Session 2
Standards
for soft
drinks
Briefing
workshop
August 4,
2004
Centre for Science and Environment
Existing soft drink standards in
India
• Exempted from industrial licensing under Industries
(Development and Regulation) Act, 1951
• Mandatory regulation under The Fruit Products Order (FPO1955); regulated by Ministry of food processing
• Soft drinks standards:
o Sweetened aerated water with no fruit juice or fruit pulp
or containing less than 10 per cent of fruit juice or fruit
pulp under Part II (D) of Fruit Products Order (FPO),
1955;
o Carbonated water as defined under item A 01.01 of
Appendix B of Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA)
Rules, 1955;
o Carbonated Beverages defined under IS 2346-1992 of
Bureau of Indian Standards.
Centre for Science and Environment
Existing soft drink standards
Centre for Science and Environment
Standards for pesticide residues in
soft drinks…
• …does not exist.
• Rule 65 of PFA regulates pesticides in food.
• But food is defined to exclude ‘beverages’.
• Sub-section A.01-01 in appendix B defines the
standards of quality for non-alcoholic beverages.
• But has nothing to say about pesticide residues.
• PFA and FPO: The water used for manufacturing the
soft drink should be ‘Potable’. But has not defined
what is potable.
Centre for Science and Environment
Difference in results: CSE lab vs.
Others
• CSE Result: 11 - 70 times higher than
multiple residues standard of bottle water
• CFRTI: 1.2 - 5.2 times higher
• CFL: 1.6 - 5.2 times higher
• CPCB: 3.1 – 7.2 times higher
• Shriram Lab: 17 – 419 times higher
o Different batches
o Manufactured during different time period
o Tested in different labs
Centre for Science and Environment
Differences in result: JPC verdict
• In view of the fact that these labs did not
test identical samples…the quantitative
results reported by them cannot be
compared.
• The Committee however find that the CSE
findings are correct….
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• What is safe? What government lab
found safe? CSE lab found unsafe?
Or Sriram lab unsafe????
• The answer to this question will also
provide the answer for: what should
be the pesticide standards for soft
drinks.
Centre for Science and Environment
Safety not about large numbers
• Pesticides are deadly. Invisible exposure –
over time, in small (tiny) doses – leads to
chronic health effects.
• Immunosuppressive effect – triggers diseases
like cancer or asthma.
• Persistent build up in our bodies – lindane for
instance is a potent carcinogen.
• Pesticide risk management is all about
managing and minimising tiny exposures.
Centre for Science and Environment
Defining safety
• Safety is all about meeting and
adhering to a given standard.
• Safety is about managing the
poison-nutrition trade-off (we ingest
poison to get some nutrition..)
• But this poison must be within safe
exposures. Therefore, safety
requires setting standards for the
food basket.
Centre for Science and Environment
Politics of clubbing of soft drinks and
juices
• Politics of regulations: widen the scope of the
regulation so that it is:
• A. impractical and unfeasible;
• B. impossible to implement;
• C. lax and weak.
• By clubbing all water based beverages into one
regulation that is exactly what happened. The
fruit juice, malt beverage clubbed together with
coke and pepsi.
Centre for Science and Environment
Take heavy metal norms:
• Companies already meet the stringent heavy metal
norms in their products (see Annexure 3).
• But they want lax standards. Asking for Juice
standards set by CODEX.
• Mercury (highly toxic):
• In drinking water: 1 ppb
• In juices: 1 ppm (1000 times higher)
• Same issue in bacterial plate count:
• In water based drinks: 100/250 ml
• In barley and malt drinks: 5000/250 ml
• How much should be allowed in soft drinks? Cannot
club significantly different ingredients.
Centre for Science and Environment
Distinct category exists
• Cannot regulate if “significantly different ingredients”
• Indian regulations already have a distinct category for
soft drinks. Under:
 Carbonated water as defined under item A 01.01 of Appendix B of PFA
Rules, 1955;
 Sweetened aerated water with no fruit juice or fruit pulp or containing less
than 10 per cent of fruit juice or fruit pulp under Part II (D) of Fruit Products
Order (FPO), 1955;
 Carbonated Beverages defined under IS 2346-1992 of Bureau of Indian
Standards.
• Separate standard for other water based beverages:
fruit nectar, synthetic syrups, and fruit juices exist. Can
keep as separate categories.
Centre for Science and Environment
Clubbing juices and soft drinks: a
masterstroke
• The pesticide residue of juices will be different
to soft drinks. Juices are part of the essential
diet. They provide nutrition.
• Cannot club juices with soft drinks.
• Also we can only allow pesticide residue in
soft drinks, if we remove some essential food
item from our diet.
• Can soft drink substitute milk?
Can soft drink substitute fruit juices?
Centre for Science and Environment
2. Should we set standards for
final product
Pesticide
Heavy metals etc.
Soft Drinks
Χ
√
Cheese (even
under PFA)
√
√
Butter (even
under PFA)
√
√
Ice cream (even
under PFA)
√
√
Baby food
√
√
Globally no country has set pesticide standards for
soft drinks. WHY??
Centre for Science and Environment
Actual exposures?
European Union (1996)
USA (1996)
Above MRL (1.4%)
Within
MRL
(35.6)
Free
from
residues
(63%)
Within
MRL
(67.2%)
Above MRL (4.8%)
Free from
residues
(28%)
India (1965-98)
Within
MRL
(39%)
Above MRL
(20%)
Free from
residues
(41%)
Centre for Science and Environment
Source:
G S Dhaliwal &
Balwinder Singh,
2000: 208
Out side System works.
Check..enforce..penalize
•
•
•
•
•
US: 6,523 samples tested and 4% failed;
EU: 46,000 samples only 4% failed standards;
Canada: 44,000 samples only 2% failed standards.
Low MRL set. Strict enforcement. Regular surveillance.
Their governments say that pesticides are not a health
hazard because the exposure is low.
• They do not regulate pesticides in
finished products like soft drinks,
because they have cleaned up their
contamination. We haven’t.
Centre for Science and Environment
Honey…jam contaminated
• Government report: 2001
• Honey: out of 82 samples, 51 per cent
contaminated.
• Jam…67 per cent contaminated
• Jelly…all 12 samples contaminated..
• Baby food (1999) all contaminated.
• India has to set standards for processed food+
enforce standards for raw commodities.
Centre for Science and Environment
How do we set standard for
final product?
• Globally pesticide standard for
processed food are set by following 3
broad principle:
o Carry forward principle
o Multi-constituent principle
o No standard - no residue principle.
Centre for Science and Environment
Carry-forward principle
• Carry-forward the pesticide from raw
agricultural commodity to the finished
product.
• Means that if under the PFA there is a
standard for ‘Phorate’ in sugarcane, then
the standard for ‘Phorate’ in sugar should
be similar to the sugarcane standard.
Conversely, if there is no standard for DDT
in sugarcane than no residue of DDT
should be found in sugar.
Centre for Science and Environment
Multi-constituent principle
• MRL of a finished Products with multiple
commodities = Sum of MRLs of various
commodities as proportionately present.
• Soft Drinks constituents:
10% sugar+1% others+89 % water
• (10% of sugar MRL) + (1% of other MRL) + (89% of water MRL)
• Calculate norms for soft drinks as
finished product…
Centre for Science and Environment
No standard-no residue principle
Law states that:
“If an MRL for a chemical is not listed in
the standard then there must be no
detectable residue of that agricultural
chemical in that food”.
Therefore, if under the PFA no standard
for DDT in sugarcane is mentioned
then there must be no detectable
residue of DDT in sugar cane.
Centre for Science and Environment
Pollution Monitoring Laboratory
• Soft Drink =
89% water + 10% sugar + 1% [co2+concentrate]
Let us take Packaged Drinking Water Standard [in ppb] >
Water
Sugar
CO2+concentrate
Final
Packaged
Drinking Water
PFA
PFA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
0.1
0
0
0.09
Lindane
0.1
0
0
0.09
Malathion
0.1
0
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
0.1
0
0
0.09
Centre for Science and Environment
Pollution Monitoring Laboratory
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
Indian
BIS
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
BIS (IS 10500)
Drinking water
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
• 100% of CFL/CFTRI/CSE/CPCB samples fail BIS norm
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
Indian
BIS
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
• 100% of CFL/CFTRI results fail BIS norm
• 75% of CFTRI and 58% of CFL results fail WHO norm
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
Indian
BIS
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
• 100% of CFL/CFTRI results fail BIS norm
• 75% of CFTRI and 58% of CFL results fail WHO norm
• 100% CSE and CPCB results fail WHO norm
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
Indian
BIS
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
• 100% of CFL/CFTRI/CSE/CPCB samples fail USEPA
norm
Centre for Science and Environment
Are soft drinks safe?
• Different standards for Soft Drinks derived from
different regulatory regimes [in ppb]
Indian
BIS
WHO
USEPA
Packaged
Drinking water
DDT
Absent [0]
0.9
0
0.09
Lindane
Absent [0]
0.27
0.18
0.09
Malathion
Absent [0]
810
0
0.09
Chlorpyriphos
Absent [0]
27
0
0.09
• 100% of all results fail USEPA norm
• And obviously all results fail packaged drinking
water norms as well.
Centre for Science and Environment
Soft drinks not safe
• CSE said “not safe” because drinks
did not meet any set-derived
standards
• Not only for the tests done by CSE
but also for tests done by CFL,
CFTRI, CPCB and Shriram lab,
Bangalore.
Centre for Science and Environment
What should be the soft drink
standard?
• If we use the global practice, then:
• As per the PFA there are only 4 pesticides for
which standards exists for sugar cane and
therefore for sugar used in soft drinks:
Atrazin:
0.25 mg/kg
Carbofuran:
0.1 mg/kg
Phorate:
0.05 mg/kg
Simazine:
0.25 mg/kg
• Ministry of health has already recommended that
water used in soft drink should meet BIS packaged
drinking water standard.
Centre for Science and Environment
What should be the soft drink
standard?
Inputs
Amount
(gm)
BIS bottle water standard/ MRLs of sugar cane and hence
sugar under PFA (ppm)
Atrazine
Simazine Carbofuran
Phorate
All other
pesticides
Water
890
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
Sugar
100
0.25
0.25
0.1
0.05
0
Others
10
0
0
0
0
0
0.025
0.025
0.01
0.005
0.00009
Soft Drink
Standard
Centre for Science and Environment
Soft drink standard using global
principle and existing Indian standards
Atrazin – 0.025 mg/l
Simazine – 0.025 mg/l
Carbofuran – 0.01 mg/l
Phorate – 0.005 mg/l
Other individual pesticides: 0.00009 mg/l
Total pesticide: 0.00045 mg/l
– Note: The total pesticide standard does not
include the 4 pesticides listed above.
• BUT THERE IS A PROBLEM?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Centre for Science and Environment
Indian law is about final product
• PFA regulates the quality of final product in
Appendix B (A.01.01).
• PFA also says that contaminants (pesticides) from
raw material cannot be carried forward to the final
product.
• Part XI A (Crop contaminants): defines pesticides
as contaminants.
• Part XIII A (Carry over of food additives):
categorically states that contaminants cannot be
carried over from raw material to final product.
• In other words, if there are contaminants in any
raw material (say sugar), manufacturers have to
clean it up in the final product.
Centre for Science and Environment
Soft drink standards in light of the
PFA provisions
•
There cannot be any carry forward of
pesticides to soft drinks from agricultural
ingredients.
•
Therefore, soft drinks will have to meet the
existing packaged drinking water
standards.
o Individual pesticides: 0.0001 mg/l
o Total pesticide: 0.0005 mg/l
Centre for Science and Environment
JPC recommendations on
pesticide standards:
• Water used in the manufacture of soft drinks
must conform with bottle water norms.
• Sugar is not the likely source of contamination.
Also soft drink manufacturers mentioned
before JPC that they have “foolproof process”
to select and treat sugar from contaminants.
• Set final product standards. “The reason that
others have not fixed should not dissuade our
law makers…”
Centre for Science and Environment
Caffeine in soft drinks
• Caffeine consumption linked with diseases and
disorders such as insomnia, nervousness, anxiety,
irritability, and deviations from the normal heart
rate.
• World regulates caffeine in food for this reason.
Centre for Science and Environment
Cannot compare caffeine in soft
drinks with tea and coffee
• Globally caffeine in tea and coffee is never
compared with caffeine in soft drinks because of
the ‘natural speciation’ of caffeine with tea and
coffee, as is the case of ‘natural speciation’ of
metals and acids in fruits (iron is apple, citric acid
in lemon and oranges etc).
• Caffeine is soft drinks is artificially added.
• there are no standards for caffeine in tea and
coffee, but there are standards for caffeine in soft
drinks.
Centre for Science and Environment
Caffeine in soft drinks
• Globally caffeine only permitted in ‘cola dinks’ (China,
Canada, Australia, South Africa, Holland, Spain etc.).
Allowed till 150 mg/l. Or caffeine-free versions sold.
• PFA makes no such distinction. Allows 200 mg/l in all.
• Result: In India, caffeine added even in non-cola drinks
like PepsiCo’s ‘Mountain Dew’.
• Harmful for children, pregnant and lactating women.
• Caffeine is addictive.
• We cannot allow caffeine in non-cola.
• Caffeine standard must be similar to global best
norms.
• We also need clear warning labels if caffeine added.
• Labels needed in regional languages.
Centre for Science and Environment
JPC recommendations on caffeine
• Lower limit from 200 ppm (200 mg/litre) to the
global best standard.
• Ask for non-caffeinated versions of caffeinated
drinks
• If above than standard, then label should have
health advisory:
• “The beverage is not recommended for:
– Children
– Pregnant or lactating women
– Individuals sensitive to caffeine”
Centre for Science and Environment
Regulate pH (acidity)
• Lower pH means high acidity in the body. Regulations
for pH do not exist in India. Only South Africa regulates
pH at 2.5.
• Non-regulation of interest to companies because low
pH gives longer shelf-life. pH regulation needed.
Water
M ilk
Beer
Nimbu Pani
M ango Juice
Orange Juice
Apple Juice
Wine
Lime
Soft Drinks
Hydrochloric
Sulphuric Acid
0
2
4
6
8
7
Centre for Science and Environment
10
12
14
What has happened after JPC: BIS
• BIS has revised its existing soft drink standards and
released it for public comment till August 31.
• BIS multi-stakeholder committee considered all issues.
• Agreed on “final product” standards for pesticide
residues in soft drinks.
• Committee discussed contamination through sugar
and agreed with JPC recommendations.
• Followed the existing provisions of PFA that carry
forward is not allowed .
• Agreed on: 0.0001 ppm (single pesticide)
•
0.0005 ppm (total pesticides)
• Bought down caffeine from 200 to 145 mg/l and
regulated pH between 2.3 – 8.5.
Centre for Science and Environment
What has happened after JPC:
Ministry of Health
• Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued
notification to the effect that the water to be
used in manufacturing soft drink should meet
packaged drinking water standard.
• Has set-up a committee to look at final product
standard.
• These standards will be mandatory.
Centre for Science and Environment
Descargar

How safe is safe? The health imperative in setting