In today's media environment, fast food, a food safety story to stand out in a sea of information, the most important thing is what? Choose a sensational headline is clearly the most convenient way, for example, you could write, "____ actually contain (detection) ____, ____ or cause long-term high intake." This sentence appears to be not very familiar?
The originator of modern medicine, the Greek physician Celsus Barra has a famous saying: "All things are toxic, key in the dose." Say "large quantities" seems to be a universal truth, but scientists at the time of the general description of the specific things would not be so sweeping that otherwise there pretend to understand too. Rigorous argument generally include: population characteristics, such as adults, children, women, intake length of time and frequency, such as life every day, a week, a single intake, ingestion, such as eating in, sucked skin intake (and weight-related);; contacts and other health effects.
In Supor manganese poisoning cases, the scientific advice on national food safety risk assessment center have given this description, "adult lifetime daily intake of 10 mg of manganese does not pose a health hazard." So next time you see "large quantities" of news reports described in general, the default may have exaggerated the ingredients, it may be asked: in the end how much the amount, how long in the end, what specific harm?
In the area of food safety, to explore the relationship between dose and toxicity of learning is called toxicology. "Everything is toxic" In fact, strictly speaking optimized for Toxicology acute toxicity, such as drinking too much can lead to water intoxication in the short term, all of a sudden you may eat 1 kg of salt to your life. But not limited to, toxicological studies of acute toxicity, including chronic and sub-chronic toxicity, genetic toxicity, teratogenicity, carcinogenicity, etc., such as melamine acute toxicity is also weaker than table salt, but that does not mean it is safe than salt, so the risk management decisions need to be based on a comprehensive understanding of the toxicity of a substance.
For food additives, pesticides, veterinary drugs these inputs must be a comprehensive assessment of their degree of toxicity from all angles to ensure that does not pose a health threat only been approved for use, otherwise you should look for other alternatives. For example, use of food additives on a limited number of factors have been considered life every day, all possible types of food, the maximum consumption and individual differences, leaving plenty of safety margin, so you want to get health hazards almost impossible.
For melamine, Sudan, clenbuterol and other illegal additives, management measures are "0 tolerance", as long as it took punished. Whether or not the actual cause health hazards, it does not affect the violations identified. Revision of food safety law will also focus on combating the results from the transition to the behavior can be solved in the past because "eaten something wrong" difficult sentencing problems. Of course, under the premise of heavy combat, the dose-response relationship could be with a reasonable explanation to alleviate social anxiety, such as "life-long Sudan duck eat 1000 may therefore have cancer."
For mycotoxins, pathogenic microorganisms, heavy metals and other naturally occurring substances or difficult to avoid, usually through a series of management measures (not limited to the standard), limiting their content in food. For example, rice aflatoxin B1 is highly carcinogenic, of course, is to eat as little as possible, but not limit the more serious the better? If you only consider the public health, the answer is yes, but other factors also have to consider.
If the limit is 0 (not detected), two-thirds of the country's rice can not end on the table, and the resulting food supply problem is almost no solution, it is unacceptable. If the limit is set at 5 micrograms per kilogram, it still can not give 10% of the rice to eat. If set to 10 micrograms per kilogram is basically there will be no loss of grain, but with respect to 5 micrograms per kg per year per million population will increase by 1 liver cancer.
Scientists at this time to make the trade-offs between 5 and 10, while a loss of 10% of the rice, while cancer risk is one in a million. As the internationally accepted concept of public health, the risk of one in a million is negligible, and therefore, on balance, China's rice Aflatoxin B1 is set at 10 micrograms per kilogram is reasonable. Select "10% of the rice" instead of "human life" seems a bit cruel, but in exchange for this sacrifice is the greatest social benefits. Conversely, if the relationship between dose and toxicity of the lack of scientific understanding, it may lead to wrong management decisions, so that damage to the public interest.
It can be said that humans have been in dance and poison, but the development of modern civilization inevitably bring new challenges and new materials, and scientific progress will be more and more poison revealed. Although we can not vulnerable to the attack, but through scientific means of risk control, and build an effective protective barrier, the face of "large quantities" of intimidation is completely possible "Chuluanbujing" in.
Questions: Do you know the following "large quantities" is wrong is?
1, Wine containing methanol, long-term high intake or lead to death.
2, Cola containing phosphate, calcium absorption, long-term high intake can lead to osteoporosis.
3, Repeated frying oil contains large amounts of MDA, long-term consumption or cause cancer.
4, Coke caramel containing four-methylimidazole, long-term heavy drinking or carcinogenic.
5, Waste oil contains a variety of carcinogens, long-term consumption of large amount to cause cancer.
Baidu know without a daily newspaper written permission, no person may not be copied, reproduced, or in any other way use Baidu know the content of the daily newspaper. Baidu know the daily chase responsibility and rights reserved. Contact: zhidaoribao@baidu.com
Article Source: Baidu know daily (http://zhidao.baidu.com/daily)
Original link: http: //zhidao.baidu.com/daily/view id = 255?