Melamine Contamination Caused by Corporate Greed, Import Liberalization, Gov’t Neglect

Published on October 4, 2008

Effects

Quijano said that based on animal data, melamine causes adverse reproductive effects, affecting genetic material. It was also found to cause bladder cancer in animals. He said it may also cause irritations of the skin, eye and respiratory tract, as well as the digestive tract thereby inducing nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. It may also damage the urinary system.

Greed

In an interview, Dr. Eleanor Jara, executive director of the Council for Health and Development slammed the use of melamine as protein substitute in milk and other products. She said that the industrial chemical is not intended for food.

“They did that intentionally. It was premeditated. May pandaraya. (There was cheating.).” “They must be punished.”

Jara added, “They get their profit at the expense of infants. They do not value life. Melamine can kill. Don’t they know the chemicals they are using?”

Quijano hit Nestle and other companies for putting out expensive advertisements proclaiming that their products are safe even without undergoing the appropriate tests.

Government neglect, liberalization

Jara criticized the Department of Health (DOH) and the Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD) for being ‘reactive.’ She said both government agencies undertake testing only when there are controversies. “Kapag wala pang nangyayari, di pa kikibo,” (If nothing has happened yet, they remain mum.) she said.

Jara said the DOH and the BFAD should instead directly say that melamine is poisonous.

She said that the Philippines, like other Third World countries, has been a dumping ground of surplus products because of liberalization. “These products are not tested for safety,” she said.

Quijano said food safety has never been a serious concern of governments and corporations, particularly with the advent of ‘corporate globalization.’ He said that provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) related to food safety ‘clearly subordinate protection of health and environment to corporate interests.’

Quijano explained, “Countries, especially the weaker ones, are forced to import food products contaminated with toxic chemicals or substances. Any attempt to ban or restrict such harmful substances, even those already banned in other countries, is met with fierce resistance by corporate giants and their host countries. Such is the case for pesticides, artificial sweeteners and additives, genetically-modified organisms and now, melamine.”

Alternatives

Jara said the government should encourage breastfeeding. “Infant formula milk does not contain the right amount of nutrition that babies need.”

With breastfeeding, there will be no cause for mothers to fear that their babies might ingest toxic substances. Likewise, water contamination would not be a problem for babies, said Jara.

She said, however, that the government is not aggressive enough in promoting breastfeeding. Citing data from United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Jara said only 16 percent of Filipino mothers practice breastfeeding. Others feed their babies with infant formula and condensed milk.

She said the government should also conduct health education among the public.

Jara also proposed that the government provide support for local manufacturers of milk and other dairy products for adults. She said that the local food production must be developed. She noted though that the government chooses to ignore food production and food safety.

Meanwhile, Quijano said mechanisms for appropriate monitoring and timely intervention should be established. “Food safety should be placed high in the political agenda. Safe food should be put in the hands of the people.” (Bulatlat)

Pages: 1 2