Research, especially the kind that touches on consumer health has always been on my heart for obvious reasons. Having had the benefit of working with a manufacturing company in my previous life, I have valued and come to appreciate the contribution of scientific research which drives innovation, meeting consumer needs with tailored products, brand development which translates into credibility, respect and goodwill.
One has come to appreciate that nations and industrial concerns that invest in research tend to be progressive in their approach to development.
Thanks to research, one gets better informed about lifestyles and life choices. For this reason, whenever I go shopping, I spend time in supermarkets checking on leads gathered from research by scrutinising labels before selecting my items. The same goes for prescriptions and supplements.
It is with this keen interest that my curiosity was piqued with the recent tomato paste research by food research scientists from the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), Kumasi, which made some headlines late in February this year.
Research
The research finding which was published in the International Journal of Food Science and which was primarily aimed at assessing the quality of tomato concentrates on the Ghanaian market drew consumer minds to foods one loves to prepare using tomato paste.
While the study in question confirmed that the eight different brands of tomato paste used in the study were in conformity to the standard labelling and quality requirements, on the other hand, however, they failed to meet the recommended range of twenty four percent of natural tomato content.
The disappointing news in the report, however, is that two of the tested brands had traces of the banned substance, Erythrosine, which is also known as “Number 3”. Those two brands were also found to have used a larger quantity of starch, much beyond the required specification.
Counter
While one was pondering over the research finding and wondering which the two unnamed “culprits” were on the market, the regulator, Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) quickly came out with their version, maybe a counter to the research finding.
According to the FDA, knowing the health dangers of Red Dye Number 3, the Authority does not permit the substance to be used in the production of tomato paste. Additionally, the FDA said they did not allow starch in tomato paste production.
To back their assertion, therefore, the Authority issued a public statement pointing to the fact that as far back as 2015, the Authority played a pivotal role in ensuring that Red Dye 3, a synthetic colour was banned in tomato products in Ghana. I guess one can rightly assume tomato products include tomato paste.
If that is so, then, there seems to be some confusion here in the minds of consumers who read the scientific research on tomato paste and what FDA is saying about the regulation on the “Number 3” substance.
Consumer
Where the consumer could be in limbo here is why despite the fact that the substance had been banned by the FDA in tomato paste production, yet some “culprits” are still using it in their production to the detriment of consumer health, as stated in the report by the KNUST Food Science and Technology research led by Dr. Abena Boakye and which has now taken a page in the International Journal of Food Science.
Most worrying is that the FDA claim in its media statement that as far back as 2018, only three tomato paste products and 10 tomato mix products were registered by them.
Seven years later, the country has as many as 40 registered tomato paste products and 62 registered tomato mix products on the market.
Interestingly, the FDA’s media statement has made it clear that all the products complied with the country’s standards, and they do undergo rigorous evaluation and testing before approval. Here, the Authority makes a clear distinction between tomato paste and tomato mix with different compositions.
So, who is right, and whose version should the consumer go by? Should one go the path of the scientific research claiming that two of the eight brands they tested in our market have the banned substance which is injurous to consumer health or the FDA claim that all the tomato paste products on our market have been tested, they undergo rigorous evaluation and testing and therefore comply with the country’s standards before approval.
The poor consumer needs clarity and reassurance, going forward. Can the KNUST Food Science research, which is now out there in the international space, name the two brands so consumers may be aware?
We need someone to come to our aid with clear and better particulars in this crucial food matter which affects one’s health.
******
The writer can be contacted via email at [email protected]
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.