THE FOOD SECURITY BILL-A BUREAUCRATIC MUDDLE IN THE OFFING?

Lot has been said and written about the pet socialistic project being taken up by the Government of India under the fanciful name of Food Security Bill though many honest, law abiding and average citizens in India are still in the dark regarding the implications of this project. It is all the more appalling that such an attempt is being made with hardly any "repair" to the existing chaotic and debilitating PDS infrastructure with most food grains being pilfered and looted, never reaching the intended beneficiaries! As some one had asked if food grains are going to be distributed practically free to 75% of the population, where is the need for these recipients to work at all! But logic and reality are never strong points with the present ruling dispensation at Delhi. Here is a perspective on the food security bill through the eyes of a foreign country which appears to be insightful and realistic.

"That is before you figure out what it will cost and who will do the legwork. The government says if the bill is legislated, the food subsidy burden will rise by Rs270 billion to Rs950 billion. Private but more reliable expert estimates put the cost at Rs6,000 billion in the first three years, or Rs2,000 billion a year. In spite of its noble intentions, the bill is more likely to aggravate and accentuate all the distortions introduced by government intervention in agriculture. As of October 1, the government had food grains stocks of 51.78 million tonnes, more than double the buffer and strategic reserve requirement on the same date. By cornering such huge volumes of grain, the government reduces supply in the open market, putting upward pressure on prices. At the same time, tonnes upon tonnes of grains just rot away in the absence of proper storage facilities. The same exercise is now proposed to be carried out on a much bigger scale. Procurement and distribution could get really messy and costly if central agencies take upon themselves to collect grain from villages, stock it in central warehouses and wheel them back to villages again. A scheme of this nature can be implemented only if there is a flawless and seamless system of storage, transportation and distribution. Since it does not exist, implementation is bound to suffer. That will lead to the familiar blame game between the centre and the states with heavy political overtones. The bill if implemented will distort cropping pattern further. Cultivation of wheat and rice, which would enjoy a wider ready market with guaranteed price, will get preference over pulses and cash crops. Private trade in food grains has reason to be seriously worried. Once the government offers grain at a price that's at least half (in many cases, a sixth) the market price to two-thirds of the population, why would anyone want to buy from a private trader? What is bad economics is often good politics. In the name of food security, a highly corrupt, bloated and wasteful system is sought to be imposed on the country. Yet no political party will have the gumption to oppose it. Which political leader would want to be seen as an 'enemy' of the poor who opposed provision of cheap food to the starving millions? The hope for the country lies in the inefficiency of its bureaucratic system. The food security bill exemplifies the self-defeating obduracy of bureaucratic modes of thinking. The administrative imagination (or lack of it) that has gone into the bill will ensure that the outcomes are deeply disappointing. That Indians have to count on the weakness of the state apparatus to mitigate impact of wrong policies is a devastating comment on the nature of things." 

It is truly said that the Bill as it stands to day is a bureaucratic creation with hardly any inputs from those knowledgeable about the dynamics of food procurement, storage, distribution and human nutrition. In the history of India bureaucratic schemes never worked and this is not going to be an exception. There cannot be a more wasteful national endeavor than this grandiose scheme. For an average middle class family, paying various taxes to the government and its countless agencies, this project is nothing but heart breaking viewed from the grandiosity and mind-boggling expenditure involved! Posterity will never forgive the politicians who are behind this scheme for the squandering of national wealth mindlessly and recklessly!

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

FOOD "MISCONCEPTIONS"-NEED FOR URGENT ACTION

Growing body of information about the food eaten daily in scientific and popular media makes citizens, even the well informed ones, really a confused lot with no degree of clarity on any issue. While this is understandable, what is alarming is the great divide taking place between urban and rural children regarding even the basic aspects regarding food. One can understand a kid coming from the US to India not knowing from where an egg comes or how milk is produced but in India itself many kids raised in urban areas have no clue regarding some of the basics of food, nutrition and health for which the current education system is to be blamed squarely. This is not only true in India but all over the world and action needs to be taken to address this subject as food safety issues are becoming more and more serious with each passing day. The Australian authorities were shocked by recent revelations about the extent of ignorance that exists among the children in urban parts of the country through a well carried out study. Following excerpts reflect the findings of the study. 

"Most Australian children in their last year of primary school think cotton socks come from animals while one-quarter believe yoghurt is from plants, a study warning of the growing gap between city and country found. The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) survey of almost 1,000 students in grades six and 10 found widespread misconceptions about food processing and farming. An overwhelming majority knew where potato chips and coffee came from but almost 20 percent of the younger age group -- aged between 10 and 12 years -- thought pasta came from animals and scrambled eggs from plants. Some 75 percent said cotton socks were an animal product and 27 percent believed yoghurt was derived from plants. "Primary industry plays a vital role in Australian's economy and society, but the gap between rural and urban communities is growing, contributing to a lack of understanding of where food and other basic necessities of life come from," the study said. The agricultural lobby group which commissioned the survey, the Primary Industries Education Foundation (PIEF), said the findings were of concern as Australia prepared to confront food security and climate change challenges. "The people who will need to solve the problems related to food security are either currently in school or are yet to be born," said foundation chief Cameron Archer. Agriculture is a major part of Australia's economy, with two-thirds of all produce shipped overseas. Exports were worth Aus$34.2 billion ($36.6 billion) in 2010-11 and are expected to come in at $34.5 billion in 2011-2012."

For ages it has been argued by food scientists in the country for reforming the curricula in schools with inclusion of study materials highlighting some basic facts about food, hygiene, nutrition and health but with no appreciable success. How can a kid drink a glass of milk every day without understanding about its source and the method of milk extraction from the cow or buffalo? What thought the kids have when they are fed boiled eggs which are excellent sources of almost all vital nutrients? Once the children grow up they have neither the time nor the inclination to learn about these fundamental facts about food. It is time the HRD ministry of GOI and state authorities sit together to modify the curriculum in primary schools to include such essential information with the help of concerned scientists. A well informed kid of to day has a better chance to become a responsible citizen of tomorrow, capable of sharing the burden of ensuring safety of foods eaten every day. Sooner it is done better it will be for the country.  

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

DECREASING SALT IN PROCESSED FOODS-NEW INITIATIVES

Salt's metamorphosis from an important food ingredient and a source of sodium essential for maintaining health into a detesting villain has happened during the last three decades. Incessant reporting in scientific and other publications about the harmful effect of salt on blood pressure, heart disease and kidney health has even turned the consumer against salt in daily diets. Though the actual nutritional need is no more than 1800 mg a day for a person, the palate demands much more than this for making the food tasty. After all consumption of 2000 kC of food cannot be in the form of bland materials and taste providers like salt make it easy for consuming many foods, which other wise are not palatable. Both national and international agencies are trying to limit salt consumption to no more than 5 gm a day though consumers find it difficult to restrict salt to such low levels. Against such a background efforts by scientists to develop technologies that will reduce salt content significantly in foods without compromising on taste is a welcome initiative. Here is a take on this burning issue. 

"Salt levels in crisps and snacks could be lowered without affecting the taste by altering the release profile of salt, according to a new study conducted by researchers at University of Nottingham, UK. In order to evaluate how salt from potato crisps is released and perceived in the mouth, the research team asked a panel of food testers to chew crisps for a specific number of times and hold in the mouth for a period of 60 seconds. The team evaluated the salt (sodium chloride) level in the mouth by collecting tongue swabs and screening them. It was identified that the salt levels peaked in the mouth 20 seconds after the chewing began, and panelists also reported that they experienced a significant increase in salt during this time, reported Foodnavigator.com.  According to researchers, this means that a majority of the crisp is swallowed even before the salt taste is experienced by the individual. The researchers are planning to develop a series of technologies to accelerate the delivery of the salt to the tongue. The new technologies will lower the salt release time to within 20 seconds, during which the crisps are usually chewed and swallowed, and hence, lower levels of salt would be required to get the same amount of taste. This idea could enable food manufacturers to produce healthier crisps with low salt levels and same taste profile, and the research could be extended to other areas of food science to achieve salt reduction in all snack foods."

There is another side to the salt story which does not subscribe to the majority view that salt is dangerous and feels that salt cannot do any harm at the level being consumed to day. It is true that for those who are affected by kidney disorders or high blood pressure need to be careful in salt consumption but for a normally healthy person is there any need to cut own on salt?. For centuries human beings have been eating salt and there have not been any large scale health disorders due to this. Probably salt alone cannot be blamed for the present day afflictions and drastic changes in the diet laying more emphasis on taste and flavor rather than nutritionally balancing it, may be the real cause for the present trend. Any how if scientists eventually succeed in developing low salt products without the consumer feeling about it when consumed, the effort is "worth the salt" for the health of most of the human beings.  

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

"COUNTRY OF ORIGIN"-LOOPHOLES IN THE LABELING REGULATION

One of the troubling questions that haunt international food trade is whether any country can impose unilateral laws which smacks of discrimination. The COOL policy now being implemented in some countries is an example where the retail shops are required to exhibit on the label the country of origin of any products sold by them. The "Country of Origin Law" (COOL), purported to be intended to serve the right of consumer to know fully about the nature of contents in a sealed food pack, is grossly discriminatory because it serves the selfish purpose of the government in the country of import to protect its own domestic industry against competition from imports. Interestingly the local retail industry itself is against such a policy because some of the products imported are far cheaper than the locally produced ones though quality wise both are comparable. Though the importing country governments feel that sheer patriotism would drive the consumers in hordes to buy locally made products, when it comes to buying many families consider price as the most sensitive factor in deciding on a purchase. If this is the reality it is unlikely that COOL will work in favor of domestically made food products. Here is a take on this interesting issue.

"COLES and Woolworth's are selling imported food without disclosing where it comes from, while still being able to boast it is "Made in Australia". The supermarket chains are using gaps in labeling laws that enable them to avoid disclosing where imports come from - despite laws stating that shoppers should be told the country of origin of their food. When the supermarkets were asked about examples of imported food sold under their private labels without showing the country of origin, Coles revealed two fruit juices for which the original source was undisclosed. Advertisement: Story continues below Woolworth's revealed Homebrand dried apricots, sultanas and dates were sourced from Turkey and 90 per cent of Homebrand orange juice concentrate was from Brazil. The labels describe the dried fruits only as "Packed in Australia from imported ingredients". A spokeswoman for Woolworth's agreed it was impossible for customers to determine the country of origin of these products "but we would also make the point that this labelling complies with what we are required to do". There is widespread disaffection with the labeling system, with Coles, the Australian Food and Grocery Council and Choice calling for a better approach. Only one in 100 Australians can explain what ''Made in Australia'' actually means under the complicated formula in the law, according to research by the labeling lobby group Australian Made, Australian Grown. "We believe it is so complicated and people are so confused about what this means that it tends to devalue the Made in Australia label," grocery council chief executive Kate Carnell said. In one Coles example, its Smartbuy three-litre apple and blackcurrant juice is sold under the label "Made in Australia from imported ingredients". To use "Made in Australia" without any further qualification, manufacturers must meet a test that shows both a substantial transformation and at least 50 per cent of the value of the good being created in Australia, including the packaging. This month, the federal government took no action on reforms to clarify country-of-origin labels proposed in the Blewett report into food labelling. Loopholes in the laws include food that is imported into New Zealand, repackaged and then sent to Australia, with no need for a label about where the food originally came from. In Australia, labelling foods with a country of origin is a legal requirement. But the loophole exists because of Australia's free trade agreement with NZ, which has a domestic policy of voluntary country-of-origin labels (except for wine). Coles and Woolworths say they label all NZ-sourced food to the higher Australian standards".

The fact food industry in Australia is exploiting the loopholes in the COOL policy speaks volumes about the likely negative impact it will have on food business in that country. Given the fact that Australia cannot provide fully the needed food for its citizens through domestic production calls for imports of some foods at least, it is imperative to go for imports. If the retailers stop importing these foods, there can be a shortage of these items, generating an upward price push for these products, harming the interests of domestic consumers. These discriminative policies ought to be frowned upon by WTO as they are hindrance for a truly free international trade. When industry world over are adopting extreme and highly stringent safety protocols under ISO, HACCP and other systems of  safety conformation, where is the need for the citizens to know from which country the food is imported? Does this information help the consumer to decide about the quality and safety of the product he is buying? No way! At best COOL is a protectionist policy that deserve to be condemned in no uncertain terms.

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

  

KITCHEN DANGERS-HOW TO PRE-EMPT THEM

It is true that many traditional kitchen practices, especially in middle class families, pose safety hazards but in most developing countries this risk is more than offset by severe heating all foods are subjected to before consumption. In contrast many developed countries have "safe" modern kitchens with high level of sanitation designed to protect the citizens from a multitude of diseases caused by pathogenic viruses and bacteria. Still careless practices by house wives can still endanger the lives of such families through serious infections. Predominant consumption of salads and animal derived food products only accentuate the problem. Only recently a warning has been issued in the US regarding the possibility of widespread Norovirus contamination for which guidelines have been issued by the Authorities concerned. Here is a list of precautions recommended for avoiding serious infection episodes at the house hold level.  

"Every year, 76 million Americans get sick from food, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Nothing you can do will ever guarantee 100 percent protection against food-borne illness, but taking certain precautions can help reduce your risk. Some of these protective steps are common sense, like washing your hands before you eat. Others aren't so obvious. Read on to discover five surprising sources of food-borne "bugs" in your kitchen that we've written about in EatingWell Magazine, and how to protect yourself."

Though the suggestions made look pedestrian bordering on being silly, they still deserve all the attention they deserve. It is advisable that every house hold takes special precaution to keep their kitchen place neat and tidy.
Refrigerator the most ubiquitous gadget without which modern life becomes unbearable is a veritable source of dangerous vectors and most house wives fail to keep it clean with frequent cleaning and disinfection practice. Though smart refrigerators are in the market with computer aided "management" capability, ultimately there is no substitute to human vigilance if any food related episodes are to be avoided.

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

THE "NOROVIRUS" SCARE-PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE

Summer is often the real season for infectious diseases as the bugs can thrive under optimal weather conditions available during the period. With the pathogens multiplying at a frenetic pace, they spread rapidly among the population through air, water, food and direct contact with contaminated surfaces. Added to this water scarcity gets acute during summer and hand washing becomes the first casualty. This is true for Bacteria, Virus and other disease causing vectors. Interestingly in a country like the US where winter conditions are still prevalent, a warning has been issued regarding the danger posed by Norvirus, earlier known as Norfolk Agent, and one can imagine the potency of this virus to cause havoc even under hostile conditions. Here is a take on this development.  

"There are some important reasons that lead to so many people becoming ill from Norovirus," said Martin Bucknavage, extension food safety specialist. "One is the virus's low infectious dose. It is estimated that it may take only 10 viral particles to make someone ill. Then, there is the ability of the virus to survive on dry surfaces for two weeks or more and in water for months." The virus, which often moves quickly through a school or cruise ship, can be spread in contaminated food or water, from contaminated surfaces, directly from a sick person or from the intake of aerosolized droplets of vomit. And the main symptom of a Norovirus infection is another factor in its spread -- acute-onset vomiting. "This prevents people from becoming sick in a secure location," Bucknavage said. "Rather, rapid onset can occur at a dinner table, in a meeting or on the bus. People usually become ill within 24 hours of exposure, although longer incubation periods do occur." And once someone gets sick, they can experience symptoms for 24 to 72 hours and can remain contagious for up to three days. Bucknavage says the key to preventing infection is frequent and correct hand washing -- scrubbing hands with soap and warm water. In addition, it's important for people to stay home when ill, especially when they may have been exposed to someone who has had the illness". 

Though the danger is confined to the population of the US where instances of food poisoning have been reported, its advent under tropical conditions cannot be ruled out. If Norovirus is so common in the atmosphere there could be the possibility that most of the population in these regions have already developed immunity long ago and only those with weak immunity might be exposed to the risk. But the immunity developed due to single exposure is considered temporary raising some concerns. An encouraging factor is that most foods consumed in tropical countries are invariably over-cooked causing destruction of all pathogens.Similarly chlorinated water is supposed to be free from this virus. Considering that Norovirus accounts for more than 90% of non-bacterial GI infection, it is better constant vigil is kept on incidences of infections caused by this RNA based virus.

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

TRAVAILS OF FOOD IMPORTERS-THE UNRESPONSIVE CONTROL REGIME

If the "wish" of the Commerce Ministry of Government of India is translated into reality, India should be a major player in the World food trade because the country is considered a leading one in production of most agri-horticultural commodities and in cattle population. Unfortunately the above "wish" continues to be a dream only, with India a very minor exporter of some commodities while export of processed food is still very insignificant. Lack of imaginative support policies and neglect of agriculture and process industry during the last 5 decades has taken its toll and the food export remains more or less stagnant as a percentage of global trade. Whatever little progress has been achieved is because of the initiatives on the part of the food industry through their enterprising spirit and endeavor. Of course there are plethora of government bodies vested with the responsibility of "promoting" exports of food but except for a couple of them all others remain as white elephants with practically nothing to show of their unexciting existence! Here is a "grouse list" of the industry when it comes to import of foods which have become part of GOI policy under WTO regime and one wonders why there is such an inertia on the part of the government in streamlining and expediting the procedures for allowing such legal imports.  

"Delay in obtaining clearance for imported food items is a major problem for the importers, who have time and again tried to bring the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India's (FSSAI) attention to the issue. This was informed by Pankaj Shah, vice-president, the Bombay Custom House Agents' Association. "The total time taken for clearance of imported food items is anywhere between five to 10 days, as sample testing itself needs five days. We have repeatedly approached the Authority on the issue but in vain. However, one good thing happened is that procedure for clearance has been placed online, which reduced our effort in approaching the authority a number of times," said Shah. The situation is aggravating also because there is not enough infrastructure backup for storage of imported food items. Items which do not come in reefer vessels lie in open. One suggestion made by Shah to the Authority was that the samples to be tested should be sent to those labs which were in the port area itself. "As Nhava Sheva port, where the imported food items land, is very far from the city, bringing the samples from there to the laboratory itself takes a day or two. If the lab is in the vicinity itself at least a day would be saved," he said. Pankaj Jaiminy, assistant vice-president, food, health and beauty, TUV SUD South Asia, had another suggestion. He said clearance model akin to Japan could be adopted in India. "Imported food items are cleared in Japan in a day or two, however, Indian imports take minimum five days. The system for testing of imported food items needs to be evaluated for workload. The system adopted in Japan can be easily adopted by India for testing imported food items," Jaiminy said. Interestingly, Japan is able to deliver results for testing of imported food items within a day or two. This is because it has approved different labs in the exporting countries. On arrival of import it would ask for the lab report from the exporting country. Then, Japanese authorities simply do a random sample testing for food items instead of testing each and every product. If the result of the sample tested does not match with that in the report received, the matter is reported to the Export Inspection Council which in turn issues an alert warning or suspends the services of the approved lab for time being". 

It is true that one of the biggest constraints in importing food into the country is the inordinate delay in getting the consignment cleared by the Port Health Authorities who have very limited facilities of their own in analyzing the items for conforming to country's standards. Outside agencies whether in the government sector or private ones do not realize the consequences of even a few hours delay in testing and sending the results which will have to be borne by the importers. Often such delays cost dearly and honest importers are bound to suffer financial losses due to exorbitant handling and port service charges. There is sufficient scope to reform this procedures so that such delays are avoided as far as possible. Probably the FSSAI is weary of doing any thing in this area because of reported import of many food products into the country with suspect credentials by a few unscrupulous traders violating all existing norms. Still it is felt that a sincere exercise in reforming this area as demanded by import trade, is worth trying.  

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