Beware: Your food might contain these toxins

Agencies
June 2, 2017

New Delhi, Jun 2: Ever thought you would be consuming heavy metals or cigarette butts with your food? As a rule of thumb, foods are generally safe. However, there are things that get into food, which could shock and disgust you enough to keep away from food altogether.toxins

What will surprise you further is that many of these things are permitted by the food safety authorities, but within limits. Some substances, like certain toxins, are naturally present in foods. And so, even if the food authorities wanted, they could not ban them totally.

Some of these ‘foreign’ substances might not be dangerous, but not even in your wildest imagination could you have thought that they could be on your plate, says Dr Saurabh Arora, founder, Food Safety Helpline.com.

1. Snack with maggots.

Next time you eat a burger or open sealed packs of foods, or cans of mushrooms and tomatoes, check carefully. It could be infested with maggots and insect eggs. Your cabbage and spinach could have caterpillar larvae in it. Believe it or not, a limited number of maggots are permitted in food, says Dr Arora.

2. Ever wondered what rats do in your food?

Rodents scavenge for food and rummage in food stocks. In fact, rodents could make stored foods their home if entry is not strictly prevented. Where there is laxity, rodent hair, urine and droppings enter foods and from there to your plate. So watch out as your food could be biologically contaminated.

3. They live in drains, dustbins and in your food.

Cockroaches, flies, insects of all kinds, and even spiders, and lizards can fall into food and are regarded as being highly dangerous if found in foods as they can carry bacteria from dustbins and drains to foods. The presence of rodents and insects is a food safety violation that could result in cancellation of license for food establishments.

4. What are cleaning agents doing in your food?

Cleaning agents like ammonia, bleach, dishwashing liquids and sanitizers can cause turmoil. People have had them with their coffee because the personnel forgot to rinse out the coffee machine thoroughly. Human error it could be but the carelessness in not rinsing and washing utensils or cooking surfaces thoroughly can lead to not only a bad taste but some stomach burning and even food poisoning. Cleaning agents need to be stored away from all food preparation areas and utensils. Cooking and food preparation surface areas must be cleaned, washed and sanitised only when food preparation is over and no food is outside. Such carelessness ruins reputations of food establishments.

5. Unseen dangers have roots.

Moulds and fungus grow on foods when the temperature is warm. The rainy season finds these in abundance in sauces, jams, jellies, cooked and processed meats and poultry, cheese, bread and even fruit. Surface moulds can be washed or dusted off but that does not mean they have gone away completely. The fungus has roots that go deep into foods and these are not visible to the naked eye. Dishcloths, towels, sponges and mops, if not kept clean, spread moulds which land up in your food. Avoid anything smelling musty and stale, and check vegetable and fruit stems to detect moulds.

6. Are you sure your milk products have no melamine?

Are you sure that the infant formula you are feeding your child with, or the chocolate and frozen yogurt you are eating is free of melamine? Melamine is synthetic material used to make plastic tableware and dishware, adhesives and even whiteboards. So what’s it doing in your food? Water is often mixed into milk and such milk loses proteins. So to enhance the content of protein, melamine is mixed in it. Products made from milk could have melamine which can damage the kidneys permanently.

7. Packaging infuses chemicals into food.

Antimony and tin are used in packaging materials from where they can enter food. Foils, cans, pans and storage containers have chemicals which can be released from them into food at low levels. When ingested, they cause various health problems.

8. You could be ingesting heavy metals.

Copper, brass, cadmium, lead, zinc, mercury and even arsenic could be in your food. Metals leach into foods from the environment and from utensils used for cooking and serving food. Cracked or chipped pewter dishes, pottery dishes with glazed lead, or those pretty enamelled dishes you cook and serve food in can leave lead or cadmium in your foods and can even react with acidic foods like tomatoes, orange juice and pickles. Copper cooking utensils, buckets and tubs made from galvanised metals like zinc, and plumbing pipes also introduce metals into foods. Mercury and arsenic can reach foods through water and cadmium and lead from soil. All these heavy metals can cause toxicity when ingested and could even damage the liver, kidneys, central nervous system and blood, while mercury can cause sensory, visual and auditory problems also. Since chemicals cannot be seen, adequate and regular food testing is required to ensure that foods are free from these elements at all points in the food chain.

9. Tea with a taste of iron.

Iron filings can enter tea when it is processed as particles escape into tea from the wear and tear of iron machinery. Iron remains in the body and though some iron is good for the body, it could become dangerous and lead to heart problems if you are a tea addict and drink copious amounts of it. The permissible limit for iron filings in tea in India is presently 150 mg per kilogram of tea.

10. Human beings leave their own stamp on foods.

While human hair found in food might not be as hazardous as animal hair, but their presence in food indicates that the establishment lacks in good hygienic practices. Besides hair; nails, false nails, nail polish, pieces of jewellery, paper napkins and even cigarette butts can enter food and have been found, more often than anyone would like to admit. All personnel working in the food service industry need to be made aware of these hazards and instructed and trained to follow good hygiene practices.

11. Mice and horse in your processed meat.

Animal hair or chipped pieces of bone can be naturally present in meat food products. Perhaps what you may not be aware of is that whole mice can sometimes be churned into foods during processing. Unscrupulous manufacturers add horse and even rat meat to canned meat food products to cut costs, especially those imported, as some countries permit horse meat.

12. Extraneous materials that can break your teeth.

They say sticks and stones won’t break bones but stones in food might break your pearly whites. You must have seen dirt, mud, manure, leaves, twigs and other filth and even insect excreta in some raw grains and other agricultural products. While some of these can be removed by picking them out, what about insect excreta? When raw materials are processed into cereals and bakery products, do these remain or have they been cleaned before processing?

13. What’s cooking, metal or glass?

Metal fragments from worn or chipped equipment and containers enter food products during processing. However, glass, plastic and metal pieces from glass tumblers, edges of badly opened tin cans, and carelessly opened caps on foods, and even shattered light bulbs fall into food without anyone realising it. Wood pieces from wooden surfaces or chopping boards slip into food too. Even a small piece of any of these substances can cause major problems if swallowed. Most establishments use shatterproof bulbs and open tin cans and bottles away from foods being cooked.

14. Sand and sawdust special.

Have you felt that grit on your tongue? It could be sand in your salt, soup and coffee whitener. Sand is mixed in powdered foods as sand absorbs moisture and prevents clumping. Sawdust is used for the same reason in foods like shredded cheese. It also makes low-fat ice cream creamy and ready-to-drink milkshakes smooth.

15. Are these food additives really permitted?

The fruit juice you enjoy so much could have sulphites. Sulphites are deliberately added to fruit juices, in some soft drinks, instant tea vinegar and wine to keep them tasting fresh. While preservatives and flavour enhancers improve the looks and taste of foods yet some of them could cause allergic reactions.

16. Of hormones and antibiotics.

Livestock are given antibiotics and growth hormones in their feeds so they can remain healthy and grow bigger quickly. If you are a non-vegetarian, you could find these growth hormones and antibiotics in the animal meats which you eat. Eating animal meats that contain antibiotic makes you resistant to them.

17. From plants to your plate.

Residues of pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers used during the agricultural process easily find their way into food. Pesticides may leave residues on the skins and surface of fruits and vegetables. Residues of pesticides and herbicides, over a period of time, can affect the central nervous system, respiratory and gastrointestinal system.

18. Gelatine: veg or non-veg?

Some vegetarian foods like certain cereals could contain animal gelatine which is used as a binding agent so that the sugar sticks to the cereal. Read the labels minutely if you are a vegetarian or you could find you’ve just eaten animal bone and skin as some gelatine are made from these.

19. Carcinogens in your foods.

Bright coloured foods look attractive but the truth is that synthetic dyes like Red 3 and Citrus Red 2, Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40 and Yellow 6 are carcinogenic and could cause various kinds of cancer and allergic reactions too.

20. What does your chewing gum contain?

If you are one of those who loves to pop a chewing gum into your mouth, then you could actually be eating a secretion from sheep wool called Lanolin. This additive is used in chewing gum because it has an oily texture which makes it easy to chew that gum.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 12,2020

Global poverty could rise to over one billion people due to the COVID-19 pandemic and more than half of the 395 million additional extreme poor would be located in South Asia, which would be the hardest-hit region in the world, according to a new report.

Researchers from King's College London and Australian National University published the new paper with the United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER) said that poverty is likely to increase dramatically in middle-income developing countries and there could be a significant change in the distribution of global poverty.

The location of global poverty could shift back towards developing countries in South Asia and East Asia, the report said.

The paper, 'Precarity and the Pandemic: COVID-19 and Poverty Incidence, Intensity and Severity in Developing Countries,' finds that extreme poverty could rise to over one billion people globally as a result of the crisis.

The cost of the crisis in lost income could reach USD 500 million per day for the world's poorest people, and the intensity and severity of poverty are likely to be exacerbated dramatically.

The report said that based on the USD 1.90 a day poverty line and a 20 per cent contraction, more than half of the 395 million additional extreme poor would be located in South Asia, which would become the hardest hit region in the world mainly driven by the weight of populous India followed by sub-Saharan Africa which would comprise 30 per cent, or 119 million, of the additional poor.

The report added that as the value of the poverty line increases, a larger share of the additional poor will be concentrated in regions where the corresponding poverty line is more relevant given the average income level.

For instance, the regional distribution of the world's poor changes drastically when looking at the USD 5.50 a day poverty line the median poverty line among upper-middle-income countries.

At this level, almost 41 per cent of the additional half a billion poor under a 20 per cent contraction scenario would live in East Asia and the Pacific, chiefly China; a fourth would still reside in South Asia; and a combined 18 per cent would live in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), whose individual shares are close to that recorded for sub-Saharan Africa.

India plays a significant role in driving the potential increases in global extreme poverty documented previously, comprising almost half the estimated additional poor regardless of the contraction scenario, the report said.

Nonetheless, there are other populous, low and lower-middle- income countries in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and East Asia and the Pacific accounting for a sizeable share of the estimates: Nigeria, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, and Indonesia come next, in that order, concentrating a total of 18 19 per cent of the new poor, whereas the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania, Pakistan, Kenya, Uganda, and the Philippines could jointly add 11 12 per cent.

Taken together, these figures imply that three quarters of the additional extreme poor globally could be living in just ten populous countries.

The report added that this high concentration of the additional extreme poor is staggering , although not necessarily unexpected given the size of each country's population.

On one hand, data shows that three of these ten countries (Ethiopia, India, and Nigeria) were among the top ten by number of extreme poor people in 1990 and remained within the ranks of that group until 2018.

Despite this crude fact, two of these countries have managed to achieve a sustained reduction in their incidence of poverty since the early 1990s, namely Ethiopia and India, reaching their lowest poverty headcount ratio ever recorded at about 22 and 13 per cent, respectively. Nonetheless, the potential contraction in per capita income/consumption imposed by the pandemic's economic effects could erase some of this progress.

The researchers are now calling for urgent global leadership from the G7, G20, and the multilateral system, and propose a three-point plan to address the impact of the COVID-19 on global poverty quickly.

Professor of International Development at King's College London and a Senior Non-Resident Research Fellow at UNU-WIDER Andy Sumner said the COVID-19 crisis could take extreme poverty back over one billion people because millions of people live just above poverty.

Millions of people live in a precarious position one shock away from poverty. And the current crisis could be that shock that pushes them into poverty.

Professor Kunal Sen, Director of UNU-WIDER said the new estimates about the level of poverty in the world and the cost of the COVID-19 pandemic to the world's poor are sobering.

We cannot stand by and see the hard work and effort of so many be eradicated. We will know what the real impact is in time, but the necessary action to ensure we achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 needs to be planned now, Sen said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 7,2020

Birmingham, Feb 7: According to a new study, social media users are more likely to eat healthy or junk food after getting influenced by their peer group.

The research published in the scientific journal 'Appetite' found that study participants ate an extra fifth of a portion of fruit and vegetables themselves for every portion they thought their social media peers ate. So, if they believed their friends got their 'five a day' of fruit and veg, they were likely to eat an extra portion themselves.

On the other hand, Facebook users were found to consume an extra portion of unhealthy snack foods and sugary drinks for every three portions they believed their online social circles did.
The findings suggested that people eat around a third more junk food if they think their friends also indulge in the same.

The Aston University researchers said the findings provide the first evidence to suggest our online social circles could be implicitly influencing our eating habits, with important implications for using 'nudge' techniques on social media to encourage healthy eating.

Researchers asked 369 university students to estimate the amount of fruit, vegetables, 'energy-dense snacks' and sugary drinks their Facebook peers consumed on a daily basis.

The information was cross-referenced with the participants' own actual eating habits and showed that those who felt their social circles 'approved' of eating junk food consumed significantly more themselves. Meanwhile, those who thought their friends ate a healthy diet ate more portions of fruit and veg. Their perceptions could have come from seeing friends' posts about the food and drink they consumed, or simply a general impression of their overall health.

There was no significant link between the participants' eating habits and their Body Mass Index (BMI), a standard measure of healthy weight, however. The researchers said the next stage of their work would track a participant group over time to see whether the influence of social media on eating habits had a longer-term impact on weight.

The most recent figures from the NHS's Health Survey for England showed that in 2018 only 28 percent of adults were eating the recommended five portions of fruit and vegetables per day. In Wales, this was 24 percent, in Scotland 22 percent and in Northern Ireland around 20 percent. Children and young people across the UK had even lower levels of fruit and veg consumption.

Aston University health psychology Ph.D. student Lily Hawkins, who led the study alongside supervisor Dr. Jason Thomas, said: "This study suggests we may be influenced by our social peers more than we realize when choosing certain foods. We seem to be subconsciously accounting for how others behave when making our own food choices. So if we believe our friends are eating plenty of fruit and veg we're more likely to eat fruit and veg ourselves. On the other hand, if we feel they're happy to consume lots of snacks and sugary drinks, it can give us a license to overeat foods that are bad for our health. The implication is that we can use social media as a tool to 'nudge' each other's eating behavior within friendship groups, and potentially use this knowledge as a tool for public health interventions."

"With children and young people spending a huge amount of time interacting with peers and influencers via social media, the important new findings from this study could help shape how we deliver interventions that help them adopt healthy eating habits from a young age and stick with them for life," said professor Claire Farrow.

A dietitian called Aisling Pigott further mentioned that "Research such as this demonstrates how we are influenced by online perceptions about how others eat. The promotion of positive health messages across social media, which are focused on promoting healthy choices and non-restrictive relationships with food and body, could nudge people into making positive decisions around the food they eat."

"We do have to be mindful of the importance of 'nudging' positive behaviors and not 'shaming' food choices on social media as a health intervention. We know that generating guilt around food is not particularly helpful when it comes to lifestyle change and maintenance," Aisling added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 20,2020

Washington D.C., May 20: While a dairy-rich diet is helpful in meeting the body's calcium requirement, outcomes of a large international study links eating at least two daily servings of dairy with lower risks of diabetes and high blood pressure.

The dairy-rich diet also proved to lower the cluster of factors that heighten cardiovascular disease risk (metabolic syndrome). The study was published online in journal BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care.

The observed associations were strongest for full-fat dairy products, the findings indicated.

Previously published research has suggested that higher dairy intake is associated with a lower risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, and metabolic syndrome. But these studies have tended to focus on North America and Europe to the exclusion of other regions of the world.

To see whether these associations might also be found in a broader range of countries, the researchers drew on people taking part in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study.

Participants were all aged between 35 and 70 and came from 21 countries: Argentina; Bangladesh; Brazil; Canada; Chile; China; Colombia; India; Iran; Malaysia; Palestine; Pakistan; Philippines, Poland; South Africa; Saudi Arabia; Sweden; Tanzania; Turkey; United Arab Emirates; and Zimbabwe.

Usual dietary intake over the previous 12 months was assessed by means of Food Frequency Questionnaires. Dairy products included milk, yogurt, yogurt drinks, cheese and dishes prepared with dairy products, and were classified as full or low fat (1-2 percent).

Butter and cream were assessed separately as these are not commonly eaten in some of the countries studied.

Information on personal medical history, use of prescription medicines, educational attainment, smoking and measurements of weight, height, waist circumference, blood pressure and fasting blood glucose were also collected.

Data on all five components of the metabolic syndrome were available for nearly 113,000 people: blood pressure above 130/85 mm Hg; waist circumference above 80 cm; low levels of (beneficial) high-density cholesterol (less than 1-1.3 mmol/l); blood fats (triglycerides) of more than 1.7 mmol/dl; and fasting blood glucose of 5.5 mmol/l or more.

Average daily total dairy consumption was 179 g, with full-fat accounting for around double the amount of low fat: 124.5+ vs 65 g.

Some 46, 667 people had metabolic syndrome--defined as having at least 3 of the 5 components.

Total dairy and full-fat dairy, but not low-fat dairy, was associated with a lower prevalence of most components of metabolic syndrome, with the size of the association greatest in those countries with normally low dairy intakes.

At least 2 servings a day of total dairy were associated with a 24 percent lower risk of metabolic syndrome, rising to 28 percent for full-fat dairy alone, compared with no daily dairy intake.

The health of nearly 190,000 participants was tracked for an average of nine years, during which time 13,640 people developed high blood pressure and 5351 developed diabetes.

At least 2 servings a day of total dairy was associated with a 11-12 percent lower risk of both conditions, rising to a 13-14 percent lower risk for 3 daily servings. The associations were stronger for full fat than they were for low-fat dairy.

This is an observational study, and as such can't establish the cause. Food frequency questionnaires are also subject to recall, and changes in metabolic syndrome weren't measured over time, all of which may have influenced the findings.

Nevertheless, the researchers suggest: "If our findings are confirmed in sufficiently large and long term trials, then increasing dairy consumption may represent a feasible and low-cost approach to reducing [metabolic syndrome], hypertension, diabetes, and ultimately cardiovascular disease events worldwide."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.