China's Troubled Food And Drug Trade.
Absolutely excellent article on the Council for Foreign Relations website on China food and drug safety. The article is entitled, "China's Troubled Food and Drug Trade" and it does a superb job explaining the food safety issues surrounding China food and drugs.
The lawyer in me sees the following as the "money" quotes:
Some families have moved to sue the companies involved, though China's tort system only allows for direct economic damages. Such amounts are likely to be far smaller than the massive punitive damages allowed in the United States that often serve as a deterrent to companies. Market forces can still play a role in China. People's unwillingness to buy milk products over fear of which producers to trust has been a huge blow to the country's dairy industry.* * * *
Liability issues for international companies using Chinese supplies are a growing concern. Jerome A. Cohen, a CFR adjunct senior fellow, writes that the liability for New Zealand firm Fonterra, a major investor in the Sanlu Group, is unclear. Cohen says the case offers a lesson for other foreign investors. Experts are also quick to point out that China's food problems mirror those that other nations have experienced, including the United States. They add, however, that China's massive growth in trade and the realities of globalization makes the country an exceptional case, increasing the urgency for Beijing to tackle its food problems.
The US consumer in me sees the following as the key:
In the United States, consumer groups have called for greater scrutiny of food imports by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA currently inspects only a small portion (PDF) of food and drug imports. An FDA official told Congress in 2008 that the agency was moving to improve safety measures (PDF), particularly against terrorist threats from those who might purposely adulterate food. The official added that the FDA is working with the Chinese government to increase inspections.Of the inspections the FDA does conduct, food from India is more likely to fail than food from China. Illnesses from food in the United States more often originate domestically, U.S. congressional investigators said. The United States allows no imports of meat and poultry from China because U.S. law requires importers to meet the same standards as U.S. producers. The U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee investigative report concluded that such a standard could not be imposed on all imported food but notes the import process can be made safer. The report also points to Japan and Hong Kong's import models as possible alternatives to the U.S. system. Japan, for example, inspects up to 16 percent of food from China and allows in food that originates only from a small number of certified farms and plants. But more stringent inspection regimes are not fool-proof. In 2008, hundreds of people in Japan fell ill from Chinese-made dumplings laced with pesticides, and Hong Kong found melamine-laden in milk products imported from the Chinese mainland.
The law firm marketer in me sees the need to call out the following paragraph as well:
In the United States, food safety is also enforced through a variety of other means, including a punitive torts system, independent media, and vigorous civil society organizations. These institutions in China are not nearly as powerful, though some analysts see signs of change. Steven M. Dickinson, a partner in the international law firm Harris & Moure who has spent the last five years in China, says local media played an unprecedented role informing the public during the 2008 milk scandal. Some critics, however, say the milk incident could have been dealt with months earlier and blame the country's focus on the Olympics for stifling early warnings.
It is truly a must read.
And for those (like me) interested in food safety, I highly recommend the Barf Blog, which describes itself as "Musings About Food Safety and Things that Make You Barf." It makes salmonella and e.coli fun. I also recommend the MarlerBlog, written by renowned Seattle food safety litigator, Bill Marler.

Comments (7)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endPaul Denlinger - October 19, 2008 4:59 PM
Actually China and the US are in similar circumstances for a simple reason.
You can have all the laws on the books you want, but if an administration (in the US's case, the Bush administration) cuts the budget for the FDA for food import inspections, then you end up with a situation which is not much different from China's. So, you end up with a lot of unenforced laws.
Which is exactly what is happening now in the US. Laws which are put forth but are not enforced quickly become irrelevant, and teaches the public, whether in China or the US, to ignore the laws.
Nonin Stone - October 19, 2008 7:59 PM
Dan,
Thanks for another excellent information tip on a timely topic. (alliteration unintended) I've just begun reading but have already gained valuable insights. This is why I send your URL to everyone who shows the even the slightest interest in China to use as a jumping off location.
Don't look now, you've become a portal.
Paul Denlinger brings up a good point. My own solution would put more of the onus on U.S. food importers to see to their own rigorous food safety testing before the products leave China. This would lighten the FDA load considerably, and be cheaper in the long term.
No doubt some corporate "risk assessment" guys would take issue. But considering that product-related death and illness are also a huge marketing cost, even the most callous should take it more seriously.
But that's just me.
Lawrence Kelly - October 20, 2008 3:31 AM
A crucial point? -- and one I’ve not seen yet addressed in any of the extensive worldwide press coverage, which seems focused only on exported Chinese finished product: What are the figures on export from China of bulk milk powder? As I’m particularly interested in the US, are there any figures anywhere as to the American food industry’s import of China-sourced bulk milk powder? An allied question of course is into what US-domestically-produced finished product is that milk powder going? Finally, does the US FDA, or any other US regulator have any sense of either of these two “items” Does anyone else?
Of interest here is a report that (relatively) “little” Lebanon was importing some 500 tons of Chinese bulk milk powder each year. Given the voracious American appetite for cheaply-priced Chinese product, what might these Lebanon figures suggest, as to the US figures?
Beirut bans Chinese milk powder over health fears
By Agence France Presse (AFP)
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=96557
David Oliver - October 20, 2008 4:12 AM
Food safety is going to become a much bigger issue in China. After the melamine scandal I am waiting to see what illegal additive will be found in some other foodstuff.
It also depends on what the inspections are looking for - if Sanlu milk powder had been exported to the U.S. then it may have passed quality inspections as no one would have been checking for melamine in milk powder.
Business and moral ethics do play a role - I would like to think that in the west food producers wouldn't knowingly add something that they knew was harmful just to make some extra money. Exporters may also think that unless the government shuts them down then they can simply find another customer if their shipment is rejected.
Nonin,
Importers do test product before it leaves China. I have visited one laboratory that provides this service. However sometimes the importer does the sampling while at other times the Chinese producer provides the sample. In the latter case that potentially leaves the system wide open to abuse if the sample they provide differs from what is actually getting exported.
That might explain some cases where food that passed inspections had problems anyway.
Nonin Stone - October 20, 2008 3:22 PM
Hi, David,
You make a good point about how the integrity of a safety system can be bypassed through company-provided samples. This could make a case for firms, such as our hosts, Harris&Moure, formulating iron-clad contracts which permitted only sampling and testing by the buyer's representatives. Of course, this must work within the framework of Chinese law.
But being a hard-core free-market -trade advocate, I believe the market provides better incentives to ensure a product's safety than does government. I submit that government intervention, except for establishing safety standards then prosecuting offenders, opens the door to corruption. They have no natural motive for enforcing standards.
Independent groups, such as UL and various insurers, are both motivated and compensated to provide safe products.
Less government seems to always produce better results.
Anonymous - October 23, 2008 10:04 PM
With all due respect -- to Mr. Stone's above concluding point, and his preceding rationale in support of it:
"Less government seems to always produce better results."
Given the current unregulated utter financial shambles, and our remarkably badly-backfiring "free trade" experiment (e.g.,massive loss of manufacturing jobs; truly gargantuan trade deficit; gutting of our once-vaunted manufacturing base; consequent impoverishment of the once-central working consumer; current descent into recession/depression) does anyone who is not, as Mr. Stone puts it, "a hard-core free-market -trade advocate" any longer believe that dropping our banking and other "referee" regulations, and also unilaterally abandoning our historical and very reasonable "leveling the playing field" tariff policies, were (are) anything other than a pair of patently dumb (some might say "stupid"?) ideas?
Perhaps in architecture, "less is more", but in our tricky attempt to blend democracy and capitalism, taking all the referees off the field, thus letting the inmates run the asylum, has but proved to be an act of naive madness.
By now, even "true believers" should appreciate that their prayer-like "act of faith" in the "free market" ideology has been but religion gone wrong.
Mike John - December 18, 2009 6:24 AM
Great post. China today is like the United States of the 1800s and I see much of what afflicts it as just part of its transition from communism to modern day capitalism.