factors have contributed in increasing demand for processed products both in domestic and International markets.
With a continuous surge in export of fruits, dry fruits and processed & canned food items from J&K, it becomes pertinent that every producer/ manufacturer is guided & controlled by a set of quality control/ assurance policy. Confidence in safety and integrity of the food supply is an important requirement for consumers. Industries are expected to use only fresh and hygienic ingredients for processing the Food Products. For this we need to have sufficient quality testing/ assurance facilities in our state so as to certify quality of processed/ packaged food products after conducting various stringent quality tests on the food products. Quality certification of all types of packaged fruit/ food items by Quality Control/ Analysis Laboratories has, today, become an essential component of food control system to protect health and safety of domestic/ international consumers. These are essential for enabling authorities to assure safety and monitor quality of state’s agricultural/ horticulture produce entering national/international trade and also to ensure that imported fruit/ vegetables conform to required standards. The analytical results of a Quality Control laboratory are often used as evidence in a court of law to determine compliance with regulations or standards of the country.
Unfortunately, J&K state sans such facility which, otherwise should have been available in each and every city/ town. Globalization of the food supply chain, the increasing importance of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the obligations emerging from the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements have resulted in unprecedented interest in development of high food standards and regulations and strengthening of food control infrastructure in our state, also. Globally, the incidence of food borne diseases is increasing and international food trade is disrupted by frequent disputes over food safety and quality requirements. Food borne disease outbreaks involving agents such as Escherichia coli, Salmonella and chemical contaminants highlight problems with food safety and increase public anxiety that modern farming systems, food processing and marketing do not provide adequate safeguards for public health. Consumers expect protection from hazards occurring along the entire food chain, from primary producer through consumer (often described as the farm-to-table continuum).
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has been established under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 which consolidates various acts & orders that have hitherto handled food related issues in various Ministries and Departments. Various central Acts like Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Fruit Products Order, 1955, Meat Food Products Order, 1973, Vegetable Oil Products (Control) Order, 1947, Edible Oils Packaging (Regulation) Order 1988, Solvent Extracted Oil, De- Oiled Meal and Edible Flour (Control) Order, 1967, Milk and Milk Products Order, 1992 etc stand repealed after commencement of FSS Act, 2006. The Act aims to establish a single reference point for all matters relating to food safety and standards, by moving from multi- level, multi- departmental control to a single line of command. To this effect, the Act establishes an independent statutory Authority – the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India with head office at Delhi. Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and the State Food Safety Authorities shall enforce various provisions of the Act. Apart from other important functions, FSSAI has been mandated by the FSS Act, 2006 for laying down mechanisms and guidelines for accreditation of certification bodies engaged in certification of food safety management system for food businesses and laying down procedure and guidelines for accreditation of laboratories and notification of the accredited laboratories. In J&K state also, the government recently appointed and designated the Controller Food & Drugs as Commissioner of Food Safety for efficient implementation of food safety and standards and other requirements laid down under this Act and the rules and regulations made there under.
Indian Institute of Integrative Medicine under Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Government of India has established Food Quality Control/ Analysis Lab at Canal Road in Jammu, which undertakes testing, quality control & offers consultancy/ licensing services with regard to plants, drugs, water, fertilizers, metal residues and pesticides residues etc. IIIM facility is insufficient to meet quality control testing/assurance requirements of horticulture producers & food processors scattered all over the state. Similar types of facilities are required to be created by the government or under Public Private Partnership (PPP) mode, at least, in each district for issuing quality control/ assurance certificates to all orchard owners/ farmers/ food processors exporting their produce outside the state/ country. These recognized/ accredited laboratories should be easily accessible to producers of fresh/ dry fruits and processed foods who may seek certification of quality of their products against affordable charges/ fees and well in time. Establishment of these laboratories gains more importance because of fast increasing trend of “Organic Farming” or farming with lesser use of pesticides. The Quality Control/ Analysis Labs, thus established, shall also certify degree of use of pesticides in fruits/ vegetables, thus helping the ultimate consumers making choice before buying fruits/ vegetables even for daily use.
To start with, it will be appropriate for the government to set up Quality Control/ Analysis Labs, on urgent basis, in three terminal fruit/ vegetable markets i.e., Narwal in Jammu, Parimpura and Sopore in Kashmir valley and in five satellite fruit/ vegetable markets at Batote, Rajouri, Kupwara, Kulgam and Kargil. All these markets have sufficient land required for establishment of such labs and the major business activities of fruit (both fresh and dry) and vegetables are carried on in these markets. These quality control laboratories, once established, shall encourage grower/ manufacturer/ trader community to meet quality standards while making export of fruit/ processed food outside the State and country. The certification facilities available at Quality Control/ Analysis labs shall enable J&K state growers and traders face perfect competition in the market. It has been observed that the imported fruit is sold in our markets with much higher prices in comparison to our own products although our fruit is of good quality and taste. We’ll be also able to check quality as well as required Food Control standards in imported fruit.
The facility should be provided in aforesaid eight markets in the first instance and, later on, in order to cover all fruit producing areas, the labs should be established in other Terminal/ Satellite markets. These laboratories should have adequate facilities for physical, microbiological and chemical analyses. In addition to simple routine analysis, the laboratories should be equipped with more sophisticated instruments, apparatus and library facilities as required. It is necessary that utmost care should be taken to ensure efficient and effective performance of the laboratory. The introduction of analytical quality assurance programmes and accreditation of the laboratory by an appropriate accreditation agency within the country or from outside, shall enable the laboratory to improve its performance and to ensure reliability, accuracy and repeatability of its results. The number and location of the laboratories should be determined in relation to the objectives of the system and the volume of work.

Milk powder fears raised again

A second baby has been found to have an abnormal thyroid-stimulating hormone level after drinking banned Japanese formula.
The seven-month-old girl registered a level slightly above the reference range, the Department of Health said last night.
Five other samples were found to be normal.
After the latest case was reviewed by Hospital Authority specialists and the department, it was learned that the girl has been mostly breastfed and only consumed Morinaga infant formula occasionally.
"Given the dietary history, the cause of elevated thyroid-stimulating hormone is less likely due to the formula and the cause requires further investigation," a department spokesman said.
The girl is thought to be the second baby to have abnormal levels of the hormone linked to the low iodine content of milk.
Also, two Korean infant formula brands - Namyang XO Five Secret 1 and 2 - were found to have iodine content below the international requirement, but show no health risks to infants, the Centre for Food Safety said last night.
The center has so far announced test results for 46 infant powders, among which six manufactured in Japan were found to have "rather low iodine content, which may affect the functioning of the thyroid gland of infants solely fed on them."
Meanwhile, United States-based Mead Johnson Nutrition said the Centre for Food Safety should adopt Codex food standards rather than those of the World Health Organization.
Its global regulatory and nutrition science vice president, Peter Van Dael, said: "Besides adopting the Codex food standards, countries and cities may also adjust the standards according to their own culture."

Aug 16, 2012

CONGRATULATIONS TO NEWLY ELECTED MEMBERS OF TAMIL NADU FOOD SAFETY OFFICER'S ASSOCIATION


Haryana bans manufacture, storage, sale of gutkha, paan masala



Haryana government has prohibited manufacture, storage, sale and distribution of guthka and paan masala containing tobacco or nicotine as ingredients from Wednesday and said violation of these orders would be punishable.
An order to this effect has been issued in the interest of public health for a period of one year, Commissioner of Food Safety, Haryana, Rakesh Gupta said here on Wednesday.
He said ‘gutkha’ and ‘paan masala’ are articles of food in which tobacco and nicotine are widely used as ingredients.
The Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act 2006, enacted by the Centre, prohibits the sale and manufacture of products which are injurious to health, he said. He said under the Act, any person who manufactures for sale, stores, sells, distributes or imports any food which is unsafe, shall be punishable.
If the food item results in death, the person could face life imprisonment with a fine of Rs 10 lakh, whereas in case of serious injury, the person could face six years jail and up to Rs five lakh fine, he said. If it results in non—grievous injury, it would be punishable with imprisonment up to one year and fine up to Rs three lakh, he said, adding for no injury, the person will face imprisonment for up to six months and Rs one lakh fine.PTI
If the food item results in death, the person could face life imprisonment

Apply for product approval before seeking import licence, FBOs advised

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has issued an advisory notification on applying for product approval before seeking a licence to import or manufacture foods.

According to the Authority, the product approval would be based on categories prescribed by FSSAI in the Indian Food Codes as on June 25, 2012.

The notification explained that applications from manufacturers and importers of products and ingredients could be sent for approval in format that has been prescribed with the fee of Rs 25,000 payable to the FSSAI.

Other specifications include submission of documents such as notarised Rs 100 stamp paper affidavit, copy of the label and safety data, according to a source from FSSAI.

He also stated that provisional NOC (no objection certificate) would be issued for a year in case of existing licence holders or importers of proprietary food products and ingredients that had been proven safe for human consumption in other countries.

However, products and ingredients that were absolutely new and never been used in any country and whose safety assessment had not been carried out yet would not be issued provisional NOC.

The applications pertaining to such products and ingredients would be forwarded to the scientific panel concerned and the committee eventually.

Not only would this method ensure streamlining of the entire product approval process, but it would also simplify and quicken the process. “If all the documents are in place as per specifications, the process will be completed in a week’s time,” pointed out the source.

Once the process is completed, the Central or the state licensing officer would then issue the licence to the manufacturer on the basis of the turnover of the company and also import licence would be issued by the Central designated officer.

However, the Authority has made it clear that manufacturers of traditional food and local cuisine like atta, suji, dal savouries, samosa, bhujia, and gulab-jamun, which are commonly used by consumers need not apply for product approval as proprietary food.

In this regard, D V Malhan, executive director, All India Food Processors Association (AIFPA), confirmed, “The manufacturers of traditional foods had an objection and the matter was settled in the presence of K Chandramouli, chairman, FSSAI, recently.”

Malhan added that these foods have been there in our country for ages and hence they have not been mentioned in the new regulation.