|
|
| Agenda Item 8 | CAP 04/5 |
FAO/WHO Regional Conference on Food Safety for Asia and Pacific
Seremban, Malaysia, 24-27 May 2004
Communication, Information Exchange and Education
Related to Food Safety
(Paper prepared by the Government of Japan)
Today’s global society demands that all stakeholders along the food chain, including government bodies, research and academic institutions, the food production and processing sector and consumers, improve their information exchange, education, and risk communication. This increased transparency should improve food safety and strengthen consumer confidence. Important lessons learned by one country in these areas should be shared with other countries, which should lead to improved regional collaboration in improving food safety.
Recently Japan has experienced a number of incidents that led to the loss of consumer confidence in the safety of food. A large-scale food poisoning caused by milk products produced in a HACCP1-certified factory in June 2000 and the detection of the first Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)-infected cow in September 2001 are among a sequence of such incidents. In April 2002, the Government of Japan established the "Ministerial Council on the Administration of Food Safety" to consider and propose modalities for a new administrative organization necessary for ensuring food safety. The Ministerial Council consists of the Ministers of Public Management, Home Affairs, Post and Telecommunications; Health, Labour and Welfare; and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; and the Chief Cabinet Secretary. The Ministerial Council, utilizing the report of the Advisory Committee on the Investigation of BSE Problems and information from other sources, decided that: (1) with a view to protecting the health of consumers as the highest priority, risk analysis should be implemented by the government to deal with food safety issues and a new body, the Food Safety Commission, should be established to conduct risk assessments; and (2) a new comprehensive law, the Basic Law on Food Safety (provisional name), should be elaborated to ensure food safety with an objective to protect consumers. Consequently, the Basic Law on Food Safety was enacted in May 2003, and the Food Safety Commission was established in July 2003 as a subsidiary body of the Cabinet Office. The Commission is independent from the risk management bodies of the Ministries of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) and of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).
The above-mentioned decisions and activities of the Government of Japan show that in order for consumer concerns about BSE in Japan to subside, not only successful risk communication, but also significant changes in the government system were necessary. These changes include the introduction of risk management measures, the enactment of the comprehensive law, and the establishment of the risk assessment body, all of which the Government hoped would restore consumer confidence.
2.1.1 Food Poisoning caused by milk products
This first case, also reported in the Lancet medical journal (page 573; Vol. 356, 12 August 2000), is an example of problems caused by inappropriate company management.
Food poisoning caused by the consumption of milk products, including "low fat milk", produced in the Osaka factory of the Snow Brand Company, affected 14,780 persons (the number of those who showed symptoms since the first report on 27 June 2000), making this an unprecedentedly large-scale food poisoning. It became clear during the investigation that there were many problems that triggered the outbreak, all of which contributed to the great loss of consumer trust in the manufacturer. These problems include: the delay in reporting the incident to the authorities, which increased the number of persons affected; inappropriate hygienic practices despite the fact that the factory had been HACCP-certified by the MHLW under Article 13 of the Food Sanitation Law; improper implementation of the HACCP plan; multiple occasions where the contents of press releases regarding the intermediate reports of the outbreak investigation both from regulatory authorities and the company were released prematurely; the continuation of the sale of other products which might contain the staphylococcus toxin; insufficient manufacturing record keeping and others.
In this case, the lack of information disclosure by the company, defective food safety controls, a lack of a sense of crisis, and inappropriate communication with consumers were identified as major problems.
2.1.2 BSE-infected cows in Japan
This case contains examples of problems that were worsened by the inappropriate safety controls and crisis communication of the Government.
On 10 September 2001, MAFF officially announced that a dairy cow brought to a slaughterhouse in Chiba Prefecture was unable to stand up and was suspected to be infected with BSE. This announcement drove the whole nation into a state of panic.
The government explained to the public immediately after the first BSE case that the number of BSE cases would be very low in Japan. However, consumers erroneously perceived the threat of BSE cases to be very large rather than listening to the government’s statements and began to distrust and become discontented with the Government.
The MHLW and the MAFF undertook a series of measures to ensure the safety of beef in the market, including the following:
As the Government implemented such measures to ensure the safety of beef and informed the general public about these measures, consumers’ concerns gradually subsided.
Since July 2003, the Japanese Government has actively conducted risk communication within the framework of risk analysis. For example, 34 meetings of stakeholders, such as administrators, consumers, producers, and food safety experts were held to exchange opinions in different areas of Japan between July 2003 and March 2004. The purpose of these meetings is to listen to the opinions of stakeholders and reflect those opinions in risk management measures. Some of the experiences occurring under this new framework are detailed below.
2.2.1 BSE-infected cows in Canada and the United States of America
A BSE-infected cow was found in Canada in May 2003 and another in the USA in December 2003. Immediate suspension of beef imports from these countries; disposal of beef contaminated with SRM; rapid announcements of the identification of BSE-infected cows in Canada and the US; and effective control measures taken by the Japanese government all resulted in insignificant changes in the purchasing and dietary behaviours of Japanese consumers.
2.2.2 Avian Influenza cases in Japan
In the case of Avian Influenza (AI), despite banning poultry imports from the affected areas as soon as information about the outbreaks was obtained, some cases have unfortunately been found in Japan. It is considered, however, that these cases were caused by migratory birds rather than related to international food trade.
The first outbreak in Yamaguchi Prefecture, reported on 16 January 2004, and another in Oita Prefecture, reported on 16 February 2004, did not significantly change the purchase or dietary behaviours of consumers.
However, the AI case in Kyoto, first reported on 26 February, resulted in a drastic reduction of the sales of chicken and eggs. No report had been made to the animal health authority in the Prefecture before that day, even though a huge number of chickens died and the number of deaths had increased every day for the last 6 days. These signs should have led the farm to suspect Avian Influenza or other disorders. Despite the large number of deaths, the farm sent chickens to two chicken processing establishments, one in Hyogo Prefecture and the other in Aichi Prefecture on 25 and 26 February. Some meat entered the food chain despite the efforts to recall all the products originating from that farm. Because consumers considered the actions of the farm to be immoral, the communication between different prefectural governments was insufficient, and the recall situation report from the Hyogo Prefecture government was revised and consumer confidence was lost.
Immediately after the AI outbreak in the Yamaguchi Prefecture, the Government began to disseminate information through the Internet and other means to promote good understanding by the general public. Since national concerns grew sharply after the outbreak in Kyoto, on 9 March the Government of Japan began a campaign to provide the people of Japan with the correct knowledge about Avian Influenza. Moreover, a meeting of the executive officials and relevant AI experts was held in Kyoto on 22 March along with an opinion exchange meeting with local stakeholders, thus deepening mutual understanding.
An Internet survey was conducted on 7 and 8 March 2004 by a company named "OISIX", which sells vegetables and other foods to the readers of their mail magazines. The results showed that although 84% of the respondents knew that there was no epidemiological information to suggest that the disease can be transmitted through contaminated chickens and eggs, 44% of the respondents refrained from their purchase, which indicates that knowing that something is safe does not cause someone to purchase it. These results illustrate the difficulty of risk communication.
With regard to Avian Influenza, it is estimated that consumers’ concern is proportional to the amount of reports about it in the press, although inadequate handling of the problem by the farm is obviously the critical factor for the increased concern.
Information must be accurately collected and effectively exchanged between and among research institutes, government bodies, the food production and food processing industries and consumers in order to improve transparency, and in an effort to improve food safety.
Triggered by the BSE cases, the system to address food safety has been strengthened in Japan, especially information collection and exchange activities.
One element of the food poisoning control measures based on Article 58 of the Food Sanitation Law in Japan is an information collection system. Any physicians that diagnose a food borne disease must report the case to the government through the health centre in the area.
This system has proved to function effectively in large-scale food poisoning cases, such as the Snow Brand case. Hospitals and other medical institutions care for patients suffering from vomiting, diarrhea and other food poisoning symptoms, and therefore can identify signs of the occurrence of food poisoning. In the Snow Brand case, such hospitals and other medical institutions reported the occurrence of food borne disease to their respective health centre on the same day as seeing the patients. After obtaining this information from the health centres, city officials performed an emergency investigation of the factory on the following day and reported the results to the MHLW.
Information collected through food poisoning reports has also been utilized for identifying increased risk associated with specific food/pathogen combinations, developing risk profiles, and making risk management decisions to control the specific hazards in the food.
After the first BSE cases in Japan, it was recognized that collection and analysis of food safety information from abroad was insufficient, and needed to be strengthened. Following these cases, the mechanism to collect information from international organizations and overseas countries in a more timely and efficient manner has been enhanced.
It is extremely important for Japan to be able to obtain food safety- related information from other countries as early as possible because imported foods occupy about 60% of the total food supply in Japan. Furthermore, the concept of the global spread of emerging hazards is not yet common in the country as Japan is geographically isolated by the seas, which made the intrusion of foreign hazards unlikely until recent decades.
The control of other diseases such as SARS emphasizes the importance of information collection and its timely exchange. For example, Japan could successfully prevent the occurrence of SARS because of adequate information collection and counter-measures.
Education in food safety is essential, at all levels, with all stakeholders, and utilizing all types of educational methods. Through effective education and communication, a culture of food safety should be fostered in each country. Several activities in this regard already exist in many countries of the region. In Japan, the system for educating small-scale food producers/processors and food vendors in food hygiene and other areas of food safety has been developed over many years and has contributed to the improvement of food hygienic conditions in Japan.
The Food Sanitation Law of Japan was established in 1947. Food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors, subject to regulation by the Food Sanitation Law, are obliged to comply with this Law. In 1948, the Japan Food Hygiene Association, comprised of food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors, was founded. The objective of this Association is to prevent food borne illness, food poisoning and any other problems related to food and beverages through increasing food hygiene awareness among its members and through the implementation of their voluntary food control systems.
In Japan, food sanitation inspectors belonging to the health centres of each local government conduct food inspections and provide guidance in accordance with the Food Sanitation Law. The above-mentioned Food Hygiene Association works in this area in collaboration with health centres in local governments and the national government.
Each time when a food safety- related law or rule is amended, the national government and health centres organize meetings to explain the amendment(s) to food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors. The activities of the Food Hygiene Association in this area include: assigning August as a nation-wide “Month of Food Hygiene”; organizing briefing meetings and training courses for food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors and consumers; providing food sanitation instructors’ guidance on food safety; and giving advice to newly- opened restaurants. These activities provide more specific guidance and advice in the area of food safety than those by the governments and are more focused on small-scale food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors.
While the responsibilities borne by food manufacturers, producers, processors and vendors in relation to food safety have increased, there has been little change in the food safety- related education system for several years, except that the government now puts more emphasis on consumer education.
It appears that the concept of risk analysis in food safety has not been well understood by the public in Japan although the Government has been actively involved in risk communication since July 2003. Therefore, the Government should strive for both the promotion of the concept of risk analysis and enhancing risk communication for sometime to come. The Japanese in general respect harmony, but expressing one’s own opinions in front of many other people or debating is not in the national tradition. It is the Government’s duty to make risk communication more useful and effective under the internationally- agreed risk analysis framework, taking into consideration the tradition, culture, and characteristics of the Japanese people.
It is essential to collect and exchange food safety related information within Japan as well as with other countries. Since global food trade is increasing, food safety problems in exporting countries should be carefully monitored. Information from the all other countries should be collected and carefully analyzed in order to make better risk management decisions based on scientific information.
When performing risk communication, it is important to offer exact information as early as possible. Since zero-risk in food safety issues cannot be achieved, in order to decide and implement risk management options for minimizing the risk in practical way, risk communication among all stakeholders, especially those who might suffer any negative affects, is extremely important to achieve consensus to implement the risk management strategy.
The rapid globalization of food production and trade has increased the potential likelihood of international incidents involving food contaminated with microbial or chemical hazards. This is important for exchanging routine information on food safety issues and to have rapid access to information in case of food safety emergencies. In order to manage food safety risks appropriately in a timely manner, it is important to establish a mechanism to promote the exchange of food safety information and to improve collaboration among food safety authorities at national and international levels. In this regard, Japan would like to encourage the development of a new International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN), which has recently been proposed by the Food Safety Department (FOS) of WHO.
In order to reduce the burden of food borne illness, it is important to provide relevant food safety education and information to a large audience across the food chain, including small-scale businesses and street vendors, and to ensure consistency in food safety messages that are being disseminated. In this regard, scientifically- sound food safety information should be accessible globally from FAO and WHO.
1 Hazard analysis and critical control point.