- Print Friendly - Help

What’s really in your food

Andrew McKenzie

Executive Director, New Zealand Food Safety Authority

We were interested to read your recent series on ‘What’s in Our Food’ but have concerns that your reports may have created unnecessary fears and concerns among your readers.

Thankfully, the true situation with New Zealand food is far less scary. In fact, it’s very good!

Our consumers demand safe food and New Zealand depends on food exports for much of its economic survival. Our food must be, and is the best of the best. Government knows this, producers and manufacturers know this, New Zealanders know this. Regulators internationally would be extremely happy to find their own industries meeting the extremely high levels of compliance we find.

We recognise that the area of food safety is complex and sorting out what is true, what is sound science and what is poor or ‘junk’ science among all the claims, is difficult. Many of the concerns raised in your articles were based on poor science, often intermingled with interest group agendas.

Though nothing in life can ever be guaranteed 100% safe, New Zealand food is of an exceptional standard. We are acknowledged world-wide as a trusted producer of safe food and more than 80% of our production is exported to the world’s most discerning consumers. We can confidently claim it is among the safest anywhere.

The New Zealand Food Safety Authority was set up with one purpose – to protect consumers here and in our trading partner countries. We ensure that food sold in New Zealand is safe and that this country’s vital reputation as a producer and exporter of safe food is enhanced.

New Zealand food’s pesticide residue results are among the lowest in the world. We know this is true because over the past two years we have conducted countless thousands of tests on New Zealand food, looking for residues of pesticides. Our research shows that just six of these exceeded the regulatory limits

In each of these cases, the exceedances were due to technicalities. Regulatory limits for pesticides are set on a crop by crop basis and in most cases New Zealand did not have a regulatory limit for the chemical concerned. This is because the food (such as bananas) is not grown here, so registering pesticides for use on bananas in New Zealand is pointless. In these cases, a default level of 0.1 mg/kg is used. The foods concerned still met rigorous international standards. It’s important to note that regulatory limits are not safety limits – they are many times below a level that could possibly cause harm.

The presence, albeit at very low levels of chemical residues in foods that we have found does not constitute a health issue; many years of international research and knowledge back up confidence that they do not cause harm.

As technology improves, we can detect ever smaller amounts of chemical residues in food. However, despite this, our 2003/04 total diet survey shows a reduction of nearly 10% in the number of residues found, and we tested many more foods for many more chemicals. This continues a very pleasing trend over the last decade.

We believe that giving prominence to a single study over the views of the world’s leading food and health organisations, including the United Nations FAO and WHO and peer-reviewed research, does not help your readers understand this complex area.

When Edmund Blackadder notes that he thought it was “common maritime practice for a ship to have a crew”, Captain Rum replies, “Opinion is divided on the subject. All the other captains say it is. I say it isn’t.”

When it comes to food safety, NZFSA sits, as do all of its international counterparts, firmly with the other captains. Your reporting, purporting to show that the ‘scary stuff’ is out of control or unknown, is sailing with Rum.

Your readers may be interested to know that antibiotic residues have not been found in our surveys of New Zealand chicken meat for years; with the exception of a few well known examples, the concept of a ‘cocktail’ or synergistic effect of chemical residues (1+1=3) has little support among food scientists; Vinclozolin has not been registered for use here since 1998. Further information is available on our website.

With regard to your comments on the sweetener aspartame, both the highly respected UK Food Standards Agency and the European Commission’s Scientific Commission on Food have recently conducted extensive studies and have concluded aspartame is safe. This view is also held by FSANZ and the US Food and Drug Administration. You will find ‘controversy’ on this subject is mainly fuelled by misleading, agenda-driven websites.

Some valid data has also been misinterpreted. For example, the inference that, because surveys found a chemical residue in one food sample then that chemical is always present in those foods all the time. This is logically not true. Indeed, most have no detectable residues at all.

While any level of foodborne illness is too high, the figures used to suggest that we’re the ‘worst in the developed world’ are misleading. The figures quoted are for all cases of gastroenteritis, not specifically those due to foodborne pathogens. New Zealand, as a small, single-state country, has sophisticated and more comprehensive reporting systems than many others and reports more types of foodborne illness. Comparisons must be made with great care.

But any rate is too high – and the main cause of foodborne illness is most likely poor food handling, not via consumption of meat. The hygiene of New Zealand’s meat processing is specifically controlled to minimise contamination of meat. But no matter where bacteria come from (food, soil, pets, flies, food handlers, the atmosphere, unclean surfaces) good food handling (clean, cook, cover, chill) will prevent most foodborne illness.

Campylobacter in chicken has been found on a high proportion of chicken meat samples, but generally in very low numbers – and the link to foodborne illness is still not clear. NZFSA currently has an extensive research programme underway to identify the causes of New Zealand’s high levels of campylobacteriosis. Chicken that is properly handled and cooked before it is eaten, will reduce the risk of illness.

Food safety authorities do not act only after ‘dead bodies’ have been lined up. NZFSA takes action as soon as there is credible evidence of concern, as in the 2004 lead in cornflour issue; with high levels of natural iodine in soy milk with added kelp and high natural levels of arsenic in hijiki seaweed. We also have an extensive review of New Zealand’s food regulatory programme underway to ensure we have the very best protection in place for consumers. Details are on our website and submissions are welcomed.

Like you, we also believe consumers should ‘hope that governments and big business can be trusted’. NZFSA backs its ‘trust’ with an extensive programme of audit, monitoring, surveillance, enforcement and other compliance measures to ensure the industry is meeting its food safety obligations. All of this is undertaken with extensive stakeholder consultation, including consumer groups.

We encourage anyone who still has concerns to visit our website (www.nzfsa.govt.nz) or the websites of the US FDA, UK FSA, FSANZ or the UN FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission, or call us on 0800 NZFSA1 (693 721).