Session 1
Overview
and
agenda
Briefing
workshop
August 4-5
2004
Centre for Science and Environment
CSE: Background
• Set up in 1980.
A public-interest research institute.
• Policy research and public awareness.
On water, forest management, air pollution,
climate change, industry, health.
Centre for Science and Environment
Pollution Monitoring Laboratory
• Set up in 2000, with state of the art equipment for
pesticide residue, heavy metal and air pollution
monitoring.
• We set it up to:
a. respond to community requests:
(endosulfan case in Kerala)
b. to investigate issues of public health concern:
air pollution monitoring, water (fluoride), bottled water
(pesticides).
• Conspiracy of silence in data. Need science for
ecological security. Need information publicly.
• Concerns our health. Our bodies. Our children.
Centre for Science and Environment
Endosulfan: confirmed by ICMR
• 2001: villagers from Padre, Kerala write to
CSE. Mysterious diseases.
Centre for Science and Environment
Endosulfan: confirmed by ICMR
• CSE lab finds endosulfan in human blood,
tissue, food, water, fish…
• Industry fights back. Hires “accredited” lab.
Says no endosulfan found.
• 10 months later, NHRC asks ICMR.
• ICMR collects blood samples of children.
Confirms endosulfan. Says that it is possible
“causative factor” for high reproductive,
neurological and congenital abnormalities
in village.
• Kerala government bans pesticide spraying.
Industry still fighting.
Centre for Science and Environment
Why study soft drinks?
• 2002: Looking at pesticides in drinking water.
Collected samples from Delhi colonies.
No visible trend as area very big.
• Decided to look at bottled water.
We detected pesticides, so looked at source.
• Collected samples of groundwater
in and around bottling plants…
Centre for Science and Environment
Ranking of bottled water: Delhi
Centre for Science and Environment
Found pesticides…
• Because groundwater used by companies for
bottling. Profile matched.
Centre for Science and Environment
What happened?
• Regulations for pesticide residues in bottle water
existed. But not quantified.
• Post-CSE study:
• July 18, 2003: government issued notification for
revised norms:
Individual pesticide: 0.0001 mg/l
Total pesticide: 0.0005 mg/l
• Implemented from January 1, 2004.
• Most companies are adhering to new norms, says BIS.
Centre for Science and Environment
Why ‘EU’ standards for water?
• Pesticides are contaminants in water. There is
no trade-off between nutrition-poison.
• WHO says pesticides are “tolerable daily
intake” not “acceptable daily intake”.
• Cannot afford contamination. Have to prevent
it with tough standards.
• Also need easy to use standards – single
residues+multiple residues. Not each
pesticide, different standard
Centre for Science and Environment
Two giants of the
corporate world.
Centre for Science and Environment
Soft drinks: what did we find?
• Same pesticides as bottled water:
DDT, lindane, chlorpyrifos, malathion.
• Same level as bottled water.
• But poorer (in
fact non-existent)
compared
Same
as bottled regulations
water
Same pesticides, same groundwater
to bottled water
36 times
36.4 times
30 times
Average
Coca-Cola India
Centre for Science and Environment
Centre for Science and Environment
Average
PepsiCo India
Average
Bottled water,
all brands
No pesticides in US bottles
• Same pesticides are used
in US.
Double standard
Global giants
• In a 2000 total diet study,
Food and Drug Administration
found five most frequently
observed chemicals:
DDT, malathion, chlorphyrifos,
endosulfan and dieldrin.
• Checked for pesticides in bottles
manufactured and sold in US. None found.
• But not found in US soft drinks:
Is human health more
important in US regulations?
Centre for Science and Environment
Centre for Science and Environment
Scandalous regulations: ‘Fixed’ /
Non-existent
• Regulations worse than bottled water
industry. It had poor norms for pesticides. But
at least mandatory norms existed.
• No norms for this ‘food’ industry.
Virtually let off. Why???
• Bottled water norms in 1998.
Made mandatory saying ‘food’ consumed by
many. Why were soft drinks not included?
Amnesia? Deliberate?
Centre for Science and Environment
Meaningless maze
• Licensed under Fruit Product Order.
Part II-(D): Sweetened aerated water with no fruit pulp...less than 10 % fruit
juice….
No regulation on basic raw material, water. Says.. “Potable”
water should be used. What is potable? No definition.
• Rule 65 of Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) regulates
pesticides in food.
• But food is defined to exclude ‘beverages’.
• Sub-section A.01-01 in appendix B defines the standards of
quality for non-alcoholic beverages.
• But has nothing to say about pesticide residues.
•
Centre for Science and Environment
Key issues
• Pesticide contamination is growing. Even soft drinks
contain pesticides. Need a stringent policy for safe
and wise use of pesticides.
• Pesticides found in soft drinks pose a long-term
health hazard as they are above standards.
A cocktail of different pesticides found.
• Regulations for pesticide residues in soft drinks do
not exist. Is that acceptable?
• Water used by this industry as raw material not
regulated. Not paid for. Is this right?
Centre for Science and Environment
Cola companies respond….
•
•
•
CSE releases study
August 5 (4 pm): Pepsi-Coke joint press conference
rejecting our study; say we are not capable of doing
this research; they have tested; they know that they
are safe…
August 8: Pepsi file defamation suit (gag-SLAPP) case
against CSE. Coke case not accepted by SC (withdraws
August 5 (12 noon):
case after we file counter in November)
•
•
Government releases its test report. Confirms
3 pesticides, in smaller quantities. But uses phrase:
drinks “safe”: meet existing packaged drinking water
standards (which were already changed because they were not safe).
August 22: sets up Joint Parliamentary Committee (4th in
India) to investigate matter. Sharad Pawar chairman.
August 21:
Centre for Science and Environment
Terms of reference of JPC
•
“Whether the recent findings of CSE
regarding pesticide residues in soft drinks
are correct or not”
•
“To suggest criteria for evolving suitable
safety standards for soft drinks, fruit juice
and other beverages where water is the
main constituent.”
Centre for Science and Environment
“We are safe: Aamir drinks it”
Centre for Science and Environment
What JPC considered…what coke-pepsi
said..what we said…
• Drinks are safe..learning the science of analysis and
the politics of standard setting;
• Pesticide contamination is not a problem in
India..learning how India uses and misuses pesticides;
• Standards for soft drinks and juices are the
same..learning the global politics of food standard
setting;
• Pesticide residues should not be regulated in
water…learning the imperative of water quality, the
need for legal standards for clean drinking water for all
and cost of cleaning dirty water…
Centre for Science and Environment
“Working” our democracy
•Endorsed our findings, government
to set stringent standards for soft
drinks; wants entire system of
pesticide use and food and water
standards revamped.
•A vindication of public health
concerns. Sets the agenda for reform
for water security and food safety.
•Our agenda. Our fight…
Centre for Science and Environment
Agenda for change: session 1
• 1. To set standards for soft drinks
(ongoing..BIS standards/Health ministry
standards…companies fighting).
• standards for pesticide residues;
• standards for caffeine/pH
• 2. July 15, 2004: Bureau of Indian Standards
(BIS) finalised draft standards for finished
products.
• 3. July 27, 2004: Ministry of Health sets
standards for quality of water to be used in the
manufacture of soft drinks.
Centre for Science and Environment
Why not check milk..vegetables…?
• …..Because we know they are contaminated.
The legal standards set (MRLs) are too high.
The food we ingest is unsafe. There is no
enforcement to check if the standards are
being exceeded for not.
• 2. Revamp pesticide regulation so that all
food is safer.
• Nutrition-poison trade-off
Centre for Science and Environment
Unsafe water: define what is “potable”
• No definition of what is potable water. No
standards for the quality of water that is “safe”
to drink.
• Without legal standards, there is no right of
Indians to clean drinking water.
• How will this “right” be created.
• What will clean drinking water cost?
• Can we afford this cost? Can we afford not to
pay this cost?
Centre for Science and Environment
Water used by industry free
• 4. Regulate the water used in soft drink
and beverage industry.
• How should this be done?
• Groundwater law says that water belongs
to person who owns the land…right to
exploit. To use. To sell.
• How much water does this industry
consume? Who knows?
Centre for Science and Environment
Regulations for “safe food”
• 5. Strengthen institutions and regulations
for food safety.
• What are the issues in modern food and
processed food?
• Why should we worry? Do we not have a
malnutrition problem? Why should we
care about new epidemics like obesity?
• What should we do?
Centre for Science and Environment
See-through change
• Translating protest into policy needs
(constant) public pressure.
• Challenge for Indians is to work democracy.
• It is being done. Must be supported and
enabled. Change needs knowledge and
information and public awareness for
change.
Centre for Science and Environment