IS ICE A FOOD? A DEBATABLE ISSUE!

Water is a unique substance which is vital for life and on an average a person needs 2 liters of water every day for maintaining normal health. Yet water is never considered a food as it does not provide any of the nutrients like calories, proteins, fats or essential micro nutrients. For a number of years in a country like India quality and safety of water used by food processing industry were never covered by the erstwhile PFA rules. Only now that it is receiving attention from the regulators and water for food processing must meet the minimum standards laid down under the ISI quality band. Ice is another substance used extensively by the food industry including fish processors and surprisingly no law covers this ubiquitous substance leaving the ice trade totally uncontrolled. This issue is now receiving attention at the hands of regulators and new rules are being promulgated to meet the exigency of the situation. Here is a take on this emerging development vis-a-vis ice.  

'That means, packaged ice must be produced in accordance with the agency's Current Good Manufacturing Practices in Manufacturing, Packing, or Holding Human Food.  Translation? Ice manufacturers "must produce, hold, and transport ice in clean and sanitary conditions, monitor the cleanliness and hygiene of employees, use properly cleaned and maintained equipment, and use water that is safe and sanitary." During inspections, FDA investigators make sure: the plumbing design prevents contamination, the water supply is safe and sanitary, and and the facility and grounds are sanitary. Small-scale producers are exempt. Labels must also meet FDA requirements. An ingredient list and nutrition fact box are not necessary, but the labels must contain other information such as the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor of the ice and the net quantity of the contents. Ice labeled as made from spring water or artesian well water must actually be derived from those sources".

With refrigeration technology developing at a fast pace, use of solid ice is becoming some what declining but those who transport fresh fish still depend on solid ice made by the so called ice factories, most of them located near the fish landing regions on the coastal areas for temporary preservation till they reach the market or processing facilities. Though vectors like bacteria do not survive at temperatures less than 4 C, there is the possibility of dirt, non-biological contaminants and even live but hibernating bacteria getting into the ice in the factories where it is made under unhygienic conditions. Therefore laying down standards for adherence by the ice manufacturers is timely and crucial.  Strict compliance to these standards must be insisted on and enforced.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

AFTER HORSE MEAT NOW COMES FISH WITH FALSE LABELS!

Who has not heard of the recent adulteration episode in Europe where horse meat was used to extend the beef content in hundreds of products labeled as beef? Though the ramification of such wide spread food fraud is limited to economic cheating, it does not make such products dangerous or unhealthy to the consumers. Paradoxically horse meat is no way inferior to beef though many sources do contain residues of some performance enhancing drugs which may pose some hazard. Close on the heels of this episode comes the news that American consumers are facing a similar situation vis-a-vis fish products. It was shocking that almost one third of market samples of fish products claimed to be based on Red Snapper, a much valued fish species, were made with other varieties with little or no resemblance to the former! Here is a take on this mislabeling practices widely prevalent in United State of America.    

"That tempting seafood delight glistening on the ice at the market, or sizzling at the restaurant table in its aromatic jacket of garlic and ginger? It may not be at all what you think, or indeed even close, according to a big new study of fish bought and genetically tested in 12 parts of the country — in restaurants, markets and sushi bars — by a nonprofit ocean protection group, Oceana. In the 120 samples labeled red snapper and bought for testing nationwide, for example, 28 different species of fish were found, including 17 that were not even in the snapper family, according to the study, which was released Thursday. The study also contained surprises about where consumers were most likely to be misled — sushi bars topped the list in every city studied — while grocery stores were most likely to be selling fish honestly. Restaurants ranked in the middle. Part of the problem, said the study's chief author, Kimberly Warner, is that there are quite simply a lot of fish in the sea, and many of them look alike. Over all, the study found that about one-third of the 1,215 fish samples bought, from 2010 to 2012, were mislabeled."Even a relatively educated consumer couldn't look at a whole fish and say, 'I'm sure that's a red snapper and not lane snapper,' " she said.

Here again nutritionally it could make very little difference whether the product is based on Red Snapper or any other fish as long they are edible. But such practices are considered unethical and amounts to cheating those who ardently love Red Snapper as a fish of their preference. While during olden days there was hardly any tool available to detect such adulteration, advent of gene testing readily offers a convenient route to differentiate between various living species. Adulteration is one of the oldest professions and no matter how diligent the consumer is, it will continue as long as there is attractive "bonus" for the fraudsters. No wonder costly products like Olive oil, Caviar, Honey, Saffron, Coffee, Tea etc attract adulterators like flies to a piece of jaggery, the basis being higher the cost more will be the profit!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FISH IN THE DIET-NEW ALARM ON ITS SAFETY

During the last two decades, role of fish in the diet assumed critical importance because it is a rich source of Omega-3 fats considered crucial for preventing heart disease and other related disorders commonly encountered in modern society. Besides, unlike red meat fish meat is not a source of cholesterol making it safe for regular consumption. However the oceans where marine fish breed, are getting heavily polluted with all types chemicals, the most dangerous being Mercury which is known to cause damage to the brain if consumed beyond a limit. Presently an upper limit of 1 ppm is prescribed in the US while many other countries have fixed the tolerable limit at 0.5 ppm. Recent reports implicating Mercury even at lower limits in human disorders call for a rethinking about the safety limit of this toxic mineral. Here is a take on this new revelation which cannot be brushed away that easily.

"Scientists say that consuming fish may be more hazardous to your health than you think, according to new reports published this week. The reports, produced by the Biodiversity Research Institute and an international coalition of environmental campaign groups called the Zero Mercury Working Group, say that mercury contamination of seafood is not only on the rise across the globe, but that "smaller traces of the toxic metal may be enough to cause restricted brain development or other health problems for humans who eat them." "The more we look at mercury, the more toxic it is," David Evers, the executive director of BRI, told the Portland Press Herald. "Threats from mercury are greater at lower levels than we have thought in the past." As the Global Post notes, scientists have long warned consumers about the potential dangers of mercury in fish and other seafood. However, the new reports have revealed that the guidelines for safe seafood consumption in place in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere may now be out of date. "Levels of [mercury] exposure that are defined as safe by the official limits, are actually having adverse effects," environmental health scientist Dr. Edward Groth, who authored one of the three reports, said at a web conference, according to the Post."These are not trivial effects, these are significant effects. There does appear to be evidence now, fairly persuasive evidence, that adverse effects occur from normal amounts of seafood consumption," Groth, who is an adviser to the World Health Organization, continued".

Mercury is thrown into the atmosphere by burning coal in power plants and when the atmospheric mercury is absorbed by the water in the ocean, algae accumulates the same in their cells which then is passed on to fish which feasts on it. When such fish reaches the dining table, mercury is passed on to the humans through their foods. So far consumers and the safety agencies were sure that most fish varieties harvested to day have far less than 1 ppm, except in case of tile fish or Sword fish and crabs which may contain up to 1.5 ppm. The new finding that even low levels of mercury can adversely affect the functions of the human brain is alarming and scary. Unfortunately coal happens to be the most abundantly available cheap source of energy and economic compulsions prevent banning coal powered power plants every where in the world. What is the option before mankind under such circumstances? Banning fish consumption altogether? Not a feasible option. May be curtailing the fish consumption to levels just enough to meet the needs for Omega-3 fats is a possibility but will it be acceptable to the consumers and the fish industry in general. Technological intervention to trap the mercury in the smoke that is spewed by the power plants is another alternative that can be considered.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com