Trade Talk

A Harvard professor recently wrote in the BMJ that the "gross over-reaction to the magnitude of the threat" of peanut allergy was similar to "mass psychogenic illness" previously known as "epidemic hysteria" whose symptoms include anxiety, over-reaction and increasing sensitisation. Extrapolate this to other contaminants in food and the number of people affected by the hysteria could be greater than those who might be at genuine risk if government adopted a less draconian approach to contamination control.

This column in the June 2008 issue touched on the subject of the epidemic of risk aversion leading to food waste. Things have not improved. The recent dioxin in Irish pork incident is a case in point. Large quantities of product were withdrawn from sale, ranging from fresh pork to manufactured products such as sausage rolls, notwithstanding the fact that it was impossible to ingest anything approaching a harmful dose of dioxin, even with worst case consumption levels. Statutory limits for dioxin and other contaminants ought to be used as a trigger, not for automatic withdrawal, but as an indication that something is amiss and action is needed to address it.

In this case, the source of the problem was identified and dealt with and the public reassured that there was virtually no risk to health if they ate affected products before and after the discovery. This proved that the system for protecting consumers is effective, the threat was taken away and it should not have been necessary to waste so much food.

The policy adopted in the dioxin case was inconsistent with government advice, which actively encourages us all to eat two portions of oily fish a week notwithstanding that it may be contaminated with small amounts of heavy metals, which accumulate in the body at harmless levels. This advice is based on common sense. The same rationale should be applied to other analogous circumstances.

Over-reaction to the Irish dioxin scare was illustrated when 40 people claimed refunds from one supermarket for Danish bacon supplied by a single slicer although only Irish meat was implicated. It was also rumoured that meat sales in general fell by 10% in the week of the incident.

Who suffers from these events? We all do: farmers, the food supply industry, consumers and undernourished people in the developing world who are indirectly affected by destruction of wholesome food for which other food will be substituted to feed the more affluent so leaving less available for others.

We could call it "double portions": one that is eaten and another that is thrown away. It's all very well for the government to tell us to tackle food waste. Let it do more to enable the industry to practise what the government preaches.

Clare Cheney

Director general

Provision Trade Federation

clare.cheney@provtrade.co.uk