CAC45 / were double standards at play for aflatoxins and zilpaterol?
The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) has adopted maximum levels (MLs) for aflatoxins in a series of food categories including types of maize, sorghum and rice, but unusually for Codex, with nearly 40 countries placing reservations in each of the categories.
“Our diet in Zimbabwe is largely these grains, the maize and rice,” says Jairus Machakwa (pictured left). “As there is no safe level of aflatoxins, we wanted to have as low values of those MLs of aflatoxins as CAC45 could allow, much lower than the ones we finally adopted. A majority of the people that are likely to suffer the effects of the aflatoxins are in the developing countries, Zimbabwe included. That is why Africa did not want the values we finally adopted.”
We have adopted standards for a product for which devastating effects on health have been reported and for a highly sensitive infant age group, said Amadou Diouf, Senegal. Even through so many countries especially from Africa expressed their reservations “we adopted by consensus, respecting the Codex Principles and the terms of the Procedural Manual”, he added.
The same session also adopted maximum residue levels (MRLs) for zilpaterol at Step 5 in the eight step process. However opposition to the standard advanced by the European Union forced a vote.
On zilpaterol “Senegal was not in favour of going directly to the vote,” said Diouf, explaining that he had expected those against advancing zilpaterol to follow the same course countries had followed on aflatoxins and make a reservation. “But this was not the case … the Chair continued to go along with the vote by relying on a term ‘opposition’,” which is not in the Procedural Manual. “A precise answer would have made it possible to see that one should go directly to the adoption and note the reservations. This is why we used the term double standards,” he said.
“Naturally a vote comes when the science is already right,” said Machakwa. “If Members bring ‘Other Legitimate Factors’ outside the purview of the Codex, then a disagreement ensues and a vote comes into place. The outcome of the vote, if it is the position that science would have determined, is just as acceptable as it would had its been by consensus.”
“The vote allowed us to advance to Step 6 while the veterinary drug committee was blocked,” said Diouf.
“We must understand that zilpaterol has come, and is here to stay.” Machakwa explains: “The EU banned the use of growth hormones but that did not stop zilpaterol use in other countries. The world is a global village and we must set MRLs to protect the populations that may come into contact with the products that have been derived from animals treated with zilpaterol. The availability of a Codex standard is for most countries a good development, indicating that the health of the consumer is protected as Codex uses science-based risk assessments to generate the standards.”
Learn more
Watch the whole of CAC45 on the FAO webcast