Food and Drug Administration: Whether Pingtung County leaked inspection documents to Ting Hsin awaits judicial determination; scholars question the adequacy of the FDA's oil testing items
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a press conference today to address issues including the leak of inspection documents by the Pingtung County Health Bureau, outside doubts that the Ministry of Health and Welfare delayed announcing the notification regarding Ting Hsin's problem oil products, and the model for oil product inspection and auditing.
FDA: Regardless of whether the document was encrypted, it should never have been given to the manufacturer
The Pingtung County Health Bureau disclosed inspection documents to Ting Hsin on the night before the FDA's inspection of Ting Hsin, sparking a major controversy. FDA Acting Director-General Chiang Yu-mei explained today that for this kind of surprise inspection, normally only the time of the visit is notified to the manufacturer in advance, to avoid being turned away at the door, and the manufacturer is required to have all personnel responsible for the relevant business present. During the inspection, the main task is to compare the documents held by the government with those provided by the manufacturer to see whether they match; it is impossible to first disclose the government's documents to the manufacturer.
In addition, regarding the Pingtung County Government's claim that the email attachment sent by the FDA to the Changhua County Government was "encrypted," while the email attachment sent to the Pingtung County Government was "not encrypted," Chiang Yu-mei implied that regardless of whether the document was encrypted, it should never be given to the manufacturer in advance. Chiang Yu-mei, herself a veteran inspector, said this mistake was a considerable lapse for inspectors, and she also felt sympathy in her heart. At present, the case has entered judicial proceedings, and they are waiting quietly for the judicial judgment.
At 5:48 p.m. on October 9, the FDA sent out its first document by urgent means. This unencrypted document was sent separately to the Central Region and Southern Region Management Centers, with a copy to the Changhua County inspector. This document was forwarded by the Southern Region Management Center to the Pingtung County Health Bureau, and receipt was confirmed at 8:38. Afterward, the FDA sent encrypted documents three more times, at 8:04, 8:48, and around 9:00, to the Northern, Central, and Southern Region Management Centers, as well as to the Changhua County inspector, mainly concerning changes to the data in the attached EXCEL statistical file.
However, regarding the Pingtung County Health Bureau passing the first inspection document to Ting Hsin, Chiang Yu-mei said that documents handled by public servants, as long as they involve a vested interest with a business operator, should all be kept confidential. This is a principle for public servants in carrying out administrative management, and everyone should know this common sense. In particular, this mistake had a major impact on the entire matter. In this regard, Chiang Yu-mei encouraged facing the judiciary with strength.
The mystery of the delayed announcement of Ting Hsin's problem oil
Yesterday the FDA announced the inspection results for 27 domestic large edible oil and fat manufacturers with capital of more than 30 million yuan, and a legislator questioned that the FDA already knew as early as October 9 that all the imported oils and fats from Vietnam's Dai Hanh Phuc were problematic, so why did it take 3 weeks before confirming this to the public? Chiang Yu-mei explained the timeline as follows:
On October 9, the FDA received a telegram from the representative office in Vietnam. The telegram replied that the lard and fish oil of Vietnam's Dai Hanh Phuc company were mainly for feed use. Although it did not mention beef tallow and coconut oil, the FDA already had suspicions, so on October 10 it urgently sent a letter to Vietnam, requesting Vietnamese officials to further confirm whether Dai Hanh Phuc's other beef tallow and coconut oil were of edible grade.
At the same time, at 9 p.m. on the 10th, the FDA also urgently notified the Southern Region Management Center to seal off all oil and fat raw materials at Ting Hsin's Pingtung plant. On the 10th, 287 metric tons of beef tallow were found at the Ting Hsin factory, made into 3.6161 metric tons of products, and Ting Hsin was required that day to stop producing and manufacturing further.
It was not until the 22nd, after the FDA had sent letters to Vietnam four times without receiving a reply, that it announced that day that all businesses using Ting Hsin beef tallow products must voluntarily remove them from shelves as a precaution.
On the 27th, confirmation was received from Vietnamese officials that Dai Hanh Phuc did not have a production manufacturer certificate meeting food safety conditions, and that its business items were oils and fats for feed use such as livestock, poultry, and aquatic products. Vietnamese officials therefore determined that Dai Hanh Phuc violated Vietnamese regulations and constituted fraud, and the FDA also announced that day that downstream products of Ting Hsin beef tallow would be changed from precautionary removal from shelves to mandatory removal from shelves.
Doubts about the oil product inspection report
In the inspection report, regarding Far Eastern Oils and Fats company having once purchased Ting Hsin's palm oil, and Tung Ching company having bought hardened palm oil from Ting Hsin and Chang Guann, food safety scholar Chen Chun-cheng questioned that imports of palm oil and coconut oil should be checked against the customs declaration items for that shipment. If it is of edible grade, further verification should be carried out, and sampling should be done to check whether the specifications of the goods are also of edible grade. Because crude oil, after refining, can all be supplied for edible use, it cannot be proven merely by official documents provided by the exporting country; the use of the oils and fats should be clarified.
Chiang Yu-mei explained that 95% of this palm oil came from Malaysia, had official certification documents of compliance, and all entered customs as food declarations. In addition, Chen Chun-cheng believed that refined palm oil and coconut oil very easily produce "acrylamide" and "3-monochloropropanediol esters," which are carcinogens. However, in the Ministry of Health and Welfare's published "Testing Items and Methods for Oil Products," only 5 items are tested: "heavy metals: arsenic, lead, mercury, copper, tin, chromium," "aflatoxin," "acid value," "benzo(a)pyrene," and "total polar compounds," which is not enough to determine whether edible oil has been adulterated with swill oil, nor to identify the harmfulness of inferior edible oil.
Chiang Yu-mei said that refining is mainly done domestically. As long as domestic manufacturers have refining equipment, they can carry out refining processes such as deacidification, decolorization, and deodorization on oil products, and then put them on the market. Therefore, it is still necessary first to understand the manufacturer's legality; operators must guarantee quality themselves. Legal edible oil will not contain waste oil or swill oil. However, once prosecutors seize it as illegal waste oil or swill oil, the Ministry of Health and Welfare will absolutely add tests for "acrylamide" and "3-monochloropropanediol esters."