Can MOH and AVA be trusted?

[dysentry]

Is it ethical for foods like Mars, Snickers, Kit Kat, Meiji and Dutch Lady milk to remain on supermarket shelves even when local tests have been successful for some specific products, although they have failed tests elsewhere?

Are the interests of public health being superceded by business interests here?

A circular was issued on 21st Sep for milk-based products from China to be withheld from sale, but I find it confusing that Meiji and Dutch Lady milk still appear on Cold Storage shelves.

Perhaps AVA should release more information about the sources and processing of these products so that the consumers can make an informed decision themselves.

Many other products like Calbee cornsticks are made in China as well; I'm restraining myself from buying them due to lack of transparency and information. All I can see is that it is prepared and packed in Shantou.

 

[dysentry]

So far don't see those Unilever brands mentioned by AVA. Is AVA scared of the big guns?

The description "milk and milk-based products" is rather vague. AVA should be more descriptive about what is being banned.

It seems that HK authorities have shown more transparency by also naming what has passed tests, putting more information in the hands of the public.

 

[Neh_Neh_Pok]

What happen? another NKayF scandal case?

 

[makapaaa]

See, we can also climb up the tree! *hee*hee*​

 

[NissanViP]

ALL SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT MINISTER AND THEIR MASTER CANNOT BE TRUSTED.

They are worst than snake.

 

[kuntakinte]

Good one !!! If you believe their (MOH and AVA) words,

母猪也会上树 ！！！

See, we can also climb up the tree! *hee*hee*​

 

[fenwick]

If really pigs can climb tree, i'll beleive !!!!!!! ( like the pic posted )

 

[suteerak1099]

look at it in broader picture and we will know that most of the facilities & institutions largely headed by expired ex-uniformed officials have done no more than going thru motion, implementing systems doing no more than just following SOP.

MOH, AVA, NEA all the same, just follow law. in the recent melamine saga, it is evident that all they do is just go thru the standard checklist, and lack the all important element called 'initiative'.

just bcos melamine and/or any other chemicals found in the contamination is not a common ingredient for the food, doesnt mean that the risk of existance is 0%. can we accept that sort of explanation?

for such a lame explanation, doesnt it mean that the authorities have done nothing else but to test authenticity of the ingredients stated on the packaging only? and have done nothing to check for non-permissable & abnormality in the contents?

the authorities now impose fines for retailers that failed to comply to recalling and/or ceasure of sales for the banned food or brands. sounds like they're taking their jobs seriously.... but b4 we jump to conclusions.

if the authorities have done their jobs dutifully, the contaminated or blacklisted food wouldnt have been supplied to the retailers. now that the believed to be contaminated goods have been supplied, and being ordered to be banned & sales to cease. who's going to bear the liguidated losses that the retailers have to bear? will all the retailers affected in this saga be compensated, or do we expect the retailers to suck it all up & bear the losses on their own?