Nearly six months after the story of formalin in fish first broke, the debate still rages on whether formalin was used, whether it is harmful or not; and if it is harmful, how is it to be stopped. It might have even been amusing to watch the political circus had it not been such a serious food and health issue. So let’s examine the issues.
Is formalin being used to preserve fish? Logistics of the fishing industry appear to provide the answer. The trawlers stay out at sea for about 20 days at a time. Assuming a turnaround point at ten days, it means the catch stays in the hold for that period, and needs preservation. Allow another 5-10 days for transport to distant points of retail sale. This requires ice, averaging about 10 tonnes per trawler. At about Rs 90 per block and rising, the cost becomes prohibitive. The operators then resort to cheaper chemicals; ammonia to extend the life of the ice, formalin and more recently sodium benzoate to preserve the fish. The formalin is smeared onto the gills and even injected into the fish; sodium benzoate powder is sprinkled on the fish. There should be no doubt about the use of formalin, as it has been found in stocks seized in Punjab, Delhi, Andhra, Chennai, Kerala, and recently, Goa. The Food Safety Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) with its “Operation Sagar Rani” seized 10,000 kg of fish in one operation alone, and confirmed beyond doubt that formalin is used. Satish Kunder, the president of the fishermen’s association from Malpe in coastal Karnataka, a major source of large fish consignments for Goa, has admitted that formalin has been used to preserve fish.
Formalin is formaldehyde gas dissolved in water. A colourless strong-smelling chemical substance used in the textile industry, plastics, papers, paint, and to preserve human corpses. Exposure to its vapour can cause irritation to the eyes, nose and respiratory tract, causing sneezing, sore throat, wheezing, bronchitis and pneumonia. Multiple exposures can lead to asthma. It can also affect the skin, causing dermatitis or allergic reaction. Serious inhalation or ingestion can cause severe pain with inflammation ulceration and necrosis of the mucous membranes, which line almost every internal organ. This may show as symptoms of nausea, vomiting blood, diarrhea with bloody stool, blood in the urine, acidosis, vertigo, circulatory failure and death. 30ml is the lethal dose of formalin. The safe limit in air for humans is less than 2 ppm. Formalin in food, might not give such obvious reactions, but it is known to be a carcinogenic. A study showed mice exposed to formalin with concentration of 6 to 15 ppm for two years developed squamous-cell carcinoma in the nostril. Other studies also show formalin will cause kidney, liver, and lung problems. Since the 1980s, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has conducted studies to determine whether there is an association between occupational exposure to formaldehyde and an increased risk of cancer. NCI investigators have concluded that exposure to formaldehyde may cause leukemia, particularly myeloid leukemia, in humans. The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) established a federal standard which reduced the amount of formaldehyde to which workers can be exposed over an 8-hour workday from 3 ppm to 1 ppm in 1987 and further to 0.75 ppm in May 1992.The US FDA approves the use of formalin as a drug to control and treat parasites and fungi in marine fish farms. Australia, Japan and Europe ban it because of its carcinogenic effects. In the face of such evidence, it was extremely irresponsible for individuals to proclaim in the local and national media that formalin was without risk.
This settles the issue that formalin was used to preserve fish, and that its usage is unacceptable due to health hazards. The debate about what exactly happened in Goa with the FDA and Health Department; who said what to whom, and who did what, becomes a secondary issue. The question is: what now? The aam aadmi is protected from being short changed by the greed of dealers, by the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006; and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) which operates under this act at central, state and tertiary levels. Customers have the right to analysis of food items suspected to have substances not permitted by law, and if proven must be prosecuted. To do this there must be centers available for such analysis. Chennai, for example has the Kings Institute. Lack of equipment, staff or facilities implies gross criminal negligence by the administration. Food safety officers must be in place at Central and State levels and the FSSAI website must provide the necessary information for redressal. Ashok Kumar, HOD, Central Institute of Fisheries Technology (CIFT), states that they have developed two rapid detection kits for formaldehyde in fish costing Rs 250-300 each and good for 25 samples. Strict inspection with these kits brought down the usage of formalin in Kerala. One fails to understand why such measures cannot be instituted in Goa.
To the credit of the authorities in Goa, after a brief spell of public debate and irrational statements by people who should have known better, the import of fish was put on hold pending testing. Even as political motives were ascribed to the ban, the ultimate result was protection of the Goan consumer and therefore necessary and commendable. If dealers are crying because of loss of income, they should not have indulged in such hazardous contamination to make a buck at the cost of the Goan consumer. But such restrictions will be meaningless unless they are followed up urgently with the necessary kits and staff to carry out the checks.
We eagerly await the follow-up action shorn of political shenanigans.
(The writer is a founder member of the Voluntary Health Association of Goa.)
