Global Scrutiny of Packaged Food

While Indian packaged food industry has shown promising growth, both locally and internationally, there are many health related concerns which merit government attention. — KK Srivastava

The packaged spices industry is witness to cheerful growth rates, both locally and internationally. But it came under scanner since internationally it was questioned on safety norms as per global standards. There have been calls for bans and stringent actions to prevent any malpractices. There is much at stake for the nearly Rs. 50,000 crore industry if things are not set right, and soon.

Hongkong and Singapore recently detected presence of ‘excess’ ethylene oxide in some spices exported by MDH and Everest from India. A ban on sale there was imposed. These two countries are not alone. Complaints about Indian spices have been registered in Australia, US and some other nations as well about dangerous contaminants in these Indian products which have the potential to even development of certain type of cancers. The two companies have tried to downplay the regulatory authorities action one way or other. For example, MDH denies using ethylene oxide. Still, the regulator of the field – the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) – decided to put all manufacturers of spices under scrutiny. Likewise for the spices Board of India, which has decided to undertake checks with greater intensity. And yet the regulatory authorities are quick to say that Indian regulatory standards are fairly stringent. The FSSAI rejected the malicious reports that Indian herbs and spices contain excess pesticides.

But the stark fact is that while the standards prescribed for food items may be fairly comprehensive and strict, the enforcement of these rules governing food processing is soberingly inadequate on safety tests. At the basic level the sorry fact is that the government does not have right – and enough number of – labs, nor adequate staff, for testing purposes.

It is also a fact that export regulations vary from country to country with no common standards. Thus the exporting companies have to have sufficient knowledge about the regulatory aspects governing each country. Thus it is not intentional that a company may sell ‘adulterated’ product; instead the problem may be ‘knowledge gap’. Not only this, even the test methodologies may be compromised since the company in question may fail to comply with standardized standard operating procedure (SOP). This then may lead to passing a sample which should not have been cleared.

Whatever, but Indian spices have come under spotlight for a bad reason. But the trouble is not confined to merely ‘exported’ spices. In the recent past the media is full of reports on India’s food safety regime in background of allegation against multiple products such as infant food, health drinks and of course spices. Thus questions have been raised about excessive sugar in Nestle’s baby food productions (Nestle of course denies it, saying the sugar content is less than permissible in India). Indian spices have been declared carcinogenic aboard. In the US the refusal rate for import of Indian spices has doubled in past one year. The European Union has put some items originating from Indian under scanner. And all this for generally well known brands. The controversies have raised fears that a larger section of the Indian market could be at the very least non conversant of regulation and testing procedures (which does not make the offence pardonable) or that they have been deliberately trying to bypass the regulatory radar. Every citizen continues to worry as to whether food products we ingest are safe or not; lately this concern has taken us under its grip at accelerated pace since issues like cancer, nervous disorder, DNA damage, elevated blood pressure – the list is very long – are taking us under their clutches at alarming rates. Most of these issues are being traced back to food contamination. To top it all, nowadays 24x7 media plays a very important role in making this information, which sometimes may even be unverified or inaccurate, easily accessible, easily digestible. 

Growing affluence is changing our food habits. We are tilting towards ‘healthy’ products (organic, hydroponic, ‘health’ drinks and so on). Then we realize that there is excessive added sugar in our packaged foods, that ‘healthy’ drinks are not providing health benefits.  Reactively then our FSSAI stops malted beverages and mixes from being sold as ‘health’ drinks. But that is not enough. 

The FSSAI was established in 2008, two years after the enactment of the food safety and standards Act. It overseas the standards of safety for all the companies, small, medium, and large, local, and international. Indeed it overseas a very large swathe, though it has been consistently hamstrung by staff and infrastructure shortage. No wonder it has had a chequred record. This has led a large section of the marketers to view regulations as paperwork rather than regulator inspections dictated by expert guidance and SOPs. The agency is actually mandated to educate both consumers and businesses on food safety issues and norms. It is supposed to “collect and collate data regarding food consumption, incidence and prevalence of biological risk, contamination in food, residues of various contaminants in food products and identify risks.” Indeed a very ambitions and (almost) unachievable canvas to paint, given the kind of backing it gets from the government in terms of resources. No wonder, food items generate umpteen controversies around them – questions being raised about their safety, falsification of labels, etc. – as regards fitness about their consumption. And immediately FSSAI is blamed that the agency has done scarce justice to its remit. Not only this, at times the courts too have struck down the agency’s actions due to procedural shortcomings, for example in the 2015 vital Neutraceuticals case. 

As gatekeepers of the nation’s alimentary canal, FSSAI needs more guts. Though it has a network of more than 200 food testing labs, given the size of the industry, number of players and the segments they play in, and expanding export market to cater to, this number is inadequate. The government must prioritise creating more accredited labs, ensuring actually functioning foods labs at state levels, deploying more trained manpower, and ensuring enforcement of norms.

There will always be scientific uncertainly (how much ethylene oxide is safe) and the variance in rules. Hence the need for updating standards regularly and enforce it strictly. Government needs to come forward.

Share This