|
Codex focus on
science in ractopamine debate
By Shih Hsiu-chuan / Staff reporter
Documents from the Codex Alimentarius Commission regarding safe levels of
residues of the leanness-enhancing drug ractopamine in meat show the
commission¡¦s discussions have centered on scientific evidence, contradicting
claims by officials from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government that the
issue has been affected by protectionist trade interests.
Government officials recently made repeated attempts to decouple the proposed
plan to accept an allowable level of ractopamine residues in US beef imports
from the highly likely event that the Codex could once again fail to ratify a
proposed residue standard when the UN¡¦s food safety agency meets on July 2 for
its annual session.
Characterizing the issue as ¡§a trade war¡¨ between the US, an active proponent of
the use of ractopamine mainly in cattle and pigs, and the EU, leading a strong
opposition to it, officials led by Executive Yuan spokesperson Hu Yu-wei (J¥®°¶)
said that discussion of ractopamine at the Codex was not and would not just be
about science and health.
The claims were not confirmed by the Codex¡¦s official record of proceedings of
meetings at which the issue had received extensive discussions over the years
involving many countries of the 185-member organization.
Since the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), which serves as a
scientific advisory body to the UN¡¦s Food and Agriculture Organization and the
WHO, advanced its draft study on maximum residue levels (MRLs) for ractopamine
to the Codex commission for adoption in 2008, the final step in the eight-step
Codex approval process, the proposal has been held for four consecutive years.
The reasons the EU opposes the adoption of the draft MRLs were mainly
articulated in its report conducted by the European Food Safety Authority to
review the JECFA study.
Presented to the Codex commission at its session in 2010, the EU report
concluded that it was impossible to derive an accepted daily intake from the
data submitted by the JECFA and that therefore no proposal for MRLs could be
made.
The EU repeatedly underlined that it highly respected the work of the JECFA, but
could not ignore the opinions provided by their own risk assessment body, which
is at the basis of their food safety system established according to the
principles of risk analysis.
China, also a strong opponent of the use of ractopamine, first reported on its
residues studies to the Codex commission in its 2009 session, saying it was very
cautious in this regard because it had seen cases of food poisoning from the
consumption of tissues containing residues of beta-agonists, the class of drug
to which ractopamine belongs.
Studies conducted by China showed residue levels in muscle, liver, kidneys, and
lungs exceeded the draft MRLs proposed by the JECFA and emphasized that internal
organs are regularly consumed in China and other Asian countries.
The Codex documents showed that countries joining the EU and China in opposition
to the draft proposal were Norway, Kenya, Singapore, among others.
At the 2008 Codex session, Singapore expressed its concerns over relying on
veterinary drugs rather than fostering genetic improvements to increase gross
weight and leanness of livestock, one of various delegations that noted that
veterinary drugs should be used only when necessary, and taking into
consideration aspects of animal health and animal welfare.
At a meeting held by the JECFA on the issue last year, Kenya said further
research should be carried out on lungs, hearts and intestines to establish MRLs
for safety purposes.
The documents showed that China had submitted at least four studies with regard
to its concerns over higher levels of ractopamine residues in offal to the Codex
in 2009 and 2010, to which the JECFA responded in Codex session in 2010 and last
year.
At the 2010 session, the JECFA dismissed China¡¦s concerns after it reviewed its
studies and dietary information, concluding that ractopamine residues in
muscles, fat, liver, kidney and other offal had been considered and that no
health concerns had been identified.
The JECFA said in 2010 that the only possible dietary source that could lead to
consumption of residues above the acceptable daily intake was lung tissue, if
considerable amounts were consumed on a regular basis.
Last year, the JECFA further dismissed concerns over lung tissue, saying
consumption of lung tissue containing ractopamine residues did not indicate a
health concern because consumption of lung tissue and other non-standard tissue
generally replaced consumption of muscle, and were not added to the daily
consumption of animal products.
The long delay in adopting the draft MRLs was also a concern of Brazil,
Australia and the Philippines, among others, some of which were among the 27
countries in the world which permitted ractopamine residues in locally produced
or imported meat products.
At last year¡¦s session, the US called for a roll-call vote on the adoption of
the draft MRLs.
Given that the US motion deviated from the Codex¡¦s normal practice, in which its
members decide food-safety standards by consensus, a roll-call vote on whether
to proceed with a vote on adoption of the MRLs by a secret vote was first held,
and then a secret vote was held to determine whether the draft MRLs should be
voted on.
The first vote saw that 64 voted in favor of a secret vote, with 54 against and
6 abstentions. Japan, one of the 27 countries that permits ractopamine residues,
did not side with the US, which voted in favor of a vote on the draft MRLs being
held by a secret vote.
In the second vote, 59 voted in favor of holding a secret vote on the draft MRLs,
but 68 voted against, with 9 abstentions, leaving the issue to be decided next
month.
|
