The CSE study has left the cola majors stuck for
answers to explain pesticide residue in their beverages. But food contamination
is a larger concern
 |
| |
The
CSE says the Central government is hand-in-glove with cola companies
and is adopting dilatory tactics |
Cola consumers watch
quietly as the cola majors and Sunita Narain of the Centre for Science
and Environment (CSE) slug it out over whose lab report gives a correct
picture of the alleged presence of pesticides in soft drinks. Underneath
the war of numbers lie the politics of foreign investment, the government’s
hesitancy in setting possibly unwelcome safety standards for multinational
companies, and the eternal query of whether multinationals make convenient
scapegoats. Within these multiple layers, a question arises: are the
real questions about contamination and pollution in our lives being
forgotten? Are public health concerns being swept aside in the cola
debate, or could this be the first step in a larger battle against contaminants
that are omnipresent in our lives?
We live in a world
where chemicals, pesticides and toxin-laced products are everywhere.
So why just talk about soft drinks? Sunita Narain refuses to be drawn
into this debate, arguing the cola contamination issue cannot be ignored
just because there are other contaminated products. Be it milk, cabbage,
meat, oil, cheese, or perhaps most importantly, tap water, there is
a larger issue of contamination and indiscriminate use of pesticides.
Dr CM Ghulati, editor,
mims (Monthly Index of Medical Specialities) India, says: “India
is home to water-borne diseases. Sugar contains pesticides due to its
excessive use in sugarcane crops. If you offer me tap water and Pepsi,
I will prefer Pepsi, because it is far less contaminated than normal
tap water. We don’t target Municipal Corporation of Delhi and
Delhi Jal Board for providing us substandard water despite charging
us. Why not check dms milk? Are there more diseases due to soft drinks
or potable water?”
 |
While Ghulati may
have this grouse, the fact is a large number of people in the country
consume colas. Adds Dr VV Pillay, head, Department of Analytical Toxicology,
Amritha Institute of Medical Sciences and Reasearch, Kochi: “The
CSE has given us a small portion of the larger story. You cannot eliminate
pesticides. During our research, we find pesticide residue in every
consumable item. I have also read about pesticides in breastmilk. I
feel the more important issue is that of the presence of phosphoric
acid which weakens the teeth. I find the presence of caffeine worrisome.
Many people are addicted to cold drinks due to caffeine.”
According to the
Toxics Link Pesticide Handbook (2000), an Indian Council of Medical
Research study found that 51 percent of tested food commodities were
contaminated with pesticides and 20 percent of the samples had levels
of pesticides exceeding maximum permissible limits. In another study
by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, 60 percent of tested
samples were found to be pesticide contaminated, of which 14 percent
showed very high contamination levels.
The handbook adds
that drinking water treatment plants are not equipped to decontaminate
water. It states that in vegetable and fruit samples collected from
16 states, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala and Madhya Pradesh showed
over 80 percent samples contaminated with pesticides. Haryana, West
Bengal, Punjab, Orissa, Delhi, Rajasthan, and Maharashtra had pesticide
contamination in 50 to 80 percent of tested samples.
Returning to the
pesticide controversy, the new study has come three years after the
first CSE report. But the results arrived at after analysing 57 samples
of 11 soft drink brands have again come as a shock.
The companies, for
sure, were caught on the wrong foot as the numbers came out, though
it took them no time to flex their muscles. First, the CSE claimed that
their website was hacked, though the companies described an attempt
to link them with “supposed hacking of the site” as “farcical”.
Then, US government issued a thinly veiled threat that the controversy
and the banning of soft drinks by states (like Kerala) could affect
foreign investment flow into the country.
India Inc. too came
down heavily on the ban on the soft drinks. Said a FICCI spokesperson:
“We are trying hard for bringing in fdi. Such illogical and indiscriminate
steps hamper our efforts. Instead of carrying out further tests on their
own, state governments took the easy and populist route of banning the
soft drinks.”
The slanging match
between the two sides has worsened. The cola companies are waving the
results of “the highly respected independent laboratory”
Central Science Laboratories in the United Kingdom which “confirms
that there are no pesticide residue problems.”
|
| |
It’s still not
clear why companies of the stature of Coke and Pepsi oppose setting
standards for final products |
The CSE has shot
back calling the tests “biased” since “the samples
were provided by the company”. They ask, “would the UK government
accept data, paid for by the very company it was testing for regulation?
If we can drink their products, we can certainly test them”.
The charges against
the cola companies are serious. The most common pesticides detected
by the CSE in the samples were Lindane, Chlorpyrifos, Heptachlor and
Malathion. Lindane accumulates in fat tissues and damages the liver,
kidney, neural and immune systems, and induces birth defects and cancer.
Exposure to Chlorpyrifos adversely affects brain cell development. Malathion
causes dna abnormalities at all doses.
According to CSE,
the United States has restricted the use of Heptachlor to underground
termite control. If the results are to be believed, therefore, they
could have serious health implications for people.
Why should a global
company which provides quality products globally provide a substandard
product in India? Equally importantly, will our government give more
importance to the threat of reduced investment vis-à-vis a possibly
very real health threat to the public at large?
The CSE alleges
the government is hand-in-glove with cola companies when it comes to
setting standards to regulate the product and is adopting dilatory tactics.
The example cited is that of Health Secretary P. Hota’s letter
to the Consumer Affairs Ministry secretary L. Mansingh dated March 29,
2006, which says that the “scientific and technical data hasn’t
been disclosed in respect of proposed limits for Ph, caffeine and pesticide
residues.” This, the letter says, is required “to formulate
a clear opinion in this matter.”
When contacted,
P. Hota refused to comment. Health activists say the issue has been
lost in committees and sub-committees. However, Dr Ghulati asks, “How
will anyone prove the companies are preventing the government from setting
standards? It reflects poorly on the government if a few companies prevail
on it.”
The multinationals
don’t want the government to notify standards for cola drinks.
Says Viraj Chouhan of Coca-Cola India: “it’s not a battle
of science, but of perception.” He says that, “the soft
drink is a complex product, whose scientific results cannot be reproduced
after it is re-tested due to a lot of variations. We are not against
standards, but there are no testing protocols worldwide.”
He was at pains
to explain that there is no difference between an American and an Indian
product. “CSE’s lab is not accredited by the National Accreditation
Board of Laboratories. The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) said
that the results need to be validated by a peer lab, which wasn’t
done.” If setting norms for colas wasn’t a serious issue,
why would the matter have been raised in Parliament and a JPC formed?
To this, a Coca-Cola insider shoots back: “Parliament is not always
known to do right things.”
After all this,
it’s still not clear why companies of the stature of Coca-Cola
and Pepsi oppose setting standards for final products. Adds the Coca-Cola
insider: “Officials say they don’t know how to deal with
the issue. Accepting the presence of insecticides would expose them
to allegations of lying to the public. Another reason could be that
it would require a huge investment, which would raise the low product
prices, affecting demand.”
Critics say if the
company has the technology to provide clean bottled water, what’s
stopping them from providing clean soft drinks? Says Upasana Choudhry,
senior coordinator with NGO Toxics Link: “There also seems to
be an attitude problem with the companies, as in, why should we follow
rules?” Clearly, the fight has to go beyond taking stated positions.
