VEGETABLE JUICES-WHO WANTS THEM ANY WAY?

There was a recent report from Hyderabad that a group of food scientists attached to a National food R & D organization is taking up a top priority project to develop an Indian version of the US branded mixed juice product going by the name V8 Vegetable Juice. One is reminded of the hectic activity in 1976-77 when India launched a research program to develop its own desi version of cola beverage. It is another matter that a cola beverage looking and tasting like the US product, Coke, which was banned in the country, was developed and branded as "Double Seven" and it never got a foot hold in the domestic beverage market whatever might be the reason. Even then, many critics did raise the inconvenient question as to what was the need to develop a cola beverage in a country where more people go hungry every day than those having adequate wherewithal to buy their daily foods. Same question is relevant to day vis-a-vis the announcement regarding the V8 juice development project at Hyderabad.

Fruits and vegetables indeed provide the foundation for a healthy life though they may not be contributing much calories or proteins in the diet. The expert recommendation that one must eat at least 250 gm each of fruits and vegetables daily is based on sound concept of human nutrition. In a country like the US, 6 servings per day are recommended and bulk wise in the latest MyPlate "Icon" replacing the age old Pyramid Icon, fruits and vegetables occupy half of the plate of foods required to be consumed for good health. Unfortunately consumption of these so called protective foods has not reached any where the figure desired by the nutritionists. Same is true all over the world.

Why fruits and vegetables? Because they are rich in many micro nutrients, health promoting biochemicals and dietary fiber which other foods will not be able to supply in required amounts to the body. The great salad movement in the Western countries is able to address this problem of insufficient consumption of fruits and vegetables but addition of calorie-rich mayonnaise, sauces, olive oil, etc dilute the value of salads vis-a-vis their pro-health credentials. There are hundreds of Soup and Salad vending outlets there offering a variety of such products with varying flavor, texture and taste. But still young children and teenagers are not enamored by salads and the fight to make them eat more and more fruits and vegetables goes on. Recent attempts by the US food industry to "smuggle in" vegetables in popular food products without making the label disclosure, speak volumes about the seriousness of the problem of inadequate consumption of these foods in that county. In India, especially in Northern parts of the country, simple salads consisting of cucumber, onion, green chilli and fresh lime are regularly consumed and are considered healthy. In the South poor people invariably consume many types of leafy vegetables which are quite cheap and affordable providing the much needed micro-nutrients.

One of the critical questions that begs for an answer is whether juices extracted from fruits and vegetables can be as effective as the raw produce themselves. Of course any one suggesting that a juice can substitute a fruit or vegetable must be out of his or her minds to make such an outlandish claim. The issue becomes all the more crucial when it is realized that modern technological operations using enzymes and high efficiency extractors produce juices which are clear in appearance and devoid of any fiber. The nutrient recovery in a juice can never be 100%, a significant portion being lost in the pomace or the residue. According to the manufacturers of V8 juice, one serving of 240 ml of its product V8 Fusion, provides 100% of the daily need of fruits and vegetables for an average adult though it is difficult to concede this point. However if one believes in the philosophy that "some thing is better than nothing", juices do serve a purpose, albeit to a lesser extent. While on the subject of juice drinking habit, Indians are not known to be voracious consumers of juices though there are many products coming under the category of fruit drinks which are regularly consumed as "thirst quenchers" but almost all these drinks contain sugar as the major ingredient with fruit pulps present in the range of 10-35% only. Consumption of vegetable juices is limited to a small population of health freaks and sick and convalescing patients.

Coming to the much vaunted V8 vegetable juice, it is a combination of juices derived from 7 vegetables like beetroot, celery, carrot, lettuce, parsley, watercress and spinach plus Tomato ( almost 87%) and probably it has the advantage of mutual supplementation of different nutrients present in the constituent vegetable juices, though real vegetables constitute only 13%!. The million dollar question is how can any average Indian be made to consume a juice which is made out of vegetables. In the fruit juice segment itself, mango based drinks outsell others to the extent of 10 to 1 and it is impossible to imagine that any vegetable juice whether it is V1 or V8 could make a break through in the market. A more feasible approach could have been to think in terms of developing mixed juices from both fruits and vegetables as the image of a juice in the minds of Indian consumer is always a sweet one and unless fruit juices are incorporated the desired sweetness cannot be attained in natural juice combinations. The US made V8 juices have versions like V8 Spash which has fruit juices but sweetened with High Corn Fructose Syrup (HFCS) and Sucralose, Diet V8 containing the sweetener Sucralose and V8 Fusion containing only pure fruit and vegetable juices. Taking up research projects like the one on V8 Juice reflects a poverty of ideas and limited vision of leadership that guides R & D workers in the country!

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

THE WATER "CONTROVERSY"-WHAT IS THE OPTIMUM INTAKE?

There is no dispute that water constitutes the most important substance, after oxygen, when it comes to sustaining life any where in the Universe. The very fact that almost 71% of the earth's surface is covered with water symbolizes the omnipotence of this simple chemical molecule. Similarly water makes up a substantial component of all living creatures. It is rather interesting that scientists are not unanimous in their view regarding how much water is required daily to maintain good health. While some say higher the amount of water taken better it will be for the human health. But this is not shared by many who consider too much water consumption is dangerous. Many believe that water therapy is an established science advocating high consumption of water every day which can be much above the quantity recommended by nutritionists and physicians.

The controversy was given a new lease of life after the recent assertion by a Glasgow-based scientist that water therapy is a myth devoid of any scientific basis. Years of faith in water therapy is driven by the belief that it can prevent many health problems. Number of people, developing the habit to drink six to eight glasses of water every day, seems to be increasing thanks to the above conviction. There are others who are scared of dehydration of the body if "adequate' water is not consumed and force themselves to drink water frequently whether thirsty or not. Of course it is known that drinking "too much" water can lead to the medical condition known as "hyponatraemia" or imbalance in Sodium in the blood which can seriously hamper brain function, some time proving to be fatal.

The million dollar question a humble citizen is forced to ask is how much is "adequate" and what constitutes excess". As a thumb rule it has been suggested that one liter of water for every 1000 kC food consumed can meet body's water requirement which goes for replacement of water lost due to perspiration and other excretions. This adds up to 2 liters of water a day. What if some human beings cannot drink the recommended quantum of water? Where does the "thirst phenomenon" fits into this equation? Human body is endowed with a system of balancing water in the body through an automatic mechanism controlled by the brain and when there is a deficiency in water, the thirst factor is supposed to kick in. Under extreme duress conditions, the body tends to lose water uncontrollably, like in diarrhea, when medical intervention is necessary and nutralite solutions or iso-tonic preparations are administered for water restoration.

Thirst signal is controlled by the brain and depending on whether it is extra cellular thirst due to reduction in water volume or intra cellular thirst caused by excess osmolite levels with in the cells and communicated through the central nervous system in normally healthy humans. With age neurological response tends to become dull and as a sufficient precaution old people are advised to consume water regularly. On the other hand the trouble of going to the toilet frequently is a factor that restrains old people from taking water regularly. According to WHO water consumption for men has to be 3.7 liters per day while for women it should be 2.7 liters per day. Of course many foods consumed as a part of the diet contributes significantly to body's water need and wide variation is possible depending on the level of activity, type of food consumed, temperature and humidity levels and other factors. Insinuation against drinking water bottling industry that it is responsible for the much hyped up water therapy may be too far fetched though the growth of this industry might be largely due to this factor.

How does a layman decide about his water requirement?. Probably, in stead of listening to divergent views, it is advisable to consume as much as he feels like taking and go by doctor's advice when ever there are symptoms of dehydration.

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

MAN VS MACHINE-DILEMMA OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

One distinguishing difference between rich and poor countries is the power of modern technology the former have which deploys energy intensive, largely automated machinery and high productivity techniques making human intervention redundant. Modern industrial economic principles call for high production volumes which brings down the cost of production and increase profitability. In contrast most developing countries, having abundant man power and large unemployment rate depend heavily on large number of small scale operators for industrial production. Dynamics of economic growth can uplift the economies of many developing countries as witnessed in China, India, Brazil, Malaysia etc and availability of manpower becomes more and more difficult. In this context is it possible for them to continue with small and micro-enterprises based economy? Do they have any option other than going in for large sized manufacturing operations involving mechanized processes and equipment and reduce human deployment to the minimum?

In a country like India many food processing operations evolved over the years and after the British era, the independent republic was left with a huge problem to provide employment to millions of people, not engaged in agriculture. Traditionally most food processing was done manually with very little use of machinery. A classical example is the grinding of grains into flours which is done even to day by stone mills or steel plate mills, the processing capacity not exceeding a few kilograms an hour. Advent of Roller Flour Mills with capacities ranging from 30 tons to 1000 tons a day did not change the landscape much since refined flours from grains like wheat have little culinary relevance. Same held good for all food processing sectors like fruit and vegetables, oil seeds, milk, poultry, meat and packed foods. Transformation from a predominantly manual mode of food processing to large scale mechanized mode has been very slow, though clearly perceptible.

The scenario started changing only when manpower availability became critical and the cost became exorbitant. Employment exchange centers where unemployed people are supposed to enroll are not able to provide required man power to the industry, forcing them to look for more and more mechanization. The trend towards increased mechanization became more perceptible after the economic liberalization process which started in early nineteen nineties and to day entrepreneurs can access the best machinery from across the world with minimum hassle. The days of Khadi and Village Industries Commission set up during the early years of independence to encourage and support micro-enterprises has largely become dysfunctional with practically no support from the government. Though there is much talk about unemployment in the country, the ground reality is that industry finds it hard to get unskilled personnel in required numbers at reasonable wages for employment. With many government employment schemes operating and paying high wages, the trend is for people to gravitate towards these schemes leaving the industry high and dry. What option does the industry have except going in for mechanized gadgets and implements for managing production?

What are the long term repercussions of such a change on the economic front of the country? There was a time when India had the cheapest labor and it was a strength on which exports were built. In the food area there are many operations that cannot be done using machines without compromising on their eating characteristics though continuous R & D may come up with more efficient equipment in response to emerging demand for such mechanical contraptions. Products like Papad, Roti, Chikki, most fried snack foods, traditional sweet meats, require deployment of artisans familiar with the unit operations involved and it is difficult to imagine that satisfactory machines will ever be evolved. If this is so how about using this situation to the advantage of the country? For this to happen the redundant and wasteful Government schemes must be replaced with imaginative productive schemes linked to industrial needs. In stead of distributing doles to people with no long term benefit, such funds must be channeled to industrial workers like artisans and unskilled labor force in cooperation with the industry.

If GOI can evolve a policy of encouraging these artisan based industries through a "special purpose vehicle" (SPV) with high priority to enable them to manufacture safe and high quality products with minimum use of power driven machinery, there will never be a challenge to the supremacy of the country from any quarters in the foreseeable future. India should learn a lesson from the experience in the cashew nut processing which was earlier a predominantly labor intensive operation, now being done with machinery. With individual skill for getting high quality nuts being marginalized, there are countries like China, Vietnam and those from some Africa which are challenging the Indian supremacy in this coveted area. What India needs is a series of functional industrial estates across the country that will specialize in some or the other food areas and if adequate technical and financial muscle is provided there is no reason why India cannot dominate the global food market with its enormous 'human muscle" and no other country on earth can pose any challenge in the foreseeable future. Where there is a vision and a will, there must be a way to accomplish the objective.

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

OMEGA-9 PLANT OILS FOR INDUSTRY-IS IT A DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT?

Oils and fats evoke different response in different people. Policy makers world over feel fats in foods consumed by citizens make them obese and sick. Food industry and the caterers love them because oils provide flavor, texture and taste that drive customers in droves to buy their products. Nutritionists advice a balanced approach where good fats are consumed in moderation while bad fats totally avoided. On the subject of bad and good fats, most consumers are now aware that saturated long chain fatty acids and trans fats are not good for health while unsaturated fats are essential for survival. Industry has problems in using unsaturated fats because of their intrinsic property of going rancid with time.

Hydrogenation was conceived as a convenient way of stabilizing fats with double bonds so that they are not vulnerable to oxidative rancidity. Industry further discovered that hydrogenated fats assume harder texture with positive functional properties. The baking industry was once dependent on hydrogenated fats to such an extent that no baked products could be made with acceptable quality characteristics without deploying them in liberal quantities. Products like margarine and mayonnaise need hydrogenated fats and the arrival of trans fats problem had caused some set back to this industry. It is another matter that this industry was able to overcome this constraint through innovative developments in fat processing technology.

As for use of various fats for frying operation, animal fat was considered most suitable with least cost as it is a by-product of meat industry. To the bad luck of the frying industry, animal fats became the "untouchable" villain because of its cholesterol content, implicated in heart disease in humans. As almost all plant oils are unstable to heat and vulnerable to peroxidation due to their unsaturated fat content, search for better frying oils and frying technologies assumed critical importance in the past millennium. Coconut oil and Palm oil are two of the most important vegetable oils with high resistance to oxidation and rancidity as they contain relatively low levels of unsaturated fats. Use of antioxidants and minerals with high adsorption capacity for polar compounds in the frying medium, has become industry standard as far as frying oil is concerned and millions of tons of fried foods are being made using almost all oils of plant origin like soybean oil, canola, peanut oil, mustard oil, corn oil, sun flower seed oil, etc.with reasonable product stability.

Sunflower oil normally has high linoleic acid content and as such its thermal and oxidation stability is rather poor because of which it is not an ideal frying oil. Through development of better seeds by the agricultural scientists, high oleic acid containing sun flower oil is possible and same is true with Canola also. The omega-9 sunflower and canola oils are better frying oils because the tendency to form trans fats at high temperatures, encountered during frying, is arrested. Of course these versions developed by giant trans national companies are patent protected creating a virtual monopoly. It is claimed that Omega-9 sunflower oil is healthier than natural oil but such claims cannot be sustained because linoleic acid is one of the essential fatty acids required for many body functions and producing an oil with less linoleic acid from the natural oil with high levels of linoleic acid, cannot be called an improvement.

Probably availability of Omega-9 Sunflower Oil may make many food companies reduce or eliminate saturated fat from new front-of-pack labels and within a couple of years such products can be expected to be on retail shelves in countries like the US. Market savvy consumer food business players have realized that the consumers invariably prefer a saturated fat free label claim on a retail bottle of oil five to one over the same product labeled without the claim. The development of Omega-9 oil is precisely targeted at this segment of the industry. However the claim that this version of oil is natural may be some what far-fetched considering that truly natural Sunflower oil contains almost 65% polyunsaturated fatty acids including linoleic acid and is far more nutritious than the industry developed Omega-9 oil in which the same is reduced to less than 4%!. It may be possible that use of Omega-9 oil can reduce the quantity of TBHQ or other antioxidants to some extent but to say that it does not require any antioxidant to extend the life of fry oil or that of the fried products also may not bear strict scientific scrutiny.

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

GLOBAL FOOD SAFETY-NEED FOR INTERNATIONALCOOPERATION

Why should America be concerned about food safety logistics in other countries? Being a super power the US always behaved imperiously with almost all its trade partners and in stead of a policy of "hand holding", the policy was more concerned with "policing" and "arm twisting". Lately realization has dawned on this country that its own citizens are vulnerable to food safety hazards, though unwittingly, if there is no understanding and cooperation with its trading partners. Food related dangers cannot be avoided but can be tackled more efficiently by working towards a global industry regime practicing universally acceptable safety standards and practices. Of course agencies like Codex Alimentarius Commission is already doing a yeomen service by harmonizing food standards with cooperation from from all UN members but when it comes to logistics and infrastructure many countries find the going tough. It is here that wealthy nations like the US must lend a helping hand through technical and economic assistance to upgrade and modernize safety assessment systems in many countries which are in the export trade sending their foods across the world.

A country like the US cannot deny the fact that two thirds of its fresh produce need and 80% of fish supply come from other countries and this is like exposing its "soft belly" to untoward incidences of dangers from unsafe foods. With terrorism raising its ugly head in many parts of the world, it is a question of time before food becomes a tool for terrorism and if a nation depends too much on imported foods, its vulnerability to food related dangers becomes all the more critical. Probably Americans must have realized this bitter truth and are coming forth for genuine international collaboration for pre-empting such a scenario in future.

A recent report by the Safety agency of the US has brought out these issue clearly and succinctly and according to this vision, there is no alternative to "assembling a global coalition of regulators dedicated to building and strengthening a world-wide product safety net work" for which concerted action is needed. It also envisages "developing global data system and net work to share real time information" which will be useful as a reliable resource material to be shared among member countries. Expanding intelligence gathering, focusing on risk analysis and helping third parties through strengthening of their capabilities are also envisaged. Knowing pretty well that 100% inspection is never in the realm of reality, alternate system will have to be evolved to ensure 100% safety.

The plans as illustrated in the FDA Report are indeed laudable but translating it into actionable program is not going to be easy. For example how is it possible to actually get more inspections done in the countries from where exports arrive at US ports? Most of these nations, engaged in export of raw and minimally processed food materials lack even the basic infrastructure that is far inadequate for carrying out safety related inspections. It is here that large investments are required for capacity building. A country like India gets high marks after the rolling out of the FSSAI though it may take years before even the minimum acceptable infrastructure is established. The question is whether developed countries like the US will ever step into this area and invest in upgrading the infrastructure to a level acceptable to all. It may be a Utopian dream but cannot be ruled out altogether in the light of frequent serious food poisoning episodes and costly product recalls becoming a routine matter in these rich countries.

It is time to realize that no country, however powerful it may be, can be 100% self reliant when it comes to food production due to many factors and the whole world trade edifice is based on this unshakable truth. Take the examples of countries like Japan, England, Singapore and many others which depend on imports to meet a substantial part of their food requirements because of constraints on land and unfavorable weather conditions, Is it not in the interest of such countries to take those countries, richly endowed with natural resources as genuine partners and invest in their well being? Investments on the food safety infrastructure and technical manpower will be richly rewarding in the long term. The new paradigm of cooperation as enunciated by the FDA of the US must be given highest priority at the UN level without further delay.

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

ARSENIC LACED CHICKEN!-POULTRY INDUSTRY ON THE MAT

Arsenic evokes fears among the consumers as it is one of the earliest poisons known to humans. It is unbelievable how such a poisonous substance is allowed to be used by the poultry industry purely for increasing the visual quality of meat. It is claimed by the industry that including arsenic in the poultry feed also fights infections among the birds though there are many other safer substances available for preventing infectious diseases. Of course there is excellent chance that practice of using arsenic compounds like Roxarsone in poultry feeds by more than 70% of the broiler growers in the US may be banned in the near future considering that the excreta from such birds containing high levels of arsenic contaminates ground water. According to WHO more than 57 million people in the world have access to only water that contains more than 10 ppb arsenic, the safe limit set by the global agency. How far the poultry industry has contributed to this unfortunate situation is any body's guess!

Elemental arsenic and arsenic compounds are classified as Group I carcinogens by the European Union as elevated levels of these poisonous substances, especially for prolonged periods, can lead to cancer of bladder, kidney, prostate, skin and nasal cavity. Though testing of blood, urine, hair and nails can reveal arsenic levels in human body, the test results cannot be depended upon to predict the effect of arsenic at levels detected by one or two tests. According to knowledgeable scientists arsenic can elevate the production of Hydrogen Peroxide in the tissue leading generation of active Oxygen radicals with potential to damage the DNA. This in turn can lead to cancer over long periods of exposure. As per some estimates there are more than 80 million people across the world, exposed to drinking water sources containing between 10 and 50 ppb arsenic and incidence of cancer is high among these population. In the US alone 20% of wells yield water with high arsenic concentration. Water treatment technology to day has the wherewithal to remove arsenic and probably such treatment regimes are protecting people from arsenic epidemic.

Recent announcement about voluntary suspension of use of arsenic laced feed by the FDA of the US comes after years of controversy over the widespread poultry industry practice of giving chicks arsenic-laced feed to combat infection and give their flesh a pinker hue. Surprisingly use of arsenic containing feed is confined only to the US and why this was being allowed could be due to the lobbying power of the industry on the government. It may be recalled that there has been persistent demand by scientists and environmentalists to ban it nationally because of their concerns about food safety and the environmental impact of arsenic in poultry waste getting into soil and streams.

Some progressive players in the poultry industry have already phased out its use seeing the writings on the wall without waiting for any government action but the current move by FDA to put in place a "voluntary suspension" mode for the arsenic-laced drug is based on findings that there were elevated levels of arsenic, a proven carcinogen, in birds fed the substance. Roxarsone, the most conspicuous brand based on arsenic, has been a standard component of chicken feeds since the 1940s as the industry claims that it ensures "growth promotion, feed efficiency and improved pigmentation in chickens." Poultry industry, probably, can justifiably argue that the US population, consuming chicken meat, produced from flocks raised on arsenic containing feeds during the last seven decades, is not affected by cancer more than those in other countries not permitting arsenic in poultry feeds!

The turn around in the stand by the FDA came after it was realized that the drug containing the less harmful organic form of arsenic in Roxarsone got converted into more harmful inorganic form, which is known to cause cancer. It is a mystery as to why the FDA came to the conclusion regarding its safety after finding that 100 broiler chickens fed Roxarsone had elevated levels of inorganic arsenic in the their livers. Both the FDA and industry aver that though arsenic is carcinogenic, the levels detected in the chickens were very low and there's no health risk for people to continue eating Roxarsone-treated poultry! .It is sad that the overseeing agency that controls poultry industry in the US had closed its eyes to this irrational and unsafe practice of the industry during the last seven decades under the guise that the chicken meat obtained from arsenic fed birds contain less than the prescribed limit of this poisonous substance. How far the data can be trusted is any body's guess because of the hold industry has on government agencies in that country. The manufacturers of 3-Nitro, an arsenic based organic drug for use in poultry feeds had the good sense to voluntarily suspend its sale realizing the seriousness of the concerns expressed by many consumer organizations. Hopefully a national ban (voluntary), expected to be put in place soon, will ensure that arsenic containing feeds will become part of history pretty soon.

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

"THEY VS US"-THE ETERNAL DEBATE ON FOOD SAFETY!

Whether one likes it or not there is a wide chasm dividing the developing and developed countries and no camouflage can mask this bitter truth. It is not for charity that wealthy countries are buying foods from poor nations and the former does it as an unavoidable necessity for their own survival. In to day's world no country can be 100% self-reliant, depending on others for supply of many products needed by their citizens. Take the instance of Japan, a country with limited land availability, which is heavily dependent on buying most of their food needs from countries all around the world or for that matter the US and Canada which import more than 80% of its needs for meat and fish products from Asia.

When developing countries are repeatedly being hauled up for unsatisfactory quality or suspect safety credentials of the foods exported by them, the industrialized nations do not think for a moment the historic reasons for such a situation. During colonial days those countries who had the ownership right on many of those countries under their subjugation could loot their resources shamelessly and ruthlessly and there were no reservations in consuming the foods made there vis-a-vis quality or safety! Though under WTO regime there should not be any technical barrier to trade between member countries, developed world invariably use the technical "route" probably to get favorable terms for buying the same products indicted once! If this is the attitude what will happen to the so called "free trade" regime? How can it work to the mutual benefit for all? There has to be a fundamental change in the mindset of these rich countries and they should consider poor countries as equal partners in protecting the free trade philosophy to which everybody is committed.

In a recent tirade against imported foods in Canada, it was claimed that most foods imported into the West are inferior and unsafe for consumption and locally made foods are discriminated against by the authorities there by insisting on stiffer standards while imported foods are not subjected to any severe scrutiny! What an insinuation! It is a common knowledge that most food poisoning cases in the West had their origin within the country and the broken safety vigilance systems there are unable to cope up with violations indulged by the domestic industry. Look at the recent German episode involving E.coli contamination resulting in at least 51 deaths so far and remember it was not caused by imported foods from Asia. The very feces blamed for contaminated foods from Asia was responsible for the food poisoning but the source was from German feces! They may blame Egyptian Fenugreek for the tragedy but such buck passing does not cut ice any more.

Read the arrogant statement by a western spokesman who proclaimed with a flamboyance that food producers in China regularly use untreated human and animal waste for feeding farmed fish meant for eating and for fertilizing land to grow produce and most of the cases of contamination involving imported food in the U.S. are related to fecal matter! Further it is claimed that chicken coops with as many as 20,000 birds are often suspended in rows above ponds used for farming shrimp and fish in countries like Thailand. The chicken waste that falls in the water is a nourishment for the aquatic life and provides food for the shrimp. Similarly Chinese are supposed to be using feces for raising Tilopia which is exported to the US. One wonders what is the role of FDA officials posted in China if such practices are really in vogue.

As per common sense it is incumbent for those having arrangements to obtain food products and ingredients from any third parties out side to ensure they have appropriate oversight of the food that's being produced or processed for imports into their country. It is fair to argue that those importing food from overseas, and those with production operations there, should be held responsible for the quality of food making it to any country including western markets. Listen to what the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has to say about such insinuations. A spokesperson of the agency asserted that the country's rigorous food safety requirements apply equally to imported and domestic foods. Further safety and quality of imported food is ensured through "equivalency agreements" with other countries and random inspections at various points in the supply cycle ranging from when the product first gets to Canada to the testing of food already on store shelves. If there is any genuine concern about the safety of imported foods in countries like Canada, which imports 70% of its food needs worth $ 22 billion annually from other countries, it is in the interest of that country to help the exporting countries in upgrading their safety vigilance infrastructure through technical and economic assistance on a long term basis.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com