Rice additive don't need to wait for the public to say "no"

news

    Food additives "no need not to add" has become a social consensus. Regulators should by this standard for all food additives, the necessity of the norm of examination and grate, why am I still have to etc public say "no"?

    According to recent fired an uproar in the "rice additives", health ministry had responded that, starch phosphate ester sodium (thickener) add in rice "completely not necessary" in, so are not allowed to use, but to double acetic acid sodium (preservative) and take off acetyl chitin (both additive by pellicle, health ministry did not make clear in rice or need to use.

    According to this response, version of "food additive using standard" allow rice could be added starch phosphate ester sodium (thickener), is obviously a mistake, is this opinion denounce "rice additives" a small gains. However, health ministry that rice add preservatives and evade whether is definitely necessary by pellicle, just "welcome to the question," opinion additives and throw it to the public.

    Associate a previous version of "food additive to use standard" is allowed to use antiseptic additive such as health system, has said, because "people new standards in public to solicit opinion nobody objection", so rice use antiseptic not be revoked. Implication, is has fulfilled the perform for advice program, the public did not do supervision, the timely discovery and objection, the responsibility is not in the health department.

    In food safety management, it is necessary to public supervision, after the termination flour zengbaiji public supervision is also showing the power, but overall, the supervision of the general public at best is auxiliary, not regulators. The "shield" shirking Food safety involve too many professional fields, the public is not food research experts, if not media interpretation, most people even "double acetic acid sodium" is what all bewildered, which have the ability to supervise?

    Moreover, the public even if has the ability to supervise, are often very lag, take flour whitening agent for, although the final push to ban in public opinion, under its was approved the use of decades, flour, the harm of bleaching agent in many people's body has been buried in the price, so that cannot call not heavy.

    So, food safety management, real or regulators on the initiative of "professional checks". The regulator can hire each domain experts, can apply for the special research funds, can control the overall food safety information, therefore has the ability to push some advanced research, bud, also capable of increasing development technology, timely save previous mistakes decisions. In fact, we have repeatedly seen some regulators through years abroad even decades of research, the conclusion before himself to deny examples, this is responsible attitude.

    Take "rice additives" speaking, regulators "professional checks" seems to have his duty. Rice add thickener obvious contrary to common sense, some rice production manufacturer to allow add this surprised, regulators, mo and why treat? So much food experts to "rice additives" say "no", in my approval "rice additives" before, these experts opinion why not valued, regulators have organized a fair and objective argument?

    Flour zengbaiji, food additives after "no need not to add" has become a social consensus, "food safety law stipulates that the" food additive shall indeed in technology is necessary and after risk assessment proof safe and reliable, listed in the scope of using only allowed ". Regulators should by this standard for all food additives, the necessity of the norm of examination and regularly. "Rice additives" has exceeded "necessary" category, why am I still have to etc public say "no"?

    "Rice additives" is how to release

    news

    May 19, have anonymous food in the system, the new "expert reflect the use of food additives standard", rice was allowed to add preservatives, including three additives. The expert thinks, rice use preservatives in process and no necessary, according to "food safety law should be revoked. (May 20 new andmorecomfortable ")

    Big rice also add preservatives? Many people, including some manufacturers listened to all by surprise. More importantly, rice use additives no law basis. "Food safety" regulation, "food additive shall indeed in technology is necessary and after risk assessment proof safe and reliable, listed in the scope of using be allowed." Rice can add additive, obviously not "technology is definitely necessary".

    So we think of two problems: one is, rice additive is how to enter additive list? From the solid on say, have what theory basis; From the program, said after the assessment and safety demonstrates how? Was there any widespread questionnaire opinion? 2 it is, now the expert suggests to rice additives to on the basis of the food safety law revoked. So, what are the procedures for cancellation additives? Would like to cancel flour, require a long time as agent of the game.

    Food additive management system should be "strict into wide out". Allow add to set up checked posts, strict procedures, layers of the difficulty of increased into; And for potentially harmful additives, should be in line with "would rather believe it has" principle of seasonable cancel, this can conduce to food security.