Controversies Over FoSHU Products

The market demand for health-promoting foods such as functional foods is high in Japan, and food manufacturers continue to innovate, bringing new products to market. Among companies selling health-promoting foods, Fima,^[710] a chemical and cosmetics company, has kept its presence in the market by

The Use of Health Foods in Japan 191 selling cooking oil, salad dressing, and mayonnaise that are certified as Foods for Specified Health Uses since 1999.^[711] FoSHU is a category of food which has “functional ingredients” that provide the special health benefits claimed on the label.^[712] Its specially branded line of FoSHU products sold well.

They were seen as helpful in preventing the rise of neutral fats in the blood and in lowering cholesterol levels. Its cooking oil was a huge commercial success. Major news companies and TV programs carried stories about the products when they were first introduced to the market in 1999, and the products sold out quickly once they were on store shelves.^[713] Its label carried the seal of FoSHU approval and also a recommendation by expert groups such as the Japan Society of Ningen Dock, all of which endorsed the safety of its use and the validity of its health claims.

An uproar about the product erupted ten years after the product launch due to food safety concerns reported in the news. The issue was the presence of high levels of glycidol esters in this cooking oil, substances which “may” transform into glycidol during the deodorization processes. Glycidol (unlike glycidol esters) is classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a part of the World Health Organization specializing in cancer prevention and control.^[714] As in the case of other food safety problems, regulators in Japan began to look into the problem in an effort to determine any safety risks.

For instance, the Food Safety Commission recommended that “Investigation of health effects [should] be done immediately,” a statement which was reported in the newspaper,^[715] triggering consumer interest groups to act upon this incident. However, to date, the scientific knowledge available does not provide a definitive answer to the problem, as evidenced in IARC’s use of the term “may.” In particular, the question of the extent to which glycidol esters will transform into glycidol, and the extent to which glycidol will morph into a suspected carcinogen after it is in the human body, are uncertain.^[716] Finally, one additional important reason that this incident was seen as highly problematic was that this particular vegetable cooking oil carried the government-approved FoSHU label, which suggests that the safety and efficacy of the product were scientifically demonstrated by the manufacturer and subsequently confirmed by the government.^[717]

Sparked by concerns about the unintended amount of glycidol esters present that “may” transform into a carcinogenic substance once ingested, discussions took place in various arenas, including government-commissioned expert committees involving multiple stakeholders such as representatives of industry, consumer groups, and mass media, as well as lobbying efforts by consumer groups. Concerns were expressed about the safety of this specific product and at the same time about the current FoSHU approval system, such as how the government will deal with the situation if a new risk factor is later found with a FoSHU-approved product. Appealing to collective conscience, consumer interest groups demanded that scientists develop methods to determine risks, that regulators translate the scientific data into more precautionary policy prescriptions, and that companies disclose any relevant scientific data about the hazardous substances and the measures taken to deal with the risks.^[718]

In response to the situation, Fima moved quickly to suspend its use of the FoSHU label and recall products that were on the market before the Consumer Affairs Agency, an agency newly established in 2009 with jurisdiction over a range of consumer problems, including oversight of food safety-related matters, could make a decision to revoke FoSHU status.

Meanwhile, voices calling into question the credibility of the FoSHU approval system and the effectiveness of regulatory oversight were heard in popular magazines and on various web sites. For instance, a lengthy article covering this incident and criticizing the regulatory procedures appeared in places such as a popular weekly women’s magazine.^[719] Meanwhile, consumer hotlines were established at the company. In the end, on September 16, 2009, Fima suspended shipments within Japan of its 59 Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)-based products, citing the presence of glycidol esters in high density.

We are taking immediate action by temporarily halting the sale and shipment of these products until the amount of fatty acid glycidol esters in [brand name of the cooking oil] and related products can be lowered to levels similar to common cooking oils....... While we believe our products have

been and are safe, we are nevertheless taking this extra precaution as a way to assure our customers that they can continue to enjoy our products with confidence.

(News Release by the Company, September 16, 2009)^[720]

Although the CAA said on October 8, 2009, that it would move to revoke FoSHU status for Fima’s DAG-based product line, the company had already

The Use of Health Foods in Japan 193 voluntarily relinquished the FoSHU label before the agency could take action. This move allowed the company to make a public display of commitment to values shared with the consumers: the company implies that it is staying fully informed about the science relevant to DAG-based cooking oil, that it is committed to developing and selling what is safe and effective, and that it is committed to giving consumers healthier choices in food. Moreover, it implies that it is committed to not only providing information to consumers but also listening to the needs and demands of consumers, thus fulfilling its role as a caretaker of consumers.

Seeing this as a serious problem, an array of consumer interest groups such as the Nippon Association of Consumer Specialists, Consumers Union ofJapan, National Consumers’ Group Communications Association, Housewives’ Federation, Japanese Consumers’ Cooperative Union, and others have become actively involved in issues related to the glycidol esters incident.

Some are represented on the commissions at the regulatory agencies such as the Consumer Commission, while others have worked on this issue outside the public policy arena, forming external pressure groups to influence regulatory agencies and industry. Although there are diverse perspectives on food and its safety among these interest groups, consumer interest groups across the board see problems with the current health food system—inadequate labeling, misleading advertisements, lack of information about its safety and efficacy—all of which have led to difficulties in understanding the safety and efficacy of health foods; all felt that something needed to be done. Among consumer interest groups, the Food Safety Citizens’ Watch, Consumer Union ofJapan, and Housewives’ Federation took a clear position on DAG-based cooking oil much earlier than the time at which the problem became widely known. They requested regulatory agencies to withdraw approval of FoSHU from their product lines, to ban the sale of products, to disclose scientific data and explain problems in a way that non-expert consumers can understand, to manage problems by taking a “worst-case scenario” stance, and to carry out health impact studies on consumers who have used the products long term. Throughout the time until the company removed the products from the shelf, these groups monitored how the problem was dealt with—or not dealt with—by regulatory agencies and described what they believed needed to be done, using their web sites and petitions to regulatory agencies based on their model of the role and responsibilities of the regulatory agencies. The logic underlying these actions is in tension with the prevailing reality that the choice to introduce a novel food is rooted in reasoning within the Industrial and Market orders of worth, in which government and industries expect that individual consumers will be responsible for their choices, and reasoning within the Civic and Domestic orders of worth, in which consumer groups attempt to represent the interests of individual consumers while also asking for the company’s commitment to consumers’ wellbeing.

At an emergency public forum organized by a consumer interest group immediately after the incidence, voices were heard from the floor saying “We thought that the Consumer Affairs Agency was established to work from the

Figure 12.2 FoSHU market in Japan: 1997-2016

Adapted and translated from the web site ofJapan Health Food & Nutrition Association, 2016, https:// jhnfa.org/tokuho-market.html

perspective of consumers”—directly calling into question assumptions about the responsibility assigned to individual consumers in this situation.

Fima published a risk communication brochure one year after the incident. In that document, the director of Consumer Communication Center of the company reflects upon what had and had not been done and what could and should have been done. In those reflections, phrases and words such as “a consumer-oriented company,” “trust,” “consumers’ right to know,” and “stands by consumers” are heavily used, such that one could clearly see how the company is trying to appeal to consumers by using values in the realm of the Domestic order of worth: sending the message that they are being looked after. A closer look at the way this situation unfolded reveals some of the ways in which the discourse around FoSHU-certified foods is shaped by negotiations structured within different orders of worth. These differences arguably contribute to confusion and mismatches between consumers’ expectations and the reality that surrounds the use of health-promoting foods.

<< | >>

↑

Source: Ni Kuei-Jung, Lin Ching-Fu (eds.). Food Safety and Technology Governance. Routledge,2022. — 252 p.. 2022

Controversies Over FoSHU Products

More on the topic Controversies Over FoSHU Products: