India's Journey in Food Safety
This year, the theme of World Food Safety Day, observed on June 7, is "Food Safety: Science in Action." It provides an opportunity to assess India's progress from a simplistic view of preventing food adulteration to a comprehensive, science-driven food safety approach. Despite advancements, challenges remain.
Historical Context and Progress
- The journey began with the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act of 1954, which considered food safety a binary issue of adulteration.
- The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 marked a pivotal shift by establishing the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
- FSSAI adopted a risk-based approach, setting maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides and standards for food additives, aligning closely with international standards by 2020.
Challenges in Food Safety
- Lack of India-Specific Studies: Safety standards often rely on international data, which might not suit Indian contexts in terms of diet, agriculture, or environment.
- Absence of Total Diet Study (TDS): Without TDS, risk assessments lack a comprehensive view of consumer exposure to contaminants.
- Complex Risk Communication: Technical terms like MRLs and ADIs are confusing, leading to misunderstandings about safety revisions, such as the change in pesticide MRL from 0.01 mg/kg to 0.1 mg/kg.
- Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) Regulations: Despite JECFA's consistent findings of MSG safety, India mandates warning labels, unlike global practices, causing unwarranted fear.
Recommendations for Sustaining Progress
- Invest in India-specific research and a comprehensive TDS to better understand local exposure to contaminants.
- Enhance risk communication by simplifying messages and updating misleading labels.
- Continuously train risk assessors to stay current with scientific advancements.
- Regularly update standards transparently, based on new research, to maintain public trust and informed choices.
Conclusion
Despite significant progress, sustaining advancements in food safety requires a commitment to science, transparency, and public education. Regulatory decisions should be evidence-driven, balancing scientific integrity with effective risk communication. Continued efforts will ensure consumers are informed, confident, and protected without unnecessary fears.
