[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Belgian dioxin in Philippines
- To: dioxin-l@essential.org
- Subject: Belgian dioxin in Philippines
- From: remonde@gsilink.com
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 07:47:37 +0000
- Comments: Authenticated sender is <remonde@mail.gsilink.com>
- Priority: normal
Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 25, 1999
Health chief assailed
for inaction on dioxin
By Stella O. Gonzales
A CONSUMER group yesterday lambasted
Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez for
downplaying the toxicity of dioxin in some
Belgian food products.
The Citizen's Alliance for Consumer
Protection said it was disappointed with
Romualdez for saying that only a large
amount of dioxin intake will make people
ill. It said the ''traditional''
toxicological and epidemiological
parameters that Romualdez used as basis
for his assurance are actually
''insufficient'' in determining low-level
exposure to dioxin.
CACP executive officer Francis Joseph de
la Cruz said scientists have found
sufficient evidence to suggest that the
danger in dioxins does not lie in massive
doses but on the timing of the exposure.
Dose of poison
''In the case of dioxin, it is not the
dose that makes the poison,'' De la Cruz
said.
Romualdez had earlier said that even if a
person eats over a period of weeks Belgian
poultry some of which, according to tests,
have high dioxin content, this will still
not reach toxic levels. He explained that
it takes long-term and large-scale
exposure before the dioxin content in
these contaminated foods would have
serious health consequences.
But the CACP countered that a statement
issued during a 1991 interdisciplinary
forum of scientists said that
endocrine-disruptive chemicals like
dioxin:
l May have entirely different effects on
the embryo, fetus, or perinatal organism
than on an adult.
l Manifest their effects on the offspring
and not on the exposed parent and depends
on the timing of exposure on the
developing organism.
l May only have obvious manifestations
only during maturity although the critical
exposure occurs during embryonic
development.
Voluntary recall
The CACP also dared local food
manufacturers who may have used raw
materials possibly contaminated with
dioxin to voluntarily recall their
products from the market. It also
questioned why the Department of
Agriculture has yet to make public a list
of local companies that receive food
materials from Belgium.
The Bureau of Food and Drugs' order for
the recall of meat and meat products, milk
and dairy products, and poultry and eggs
from the Philippine market applies only to
those made in Belgium. BFAD has even
rescinded an earlier order calling for the
recall of similar products from the
Netherlands, Germany and France following
assurances from these governments that
their products are free from dioxin.
The CACP likewise lamented the seeming
inability of concerned government agencies
in assisting consumers in taking
precautions.
No ban list
BFAD was supposed to come out with a list
of specific Belgian food products that are
covered by the market ban but it is not
likely to do so anymore.
BFAD officials said they might miss out
some products in the list and the public
might think that these are safe for
consumption. They instead advised
consumers to just avoid all Belgian meat,
milk, and poultry products.
On the issue of dioxin toxicity, Romualdez
had based his earlier assurances on data
coming from the World Health Organization.
According to a fact sheet prepared by the
WHO European Center for Environment and
Health, consumption of contaminated
poultry meat and eggs from Belgium might
lead to an additional dioxin intake 30
times higher than the WHO-set tolerable
daily intake (TDI) of 1-4 picograms per
kilogram bodyweight.
But WHO said the TDI represents a
tolerable daily intake for lifetime
exposure.
''An occasional short-term excursion above
the TDI like the one that may have
occurred in Belgium between January-June
1999, does not necessarily have serious
health consequences, provided that the
average intake over long periods is not
exceeded,'' WHO said.
The same fact sheet, however, noted that
the TDI set in 1990 was 10 picograms but
this was changed in 1998 to 1-4 picograms
following new data concerning
neurodevelopmental and endocrinological
effects of dioxin. It also pointed out
that the health experts who lowered the
TDI in 1998 ''recognized that subtle
effects may already occur in the general
population in developed countries at
current background levels of 2-6
picograms/kilogram bodyweight.''
''They therefore recommended that every
effort should be made to reduce exposure
to the lowest possible level,'' WHO said.
In another fact sheet, WHO said short-term
exposure to high levels of dioxin may
result in skin lesions, like chloracne and
patchy darkening of the skin, and altered
liver functions. Long-term exposure is
linked to the impairment of the immune
system, the developing nervous system, the
endocrine system and reproductive
functions. Animals chronically exposed to
dioxins developed cancer. [Up arrow]
[Local News logo]
June 25, 1999
[Other logo]
Taxman,
lawmakers
now after
Jimenez
Top CPP officer
arrested as
government
starts crackdown
Corporate coup
rocks
jai alai firm
RP padre yields
$2B in fake
notes
Estrada on
Pagcor
president: If
she wants
to quit, OK...
Daughters try
to save rapist
pa
'The Grandmother
of All Scams'
chosen
best
investigative
report
Kuala Lumour
shrugs
off RP protest
Health chief
assailed
for inaction on
dioxin
Mayon more
fickle
than
Pinatubo--Phivolcs