NEW TRANSPARENCY POLICY FOR RESTAURANTS-KERALA INITIATIVE

Kerala is supposed to be a 100% literate state in the Indian Union and hence one would expect the population there to be more sensitive to laws of the country which need to be respected by every citizen. The recent report that the hoteliers in that state are flouting the orders of the state High Court is some what disturbing. During the last two years the attitude and behavior of hoteliers all over the country have witnessed a sea change with prices of food preparations being hiked indiscriminately for no rhyme or reason. It defies logic as to why a cup of coffee should cost Rs 10 plus or an idli plate cost Rs 20-25 or a dosa cost Rs 25-30! Of course there is some inflation which is causing marginal rise in the market prices of raw materials but the prevailing prices do not justify such deep escalation, bordering almost on fleecing the customers. Added to this the food regulations are not being followed scrupulously with no one afraid of the law. Here is a take on this unfortunate development affecting millions of consumers who depend on hotel food for meeting their day to day needs.

Even as most of the hoteliers and restaurant owners in the city have started displaying price list of foods, they are yet to comply with the provisions of the Food Safety Regulations for exhibiting ingredients used in their food. As per the provision of the Act, the seller of the food articles is bound to display the ingredients used in foods being sold. High Court lawyer Basil Attipetty, who had obtained an order from the consumer court for enforcing the rules relating to display of price lists, said that the regulations had made it mandatory for sellers of any food stuff to display its ingredient list in their shops. He said that the High Court had recently emphasised the need for regulating the prices of even hotel foods and thereby preventing fleecing by hoteliers. Mr. Attipetty said that the Ernakulam Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum had also ordered displaying of price lists of food stuff in terms of the Kerala Food Stuffs (Display of Prices by Catering Establishment) Order, 1977. He said that some of the hotels were yet to exhibit the price list of food stuff in compliance with the forum's order. He had contended that as per the order, the police and local bodies and civil supplies department had the power to direct hotels and restaurants to display the price list of food stuffs. The forum had also directed the Kochi City Police Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Aluva Rural, to file a report after implementing the order of the forum. He pointed out that the police officers were yet to file a report on the compliance of the directive. The High Court had also expressed its concern over the soaring prices of hotel foods and suggested bringing in a law to hold the price line of hotel food.

Price control is not a desirable step in a democracy, if it can be avoided. The hoteliers must have self restraint as well as sufficient sensitivity to the feelings of their customers. No body is holding a brief for the way the insipient FSSAI is functioning at present and there must be realistic moderation of rules equitable to both the consumer as well as the hotelier. The rules regarding display of prices along with quantity served must be enforced at any cost and violators must be meted out exemplary punishment. Same is true regarding the nature of ingredients used either through the Menu card or through display. Consumer has a right to know whether the preparations contain any ingredient not to his liking. For example use of ingredients like Garlic, Onion, Chilli and other spices may not  be liked by some and such display will help them to avoid preparations containing these objectionable ingredients. While insisting on such practices the authorities must also look into the practical difficulties faced by the catering industry in meeting such aspirations of the consumer. 

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

THE DAY OF RECKONING FOR GM CROPS-REACHING THE DEAD END?

GM foods are facing enormous consumer resistance due to the "trust deficit" that exists to day between the GM food producers and the consumer, mainly because of the "opaque" manner in which the former work. While the safety of GM foods has not yet been established beyond a shadow of doubt, its potential environmental hazard is yet to be realized widely. It is another matter that 80% of the processed foods consumed in the US contain one or more of GM food ingredients, without the consumer ever knowing about it! The emerging consumer awareness about the uncertainties inherent in GM foods is putting pressure on the industry to declare the presence of GM ingredients in packed foods as a part of the label. Though the GM food lobby is powerful enough to deflect criticisms, the recent report that even they are rattled by the emergence of weedicide resistant weeds which seem to have adversely affected the crop yields. Here is a take on this new development with far reaching implications.

"This is a complex problem," said weed scientist David Shaw in remarks to a national "summit" of weed experts in Washington to come up with a plan to battle weeds that have developed resistance to herbicides. Weed resistance has spread to more than 12 million U.S. acres and primarily afflicts key agricultural areas in the U.S. Southeast and the corn and soybean growing areas of the Midwest. Many of the worst weeds, some of which grow more than six feet and can sharply reduce crop yields, have become resistant to the popular glyphosate-based weed-killer Roundup, as well as other common herbicides. Monsanto Co's Roundup worked well for many years. It became prevalent with the commercialization of "Roundup Ready" crops Monsanto developed to tolerate the weedkiller, making it easy for farmers to treat their fields. But now super weeds have developed a resistance to Roundup, and farmers are scrambling to figure out how to combat their weeds. "We don't have that next technology. We have to get back to the fundamentals," said Shaw, who chairs a task force that is working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on how to tackle weed resistance problems. Several farmers spoke out about their struggles at the summit, as did experts from the USDA and crop consultants. "This is our number one issue," said Arkansas crop consultant Chuck Farr. "It is a challenge every day, every field." Harold Coble, an agromist and weed scientist with the USDA, called the problem of weed resistance a "game changer" and said farmers must become more versatile. Too many have simply been relying on the chemicals for too long, he said.

Whether the above development will restrain further growth of the GM food industry is some thing to be watched in future. Already the cost of GM seeds and the high cost of cultivation of such crops are impediments for the growth of the industry. Promised yield increase using GM seeds is not happening in many places where cultivation of GM crops has been popular for some time. If the GM technology innovators are not able to find a solution to this emerging dangers, there is every likelihood of farmers reverting to conventional agricultural practices which may sound the death knell for the GM crops industry.  

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

IN DEFENSE OF GM FOODS-WHERE LIES THE TRUTH?

Genetically Engineered (GM) food is a highly controversial subject with no unanimity among the scientists regarding its safety. Tons of reports have been written for as well as against the safety or desirability of this modern scientific marvel. Depending on who is talking GM food can be a catastrophy if permitted world wide or it can be a boon to augment food supply to meet future food needs. What is forgotten in this highly emotional debate is the freedom that is an inherent right of every denizen to decide what he or she wants to eat. It may be true that almost 80% of processed foods eaten in the US contain one or more ingredient derived from a GM crop but the sad part of it is that the consumer never knows about it because of the skewed labeling policy in force in that country. Interestingly the dichotomy of the US Food Laws is brought out by the stipulation laid down for compulsory declaration on the label of foods processed with irradiation technology! The protagonists of GM technology, mostly industry supported, talk only about the safety of the foods derived from GM materials ignoring the right of the consumer to determine for himself whether he wants to consume such foods! It is a shame to call the act of the industry "capitulation" because industry knows what is to be offered to the consumer based on their preferences and reservations. Here is a gist of the arguments from GM supporters which does not make any sense at all. 

"During the late 1990's, a singular phenomenon appeared in countries around the world. One after another, food and beverage companies capitulated to activists opposed to a promising new technology: the genetic engineering of plants to produce ingredients. They are still capitulating to this day. The Japanese brewer Kirin and the Danish brewer Carlsberg eliminated genetically engineered ingredients from their beers. In the United States, the fast-food giant McDonald's banned them from its menu; food manufacturers Heinz and Gerber (then a division of Switzerland-based Novartis) dropped them from their baby-food lines; and Frito-Lay demanded that its growers stop planting corn engineered to contain a bacterial protein that confers resistance to insect predation. These measures were rationalized in various ways, but the reality is that by yielding to the demands of a minuscule number of disingenuous activists, the companies opted to offer less safe products to consumers, thereby exposing themselves to legal jeopardy. Every year, innumerable packaged-food products worldwide are withheld or recalled from the market due to the presence of "all natural" contaminants like insect parts, toxic molds, bacteria, and viruses. Because farming takes place outdoors and in dirt, such contamination is a fact of life. Over the centuries, the main culprit in mass food poisoning often has been contamination of unprocessed crops by fungal toxins – a risk that is exacerbated when insects attack food crops, opening wounds that allow fungi (molds) to get a foothold. For example, fumonisin and some other fungal toxins are highly toxic, causing esophageal cancer in humans and fatal diseases in livestock that eat infected corn. Fumonisin also interferes with the cellular uptake of folic acid, a vitamin that reduces the risk of neural tube defects in developing fetuses, and thus can cause folic acid deficiency – and defects such as spina bifida – even when one's diet contains what otherwise would be sufficient amounts of the vitamin. Many regulatory agencies have therefore established recommended maximum fumonisin levels permitted in food and feed products made from corn. The conventional way to meet those standards and prevent the consumption of fungal toxins is simply to test unprocessed and processed grains and discard those found to be contaminated – an approach that is both wasteful and failure-prone. But modern technology – specifically, the genetic engineering of plants using recombinant DNA technology (also known as food biotechnology or genetic modification) – offers a way to prevent the problem. Contrary to the claims of food-biotech critics, who insist that genetically modified crops pose risks (none of which has actually occurred) of new allergens or toxins in the food supply, such products offer the food industry a proven and practical means of tackling the fungal contamination at its source".

There may be many good features associated with GM technology but unless there is economic or health or safety advantages consumers can never be expected to patronize such products and GM foods fall far short of these yardsticks. There is no point in blaming those industry players who shun GM foods as "capitulationists", just because they are not toeing the lines of GM lobbyists. No industry will dare to force the consumer to eat a product not acceptable to the latter, no matter how good it is from industry perspectives. Same applies to irradiated foods also where there is near unanimity regarding the safety of these foods. Still industry does not want to use the technology for fear of consumer backlash. After introducing mandatory labeling of GM foods, if consumers still want to use them industry will be justified in continuing with them.  

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