Plastic bags usage-Progressive measures in Europe

By now even a child knows the dangers involved in using disposable plastic bags which pose a great environmental hazard to humans as well as animals, both terrestrial as well as aquatic. During the last two decades increased awareness about these hazards have compelled many countries to introduce legislation to curb their use drastically over a period of time. Unfortunately the progress achieved cannot be said to be satisfactory as stricter laws are not being implemented rigorously and sternly. The result is that fossil fuel plastics continue to dominate in the day to day lives of population in many countries. The talk about substituting these almost indestructible man-made materials is going on though here also progress is not some thing about which we can really proud of. Bioplastics including Biopolymers have established their credentials with almost all user industries but their production has not reached even half a million tons per year while global demand for plastics stands at around 13 million tons. Europe is particularly in the forefront in dealing with use of plastics and their disposal and here is the latest development in this bloc of 28 nations as reported recently   

"According to the new rules, member states could either ban free plastic bags for shoppers by 2018 or else ensure that the average consumption of them does not exceed 90 a year per person by 2019. Under the proposal to be voted on by the environment committee, member states could choose to either ban free plastic bags for shoppers by 2018 or else take measures to make sure that the average consumption of these bags drops to 90 a year for each person by 2019 and to 40 by 2025. The European Commission would be required to evaluate the impact on the environment of oxo-degradable plastic materials, which fragment into small particles, and propose measures accordingly."

In India also "brave" talks are there regarding banning of plastics but where ever laws have been promulgated the enforcement is practically non-existent! Low awareness about the risks in continued use and careless disposal of plastics adds up to the problem. Government of India's brand new initiative under the name of Swach Bharat Abhiyan aims to stop mindless littering all around in urban as well as rural areas but it remains to be seen whether this will remain largely a photo-op without achieving much. At the retailers level there are some sincere players who already insist on the customers to bring their own bags or give only non-plastic carry bags at a price. Here again the possibility of this segment becoming lethargic in due course of time because of laxity all around cannot be ruled out. If adequate deterrent punishments are put on the statute books for violation of laws pertaining to use of plastics, probably that may have a salutary effect.  

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

TRAINING OF TRAINERS-SPREADING FOOD AND NUTRITION AWARENESS

Food, nutrition, health, eating habits and sanitation are subjects which are usually confined among experts and scientists. Inculcating healthy eating is a responsibility shared equally by the parents of growing kids at home and by the teachers in schools where kids go at least 200 days an year. The big question is how far the parents and teachers know about these subjects and poorly informed and ignorant parents and teachers cannot be expected to teach the children correctly and adequately. Going further down, only adequately exposed children can become good parents of tomorrow who in turn can transfer their knowledge and experience to their kids. Thus school teachers are the vital cogs in the education of kids vis-a-vis food related issues. The FDA of USA and the teachers' association in that country are doing wonderful work in training teachers for such a job so that they can train the children in making them practice eating good foods with high nutrition content and adhering to scientific hygiene and sanitation habits. Read further below to understand fully the implications of the program being undertaken in America to train the school teachers.  

"One way to teach kids about food safety and nutrition is to teach their teachers. That's the idea behind a training program the Food and Drug Administration has been running for the past 15 years. "Science and Our Food Supply" is a week-long program held in the summer that brings together teachers from all over the country who teach biology, chemistry, food science and health. Its aim is to improve food safety and nutrition education in schools using a curriculum co-developed by FDA and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), which looks at the science behind issues such as foodborne illnesses.The participants learn about the journey of food from farm to table, basic microbiology techniques, FDA's role in regulating products, new research on food safety, nutrition and nutrition labeling, and food allergies. This year, 32 teachers from 22 states participated and then returned to their own schools to teach the curriculum to students and hold day-long sessions to train their fellow teachers."

It is rather a mystery as to why Indian education planners are ignoring this respect, considering that children form their habits fairly early in their life and undesirable and inappropriate habits imbibed early in life will be difficult to be changed later. A body like NCERT in India can do wonders by introducing basic concepts of food and its allied aspects in text books designed for school going kids at the age of 5-8 years and undertake a national endeavor of training teachers through short term abridged programs at the national, regional and state levels. It can always depend on scientific bodies like CFTRI, DFRL, NIN, NIFTEM. Universities etc to provide experts in transferring the technical information to teachers through well designed programs, especially during vacation times when teachers do not have much teaching load. This is the only way to transform India into "Swacha Bharath" , as being propagated by the present Prime Minister of the country.  

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

              

HEALTHY EATING-AN ENDLESS DEBATING ISSUE!

What does it mean when one is "advised" to practice healthy eating? Does it refer to the way one eats the food or what type of food is to be eaten to maintain good health? If it refers to the eating practice, slow eating as Buddhists practice is considered most healthy. But the foods that are healthy can be many depending on who talks about it. Industry always avers that their food products are good and even if they are not nutritionally balanced, they still do not cause any harm. Nutritionists beg to differ with this stand because scientifically one must eat more and more protective foods like fruits and vegetables, less and less of animal products and high fiber foods. Most consumers are either unaware or mindlessly ignore the principle that one's calorie intake must be balanced with calorie expenditure through physical activities to maintain decent health. Some experts promote the idea that there must be a "facilitatory" environment for helping consumers to practice healthy eating. Most importantly the present situation where healthy foods are priced out of the reach of most people while nutritionally empty products are flooding the market at ridiculously low cost, in every nook and corner in the US, must be reversed if perceptible improvement in the health of population there is to be expected. Here is an interesting expose on this important issue by a learned expert.  

"People are bombarded with conflicting advice, much of it from sources with a vested interest in selling particular foods, supplements or diet plans. Nutrition studies tend to focus on single nutrients, making their results difficult to apply to real diets. No wonder people have a hard time knowing what or whom to believe. This is too bad, really. The basic principles of healthy eating could not be easier to understand: eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, balance calorie intake with expenditure, and don't eat too much junk food. If such principles seem hard to follow, it is surely because of how they affect the food industry. Balancing calorie intake often means eating less, but doing so is bad for business. Food companies must do everything they can to sell more food, not less. So they make foods available everywhere — even in drug, book and clothing stores — and in very large portions. Few people can resist eating tasty food when it's right in front of them. Large portions alone explain rising rates of obesity: they encourage people to eat more calories but to underestimate what they have eaten. Healthy eating requires a food environment that makes it easier for everyone to make better choices. It also requires a food system that makes it cheaper to buy fruits and vegetables than less healthful foods, so everyone can afford to eat healthfully". 

It is true that to day's environment is not conducive to creating clarity in the mind of the consumer, even if he is well read because the vast information surge vis-a-vis food across the global media causes more confusion due to severe contradictions and conflicting ideas. Consumer education is a very difficult task and the current efforts in all countries are grossly inadequate to raise the awareness about all aspects of food among the citizenry. The present curricula followed in primary schools need radical changes and this is an area neglected by many governments world over. If the basic principles of healthy eating whether referring to mode of eating or healthiness of foods consumed are not inculcated at young age, it will be difficult for grown ups to imbibe the same later. Industry cooperation may be difficult to get because business flourishes only when tasty foods are sold which in most cases are invariably unhealthy. A blend of coercive enforcement of discipline in food products marketing and persuasive efforts to wean away the industry from developing recklessly bad food that cockle the taste buds only ignoring the well being of the consumer, can only succeed in the long run.   

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

AWARENESS ABOUT GM FOODS-NO UNIVERSAL CONCENSUS

The controversies surrounding GM foods never seem to be ending with increasing polarization taking place all around regarding their safety. Though countries like China, with authoritarian governments at the helm have adopted GM foods with out bothering about the feelings of their populations, there are many others categorically rejecting these unnatural versions of food as unsafe or not proved unequivocally safe. Recent Bt Brinjal incidence in India has shown how sensitive people can be to issues concerning food safety and environmental protection though this is a country with high degree of illiteracy! Contrast this with the situation in the US where literacy is very high but 80% of market foods contain GM food ingredients. This anachronism can be explained away by the irony that despite being a democratic country the US government does not mandate the industry to declare the GM origin of the ingredients on the front of the pack label denying its citizens the fundamental right to know what they are eating!  Against this background the attitude of people in a country like the UK where citizen's right is highly valued, is worth knowing and this has been highlighted in a recent survey. Here is a gist of the conclusions of this study:

"Twenty nine per cent of those polled said GM food is good for the economy. A similar number- 27 per cent - disagreed with the statement and 44 per cent said they didn't know. Just over half agreed that GM food helps people in developing economies. Twenty four per cent agreed that the foods are safe for future generations - a fall from 31 per cent in 2010. The proportion who believe there to be safety risk also fell, from 39 per cent to 27 per cent, leaving more people sitting on the fence. The men were more pro-GM than the women but levels of varied depending on the potential use of the technology. For instance 64 per cent of those quizzed were supportive of a rice group with built in vitamin A that could stave of malnutrition and blindness. But just 22 per cent agreed with the production of carnations coloured violet through genetic modification. Sir Roland Jackson, chief executive of the British Science Association, said the survey showed 'a pretty high awareness of GM food' and considerable interest in the subject, with two-thirds of respondents interested in it."

Amid all these arguments and counter arguments, a basic issue has been obscured, that is about the personal freedom of the denizen to choose and consume what he wants with full knowledge of its advantages and deficiencies. It is here that governments world over must concede the inevitability of letting their citizens know in a clear and transparent manner what is offered to him by the market and front of the pack labeling must be made mandatory whether one likes it or not. Industry must not be allowed to hijack this right of the consumer through lobbying and money power. The above survey cannot be interpreted, as the GM lobby is trying to do, to mean that consumers are increasingly accepting GM foods but it only exemplifies their dilemma in coming to any conclusion in absence of "conclusive" data regarding the safety of GM foods to humans and the environment beyond a shadow of doubt. 

V.H.POTTY

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