本次時程
10/3-9資料收集
10/10-14撰稿
請在14號以前交稿
工作分配
主題：芳盈
國外：豪哥、民浩、佳真
國內：光狐、浩哥
麻煩大家了！
2007年10月2日 星期二
下一次主題：世界心臟日
我是芳盈，這次輪到我寫主題的部份囉~^^
前幾天我上WHO網站看了一下，發現9/30是世界心臟日，因此和光狐討論之後，決定以此為這期的主題。
我覺得這個議題應該還滿好發揮的，由於心血管疾病是種「文明病」，發生率和死亡率越來越高，因此在現在非常受到重視。我的部份當然就是有關WHO對心血管疾病做了哪些預防工作，他們也出版了許多相關的書籍，再帶一些有關世界心臟日的東西；如果寫台灣議題的伙伴們，當然也可以提到心血管疾病一直是十大死因的常客(還是VIP級的咧~^^")，國際的部份可以寫9/30是否有配合做什麼活動，或是該國心血管疾病的狀況，是否造成什麼問題或影響及預防政策等，以上只是我的建議啦~~~~
大家加油！！^^
確切的工作分配表就請光狐公告囉~
前幾天我上WHO網站看了一下，發現9/30是世界心臟日，因此和光狐討論之後，決定以此為這期的主題。
我覺得這個議題應該還滿好發揮的，由於心血管疾病是種「文明病」，發生率和死亡率越來越高，因此在現在非常受到重視。我的部份當然就是有關WHO對心血管疾病做了哪些預防工作，他們也出版了許多相關的書籍，再帶一些有關世界心臟日的東西；如果寫台灣議題的伙伴們，當然也可以提到心血管疾病一直是十大死因的常客(還是VIP級的咧~^^")，國際的部份可以寫9/30是否有配合做什麼活動，或是該國心血管疾病的狀況，是否造成什麼問題或影響及預防政策等，以上只是我的建議啦~~~~
大家加油！！^^
確切的工作分配表就請光狐公告囉~
2007年9月27日 星期四
0926期稿件
食品安全控管恢恢 黑心中國銷售全球 吳佳真
中國劣質食品已成為「黑心」產品的代名詞，近來引起全球恐慌的中國黑心食品如致癌大閘蟹、頭髮醬油、假酒、毒寵物食品等使消費者失去信心，掀起了抵制中國產品的風潮，在台灣及歐美國家甚至出現了以非中國製造標籤來提昇產品形象及安全性的做法中國黑心食品的販賣情形。
事實上，WHO自2000年開始，為了減少開發中國家食物引起的疾病，將食品安全列為主要公共衛生議題之一，開始建構食物感染疾病之監控系統、食品安全標準、風險評估、品質要求計畫，在基改食品出現後，加強了新科技產品的安全檢驗，亦鼓勵政府應與民眾進行正確的風險溝通，並加強各會員國疫情資源的利用等等。 食品的化學性污染漸漸是食品安全的一大焦點，跨國性組織CAC(Codex Alimentarius Commission )確立國際間的食物標準Codex Standards予各國參考，成為各國食品管制的訂定指標。
日漸氾濫的中國黑心食品不僅顯示食品安全標準及檢測的重要，亦是檢驗各國食品安全控管系統的完整性之時機。2004十月Global Fora of Food Safety Regulators在泰國孟買舉行第二屆全球食品安全控管會議，以「建立有效的食品安全控制管制系統」為題，邀請各國一同分享管制經驗及討論相關的重要議題。印度政府以該國「出口食品的控制及檢定」的經驗，建議出口食品量大的國家應確認進口國家的食物標準及檢測方法，與進口國家達成食品檢定決議，藉著自我食品檢定確保出口食品的安全，不但能保護消費者，建立國家信譽，亦能減少出口末端食品認證的時間和金錢，避免負擔退貨的額外損失。
美國政府亦指出，其各自有兩個單位控管進口食品，FSIS(The Food Safety and Inspection Service)規定進口肉類、禽類及蛋類國家應與美方有相同的食品管制檢查機制，HHS/FDA(The U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services) 則規定各國進口的其他所有食品之製造程序應符合美國當局的安全要求，違反規定即無法進口至美國。
國際貿易將食品從製造國送往世界的另一頭，各國進出口的食品控管系統各自面對互相折衷規範的情形。中國食品在此氛圍露出劣質原形，遭受各國譴責，其後兩領導人胡錦濤及溫家寶皆誓言加強產品安全監管力度和法律體系建設，從而使全球消費者的權益得到更好的保障。但在強力管制之前，中國食品的製造源頭之原料、生產製造、販賣等過程仍有錯綜複雜的問題有待當局解決為先。
參考資料：
1. 維基百科，黑心食品
2. WHO，http://www.who.int/features/qa/19/en/index.html
What is WHO doing to help countries improve food safety?
3. WHO，http://www.who.int/foodsafety/codex/en/
Food standards (Codex Alimentarius)
4. Ms Shashi Sareen, Director, Export Inspection Council, India ，Food Export Control And Certification，Second FAO/WHO Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators，Bangkok， Thailand， 12-14 October 2004
5. the United States of America，Food Export Control And Certification，Second FAO/WHO Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators ， Thailand， 12-14 October 2004
中國應重新面對產品品質不良的問題 顏稚浩
從今年(2007)四五月間開始，美國媒體開始大幅度報導有關中國的黑心食品，該月就有257項中國大陸被以安全問題為由，拒絕入境美國。之後又爆發了一連串的黑心產品事件，從震驚全球的巴拿馬的毒感冒糖漿事件、導致美國境內許多家庭飼養的寵物死亡的有毒飼料、義大利和西班牙查獲的有毒牙膏，到屬於美國境內的回收含鉛的玩具、有問題的輪胎、零食的調味料被驗出受沙門氏菌(salmonella)污染和被檢驗出含有禁用的抗生素的海鮮等。這些事件顯示出作為世界上重要的產品輸出國家，中國在管制其輸出食品的安全把關上出現了一些問題，導致有越來越多的人開始把”中國製造”和”不安全”畫上等號，據報導甚至也有製造商在其商品上標榜”非中國製造”來使消費者安心。
隨著其他國家對中國製的食品質疑的聲浪越來越高漲之際，中國起初維持其一貫的否認作風，將問題歸咎於其他國家的檢驗誤差、安全檢測的標準不同之外，其官方還宣稱美國輸入中國食品的近三年平均合格率只有98.9%，低於中國輸美食品99%以上的合格率。也有學者說今年上半年中國對美國出口總值達1072億美金，順差更高達739.1億美金，較去年同期增加了18.6%，這讓美國政府感到不悅，所以認為黑心食品問題的突然爆發，很大的一部分只是美國政府用來發洩對巨大的貿易逆差問題的不滿而已。不過隨著問題食品如滾雪球般越滾越大，北京當局也不得不承認確實在食品的安全管制系統出現了問題，像是權責不明，很多機構都對食品和藥物有檢測權，導致責任上出現重疊; 相關的規定執法不嚴;部分製造商鑽法律漏洞，以次級品替代來謀取暴利; 沒有建立起一套完整、統一的檢測系統來應付中國這個快速成長和流動的經濟等。不過值得一提的是，中國政府在同時也加強檢查其他國家輸入的食品作為反制，這兩個月來包括美國進口的內類和家禽製品被沙門氏菌汙染、日本的奶粉含鋅量低於包裝標示、印尼的水產品含有過量的微生物、菲律賓的食品也被驗出含有重金屬等事件也陸續爆發。
不過也有人把這項舉動解讀為中國政府在有能力完全解決自身的問題前，對其他國家進行的反抹黑手段。
中國民眾對這些事件的看法深受媒體的影響，食品問題剛爆發時，中國的媒體多數把它訴諸於貿易障礙問題，而不認為那是真正食品出了問題。不過最近開始有少數的媒體認為應該屏棄那種看法，而開始認真面對來自國外的質疑聲浪。
一般民眾對於國內的食品安全也有信心動搖的情況，很多消費者對層出不窮的問題食品新聞感到難以招架，根據報載，有些民眾已經不知道什麼東西可以吃，什麼東西有問題不能吃了，他們也不知道政府如何在食品安全上做把關，他們只知道安全可供食用的食物已經越來越少了。
在本身的食品安檢系統的改進上，北京當局在六月間由國家會議(state council)發表聲明說，中國將全面改革其食品和藥物的安全規定，這是至今中國對於食品安全問題最強烈的談話。七月間，中國皆露了新的食品和不合格的輸出品的管制措施，中國官方也誓言加強管理運用在內類和海鮮的化學藥品。七月底中美兩國在北京就食品安全議題舉行會談，八月間中國也派出代表團到華盛頓，與美方做近一步的討論，預計雙方在今年底前會就食品安全簽署備忘錄，在雙方進行會談之際，中國政府也關閉了三家違反食品安全規定的公司，這三家公司分別涉及了巴拿馬含二甘醇有毒感冒糖漿，和生產含有三聚氯胺(melamine)的寵物飼料的事件。北京當局也計劃在2010年時建立一套對食品藥物進出口以及藥物隨機檢測的管制標準，雖然他們還沒有說明是否會提供更多的資金在這件事上，以及由哪一個機構執行這項業務。幾個月前，北京當局將其前食品與藥物管理局局長判處死刑並已執行槍決。他被控收受廠商賄賂，讓未經檢測的藥物合法上市。
雖然這件事不免讓人對其食品安全檢測系統的公信力有了懷疑，不過從中國政府鐵腕處理這件醜聞來看，可以看出其改善食品安全的決心。
大部分的外國政府官員對於中國的改革措施均表示樂觀其成，不過他們也表示如果中國的產品持續出現問題，他們還是會做近一步的限制。不過有部分專家則對中國的宣示抱持懷疑的態度，他們認為有一部分是之前就已經做過的承諾了，而且中國並沒有承認所有的問題，其官方不斷指控這是國際媒體誇大了中國有問題的產品。有些專家也認為部分問題已經根深蒂固了，改革不可能進行的很快速，中國的經濟快速成長，要建立起能夠監控所有產品的系統所耗費的成本相當大，這實非一朝一夕就可以達成的。不過還是有評論家認為，對照之前一直不願意承認問題的中國政府來說，現在他們對這個問題的處理態度令人感到樂觀。
參考資料
1. 工商時報 B1-2版 96.08.12
2. 中國時報 A13版 96.08.01
3. http://www.nytimes.com/ (紐約時報)
4. http://www.cnn.com/ (CNN)
黑心食品的最大受害者—中國 林民浩
當世界上把”Made in China”當作一種警語，對於中國製造的產品採取高規格檢驗措施的同時，我們卻忽略了中國當地的民眾，他們的生活周遭充斥著黑心商品，這些中國民眾才是黑心食品的最大受害者。據指出，百分之八十二的大陸民眾擔心食品安全問題，更有高達百分之九十一的受訪者表示，曾經在生活中遭遇到食品安全的問題(王信賢，中國大陸黑心食品問題，陸委會)。
近年來，中國大陸重大的黑心食品事件層出不窮：2004年爆發黑心商人收集理髮店剪下的頭髮，經由化工廠以化學藥劑提煉出胺基酸溶液，並加入醬油中，以減少大豆的使用，達到降低成本的目的，但這些自頭髮提煉出來的胺基酸溶液，含有砷、鉛、氯丙醇等，而製成的醬油中則帶有4-甲基咪唑，可誘發癲癇，甚至致癌，受害人數不明；2003年阜陽劣質奶粉事件：安徽省阜陽縣自2003年底，陸續發現有嬰兒出現「頭極大，但軀幹發育不良」的情況，經調查，發現這些嬰兒使用黑心奶粉，比起一般奶粉蛋白質含量介於12%至18%間，該黑心奶粉的蛋白質含量只有0.37%，其營養價值遠低於一般奶粉，使得嬰兒在發育過程中營養不良，最後甚至死亡，據統計，至少有12人死亡，超過二百人有營養不良的情形，除了安徽外，在其他省分也有類似事件傳出。除此之外，還有成千上百的黑心食品，危害著中國民眾的健康。
一般咸信看得到的黑心商品只是冰山一角，還有許許多多黑心商品，是尚未被揭露的，但目前中國大陸資訊傳播受到管制，相關訊息無法被傳播及接收，再加以中國本身的官僚制度，黑心商品的檢舉訊息往往被掩蓋，民眾無法得知相關訊息的情況下，只能無辜受害。然而世界衛生組織在解決中國黑心食品方面，毫無著力點。而國際間的貿易手段，效力只及於中國大陸的進出口商品，對於中國內部的貨物品質問題乃至於內政問題，除譴責外，也毫無辦法。儘管中國官方已宣稱著手解決相關問題，甚至與國際合作，參與訂定食品安全國際標準，但成效如何，仍令人存疑。目前黑心食品問題只能仰賴中國大陸本身自覺，徹底落實相關食品安全管理，亦期待國際間能對此投注更多關注的眼神，並採取更積極的方式迫使中國面對、解決問題。
參考資料：
1. http://www.mac.gov.tw/big5/risk/2-3.pdf
2.http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%BB%91%E5%BF%83%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81
中國經濟與安全應同時並進 陳治平
經濟的發展是否真的讓我們吃的更健康？這對於中國來說似乎要打上一個問號。中國目前雖然在經濟上有明顯的發展，但是對於產品的品質要求上仍在原地踏步，從今年數種產品發生問題似乎可見一番。
中國在今年陸續在食品上發生問題，有寵物食品的成分不良造成寵物腎臟問題，使得美國有相當數量的寵物因此死亡。而中國出口的海產也因檢驗出內含重金屬可能造成人體傷害。這些食品衛生問題更近一步到達產品安全上，中國出產的玩具外層塗料上含有過量的鉛，另一方面部分牙膏產品內含工業用的二丁醇也存在致癌風險等。這些問題都顯現出在低成本取向的中國產品，存在著另一層的健康及安全衛生的隱憂。
這似乎不是一個單純的問題。一般我們多數會認為在經濟開始發展以後，能夠將生活水準有所提升，但是對於中國這樣的發展狀況，利用低工資、低成本吸引國際投資及進駐，在於汙染及環境保護的支出似乎就不甚重視，雖然近年中國更改經濟政策，希望從低成本高勞力的產業，改走向有永續發展、重視生活環境的經濟發展。但內陸的省份為求能和沿海發展快速的省份有相同的競爭力，勢必在部份限制及管理上必需妥協及讓步，這往往都是環保及衛生限制。這也帶來了更多的食品及衛生問題。
這造成兩種途徑的食品安全衛生問題：第一，部份商人為求低成本生產，在品質檢驗不完善及相關衛生條件未能強力執行下(執法機關收賄等)，使用工業用或是不符合標準的材料來製作食品(先前曾被報導的紙餡包子即是比較誇張的案例)，這往往會造成直接食用者中毒的案例發生。對於出口的產品來說，相對可能發生的案例數量會比較低，但是對於國內的使用者來說，卻往往是被隨著極高的風險。第二，長期生產高污染性的產品(如電鍍、電池等)，對於環境將留有重大的汙染，而污染物也將帶入食物鏈當中，人也將有可能吃到這樣的產物(中國海鮮存在重金屬就可能是這樣的問題)。
這對於中國來說，直接的衝擊是食品安全上的不信任及產品的信譽遭受損害，進而使得經濟上受到損失。這對於中國來說，似乎是個不大好的消息。中國必須在經濟發展的同時，提高國內對於食品衛生上的要求，更近一步對於整個產品製造上的標準及執行上更加嚴格。這是對於中國面對現有產品受到國際不信任所必須做的改進，另一方面，中國人民一直處在如此隨時可能因不良食品而有生命威脅的情況下，食品安全及衛生上的保障，將也是中國改進人權問題的必要措施。
資料來源：
1. BBC NEWS, “China food safety head executed”, 10 July 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6286698.stm
2. BBC NEWS, ” China cracks down on food safety”, 9 May 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6638113.stm
3. economist, “China's food safety”, Jun 12th 2007, http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9325404
4. MSNBC, “China's food safety woes now a global concern”, April 12, 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18078824/from/ET/
5. BBC NEWS, “US checks toothpaste for toxins”, 24 May 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6686627.stm
黑心氾濫，民眾如何自保 李芳盈
近來黑心食品氾濫，令人聞之色變，唯恐自己不小心買到或是誤食黑心食品。在媒體的報導之下，將所有不合乎理想期待的食品，都簡化歸類為「黑心食品」，造成這個名詞的濫用，到底什麼是「名符其實」的黑心食品呢？
按照中華民國行政院衛生署消費者資訊網所提供的定義，簡單來說：不該給人吃的，拿來給人吃，以及對消費者的健康、權益有重大危害的食品，都算是「黑心食品」。前者例如病死豬肉，病死豬肉屬於廢棄物，應該按照規定的相關管道回收或銷毀，不能再食用，若把這些病死豬肉當作食品，無論是否真的危害人體健康，都算是黑心食品。而食物中若出現不該添加的防腐劑，蔬菜水果使用不該使用的殺蟲劑，養雞鴨使用不該使用的抗生素，或是添加合法但過量的防腐劑、使用「合法」的抗生素，卻沒有適當的停藥時間等，也算是黑心食品。而隨著所添加的成份不同，黑心食品對人體的健康也造成不同的危害，例如過氧化氫，大多使用在病死的家禽家畜，將其漂白及殺菌，避免肉品發出腐敗的味道，若食用過量，則會造成頭痛、嘔吐，對皮膚及腸胃道都有腐蝕性的傷害。為了讓食品賣相更好，添加二氧化硫讓食品的顏色更鮮艷，但二氧化硫可能引發哮喘、呼吸困難等症狀。
為了因應層出不窮的黑心食品事件，政府對食品這個部份的把關越來越嚴格，包括賣場產品的標示抽查、抽驗以及生產源頭的管理。但由於賣場產品的標示抽查及抽驗屬於產品上市後的管理，可能等到不合格的檢驗報告出來時，產品早已銷售出去，因此對於食品的管理，從源頭就開始把關才是最重要的。因此行政院消費者保護委員會積極推動多項措施，除協調農委會、環保署等單位強化「環境污染與食品安全衛生監控機制」、「聯合查核(緝)行動」等防制黑心食品的合作機制外，並建立整體「食品製造業履歷管理機制」，以確實掌握食品產製及販售流向、研擬「管制黑心再生商品計畫」，就工廠管理、商品檢驗、商品標示及廢棄物回收處理等各項措施積極規範、評估試辦乳製品履歷制度之可行性、設立黑心食品免付費檢舉專線電話、規劃建立「食品安全警報紅綠燈機制」、研議修正「食品衛生管理法」，加重不法業者之行政罰鍰及罰金額度等。
其中「食品安全紅綠燈」這項措施對民眾最有助益，在第一時間內為民眾帶來最即時最詳盡的建議；食品安全的事件發生時，專家小組會在6~8小時以內，提供食品相關資訊：包含發佈日、燈號、事件過程、處置建議，讓民眾作為參考，其中「紅燈」指的是對人體有立即危害，包括遭下毒、重金屬或是抗生素超過標準值的食品，此外，即使對人體無害，但是以不該給人吃的原料製作的食品，也納入其中、「黃燈」指的是對人體有安全疑慮、或是添加物違反規定的食品、「綠燈」就是可以安心食用的指標，指的是原料雖不符合規定，但是這項瑕疵不影響食用安全的食品。
除了從政策上改善之外，許多政府單位更設立與食品安全相關的網站供民眾瀏覽查閱，例如：「消費者資訊網」、「食品資訊網」、「不安全進口產品資訊網」等，有些網站還提供諮詢專線及申訴信箱，歡迎民眾共同檢舉不法的黑心食品。想要徹底打擊黑心食品，需要政府與民間共同合作，由政府做好源頭把關及過程中的查驗，民眾也要記得切勿貪小便宜，購買來路不明或標示不清的食品，向信用良好之企業經營者購買，才能安心食用各種食品。
參考資料：
1. 行政院衛生署消費者資訊網 http://consumer.doh.gov.tw/fdaciw/pages/index.jsp
2. 食品資訊網 http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/chinese.asp
3. 不安全進口產品資訊網 http://www.unsafeimports.nat.gov.tw
(4) 行政院消費者保護委員會 http://www.cpc.gov.tw/fp.asp?id=317
Reflection behind the “Black-Hearted Food”:
Media’s effect on food safety in Taiwan 陳柏翰
Have you ever worried about the food you bought from the market when you see news on TV concerning the safety of the similar items? Maybe some of us are clever enough to differentiate the black-hearted products and ones with officially acknowledged labels, but many others are not. The media are capable of magnifying some certain insignificant events in our society, and the phenomenon gets even worse in Taiwan. On one hand, the media environment in Taiwan is among the freest in Asia and extremely competitive. On the other hand, the multitude is ravenous for gossips, which results in great competitions that the agencies always run after acerbic news to cater public tastes. The reasons above both result in categorizing all the products under expectation into the range of black-hearted food. Therefore as soon as we know what the black-hearted food is and what Taiwan government has done regarding food safety, we will identify the black-hearted food handily.
What is Black-Hearted Food?
The black-hearted food is, in official definition, the food that is not esculent for human, but produced and proffered by wicked dealer. The diseased meat, for example, are classic events occurring quite often in Taiwan. It is viewed as waste which should be recycled or destroyed by burning whether it is harmful to human health or not. Besides, food that is detrimental to consumer’s health and right is another definition for black-hearted food. For instance, unexpected antiseptics in food, fruit and vegetables with illegal pesticide are typical items of black-hearted food. Moreover, poultry products applying legal antibiotics without appropriate suspension period is also classified into black-hearted food.
The Certification, Traceability Systems and Labels
What has Taiwan government done toward food safety? To protect consumers from hazards of black-hearted food, the Council of Agriculture (COA) and acknowledged organizations started to advance some products certification and traceability systems, and labeling as well.
The COA began to implement the agriculture products resume information system in 2006. In the primary step, carrots and organic paddy are the two first products detailed by the system. Consumers can check all the producing procedures, including soil conditions, fertilizer and pesticides applications…etc, through the bar-code and resume checking machines in the supermarkets. And more and more product resumes will be added in the system. In addition to the resume information system, the authority concerned has also established the quality certification system. The three measures COA adopted in 2006 certification system are that coaching to establish brands, reinforcing marketing strategies and enlarging visibility, also including strengthening the tracing mechanism.
The traceability system was implemented in 2005. The system achieved the establishment of Taiwan Good Agriculture Practices (TGAP) for some of agricultural products. Also some demonstration pilots are promoted and educated to conduct paper records and pesticides application management. The scope of 2006 work plan is to integrate resume information system and recording methods of different certified organizations. The most important event is to upload the paper records to the information tracing platform. Besides, Department of Health has also implemented GHP (Good Hygienic Practice) and HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) to reinforce source control in the food manufacturing process.
Labeling, the friendliest measure, is still considered an effective way against black-hearted food. Following is the brief introduction of some common labels concerning food safety in Taiwan.
(A) (B) (C)
Label (A) presents Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), which is certified by Food Industry Research and Development Institute (FIRDI). The GMP label promotes the industry to implement good manufacturing practice. Its main scope concerns the fundamental management of “4M”, which are Man, Material, Machine, and Method. There exist 25 different categories of food labeling GMP in the market, which enables the consumers to shop at ease.
CAS (Chinese Agricultural Standard), the label (B), is certified by the COA, Executive Yuan. Its goal is to raise the quality standard of agricultural products and its artifacts. The characteristics of the products labeling CAS include consistent quality and composition, the manufacturing process under the Act Governing Food Sanitation, intact packing with precise composition details, and homegrown raw materials.
The third label is called Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). COA plays the role in certifying fruit and vegetables to insure quality and safety. The three circles in the label indicate Coaching, Inspection, and Control in reminding farmers of following appropriate agricultural practice.
The Department of Health (DOH), Executive Yuan are also aware of the demand-side concerning food safety. DOH has constructed several websites to inform and educate the mass population with correct general knowledge, simplified regulations and the latest updated food information. Consumers can check certain food information they are interested in the websites such as Consumer Information Website and Food Information Website. The interactive activities DOH has developed, for instance, are Diet Quotient Quizzes and Food Safety Alert Mechanism. Diet Quotient Quizzes are some problems testing general population’s common knowledge about food safety. Consumers can not only examine their general sense but also get correct information. On the other hand, Food Safety Alert Mechanism reminds the consumers of the latest updated information through green-yellow-red light. If there are any news about black-hearted food, consumers can surf the website to see which light shines for the certain food. In conclusion, the mass population can receive instant official information by way of internet, which can eliminate the magnified effect by the news agencies.
True amplified examples in Taiwan
(I) In June 2005, United States confirmed that the second annual case of prion disease had occurred. Since then, the news agencies and many representatives began appealing not buying and eating American beef. In addition, the opinionists asked suppliers to remove all the related products from the markets. By such acrimonious movement, many consumers would be most likely considering all the American beef products were infected with prion disease. It seemed to be that there existed great possibilities that any one who ate American beef would be attacked by the prion protein. Although the concepts above would be considered silly by some consumers with medical background, the anti-beef movement brought the masses no practical benefit, but panic. According to the proclamation of U.S. Meat Export Federation, the infected beef was not in part of any food supply chain. As a result, the mass media and Taiwan government should cooperate to stress the regulation and inspection of quality of American beef as part of mass health education.
(II) In recent years, there was a case that a carcinogenic risk assessment study of oyster was misemployed in a news report. Some news agencies neglected the conditions under the study and overemphasized the study result that the carcinogenic risk was 500 times higher than the standard set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Due to the overblow of the mass media, consumers were afraid of excess uptake of the heavy metals and the related industry suffered uncountable damage. The event again indicates the importance in stressing the expertise of the news agencies and the role of government regarding the media environment management.
Source
1. 藥物食品安全周報
http://www.nlfd.gov.tw/uploadfile/File/%E8%97%A5%E7%89%A9%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81%E5%AE%89%E5%85%A8%E9%80%B1%E5%A0%B1/%E8%97%A5%E7%89%A9%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81%E5%AE%89%E5%85%A8%E9%80%B1%E5%A0%B1%E7%AC%AC002%E6%9C%9F.pdf
2. Food Information Website
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/chinese.asp
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/libary/libary5_2_7.htm
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/history_post_1.asp?idx=129
3. BBC News, Taiwan profile
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/country_profiles/1285915.stm
4. 2006 Year Book
http://www7.www.gov.tw/EBOOKS/TWANNUAL/show_book.php?path=8_011_061
5. Agriculture and Food Agency
http://www.afa.gov.tw/content_en.asp?pcatid=1&ycatid=1&lcatid=327&hcatid=331&sub=t
6. News
http://food.doh.gov.tw/files/paper/0094.jpg
中國劣質食品已成為「黑心」產品的代名詞，近來引起全球恐慌的中國黑心食品如致癌大閘蟹、頭髮醬油、假酒、毒寵物食品等使消費者失去信心，掀起了抵制中國產品的風潮，在台灣及歐美國家甚至出現了以非中國製造標籤來提昇產品形象及安全性的做法中國黑心食品的販賣情形。
事實上，WHO自2000年開始，為了減少開發中國家食物引起的疾病，將食品安全列為主要公共衛生議題之一，開始建構食物感染疾病之監控系統、食品安全標準、風險評估、品質要求計畫，在基改食品出現後，加強了新科技產品的安全檢驗，亦鼓勵政府應與民眾進行正確的風險溝通，並加強各會員國疫情資源的利用等等。 食品的化學性污染漸漸是食品安全的一大焦點，跨國性組織CAC(Codex Alimentarius Commission )確立國際間的食物標準Codex Standards予各國參考，成為各國食品管制的訂定指標。
日漸氾濫的中國黑心食品不僅顯示食品安全標準及檢測的重要，亦是檢驗各國食品安全控管系統的完整性之時機。2004十月Global Fora of Food Safety Regulators在泰國孟買舉行第二屆全球食品安全控管會議，以「建立有效的食品安全控制管制系統」為題，邀請各國一同分享管制經驗及討論相關的重要議題。印度政府以該國「出口食品的控制及檢定」的經驗，建議出口食品量大的國家應確認進口國家的食物標準及檢測方法，與進口國家達成食品檢定決議，藉著自我食品檢定確保出口食品的安全，不但能保護消費者，建立國家信譽，亦能減少出口末端食品認證的時間和金錢，避免負擔退貨的額外損失。
美國政府亦指出，其各自有兩個單位控管進口食品，FSIS(The Food Safety and Inspection Service)規定進口肉類、禽類及蛋類國家應與美方有相同的食品管制檢查機制，HHS/FDA(The U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services) 則規定各國進口的其他所有食品之製造程序應符合美國當局的安全要求，違反規定即無法進口至美國。
國際貿易將食品從製造國送往世界的另一頭，各國進出口的食品控管系統各自面對互相折衷規範的情形。中國食品在此氛圍露出劣質原形，遭受各國譴責，其後兩領導人胡錦濤及溫家寶皆誓言加強產品安全監管力度和法律體系建設，從而使全球消費者的權益得到更好的保障。但在強力管制之前，中國食品的製造源頭之原料、生產製造、販賣等過程仍有錯綜複雜的問題有待當局解決為先。
參考資料：
1. 維基百科，黑心食品
2. WHO，http://www.who.int/features/qa/19/en/index.html
What is WHO doing to help countries improve food safety?
3. WHO，http://www.who.int/foodsafety/codex/en/
Food standards (Codex Alimentarius)
4. Ms Shashi Sareen, Director, Export Inspection Council, India ，Food Export Control And Certification，Second FAO/WHO Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators，Bangkok， Thailand， 12-14 October 2004
5. the United States of America，Food Export Control And Certification，Second FAO/WHO Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators ， Thailand， 12-14 October 2004
中國應重新面對產品品質不良的問題 顏稚浩
從今年(2007)四五月間開始，美國媒體開始大幅度報導有關中國的黑心食品，該月就有257項中國大陸被以安全問題為由，拒絕入境美國。之後又爆發了一連串的黑心產品事件，從震驚全球的巴拿馬的毒感冒糖漿事件、導致美國境內許多家庭飼養的寵物死亡的有毒飼料、義大利和西班牙查獲的有毒牙膏，到屬於美國境內的回收含鉛的玩具、有問題的輪胎、零食的調味料被驗出受沙門氏菌(salmonella)污染和被檢驗出含有禁用的抗生素的海鮮等。這些事件顯示出作為世界上重要的產品輸出國家，中國在管制其輸出食品的安全把關上出現了一些問題，導致有越來越多的人開始把”中國製造”和”不安全”畫上等號，據報導甚至也有製造商在其商品上標榜”非中國製造”來使消費者安心。
隨著其他國家對中國製的食品質疑的聲浪越來越高漲之際，中國起初維持其一貫的否認作風，將問題歸咎於其他國家的檢驗誤差、安全檢測的標準不同之外，其官方還宣稱美國輸入中國食品的近三年平均合格率只有98.9%，低於中國輸美食品99%以上的合格率。也有學者說今年上半年中國對美國出口總值達1072億美金，順差更高達739.1億美金，較去年同期增加了18.6%，這讓美國政府感到不悅，所以認為黑心食品問題的突然爆發，很大的一部分只是美國政府用來發洩對巨大的貿易逆差問題的不滿而已。不過隨著問題食品如滾雪球般越滾越大，北京當局也不得不承認確實在食品的安全管制系統出現了問題，像是權責不明，很多機構都對食品和藥物有檢測權，導致責任上出現重疊; 相關的規定執法不嚴;部分製造商鑽法律漏洞，以次級品替代來謀取暴利; 沒有建立起一套完整、統一的檢測系統來應付中國這個快速成長和流動的經濟等。不過值得一提的是，中國政府在同時也加強檢查其他國家輸入的食品作為反制，這兩個月來包括美國進口的內類和家禽製品被沙門氏菌汙染、日本的奶粉含鋅量低於包裝標示、印尼的水產品含有過量的微生物、菲律賓的食品也被驗出含有重金屬等事件也陸續爆發。
不過也有人把這項舉動解讀為中國政府在有能力完全解決自身的問題前，對其他國家進行的反抹黑手段。
中國民眾對這些事件的看法深受媒體的影響，食品問題剛爆發時，中國的媒體多數把它訴諸於貿易障礙問題，而不認為那是真正食品出了問題。不過最近開始有少數的媒體認為應該屏棄那種看法，而開始認真面對來自國外的質疑聲浪。
一般民眾對於國內的食品安全也有信心動搖的情況，很多消費者對層出不窮的問題食品新聞感到難以招架，根據報載，有些民眾已經不知道什麼東西可以吃，什麼東西有問題不能吃了，他們也不知道政府如何在食品安全上做把關，他們只知道安全可供食用的食物已經越來越少了。
在本身的食品安檢系統的改進上，北京當局在六月間由國家會議(state council)發表聲明說，中國將全面改革其食品和藥物的安全規定，這是至今中國對於食品安全問題最強烈的談話。七月間，中國皆露了新的食品和不合格的輸出品的管制措施，中國官方也誓言加強管理運用在內類和海鮮的化學藥品。七月底中美兩國在北京就食品安全議題舉行會談，八月間中國也派出代表團到華盛頓，與美方做近一步的討論，預計雙方在今年底前會就食品安全簽署備忘錄，在雙方進行會談之際，中國政府也關閉了三家違反食品安全規定的公司，這三家公司分別涉及了巴拿馬含二甘醇有毒感冒糖漿，和生產含有三聚氯胺(melamine)的寵物飼料的事件。北京當局也計劃在2010年時建立一套對食品藥物進出口以及藥物隨機檢測的管制標準，雖然他們還沒有說明是否會提供更多的資金在這件事上，以及由哪一個機構執行這項業務。幾個月前，北京當局將其前食品與藥物管理局局長判處死刑並已執行槍決。他被控收受廠商賄賂，讓未經檢測的藥物合法上市。
雖然這件事不免讓人對其食品安全檢測系統的公信力有了懷疑，不過從中國政府鐵腕處理這件醜聞來看，可以看出其改善食品安全的決心。
大部分的外國政府官員對於中國的改革措施均表示樂觀其成，不過他們也表示如果中國的產品持續出現問題，他們還是會做近一步的限制。不過有部分專家則對中國的宣示抱持懷疑的態度，他們認為有一部分是之前就已經做過的承諾了，而且中國並沒有承認所有的問題，其官方不斷指控這是國際媒體誇大了中國有問題的產品。有些專家也認為部分問題已經根深蒂固了，改革不可能進行的很快速，中國的經濟快速成長，要建立起能夠監控所有產品的系統所耗費的成本相當大，這實非一朝一夕就可以達成的。不過還是有評論家認為，對照之前一直不願意承認問題的中國政府來說，現在他們對這個問題的處理態度令人感到樂觀。
參考資料
1. 工商時報 B1-2版 96.08.12
2. 中國時報 A13版 96.08.01
3. http://www.nytimes.com/ (紐約時報)
4. http://www.cnn.com/ (CNN)
黑心食品的最大受害者—中國 林民浩
當世界上把”Made in China”當作一種警語，對於中國製造的產品採取高規格檢驗措施的同時，我們卻忽略了中國當地的民眾，他們的生活周遭充斥著黑心商品，這些中國民眾才是黑心食品的最大受害者。據指出，百分之八十二的大陸民眾擔心食品安全問題，更有高達百分之九十一的受訪者表示，曾經在生活中遭遇到食品安全的問題(王信賢，中國大陸黑心食品問題，陸委會)。
近年來，中國大陸重大的黑心食品事件層出不窮：2004年爆發黑心商人收集理髮店剪下的頭髮，經由化工廠以化學藥劑提煉出胺基酸溶液，並加入醬油中，以減少大豆的使用，達到降低成本的目的，但這些自頭髮提煉出來的胺基酸溶液，含有砷、鉛、氯丙醇等，而製成的醬油中則帶有4-甲基咪唑，可誘發癲癇，甚至致癌，受害人數不明；2003年阜陽劣質奶粉事件：安徽省阜陽縣自2003年底，陸續發現有嬰兒出現「頭極大，但軀幹發育不良」的情況，經調查，發現這些嬰兒使用黑心奶粉，比起一般奶粉蛋白質含量介於12%至18%間，該黑心奶粉的蛋白質含量只有0.37%，其營養價值遠低於一般奶粉，使得嬰兒在發育過程中營養不良，最後甚至死亡，據統計，至少有12人死亡，超過二百人有營養不良的情形，除了安徽外，在其他省分也有類似事件傳出。除此之外，還有成千上百的黑心食品，危害著中國民眾的健康。
一般咸信看得到的黑心商品只是冰山一角，還有許許多多黑心商品，是尚未被揭露的，但目前中國大陸資訊傳播受到管制，相關訊息無法被傳播及接收，再加以中國本身的官僚制度，黑心商品的檢舉訊息往往被掩蓋，民眾無法得知相關訊息的情況下，只能無辜受害。然而世界衛生組織在解決中國黑心食品方面，毫無著力點。而國際間的貿易手段，效力只及於中國大陸的進出口商品，對於中國內部的貨物品質問題乃至於內政問題，除譴責外，也毫無辦法。儘管中國官方已宣稱著手解決相關問題，甚至與國際合作，參與訂定食品安全國際標準，但成效如何，仍令人存疑。目前黑心食品問題只能仰賴中國大陸本身自覺，徹底落實相關食品安全管理，亦期待國際間能對此投注更多關注的眼神，並採取更積極的方式迫使中國面對、解決問題。
參考資料：
1. http://www.mac.gov.tw/big5/risk/2-3.pdf
2.http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%BB%91%E5%BF%83%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81
中國經濟與安全應同時並進 陳治平
經濟的發展是否真的讓我們吃的更健康？這對於中國來說似乎要打上一個問號。中國目前雖然在經濟上有明顯的發展，但是對於產品的品質要求上仍在原地踏步，從今年數種產品發生問題似乎可見一番。
中國在今年陸續在食品上發生問題，有寵物食品的成分不良造成寵物腎臟問題，使得美國有相當數量的寵物因此死亡。而中國出口的海產也因檢驗出內含重金屬可能造成人體傷害。這些食品衛生問題更近一步到達產品安全上，中國出產的玩具外層塗料上含有過量的鉛，另一方面部分牙膏產品內含工業用的二丁醇也存在致癌風險等。這些問題都顯現出在低成本取向的中國產品，存在著另一層的健康及安全衛生的隱憂。
這似乎不是一個單純的問題。一般我們多數會認為在經濟開始發展以後，能夠將生活水準有所提升，但是對於中國這樣的發展狀況，利用低工資、低成本吸引國際投資及進駐，在於汙染及環境保護的支出似乎就不甚重視，雖然近年中國更改經濟政策，希望從低成本高勞力的產業，改走向有永續發展、重視生活環境的經濟發展。但內陸的省份為求能和沿海發展快速的省份有相同的競爭力，勢必在部份限制及管理上必需妥協及讓步，這往往都是環保及衛生限制。這也帶來了更多的食品及衛生問題。
這造成兩種途徑的食品安全衛生問題：第一，部份商人為求低成本生產，在品質檢驗不完善及相關衛生條件未能強力執行下(執法機關收賄等)，使用工業用或是不符合標準的材料來製作食品(先前曾被報導的紙餡包子即是比較誇張的案例)，這往往會造成直接食用者中毒的案例發生。對於出口的產品來說，相對可能發生的案例數量會比較低，但是對於國內的使用者來說，卻往往是被隨著極高的風險。第二，長期生產高污染性的產品(如電鍍、電池等)，對於環境將留有重大的汙染，而污染物也將帶入食物鏈當中，人也將有可能吃到這樣的產物(中國海鮮存在重金屬就可能是這樣的問題)。
這對於中國來說，直接的衝擊是食品安全上的不信任及產品的信譽遭受損害，進而使得經濟上受到損失。這對於中國來說，似乎是個不大好的消息。中國必須在經濟發展的同時，提高國內對於食品衛生上的要求，更近一步對於整個產品製造上的標準及執行上更加嚴格。這是對於中國面對現有產品受到國際不信任所必須做的改進，另一方面，中國人民一直處在如此隨時可能因不良食品而有生命威脅的情況下，食品安全及衛生上的保障，將也是中國改進人權問題的必要措施。
資料來源：
1. BBC NEWS, “China food safety head executed”, 10 July 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6286698.stm
2. BBC NEWS, ” China cracks down on food safety”, 9 May 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6638113.stm
3. economist, “China's food safety”, Jun 12th 2007, http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9325404
4. MSNBC, “China's food safety woes now a global concern”, April 12, 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18078824/from/ET/
5. BBC NEWS, “US checks toothpaste for toxins”, 24 May 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6686627.stm
黑心氾濫，民眾如何自保 李芳盈
近來黑心食品氾濫，令人聞之色變，唯恐自己不小心買到或是誤食黑心食品。在媒體的報導之下，將所有不合乎理想期待的食品，都簡化歸類為「黑心食品」，造成這個名詞的濫用，到底什麼是「名符其實」的黑心食品呢？
按照中華民國行政院衛生署消費者資訊網所提供的定義，簡單來說：不該給人吃的，拿來給人吃，以及對消費者的健康、權益有重大危害的食品，都算是「黑心食品」。前者例如病死豬肉，病死豬肉屬於廢棄物，應該按照規定的相關管道回收或銷毀，不能再食用，若把這些病死豬肉當作食品，無論是否真的危害人體健康，都算是黑心食品。而食物中若出現不該添加的防腐劑，蔬菜水果使用不該使用的殺蟲劑，養雞鴨使用不該使用的抗生素，或是添加合法但過量的防腐劑、使用「合法」的抗生素，卻沒有適當的停藥時間等，也算是黑心食品。而隨著所添加的成份不同，黑心食品對人體的健康也造成不同的危害，例如過氧化氫，大多使用在病死的家禽家畜，將其漂白及殺菌，避免肉品發出腐敗的味道，若食用過量，則會造成頭痛、嘔吐，對皮膚及腸胃道都有腐蝕性的傷害。為了讓食品賣相更好，添加二氧化硫讓食品的顏色更鮮艷，但二氧化硫可能引發哮喘、呼吸困難等症狀。
為了因應層出不窮的黑心食品事件，政府對食品這個部份的把關越來越嚴格，包括賣場產品的標示抽查、抽驗以及生產源頭的管理。但由於賣場產品的標示抽查及抽驗屬於產品上市後的管理，可能等到不合格的檢驗報告出來時，產品早已銷售出去，因此對於食品的管理，從源頭就開始把關才是最重要的。因此行政院消費者保護委員會積極推動多項措施，除協調農委會、環保署等單位強化「環境污染與食品安全衛生監控機制」、「聯合查核(緝)行動」等防制黑心食品的合作機制外，並建立整體「食品製造業履歷管理機制」，以確實掌握食品產製及販售流向、研擬「管制黑心再生商品計畫」，就工廠管理、商品檢驗、商品標示及廢棄物回收處理等各項措施積極規範、評估試辦乳製品履歷制度之可行性、設立黑心食品免付費檢舉專線電話、規劃建立「食品安全警報紅綠燈機制」、研議修正「食品衛生管理法」，加重不法業者之行政罰鍰及罰金額度等。
其中「食品安全紅綠燈」這項措施對民眾最有助益，在第一時間內為民眾帶來最即時最詳盡的建議；食品安全的事件發生時，專家小組會在6~8小時以內，提供食品相關資訊：包含發佈日、燈號、事件過程、處置建議，讓民眾作為參考，其中「紅燈」指的是對人體有立即危害，包括遭下毒、重金屬或是抗生素超過標準值的食品，此外，即使對人體無害，但是以不該給人吃的原料製作的食品，也納入其中、「黃燈」指的是對人體有安全疑慮、或是添加物違反規定的食品、「綠燈」就是可以安心食用的指標，指的是原料雖不符合規定，但是這項瑕疵不影響食用安全的食品。
除了從政策上改善之外，許多政府單位更設立與食品安全相關的網站供民眾瀏覽查閱，例如：「消費者資訊網」、「食品資訊網」、「不安全進口產品資訊網」等，有些網站還提供諮詢專線及申訴信箱，歡迎民眾共同檢舉不法的黑心食品。想要徹底打擊黑心食品，需要政府與民間共同合作，由政府做好源頭把關及過程中的查驗，民眾也要記得切勿貪小便宜，購買來路不明或標示不清的食品，向信用良好之企業經營者購買，才能安心食用各種食品。
參考資料：
1. 行政院衛生署消費者資訊網 http://consumer.doh.gov.tw/fdaciw/pages/index.jsp
2. 食品資訊網 http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/chinese.asp
3. 不安全進口產品資訊網 http://www.unsafeimports.nat.gov.tw
(4) 行政院消費者保護委員會 http://www.cpc.gov.tw/fp.asp?id=317
Reflection behind the “Black-Hearted Food”:
Media’s effect on food safety in Taiwan 陳柏翰
Have you ever worried about the food you bought from the market when you see news on TV concerning the safety of the similar items? Maybe some of us are clever enough to differentiate the black-hearted products and ones with officially acknowledged labels, but many others are not. The media are capable of magnifying some certain insignificant events in our society, and the phenomenon gets even worse in Taiwan. On one hand, the media environment in Taiwan is among the freest in Asia and extremely competitive. On the other hand, the multitude is ravenous for gossips, which results in great competitions that the agencies always run after acerbic news to cater public tastes. The reasons above both result in categorizing all the products under expectation into the range of black-hearted food. Therefore as soon as we know what the black-hearted food is and what Taiwan government has done regarding food safety, we will identify the black-hearted food handily.
What is Black-Hearted Food?
The black-hearted food is, in official definition, the food that is not esculent for human, but produced and proffered by wicked dealer. The diseased meat, for example, are classic events occurring quite often in Taiwan. It is viewed as waste which should be recycled or destroyed by burning whether it is harmful to human health or not. Besides, food that is detrimental to consumer’s health and right is another definition for black-hearted food. For instance, unexpected antiseptics in food, fruit and vegetables with illegal pesticide are typical items of black-hearted food. Moreover, poultry products applying legal antibiotics without appropriate suspension period is also classified into black-hearted food.
The Certification, Traceability Systems and Labels
What has Taiwan government done toward food safety? To protect consumers from hazards of black-hearted food, the Council of Agriculture (COA) and acknowledged organizations started to advance some products certification and traceability systems, and labeling as well.
The COA began to implement the agriculture products resume information system in 2006. In the primary step, carrots and organic paddy are the two first products detailed by the system. Consumers can check all the producing procedures, including soil conditions, fertilizer and pesticides applications…etc, through the bar-code and resume checking machines in the supermarkets. And more and more product resumes will be added in the system. In addition to the resume information system, the authority concerned has also established the quality certification system. The three measures COA adopted in 2006 certification system are that coaching to establish brands, reinforcing marketing strategies and enlarging visibility, also including strengthening the tracing mechanism.
The traceability system was implemented in 2005. The system achieved the establishment of Taiwan Good Agriculture Practices (TGAP) for some of agricultural products. Also some demonstration pilots are promoted and educated to conduct paper records and pesticides application management. The scope of 2006 work plan is to integrate resume information system and recording methods of different certified organizations. The most important event is to upload the paper records to the information tracing platform. Besides, Department of Health has also implemented GHP (Good Hygienic Practice) and HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) to reinforce source control in the food manufacturing process.
Labeling, the friendliest measure, is still considered an effective way against black-hearted food. Following is the brief introduction of some common labels concerning food safety in Taiwan.
(A) (B) (C)
Label (A) presents Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), which is certified by Food Industry Research and Development Institute (FIRDI). The GMP label promotes the industry to implement good manufacturing practice. Its main scope concerns the fundamental management of “4M”, which are Man, Material, Machine, and Method. There exist 25 different categories of food labeling GMP in the market, which enables the consumers to shop at ease.
CAS (Chinese Agricultural Standard), the label (B), is certified by the COA, Executive Yuan. Its goal is to raise the quality standard of agricultural products and its artifacts. The characteristics of the products labeling CAS include consistent quality and composition, the manufacturing process under the Act Governing Food Sanitation, intact packing with precise composition details, and homegrown raw materials.
The third label is called Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). COA plays the role in certifying fruit and vegetables to insure quality and safety. The three circles in the label indicate Coaching, Inspection, and Control in reminding farmers of following appropriate agricultural practice.
The Department of Health (DOH), Executive Yuan are also aware of the demand-side concerning food safety. DOH has constructed several websites to inform and educate the mass population with correct general knowledge, simplified regulations and the latest updated food information. Consumers can check certain food information they are interested in the websites such as Consumer Information Website and Food Information Website. The interactive activities DOH has developed, for instance, are Diet Quotient Quizzes and Food Safety Alert Mechanism. Diet Quotient Quizzes are some problems testing general population’s common knowledge about food safety. Consumers can not only examine their general sense but also get correct information. On the other hand, Food Safety Alert Mechanism reminds the consumers of the latest updated information through green-yellow-red light. If there are any news about black-hearted food, consumers can surf the website to see which light shines for the certain food. In conclusion, the mass population can receive instant official information by way of internet, which can eliminate the magnified effect by the news agencies.
True amplified examples in Taiwan
(I) In June 2005, United States confirmed that the second annual case of prion disease had occurred. Since then, the news agencies and many representatives began appealing not buying and eating American beef. In addition, the opinionists asked suppliers to remove all the related products from the markets. By such acrimonious movement, many consumers would be most likely considering all the American beef products were infected with prion disease. It seemed to be that there existed great possibilities that any one who ate American beef would be attacked by the prion protein. Although the concepts above would be considered silly by some consumers with medical background, the anti-beef movement brought the masses no practical benefit, but panic. According to the proclamation of U.S. Meat Export Federation, the infected beef was not in part of any food supply chain. As a result, the mass media and Taiwan government should cooperate to stress the regulation and inspection of quality of American beef as part of mass health education.
(II) In recent years, there was a case that a carcinogenic risk assessment study of oyster was misemployed in a news report. Some news agencies neglected the conditions under the study and overemphasized the study result that the carcinogenic risk was 500 times higher than the standard set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Due to the overblow of the mass media, consumers were afraid of excess uptake of the heavy metals and the related industry suffered uncountable damage. The event again indicates the importance in stressing the expertise of the news agencies and the role of government regarding the media environment management.
Source
1. 藥物食品安全周報
http://www.nlfd.gov.tw/uploadfile/File/%E8%97%A5%E7%89%A9%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81%E5%AE%89%E5%85%A8%E9%80%B1%E5%A0%B1/%E8%97%A5%E7%89%A9%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81%E5%AE%89%E5%85%A8%E9%80%B1%E5%A0%B1%E7%AC%AC002%E6%9C%9F.pdf
2. Food Information Website
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/chinese.asp
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/libary/libary5_2_7.htm
http://food.doh.gov.tw/chinese/history_post_1.asp?idx=129
3. BBC News, Taiwan profile
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/country_profiles/1285915.stm
4. 2006 Year Book
http://www7.www.gov.tw/EBOOKS/TWANNUAL/show_book.php?path=8_011_061
5. Agriculture and Food Agency
http://www.afa.gov.tw/content_en.asp?pcatid=1&ycatid=1&lcatid=327&hcatid=331&sub=t
6. News
http://food.doh.gov.tw/files/paper/0094.jpg
2007年9月23日 星期日
Food Safety
WHO主要重視的部份
http://www.who.int/foodsafety/en/
The Department of Food Safety, Zoonoses and Foodborne Diseases (FOS) strives to reduce the serious negative impact of foodborne diseases worldwide. Food and waterborne diarrhoeal diseases are leading causes of illness and death in less developed countries, killing approximately 1.8 million people annually, most of whom are children.
Recent trends in global food production, processing, distribution and preparation are creating an increasing demand for food safety research in order to ensure a safer global food supply. FOS works with other WHO departments, Regional Offices and WHO collaborating centres as well as other international and national agencies. In particular, WHO works closely with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to address food safety issues along the entire food production chain--from production to consumption--using new methods of risk analysis. These methods provide efficient, science-based tools to improve food safety, thereby benefiting both public health and economic development. FOS endeavours to help all WHO Member States, both developing and developed, through the approaches outlined in the WHO Global Strategy for Food Safety.
http://www.who.int/foodsafety/en/
The Department of Food Safety, Zoonoses and Foodborne Diseases (FOS) strives to reduce the serious negative impact of foodborne diseases worldwide. Food and waterborne diarrhoeal diseases are leading causes of illness and death in less developed countries, killing approximately 1.8 million people annually, most of whom are children.
Recent trends in global food production, processing, distribution and preparation are creating an increasing demand for food safety research in order to ensure a safer global food supply. FOS works with other WHO departments, Regional Offices and WHO collaborating centres as well as other international and national agencies. In particular, WHO works closely with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to address food safety issues along the entire food production chain--from production to consumption--using new methods of risk analysis. These methods provide efficient, science-based tools to improve food safety, thereby benefiting both public health and economic development. FOS endeavours to help all WHO Member States, both developing and developed, through the approaches outlined in the WHO Global Strategy for Food Safety.
China's food safety
http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9325404
Jun 12th 2007
From the Economist Intelligence Unit ViewsWire
A new plan to improve standards of food and drugs
When pet cats and dogs in the US started dying in April, few would have thought that the deaths would have much relevance for the Chinese export juggernaut. But the issue looks like spiralling into a major problem for international traders, and in an effort to cool the controversy China was forced to release on June 6th its first five-year plan to improve food-and-drug safety standards. The plan has a political as well as practical motive, as the government is keen to undo the reputational damage from scandals ranging from food contamination to the sale of fake antibiotics. However, implementation of the plan is likely to be difficult.
China is no stranger to quality problems, be it in food, drugs or toys. The US pet deaths—stemming from the contamination by melamine, a chemical toxin, of a vegetable protein used in animal foods—were not all that different from many other past cases in China. However, the massive scale of the pet-food recall, involving thousands of retail products, was unprecedented. The issue also touched on an unusually emotive subject at a time of rising Sino-US trade tensions. That was not all. The story was followed by a plethora of articles in the foreign media highlighting similar cases, ranging from a series of alleged deaths in Panama last year caused by the use of industrial toxins in cough medicine exported from China to the US Food and Drug Administration's warnings over chemicals in Chinese-made toothpaste. China was on the verge of a global PR disaster.
Investigations into such cases have thrown light on the tangled morass of the Chinese regulatory system. The State Food and Drug Administration (SFDA), the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine and other agencies have a tendency to pass the buck between each other, denying responsibility for mistakes. That allows producers and traders to get on with business as usual. In many cases a lack of regulatory clarity and co-ordination prevents the authorities from tackling abuses. In others, businesses simply buy the required documentation.
Deadly consequences
It has been an ironic coincidence that the latest furore has come as the former head of the SFDA, Zheng Xiaoyu, was on trial for accepting bribes in return for granting government approval for various medicines in 2005. Amid the international uproar over tainted Chinese products, there was little surprise when the court imposed the death sentence when he was found guilty. But for regulators still trying to save their necks, they now have the unenviable task of sifting through all the drugs and pharmaceutical firms approved for licences under Mr Zheng in an attempt to make sure they did not breach standards.
As Mr Zheng's case—which did not involve exports—showed, this is not purely a problem for foreigners who buy Chinese products. It is a safe to say that many more Chinese people than foreigners are harmed by ingesting toxic or substandard foods and drugs each year. In one particularly tragic case in Anhui in 2004, for example, several babies died of malnutrition after consuming fake baby-milk powder. Investigative programmes exposing factories, farms and restaurants engaged in various nefarious practices with food are a stomach-churning staple of Chinese television.
Yet Chinese officials' reflexive response to more serious cases remains the cover-up. The pet-food case saw a classic hash of a government PR job. First came denial: "The poisoning of American pets has nothing to do with China," claimed a report in the People's Daily. This was followed by a blustering counter-attack noting that food contamination occurred both within the US and with US exports to China. "No food-inspection system is foolproof," pointed out Li Yuanping, director general of the Import and Export Food Safety Bureau. "It's like an airplane. Flying is said to be the safest way to travel, but sometimes you have plane crashes".
Only later did officials start revealing more substantive measures to address the problem, including the release of the five-year food-and-drug safety plan. The plan calls for more inspections of food exports, improved procedures for recalling faulty or tainted products, more pollution monitoring in food-producing areas, as well as an improved structure for monitoring--and blacklisting--food trading companies. According to the Chinese state media, the plan also aims to implement a system of special inspections for 90% of food producers. It also calls for more stringent controls on the use of additives and pesticides, and for nationwide monitoring of the ill effects of medication. However, despite the plan's laudable aims, corruption and inefficiency will continue to leave doors wide open for companies wanting to cut corners.
Legal fallout?
For foreign businesses, the lack of quality control in China is not someone else's problem. Several lawyers have argued that, since Chinese regulatory bodies are demonstrably unfit for purpose, any company accepting Chinese exports with official quality or safety certificates could theoretically be held liable for problems that subsequently emerge. Once again, this dilemma highlights the importance for companies of detailed knowledge of their supply chains in China, and of not taking documentary or verbal assurances at face value. To help deal with such challenges, bigger companies should establish their own internal quality-control mechanisms. But for smaller traders, the costs of such systems could undermine their profitability. For many importers then, the best acid test may well be that if a product's price looks too good to be true, it probably is.
Jun 12th 2007
From the Economist Intelligence Unit ViewsWire
A new plan to improve standards of food and drugs
When pet cats and dogs in the US started dying in April, few would have thought that the deaths would have much relevance for the Chinese export juggernaut. But the issue looks like spiralling into a major problem for international traders, and in an effort to cool the controversy China was forced to release on June 6th its first five-year plan to improve food-and-drug safety standards. The plan has a political as well as practical motive, as the government is keen to undo the reputational damage from scandals ranging from food contamination to the sale of fake antibiotics. However, implementation of the plan is likely to be difficult.
China is no stranger to quality problems, be it in food, drugs or toys. The US pet deaths—stemming from the contamination by melamine, a chemical toxin, of a vegetable protein used in animal foods—were not all that different from many other past cases in China. However, the massive scale of the pet-food recall, involving thousands of retail products, was unprecedented. The issue also touched on an unusually emotive subject at a time of rising Sino-US trade tensions. That was not all. The story was followed by a plethora of articles in the foreign media highlighting similar cases, ranging from a series of alleged deaths in Panama last year caused by the use of industrial toxins in cough medicine exported from China to the US Food and Drug Administration's warnings over chemicals in Chinese-made toothpaste. China was on the verge of a global PR disaster.
Investigations into such cases have thrown light on the tangled morass of the Chinese regulatory system. The State Food and Drug Administration (SFDA), the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine and other agencies have a tendency to pass the buck between each other, denying responsibility for mistakes. That allows producers and traders to get on with business as usual. In many cases a lack of regulatory clarity and co-ordination prevents the authorities from tackling abuses. In others, businesses simply buy the required documentation.
Deadly consequences
It has been an ironic coincidence that the latest furore has come as the former head of the SFDA, Zheng Xiaoyu, was on trial for accepting bribes in return for granting government approval for various medicines in 2005. Amid the international uproar over tainted Chinese products, there was little surprise when the court imposed the death sentence when he was found guilty. But for regulators still trying to save their necks, they now have the unenviable task of sifting through all the drugs and pharmaceutical firms approved for licences under Mr Zheng in an attempt to make sure they did not breach standards.
As Mr Zheng's case—which did not involve exports—showed, this is not purely a problem for foreigners who buy Chinese products. It is a safe to say that many more Chinese people than foreigners are harmed by ingesting toxic or substandard foods and drugs each year. In one particularly tragic case in Anhui in 2004, for example, several babies died of malnutrition after consuming fake baby-milk powder. Investigative programmes exposing factories, farms and restaurants engaged in various nefarious practices with food are a stomach-churning staple of Chinese television.
Yet Chinese officials' reflexive response to more serious cases remains the cover-up. The pet-food case saw a classic hash of a government PR job. First came denial: "The poisoning of American pets has nothing to do with China," claimed a report in the People's Daily. This was followed by a blustering counter-attack noting that food contamination occurred both within the US and with US exports to China. "No food-inspection system is foolproof," pointed out Li Yuanping, director general of the Import and Export Food Safety Bureau. "It's like an airplane. Flying is said to be the safest way to travel, but sometimes you have plane crashes".
Only later did officials start revealing more substantive measures to address the problem, including the release of the five-year food-and-drug safety plan. The plan calls for more inspections of food exports, improved procedures for recalling faulty or tainted products, more pollution monitoring in food-producing areas, as well as an improved structure for monitoring--and blacklisting--food trading companies. According to the Chinese state media, the plan also aims to implement a system of special inspections for 90% of food producers. It also calls for more stringent controls on the use of additives and pesticides, and for nationwide monitoring of the ill effects of medication. However, despite the plan's laudable aims, corruption and inefficiency will continue to leave doors wide open for companies wanting to cut corners.
Legal fallout?
For foreign businesses, the lack of quality control in China is not someone else's problem. Several lawyers have argued that, since Chinese regulatory bodies are demonstrably unfit for purpose, any company accepting Chinese exports with official quality or safety certificates could theoretically be held liable for problems that subsequently emerge. Once again, this dilemma highlights the importance for companies of detailed knowledge of their supply chains in China, and of not taking documentary or verbal assurances at face value. To help deal with such challenges, bigger companies should establish their own internal quality-control mechanisms. But for smaller traders, the costs of such systems could undermine their profitability. For many importers then, the best acid test may well be that if a product's price looks too good to be true, it probably is.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)