ANOTHER BLAH BLAH ABOUT STREET FOODS-NEW DECLARATION BY FSSAI!

What are the chances of one getting sick after consuming foods from vendors who serve their "mouth watering" products under the open air without worrying too much about hygiene and sanitation or the likely chance of the same to be vitiated by hundreds of smoke emitting automotive vehicles passing in front of them? Obviously there does not appear to be any major food poisoning episodes in India during the last three decades putting to rest the speculation in this regard by the western educated food scientists based on their perception of science! Could this be due to the extraordinarily tough stomachs Indians possess or is there any other strong reason? Probably these vendors are not as irresponsible as being made out by "scientific" surveys undertaken from time to time by scientists! One of the major reasons could be that most foods offered are cooked on the spot and served hot leaving very little chance of contamination from pathogenic microbes. Those which are not served hot are either sour tasting or salt laden or laced with sour curds that, here also there is very little chance of the customers getting sick. Against this background the recent proposal from Delhi to initiate a "certifying" scheme for these small players, purveyors of tasty local foods, may be somewhat out of place and it will likely to end up as an harassment tool that might be deployed by petty officials to extract extortion from them. Here is a take on this new "awakening" in Delhi about the safety of street foods, after doing nothing for ages!  

"Vendors wearing gloves while serving up plates of pani puri or donning a chef's hat while stirring spicy bhel may soon be a regular sighting to Mumbai's street food culture. Street food is set to become certifiably safer with the central government kicking off their Safe Street Food project across fifteen cities in India including Mumbai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Ahmadabad, Kolkata, Patna, Lucknow, Varanasi, Dehradun, Bhubaneshwar, Agartala, Jammu, Trivandrum and Chennai. The project will take off in November this year. Food Safety and Standard Authority of India's (FSSAI) that launched the Safe Street Food project plans to use officials from the state Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) to narrow down food stalls at Juhu and Girgaon Chowpatty as a part of the pilot project. Prior to the implementation, a detailed project report has been sought by FSSAI from all states. FDA officials are currently seeking information on 80 food stalls in Juhu and 28 stall in Girgaon about their working practices. "We are closely studying the cooks to see if they maintain hygiene while cooking. We are also observing how they store food and dispose garbage," said Kamlesh Sankhe, joint commissioner (food), FDA. Apart from training the street vendors on handling preparation, storage and presentation of food, the central government has instructed the state and BMC to develop an infrastructure at street food hotspots to make them more tourist-friendly. "We have repeatedly requested the civic and state authorities to provide sheds as protection from the rain and winds. Toilet facilities, waste disposal and drainage facilities should be provided as well," said Atul Gupta, treasurer, Girgaon Bhelpuri Khadya Peey Vikreta Industrial Products Co-operative Society Limited".

The response from the organization that represents street vendors is logical and correct. In stead of a window dressing approach, what the government must do is to relocate these vendors to food complexes with complimentary facilities like safe water supply, access to clean toilet and clean environment. Every city in this country should have a few such infrastructure set ups immediately for shifting the existing vendors and establishing new players with minimum hassles. The street food lovers in this country, millions in number will owe a debt of gratitude to the government, if it thinks in this direction. Of course in a country where every exercise by the government has more publicity value than substance, it may be too much to expect such progressive measures to be implemented in the foreseeable future! 

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

CALORIE VS NUTRITION-THE PERPETUAL DILEMMA

Food consumption is often viewed by most consumers from the body weight perspective because it is the single most critical input from the diet that causes weight gain over a period of time if the intake of calories is more than the expenditure due to daily physical activity. Almost all labels on packed foods distinctly bring out the extent of total calories and calories from fat that can be expected by consuming the prescribed serving size. Recent moves in some countries to force all food serving agencies including theaters, food trucks, aviation sector etc to make calories declaration may serve the limited purpose of putting the consumers on an alert regarding the potential for weight gain by consuming high calorie food preparations. Insisting on these marginal players to comply with nutrition labeling regulations may be far fetched and it may not serve any purpose as these consumers are taking these foods only occasionally.

"So too with food, where calories count, but they are far from all that matters. Calories tell a truth about food, but nothing remotely like the WHOLE truth. This is an important consideration as mandatory calorie labeling expands from chain restaurants to other venues, such as theatres and airplanes. For instance, let's consider two orders of french fries. One is small and, say, 100 calories; the other is large and say, 350 calories. The calorie difference might encourage you to go with the smaller order. So far, so good. But now imagine that the small order of fries was prepared in trans fat, and the large order was prepared in a healthful oil. If they are fries on the same menu board, that's unlikely, I know -- but nonetheless indicative of the fact that calories don't tell all. Calorie counts are potentially valuable in helping you see the cost -- in calories -- of larger portions. But they tell you nothing about the return on that investment, in terms of either nutrition, or the fullness and satisfaction you are hoping to achieve. And the evidence suggests that while providing a reality check that does, at times, encourage the more moderate choice. Theeffect of posting calories is variable, and modest. One likely reason for this is that people don't generally eat to fill a calorie quota, they eat to fill themselves. If you like a large burger and fries, you might order a smaller version of each with the calories on display. But you might, then, finish and still want more. So maybe you order another, or maybe you eat something else just a little while later. Calories may have gone down at the time of the initial selection, without going down for the day".

It is very true that calorie number does not convey the full details regarding the quality of the food consumed vis-à-vis one's health and there are may other factors like the extent of fat calories, presence of trans fats, sodium level, sugar content, fiber content etc which also influence the effect of foods on health. But providing such information details in casual eating points is neither desirable nor practical. As it is rightly said eating is primarily a function of hunger and sensory pleasure and health considerations invariably are marginal especially with most consumers not aware of the dynamics of nutrition. Eating disorder involves many social, economical, environmental and psychological factors and no matter how efficiently labels are formatted, most consumers are unlikely to be persuaded to willingly give up high calorie/high fat foods till health disorders visit them with all their dangerous ramifications.

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