Palm oil contamination allegation needs thorough investigation

Dinah Amankwah Opinion Mar - 01 - 2016 , 09:32

The local palm oil industry in recent times has been hit by two major scandals which pose a risk to the health of consumers; this subsequently is bad for palm oil patronage. The primary issue here is the health of consumers; palm oil dealers’ financial concerns are secondary, though legitimate. The Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) confirmed the first allegation and proceeded to sanction the offending operators.

In the second issue, however, a week after a group of university students publicised their research report that a cross-section of palm oil operators added centipedes to the oil during production for colour and taste, the FDA has refuted the claim, alongside strong protests from the industry. There clearly are credibility issues that must not be ignored.

A spokesperson for the FDA indicated that the allegation was being investigated, yet she declared her partiality by rubbishing the finding. She could not concede that anyone would include centipede in palm oil, for any reason. Yes, the researchers’ allegation is serious and needs thorough investigation. I am concerned that the FDA would refute an allegation it is still investigating. Apparently, the report came from the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST).

Legitimate reports

Research ethics require that only legitimate reports are shared with the community. Doubtful reports can be contested; therefore, the traders are right in challenging the university to refute or substantiate the claim. One would expect the same objective stance from the FDA.

Fact is that the FDA is not the most credible and reliable agency for food safety in spite of its national mandate. A while ago, when a researcher alerted the public to the health hazards of plastics, a spokesperson from the agency refuted the allegations, claiming that the harm was not as high as the researcher claimed. Yet, the harmful effects of Biphemol are well reported by researchers globally. Communities interested in human safety now manufacture biodegradable plastics, some of which are imported into the country. The mandate of the FDA notwithstanding, food products of questionable safety are constantly on Ghanaian market shelves. The report that centipedes are added to palm oil is alarming but not surprising.

Every consumer of Ghanaian palm oil is interested in this issue; if some producers could add bad chemicals to palm oil for colour, what prevents others from adding centipedes to the product for the same effect? Some traders and manufacturers have completely written off ethics and morality from their business catalogues. Some farmers in the country add carbide to food products to expedite the ripening process. Such products can make consumers sick or die. Consumers are ill-informed about the potential health risks of such contaminated food products. That such contaminated products are rejected by the international market alerts the local consumer that food in the country is not safe. Ironically, outsiders will not eat it, but it is okay to sell the contaminated products to Ghanaians.

Much as I sympathise with the palm oil manufacturers and retailers, I prioritise food and human safety. It might just be that a cross section of traders is indulging in business malpractice. It could also be true that an unscrupulous competitor, local or international, desires to eliminate all competition and pave the way for a new palm oil product. Businesses engage in such unethical behaviour. In the same manner, some researchers breach research ethics and disseminate false information. All the horrible scenarios I have painted above are highly possible in a country which is clearly averse to quality. Therefore, this is not the time for threats; it is time for proper investigation.

Need for investigation

All the agencies involved have so much at stake: KNUST is a reputable research institution which ought to abide by research ethics. It is expected to conduct legitimate research and report credible outcomes. Research from both staff and students must be above reproach. KNUST risks jeopardising its research reputation, locally and internationally, if it allowed false reports to be published or if its agencies compromised research ethics in any way. The institution must spearhead the investigation and muster the intellectual integrity to confirm the authenticity or falsehood of the report in question. Should the report be found to be false, the researchers involved must be appropriately sanctioned by the institution and its collaborators.