Headline : COLANISATION'S DIRTY DOZEN
Intro:Deadly
pesticides found in 12 leading brands of soft drinks
The
Pollution Monitoring Laboratory (PML) of the Centre for
Science and Environment (CSE) places in the public domain
its analysis of the contents of 12 cold drink brands sold
in Delhi. Three bottles of each of the 12 brands were
purchased from markets across the city and analysed to
see if they contained pesticides.
PML tested the cold drink samples for 16 organochlorine
pesticides, 12 organophosphorus pesticides and 4
synthetic pyrethroides all of these are commonly
used in India as insecticides, in agricultural fields as
well as at home
The test found: organochlorine pesticides LINDANE (g-HCH): This deadly
insecticide damages the bodys central nervous
system as well as immune system and is a confirmed
carcinogen. It was found in 100 per cent of cold drink
samples. Its concentration ranged from 0.0008 milligram
per litre (mg/l) to 0.0042 mg/l in the samples tested.
This last amount is 42 times the 0.0001 mg/l EEC limit
a set of standards stipulated by the European
Economic Commission to control contamination in water
used as food for maximum admissible
concentration for an individual pesticide. It was found in Mirinda
lemon. On an average, lindane concentration in all brands
was 0.0021 mg/l, or 21 times higher than the EEC norm. (see graph)
In the popular Coca-Cola brand lindane concentration was
0.0035 mg/l a level of concentration which was 35
times higher than the EEC norms.
DDT AND ITS METABOLITES (DDD & DDE): Also
detected in 81 per cent of the samples. Absent in Diet
Pepsi, their concentration is as high as 0.0042 mg/l in
Mirinda lemon (42 times higher than EEC norms). On
average, total DDT and metabolites found in the samples
stood at 0.0015 mg/l, 15 times higher than EEC limits. In
the popular Pepsi brand it was 16 times higher than EEC
norms. In the equally popular Coca-Cola brand, it was 9
times higher than the EEC limit. (see graph)
It found: organophosphorus pesticides CHLOROPYRIFOS:
Especially dangerous for mothers-to-be and babies as it
is a suspected neuroteratogen (it causes malformations in
foetuses), this pesticide was found in 100 per cent of
the samples. Maximum concentration was in Mirinda lemon
flavour: 0.0072 mg/l , or 72 times more than the EEC
single-pesticide norm. The average amount of chlorpyrifos
found in all samples was 0.0042 mg/l , 42 times higher
than the EEC norm.
MALATHION: Detected in 97 per cent of the samples, its
concentration was highest in a Mirinda lemon sample:
0.0196 mg/l , or 196 times the EEC limit for a single
pesticide. Coca-Cola had malathion 137 times higher than
EEC norms. Malathion gets activated in the human liver to
produce malaoxon, deadly for the nervous system. It is
also a confirmed mutagen it can tinker with the
bodys chromosomal set-up.
In brand terms Two multinationals
Atlanta-headquartered The Coca-Cola Company and New
York-based PepsiCo control the cold drink market
in India. Their market share is a fiercely contested
secret. They also seem to share a penchant for pesticide
residues in their products. Total pesticides in all
PepsiCo brands on average was 0.0180 mg/l, 36 times
higher than the EEC limit for total pesticides (0.0005
mg/l). Total pesticides in all Coca-Cola brands were
0.0150 mg/l, 30 times more than the same EEC limit.
In conclusion, the pesticides found in soft drinks are
odiously similar to bottled water, which the PML had
investigated earlier in the year.
Merchanting madira By the 1990s, the carbonated drinks
market in the US and Western Europe was saturated.
Companies therefore turned to new ones. So came the fizz
to the Middle East, refurbished East Europe and Asia. In
1991, PepsiCo entered the newly liberalised Indian
market. 2 years later, Coca-Cola re-appeared (it was
thrown out in the wake of the 1977 FERA regulations).
Slowly beginning to dominate the Indian market
Coca-Cola bought out Parle Beverages and its brands Thums
Up, Limca and Gold Spot; in 1999 it acquired Cadbury
Schweppes brands Crush, Canada Dry and Sport Cola.
Pepsi, on its part, took over Mumbai-based Duke range of
soft drinks they now rule over it. By March 2001,
government estimates that 6540 million cold drink bottles
were sold annually in the country. In other words, with
over a billion Indians, each Indian would be drinking
roughly 6 bottles of soft drinks each year (compare:
Pakistan, 17 bottles per capita per year; Sri Lanka, 21
bottles; China, 21). In Delhi, the consumption is a
whopping 50 bottles per person per year. Companies are
now busy wooing rural markets the innovative 200
ml bottle, costing Rs 5-7, has been hailed as a success.
In short, colanisation is here to happen.
But how can
quality-conscious multinationals market products unfit
for human consumption?
The
regulators meaningless maze
Will they get away with it?
They wouldnt have got away in the US. Legally
enforceable norms exist there, that regulate the kind of
water used to make cold drinks with. (Remember, the main
ingredient in a cold drink or carbonated
non-alcoholic beverage, as it is technically called
is water.) In the US, regulations provide that the
quality of water used to make cold drinks must be the
same as that used to make bottled water. Raw
water used to make bottled water falls under the
regulative umbrella of the US Food and Drug
Administration. In their rule-book, water consumed in
this form is a food; therefore water used as
an ingredient in beverages also therefore a food
must meet the same standards as bottled water. In
addition the Safe Drinking Water Act, a federal
legislation under the Environment Protection Agency
(EPA), stipulates drinking water standards to protect
public health. Its primary standards are legally
enforceable nationwide. The state of Massachusets, for
instance, stipulates that the source water used for
bottled water (and carbonated drinks) must meet the
federal EPA national primary drinking water standards.
They wouldnt have got away in Europe. The European
Economic Council Directive 80/778/EEC lays down standards
for the quality of drinking water intended for human
consumption. Such water, it clearly specifies, shall
include water used in a food production undertaking for
the manufacture or processing of products and substances
intended for human consumption, or effecting the
wholesomeness of the foodstuff in its finished
form. (From December 25, 2003, this directive will
be repealed and replaced by Directive 98/83/EC, in which
the maximum admissible concentration for individual and
total pesticide is the same.)
But in India, these companies cannot be taken to court.
In fact, forget legal procedure; these companies cannot
even be politely told to stick to norms. For and
this is precisely where quality-conscious multinationals
laugh all the way to the bank the norms that
regulate the manufacture of cold drinks in India are a
meaningless maze.
There is Rule 65 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration
Act, 1954 (PFA). Rule 65 regulates the presence of
insecticides and pesticides in food. But food
is so defined in Rule 65 as to exclude
beverages. Does this mean the Act has nothing
to say about cold drinks? Not at all. 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. This Act is mandatory, but does not
regulate pesticides in soft drinks.
Then, there are the specifications for sweetened
aerated water with no fruit juice or fruit pulp or
containing less than 10 per cent of fruit juice or fruit
pulp in Part II(D) of The Fruit Products Order
(FPO), 1955. FPO rules are as mandatory as the PFA's. It
regulates the general characteristics of a beverage. On
the quality of the basic raw material it merely says:
water used in the manufacture shall be potable and
if required by the licensing officer shall be got
examined chemically and bacteriologically by any
recognised laboratory. Please note:
water
shall be potable. But what is
potable? The Order does not define it;
legally, therefore, the order provides no scope to
regulate pesticide residues.
These two mandatory sets of rules apart, there exists IS
2346: 1992, a norm of the Bureau of Indian Standards
(BIS). It lays down specifications for carbonated
beverages. In the foreword to this
document, water is clearly mentioned as an ingredient in
carbonated beverages: The quality of a carbonated
beverage depends on the quality of the various
ingredients that go into its manufacture water
, acidulants, sweetening agents, emulsifiers and
stabilisers, flavour, colour and carbon dioxide being the
important ones [emphasis added]. The document then
prescribes the requirements and methods by which the
quality of carbonated beverages may be gauged. As part of
this process, it lists the various ingredients that can
be used to make carbonated beverages. In this list, there
is no mention of water! In any case, this BIS standard is
voluntary in nature (unlike the certification for bottled
water); a company neednt meet its specifications.
BIS has another standard, also voluntary IS
4251:1967 (reaffirmed 1977) which prescribes
standards for quality tolerances for water for
processed food industry. Its a bizarre piece
of standard-setting. In its foreword, it says: In
processed food industry, water is used for a number of
purposes, such as processing, washing, flushing and
general usage and also for boiler feed and cooling.
Isnt it also used to make cold drinks?
The bottom line is that in India, the cold drinks
industry is virtually unregulated. Strangely, it is also
exempted from the provisions of industrial licensing
under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act,
1951. It gets a one-time license to operate from the
ministry of food processing industries, which includes a
non-objection certificate from the local government and a
water analysis report from a public health laboratory. It
also requires a no-objection certificate from the state
pollution control board. Thats it. Theres no
environmental impact assessment, or siting regulations
for the industry. Its use of water largely
unpriced groundwater is not regulated.
Forget pesticides. Standards for other substances
such as heavy metals like arsenic or lead also are
many times above the guidelines for drinking water issued
by the ministry of urban development (see table: Standards to regulate
). For instance,
for deadly arsenic, standards differ in different
regulations in soft drinks under the mandatory
Food Products Order it is 0.5 ppm; under the BIS
voluntary standards, the quantity drops to
0.25 ppm; and strangely, drinking water guidelines
specify a safe level of only 0.01 ppm. Therefore, soft
drinks have been allowed 50 times higher arsenic content
than in drinking water. Allowed lead levels for soft
drinks are 50 times higher than bottled water. Cadmium is
not even legislated. Why? Dont ask. Working within
the meaningless maze of such regulations, common sense
dictates that a company would love to set up shop in
India.
|