http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/24/us-unilever-china-quality-idUSBRE83N0AT20120424
Yesterday, word spread that Lipton tea bags sold in China contained unsafe levels of pesticide residue. Greenpeace purchased several boxes of Unilever's Lipton tea in March and sent the samples to an independent lab to be tested for pesticide residue. All four Lipton samples were found to have pesticide levels above the EU's allowable threshold. Furthermore, some of the pesticides detected are illegal in tea production according to the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture and the EU. Unilever responded to Greenpeace's study by stating that their products are safe and comply with all national standards. Historically, China has struggled to adhere to health regulations and is known for its "food safety woes." On the other hand, the American Chamber of Commerce in China and the EU Chamber of Commerce in China published reports that said Unilever China and other foreign companies are unfairly punished for health violations.
This news merits further discussion. First, it was interesting to learn that there are national standards for pesticides. Pesticides were discussed in class this week, and one point came up about the need to develop international standards for acceptable doses and concentrations of pesticides. Apparently, some standards are already in place, although given this Lipton situation, they are not effectively enforced. Moreover, this news begs the following questions: Who is in charge of monitoring companies' compliance with food and health standards, and why aren't they properly doing their job? Do you think foreign companies are unfairly punished for health violations? As a consumer, I think any company that produces products (especially consumables) which do not meet legal standards should be held responsible and punished. Ultimately, it is the public's health at stake.
What should be done to prevent similar situations like this from occurring? Or, are the standards unreasonable and therefore nothing should be done? I think the public has the right to know their food is safe to eat and their tea is safe to drink. This either necessitates more restrictions, or better enforcement of the rules already in place (most likely the latter).
Lipton tea is a household brand, and consumers do have a right to tea that does not contain pesticides. There are problems with establishing international standards for 'safe levels' of pesticides because the scientific methodologies used to determine such risks do not always account for cumulative or chronic and longterm exposure, as well as the synergistic elements of toxic pesticide exposure, especially for workers. nonetheless,the tea should certainly be recalled, and measures taken to ensure future tea is not contaminated this way. I feel monetary fees for health violations by international food industries are not as important as increased food safety management for consumers and employees. with pesticides, especially the common organophosphate pesticides that carry health concerns ranging from rashes, headaches, and shock coma and death in high levels of exposure, and neurological and reproductive impairments, even cancer for low-level chronic exposure. i feel the only answer is to reduce and eliminate the use of these chemicals.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree, it is definitely nice to hear of the presence of pesticide regulations and the like on an international level. Furthermore, it is deplorable that "Lipton China" has been selling tea that is above these levels. Not only does this indicate that they are placing farmworkers at risk, but it is also worrisome for us as consumers, especially those of us who are somewhat dependent on our caffeine. One thing I find significant, however, is the fact that the U.S. and E.U. Chambers of Commerce have spoken out against what they say are "unfair" punishments for these "health violations." The image connected to this post also says a lot. It seems that it is uniquely Chinese Lipton tea that has been affected, under the parent company Unilever. In thinking about why Western regulatory bodies would speak out against punishment of obvious health violations, I found myself wondering if there could possibly be something lax or biased about Unilever that could serve to extricate China from blame to some extent. Given that Unilever is an American-based parent company, do they have unequal enforcement agencies that would serve to make, say, American Lipton safer than Chinese Lipton? As 'The Domer' pointed out: Whose responsibility is it to make sure that growers are complying with health standards? Unilever's or Chinese Lipton's? Before we place blame on foreign industry, we must ask these important questions and think about the way our country or our practices could be complicit in these dangers.
ReplyDeleteI think it's unfortunate that China continues to make headlines for its hazardous products and lack of regulation enforcement. What is more unfortunate, though, is that incidents like these reveal that companies adapt their production and marketing strategies to public demands and not for the sake of wanting to provide a healthy, ethically manufactured product. Once again, profit outweighs the interest of consumer and employee health and safety. This is not to say that Unilever China should not be held accountable. There ARE pesticide regulations in the country, and it is the company's job to enforce that they are being met. It's really discomforting that both the local and international branches of the company really don't have the consumer's interest in mind and value the economic benefits of altering products over consumer well-being.
ReplyDeleteThis article definitely made me do a double take since I drink tea on an almost daily basis. Seriously – is it safe to eat anything anymore? I’m disappointed that Lipton would exceed the pesticide limit and even use illegal pesticides. Can we be sure that these pesticides are just limited to China? Not to mention, if they are, does that mean that Lipton is targeting China, possibly because they didn’t expect to get caught? I don’t understand why any company wouldn’t be as absolutely careful and judicious as possible with its pesticide use. There is a part of me that literally can’t even believe this is a problem. It’s a widely known fact that pesticides are harmful, and there’s a reason why these regulations are in place – do these companies honestly not even care? More importantly – what do we need to do to keep unsafe levels of pesticides out of our food, if even the law can’t do it?
ReplyDelete