Wrapping food in used news paper-A practice with questionable safety issues

It may appear ridiculous for a westerner to see foods being wrapped in old news paper materials in many countries in Asia such as India, Pakistan, Malaysia etc which is the most practiced way of serving foods by most street vendors. This is due to the thriving market that exists for used news papers in these countries, as millions of copies of publications in English as well as in many local languages are printed and distributed to meet the demands of the reading public. It is amazing that in spite of the high growth of electronic communication system news papers are vividly read by most people to satisfy their hunger for news and information. By the latest count there are over two hundred and fifty major news paper publications alone in India though over 85000 publications are registered in total. In Hindi language itself there are over 156 million copies circulated daily while English papers print another 56 million copies every day. On an average each news paper copy costs about Rs 5 and monthly budget for a reader estimated at Rs 150 for one publication. Most households sell off their old news papers to "raddiwallas" who buy these papers through house to house soliciting. In general a month's paper can fetch about Rs 20 on an investment of Rs 150. Where do these papers end up?

The curiosity about this subject was aroused by a recent report from Kangar, Malaysia about a ban enforced by the local government on use of old news papers for wrapping food materials due to apprehensions about the safety of the paper wraps for food contact application. Accordingly from January 2016 no food operator is going to be allowed to use printed papers, mostly old news papers for  packing of foods and violations can attract punitary fines as high as 10 000 Ringits ( about one and a half lakh rupees) and possible imprisonment of two years. The reason cited by the authorities for taking such a strong policy decision is based on the data generated on the toxicity of chemicals present in news papers that can get migrated easily into the food packed in it. Interestingly the punishment regime was proposed for January next year after giving about 6 months time for the food operators to understand and be well informed about the health implications inherent in use of printed papers. Probably this is a wise move by a government which has the health and well being of the citizens upper most in its mind.          

In India we consume about 2.5% million tons of news print annually out of which 60% is imported. May be this is not a huge quantity amounting to just 1.8 kg annual per capita compared to 3.5 kg in Asia as a whole and against the global average of 9 kg per capita. In a country like Canada 80% of used paper is recycled whereas in our country the corresponding figure is just 26%. Packing or wrapping in old news papers and other discarded papers is very common in India and those who buy them use the same in a variety of ways. Some make paper bags for packing dry materials while others resell them to retail traders for packing the wares sold by them It is rare that such paper wastes are burned or used in land fills. With the advent of plastics, especially polyethylene and polypropylene, use of paper is increasingly being phased out by the retailers. But use of plastics is also now being frowned upon because of the dangers involved in migration of chemicals, some of them toxic, from the plastic bags to the foods carried in them and use of plastic bags with less than 40 microns thickness is banned in many places in India. This naturally shifts the focus once again on paper though reusable cloth bags are being promoted extensively. With such a dicey situation is the paper usage going to see a spurt in future? May be but the dangers involved must be carefully monitored to prevent any future catastrophe at the national level.

A curious consumer may be pardoned if he is not convinced about the non-safety of used news papers and other printed paper materials for packing foods. but scientific evidence cannot be brushed away easily. According to toxicologists familiar with hazards of printing inks which are used across the world, there are thousands of chemicals required to be used to get attractive printed products and many of them are highly toxic to human beings. Especially news papers produced using the off set -web printing use very thick consistency inks and a particular type of drying where mineral oil, solvents like methanol, benzene and toluene are used. The heavy metal Cobalt is a part of most of the drying agents. Generally mineral based printed inks are known to contain Mineral Oil Saturated Hydrocarbon (MOSH) and Mineral Oil Aromatic Hydrocarbon (MOAH) which are sources of gases generated by evaporation which can penetrate into foods packed in such papers. The FAO-WHO Alimentarius Commission has set an upper limit of 0.6 mg/kg that can be considered safe intake through food. Besides countless colorants, pigments, binders, additives, photo-initiators etc are present in high quality printing inks, some of them being highly toxic. Some of the chemicals detected in printed papers include Aryl Amines, Benzidine, 2-Naphthylamine, 4-Aminobiphenol etc implicated in cancers affecting bladder and lungs. 

What type of foods are most vulnerable to dangers due to printed paper packing? Generally dry products with low water and fat are relatively safe to be wrapped for short time while high fat products like Pakoda, Vada, Dosa, Bajji, etc are unsuitable to be packed in these papers. Similarly wet foods are also not considered suitable for news paper packing though the low strength of paper will cause disintegration after a few minutes, thus being a self limiting factor.While focus above has been mostly on used news papers, there is another equally critical area requiring attention when the safety of food packing is considered.  According to some estimates Indian generates about 15 million tons of waste papers of all types that include note books, stationery products, envelops, notices, etc and since only quarter of this gets into the recycling stream bulk of it gets used for packing house hold goods including food. What are the safety implications here? They are equally risky when it comes to food wrapping or packing. Another dimension to their safety is the danger posed by pathogenic micro organisms which contaminate the papers when stored for some time under humid conditions in unhygienic places exposing them to open air and atmospheric dust besides vectors like cockroach, insects and house hold pests all of which make their own contribution to make the old news papers a veritable source of microbes with different pathogenicity.         

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

THE ARSENIC "DEBATE"-A MISPLACED SAFETY CONCERN

In to day's world man suspects that every thing he comes into contact with, can be dangerous and with modern style of living, the number of chemicals used in thousands of consumer products is increasing every day. Many of these have been studied for their safety and clearance for use given based on available scientific data. However with widely divergent conclusions thrown up by such studies, no firm conclusion can be drawn regarding the safety of any chemical that comes into contact with human being or consumed through foods. To cite an example both Saccharine and Cyclamate were hailed, when they were introduced as sugar substitutes, as "God sent" and enjoyed wide scale acceptance, especially by the consumers who are sugar "intolerant"! A few years later both were implicated in many health disorders by toxicologists leading to their ban in many countries. This trend was reversed later after finding the earlier studies faulty and unreliable and to day both these sugar substitutes are allowed in many countries!

Recent uproar regarding Arsenic content in Apple juice is another example of misplaced concerns on the part of some consumers and activists, in spite of the fact that arsenic is a common contaminant in air since time immemorial. Finding fault with regulatory agencies for not banning the Apple juice is totally misconceived and deserves contempt and pity! Probably those who find danger in every food they eat must think of migrating to another planet where they may get the ideal living condition aspired by them. Life on earth is based on a balance of risks and benefits associated with any endeavor and one has to get reconciled to this truth. It is true that ingestion of Arsenic by humans at high doses can be dangerous and this trace mineral is implicated in development of cancer of Lungs, Bladder, GI Tract and Skin, especially when consumed through water containing more than 50 micro grams (ug)per liter. This is the reason why only a low level of 10 parts per billion of Arsenic is allowed in drinking water.

Arsenic concentration in air can be about 0.02 to 4 nano gram (ng) per cubic meter in rural areas where air is considered relatively pure. This can go up to 200 ng per cubic meter in urban areas where industrial emissions and other factors can contribute to higher Arsenic concentration. It can go as high as 1000 ng in areas near smelters. Sea water contains arsenic as high as 1000 to 2000 ng per liter while ground water may also have same levels of this toxic metal. There are reports that water sources near volcanic rocks, sulfur mineral deposits can have Arsenic as high as 3000 ug per liter! Normally soil samples contain about 1-40 mg of Arsenic per kg. While discussing about the toxicity of Arsenic it is to be noted that inorganic Arsenic is more dangerous and out of the average consumption of Arsenic through the food, about 20-300 ug/day, 25% is the inorganic version. There is the million dollar question as to why no agency has set an upper limit for Arsenic that can be considered safe when ingested through food and probably this may be exercising the mind of many people who entertain apprehension on this score.

It is true that long term exposure to Arsenic, especially at high levels is injurious but setting up an upper limit for safety for every food is not considered practical. Water is a critical material consumed in large quantities, 2-3 liters a day and greater precaution is necessary in avoiding unsafe levels. Therefore such limits have been incorporated in potable water standards. One of the reasons for giving priority to water is that most Arsenic present in water is inorganic in nature and hence more dangerous. In contrast Arsenic present in foods is organic type with considerably less toxicity. So far no food product has been reported to have Arsenic content more than that set for water and therefore the apprehension on this score may be misplaced.

According to present data available Sea foods including fish contribute about 77% of the Arsenic exposure by average person while cereal products, vegetables, meat products and dairy products account for 10%, 6%, 4% and 3% respectively. Further the present safe Arsenic intake level is 15 ug per kg body weight per week (PTIW) while through all sources the average intake is reported to be less than 7 PTIW as per some studies. Rice is one of the food materials, suspected to have a tendency to absorb Arsenic from the soil because of profuse water use and rice products originating from the US and France have been reported to contain 0.24 to 0.28 mg per kg posing some concern at one time. Use of Arsenic containing crop protectants in the field also has been implicated in accumulation of the metal in paddy crops. Fortunately in high rice consuming countries like India and Egypt, the Arsenic levels in the rice are never known to be above 0.1 mg per kg. While continued monitoring of foods for Arsenic level is necessary to pre-empt any possible poisoning episode in future, consumers should not be unduly worried about Arsenic at least for the time being.

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

AFLATOXIN MENACE-THE 'CURSE' OF PEANUTS

Though peanut is considered a wholesome food rich in proteins, fats and many nutrients vital to the body, it was shunned for some time by the international buyers, because of the presence of mycotoxins, the hazardous metabolic product of the mold belonging to Aspergillus species which contaminates the crop mostly in the field due to improper drying. Its good thermal stability at high temperatures make it hard to destroy during processing and mold infected raw material if used will taint the final product also. Non-availability of an acceptable process to decontaminate peanuts and bring down the aflatoxin content to safe levels is a constraint coming in the way of development of this agricultural crop, competing effectively against soybean, considered its rival in the international market. While decorticated nut is a versatile food material for humans both for direct consumption as well as for providing edible oil, the protein rich deoiled residues are much sought after as an ingredient for animal feeds. In contrast soybean is mostly used for oil extraction, soy flour and processed products based it and as a component in animal feeds.

Peanut seeds can be blanched to remove cuticles if white kernel is desired or can be roasted, boiled, fried or coated to get different consumer products. Peanut butter, a highly popular product in western countries is made by grinding decuticled and roasted kernels through a process that ensures no separation of oil during packing and storage. Nutritionally shelled peanut seeds contain good quality oil to the extent of 50% while its protein content is around 25%. Bold seeds are in good demand and hand picked bold seeds fetch premium price in the export market. In India peanuts are processed in oil mills using ghani type rotary presses, screw expellers and solvent extraction plants to recover as much oil as possible. Since oil recovery is the major goal, very little attention is paid to the quality of the deoiled residue which generally contains high levels of husk and cuticles besides other undesirable contaminants. Edible quality peanut cake can be made if the seeds are precleaned before pressing for oil and during nineteen fifties and sixties, peanut protein isolate made from the deoiled cake was touted as a concentrated protein source with 90-93% protein content. Deficiency of amino acid lysine is considered as a drawback when peanut protein isolate is compared with that from soybean. Even a milk like product was developed from the peanut 4 decades ago in India as a cheap substitute to dairy milk.

Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus, the two organisms that grow on moist peanut seeds containing more than 7% moisture, excrete aflatoxins of different types which if consumed have been found to cause acute hepatic necrosis, liver cirrhosis and eventually carcinoma. There are 13 different types of aflatoxins identified so far and the most potent is aflatoxin B1. Global standards do not permit aflatoxin presence in peanut or any preparations derived from it beyond 4-20 parts per billion (ppb) and unless very high precaution is taken it will not be possible to restrict the aflatoxin to the stringent standard that exists to day. However in a country like USA, aflatoxin up to 300 ppb is permitted in domestic corn for feeding beef cattle, swines and mature poultry birds. It was in 1960 that the first out break of aflatoxin poisoning was encountered in UK killing more than 1 lakh turkey poults and subsequently several such incidences were reported from different parts of the world due to feeding aflatoxin contaminated feeds.

Aflatoxins belong to the difurocoumarolactone group of chemicals with molecular weights ranging from 312 to 346 with melting points in the range of 190-299C. Neither heat processing as encountered in frying or baking nor any other known method can destroy the toxin very significantly. Toxins present in oil fraction are not affected by the conventional alkali refining process but special filtration system can remove the particulates of aflatoxin satisfactorily. Ammoniation (0.5-2% ammonia) at room temperature or at elevated temperature and pressure can bring down the toxin level considerably but whether it can be deployed commercially is not certain. Use of Flavobacterium auranatiacum bacteria to destroy aflatoxin has been found to be technically feasible but the limitation is that such biological system can work only in aqueous medium calling for expensive process technologies and long processing time. Gamma irradiation at a level of 5-20kGy dose has been reported to be effective in detoxification but limited facilities available for irradiation makes this technology impractical on a large scale.

In spite of 4 decades of scientific endeavor a satisfactory method of detoxification is still eluding the peanut industry. Preempting development of mold infection through prompt drying of the crop to less than 7% moisture, careful handling and storage at low temperature and humidity may be the best option. Use of electronic sorters to sort the seeds based on color development caused by the growth of the mold was explored without success. Considering the practical constraints in changing the prevalent agricultural practices, the best way to eliminate aflatoxin problem seems to be manual sorting of the seeds which has been accepted by many importing countries.

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

NANO FOOD TECHNOLOGY-THE SAFETY ISSUES

Nanotechnology based on highly reactive particles of sizes less than 100 nano meter is predicted to be central to developing and using new electronics and energy technologies during the present century. Properties of nano particles are not governed by the same physical laws as larger particles but by quantum mechanics. Their physical and chemical properties such as color, solubility, strengths, chemical reactivity and toxicity can be quite different. Engineered nano particles are used in hundreds of commercial products that are marketed to day which include transparent sun screens, light diffracting cosmetics, penetration enhanced moisturizers, stain and odor repellent fabrics, dirt repellent coatings, long lasting paints & varnishes and many others.

A nano meter (nm) sized particle measures one billionth of a meter and one can imagine how small it is when a human hair measures 80,000 nm! A DNA strand is 2.5 nm wide while a protein chain is 5 nm in diameter. Nano technology has already made inroads into food industry and it is claimed that more than 300 foods have already been developed with this technology. The market value for nano foods is estimated to increase to more than $ 20 billion by 2010 and it is predicted that more than 40% of food products will be nano technology based by the year 2015. Nano technology can confer unique advantages on processed foods in many ways. Programmable foods, considered the ultimate dream of the consumer will have designer food features built into it and a consumer can make a product of desired color, flavor and nutrition using specially programmed microwave ovens. The trick is to formulate the food at the manufacturer's end with millions of nano particles of different colors, flavors and nutrients and under the program in the oven set by the consumer based on his preferences, only selective particles are activated while others stay inert, giving the desired product profile. Nano based polymers with silica based nano particles sandwiched can enhance the properties of pressure sensitive adhesive labels and create biodegradable properties in them. Enhanced solubility, improved bio-availability, facilitating controlled release and protecting the stability of micro nutrients in food products are other virtues of nano technology. According to MFPI Minister, GOI is setting up a National Nano Science and Technology Institute to develop nano foods by using nano technology during cultivation, processing and packaging of food but it is not clear whether the declaration has any backing of the GOI or whether any serious planning has really gone into the proposal.

How about a butter with low fat but tasting and feeling like natural butter? Nano technology bluffs believe it is possible in future using this powerful technique. Similarly one can make milk taste like cola beverage so that youngsters will have less inhibition in consuming nutritious milk. Foods can be enriched with fruits and vegetables through nano technology to deliver higher nutrient density in such foods. Nano scale food components can be encapsulated and mixed with other foods in novel combinations. This technology is also seems to be useful in dissolving additives like vitamins, minerals, anti oxidants, phytochemicals, nutritious oils which are not normally soluble. Nano particles can make many products clear which other wise are opaque or translucent. Nano adhesive properties can bind to harmful matters in the GI tract and remove them without any harm. Pure silver colloid liquid, reduced to one nano meter size with atomic particles is highly bactericidal, capable of achieving 99.9% kill against 650 species of microorganisms within 6 minutes while a normal antibiotic is effective only against 5-6 species. There are containers being offered with coatings of nano silver particles which can be used for storage of foods safely without spoilage. Use of nano technology as a sensor to detect food spoilage within a packet of processed food is fraught with great significance in our fight against pathogenic microorganisms.

While consumer will be thrilled at the enormous range of exciting food products emerging by application of nano technology, like any other new technologies, serious questions about safety will be an issue requiring attention by the industry as well as the policy makers. The GRAS list of additives universally accepted will have to be reexamined when used at nano scale level. Rats breathing nano particles showed a tendency to collect them in the brain and the lungs increasing the bio markers for inflammation and stress response. Toxicity is one issue which will be upper most in the minds of the consumer and since nano particles are more reactive, more mobile and likely to be more toxic, this concern must be addressed. There is strong possibility that nano particles in the body can result in increased oxidative stress which, in turn, can generate free radicals leading to DNA mutation, cancer and possible fatality. If irradiation technology has taken more than 5 decades of research and safety assessment before becoming acceptable in a limited way, nano technology also can wait till all safety issues are resolved.

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