Sridhar Dharmapuri, an expert in food analysis with the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has asserted that the threat of formalin to food safety in Bangladesh is yet to be proved. The real threat, rather, comes from pesticide and metals present in foods. According to the food analyst -one who was one of the key scientists responsible for establishing the National Food Safety Laboratory (NFSL) in Dhaka with support from the FAO, Bangladesh would do better not to mind so much about the naturally occurring organic compound because it is 'not a food hazard'.
He made this claim on Sunday at an international gathering titled, "One Health Conference" held in the capital. Dharmapuri also advised not to be misled by what he called 'perception', rather scientific evidence should be the basis of any government action. At the time he spoke on 'Risk Perception', a component of the conference subjects, Professor of Medicine, Stephen Luby of the Stanford University and John Ryder, Chief Technical Adviser of the FAO Food Safety Programme, graced the conference as co-chairs.
Evidently, the FAO expert has referred to the Formalin Control Act-2015 and the anti-formalin drive carried out last year against fruits, in which tonnes of mangoes in particular were destroyed. The food analyst also raised the issue of the faulty formalin-detection device. The one used to determine the presence of formalin in fruits was in fact meant to measure it in the gaseous form. The kit could measure the presence of the substance in air or atmosphere, not in a solvent state with fruits. The High Court ruled, not for nothing, that proper device had to be used to detect formalin with which fish, fruits and vegetables were treated.
So the FAO expert's considered recommendation is not to make it a big issue. He claims that formalin is naturally added in various quantities in different foods, fruits and vegetables. So no country could set the limit of formalin in foods. Also, repeated washing takes away the substance. In case of fish, washing, boiling and the process of cooking almost cure the item from residual effect of formalin, he further claims. The European food safety authority sets the safe limit of 100 ppm of formalin a day.
So he would like the country to concentrate on limiting the application of chemical pesticide and metals. Tests carried out on some of the questionable samples at the NFSL found the result negative. However, the test carried out on turmeric powder at the laboratory found lead 20 times higher than the permissible level. He considers that it was a deliberate act. Clearly, he wants the policy-makers and others involved with ensuring food safety to shift the focus from formalin to more hazardous pesticides and metals.
Farmers use pesticide in order to control pests and raise crop yield. But they are not often aware of the right amount of pesticides to be used. Application of too much of such toxin can at times be counterproductive. The need, therefore, is to train farmers about the use of right proportion of synthetic compounds. Even the timing of pesticide's application in a crop field or on vegetables proves crucial. These are areas where the country needs to do a lot of work. After all, food security alone is not enough; there is need for ensuring safe foods for the people.
Now that the FAO expert's contention has somewhat helped settle some of the serious questions about formalin, traders may feel elated to go about their business with a fresh gusto forgetful of the fact that it is illegal, anyway. When used to lengthen shelf life of fruits or vegetables or give a fresh and shiny look, the chemical is treated illegal. After all, this compound was meant for other uses and never for use in food items. Addition of lead to turmeric is intended to give it a brighter yellow colour. This is a crime, so is the use of formalin because the process is nothing but tinkering with the originality of something.
It is adulteration of food of a different type. The right to safe foods is violated by such manipulation. From growing crops to preparation of foods, there are different stages and all such stages have to be put under scrutiny. When cereals like paddy are husked or powdered, there is always a tendency to give them a better look. But appearances can be deceptive in case extra ingredients are added to give them a more attractive look. Formalin takes away the original taste, so does such manipulation with cereals. It speaks volumes of the craftiness and dishonesty ingrained in the country's trade circles when molasses becomes costlier than sugar and the latter is used for the former item's adulteration.
Therefore, the FAO expert suggests that those who are involved in trading malpractice should be caught in the act. He has refrained from telling of awarding punishment. Everyone knows that in this country criminals are seldom punished. True, the law of the land is not allowed to operate unhindered. Unless the rule of law becomes an operative tool to take on the criminals the unholy alliance of traders cannot be busted. What the country's farmers are doing is out of ignorance. If properly informed and guided, they will correct themselves but one would be happy if the same could be said about the traders as well.
Finally, Dharmapuri's contention may not be conclusive yet because the debate on effects of some natural pesticides like caffeine and capsaicin on human body is yet to be resolved.
nilratan halder2000@yahoo.com
Pesticide more dangerous than formalin!
Nilratan Halder | Published: April 03, 2015 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2024 06:01:00
Share if you like