Rice flour Vs. Wheat flour

We have launched a vigorous programme to manufacture bread, and bakery items from rice flour. Rice flour is the main food consumed by most Asian countries. It is home grown, it is nutritious, it is cheap. With that, we live with nature. That is how our ancestors lived so healthy and so long.

On or about 1505 we were compelled to change of our food pattern, our cultural heritage based in the paddy field, temple, kovil and dagoba was transformed to bread and an alien culture. We now depend on wheat flour and subsidise farmers of the USA, Brazil and other wheat growing countries.

With wheat flour we impart diabetes and pressure. We are self sufficient in rice. Nutritionists all over the world say it is one of the best main food items in the world. The amount of foreign exchange spent on flour is enormous.

Our paddy farmers go through immense sufferings due to low prices for paddy. The situation is heart breaking. We have made serious mistakes somewhere in history, yes it is still not too late to correct ourselves. President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Miniser of Agriculture Chamal Rajapaksa and Minister Chandrasena have directed and encouraged the Consumer Affairs Authority to implement a programme, to popularise the concept-"Bread from Rice Flour".

It is the duty of the Consumer Affairs Authority to pave the way for consumers to get high quality food products at a reasonable price. It is a 'human right' and the duty of any Government in power to provide this facility to citizens. It is also in our parameter and mandate to guide, encourage and pave the way for the industrialists, traders and businessmen to help the consumers.

The Bread and Bakery products we propose to produce are of equal or better standard and extremely healthy than that of wheat flour products. It is true that wheat-flour products are easy to make and consume in this fast and developing world. Steps are being taken to maintain the same standard and present the items on rice flour products in a modern and sophisticated way.

There will be projects all over the country to encourage bakers and generate income for youngsters based on self-employment projects. Minister of Trade Jeyaraj Fernandopulle and the Government has planned to introduce small scale rice mills to villages.

Steps are being taken by the other Ministers to provide small-flour mills and to establish "Bakery Villages". Minister Dinesh Gunawardena has agreed to provide us with lands for Bakeries. These are very encouraging signs. We need the co-operation of the people, scientists and organisations from Sri Lanka and worldwide in this exercise.

We hope to seek the assistance of Japan, Thailand etc to give us the necessary support to our bakers. Based on Mahinda Chinthana, we propose to give school children and patients "Healthy Rice Bread" instead of junk wheat bread. British Prime Minister Tonny Blair has launched a vigorous campaign against junk food and to give the children the traditional vegetarian English meal to live with nature. It is time for us to follow the good things from the West.

As the CAA, we act as a catalyst and a guiding force. We have paved the way and directed the respective organisations to commence the project and we request the public to use our consumer pages in the "Dinamina", "Daily News" and "Thinakaran" in this exercise. Let us work together to derive the benefits of this natural policy, states Sarath Wijesinghe Chairman Consumer Affairs Authority in a press release.

"Drugs - "Generic name" Vs. "Brand name"

The National Health authorities take up the position that doctors should prescribe drugs by their generic names and not by their brand names. While doctors do not openly challenge this, they do openly disregard the principle, when most of them prescribe drugs by the brand name, and sometimes even stamp the prescription with a "No Substitutes" stamp.

The patients are still confused as to whether they would run the risk by opting to purchase cheaper drugs of 'generic' description, which are commonly called "SPC" drugs, or whether they should solemnly follow the doctors prescription of a branded drug, however much it may be expensive.

A patient's selective action to purchase a drug by its generic name, as against the doctor's advice to buy a branded drug, as well as a doctor's prescription of a generic variety due to an enforced rule, may run the following risks.

Every drug of generic description will have a brand name to locate the manufacturer's identity. Prescribing a medicine only by its generic name leaves it open to the pharmacist to issue what ever brand he pleases.

The pharmacist will not show a list of brands under each generic description and provide the opportunity to the customer to pick one from such list. Even if he does so, if the customer is poor he may select the cheaper one, and if the customer is rich or snobbish, he may opt for the expensive one.

The question is how educative is a patient or customer to select the best one out of the lot. Similarly how medically educative is the pharmacist to select the most appropriate brand for a particular patient.

The pressure on medical practitioners to recommend generic names as against brand names is based on the foregone conclusion that prescribing drugs by generic names ensures the customer a cheaper drug of the same quality as an expensive branded one.

]This may not be so, firstly because, as I have said earlier, it is still left for the pharmacist to dispense an expensive one of his choice, on which he will have a higher profit. Secondly, the foregone conclusion is also made that a cheaper drug is as good as an expensive (branded ) variety. This too is not correct, since, although a cheaper drug will also have the same amount of the main active ingredients and performs the basic job, an expensive variety will always be superior in its application on a particular patient.

A cheaper variety may have side effects, which a particular patient cannot cope up with. The expensive brand may not, for instance, cause stomach irritation (Eg. enteric coated aspirin). An expensive variety will be convenient in usage like the facility of taking one tablet daily and not three times (Retard, Slow Release, Sustained Release, etc). A cheaper brand may have uncomfortable side effects.

The doctor's the best judge of what drug should be prescribed to a particular patient. He will take in to account the other complications his patient may be having or due to the patient insisting on a convenient dosage or minimal side effects.

A drug can be expensive not simply because it has a famous brand name, but because of higher costs on account of expensive research, refined ingredients, other additives or supplement, etc., resulting in minimal side effects, or absence of adverse drug effects.

In other commodities, other than medicines, the choice can be left to the customer to select what his purse permits. He will definitely know the superiority of an expensive one, but decide to settle for the cheaper one despite its poor quality or performance, knowingly compromising quality for affordability.

But in the case of drugs, he should better leave it, for his own good, to the doctors, and not for himself or the pharmacist, to determine what is best for him. I don't think anyone has a right to interfere with the doctor's responsibility of determining the correct type, including brand name, of medicine that should be prescribed for his patient.

Doctors should loudly educate the ignorant public and the rule makers as well, as to why they prescribe drugs by brand name.

If they are honest, they can also clear the unfair allegations that they are in the pockets of drug manufacturers. What needs to be enunciated is not "generic" or "brand", but a cheaper drug with appropriate performance for the individual patient.

International Consumer Charter mooted

The 11th International Workshop on Competition Policy co-hosted by the Korean Fair Trading Commission and UNCTAD in co-ordination with IDRC was held from September 6 to 7 at Haundai in South Korea where most of the countries which are leaders in the business world participated.

The workshop concentrated on Competition, Law, mergers and Consumer law. The discussions were based on internal policy bilateral, regional competition merger and consumer law. Most of the complex issues were discussed and the ways and means to help the consumers worldwide and to help industrialists, businessmen and the participant countries were discussed.

The full details and features of the Workshop will be discussed and published in due course. CAA Chairman Sarath Wijesinghe addressed the International gathering mooting International Charter for Consumers, which was well received by the Organisations to implement.

The CAA Chairman invited the organisers to use Sri Lanka as the venue for the next international event. It is a matter that has to go through the proper protocol channels and this matter will be pursued in due course.

Competition Law is an area where we need a lot of improvements. There are a few lawyers who are conversant in Competition Law, Mergers and Consumer Law in Sri Lanka.

The CAA representative has discussed an exchange programme for lawyers and experts to exchange knowledge and know how. An Invitation was extended to a few experts to conduct lecturers and seminars in Sri Lanka and some organisations agreed to sponsor and train our lawyers and officers engaged in Consumer Law.

The manufacture of bread from rice flour and assistance for bakers in this sphere was also discussed with participants and organisers. "We appealed to our Embassy in South Korea to help us in this Project by finding technical help. The Project will be launched in due course.

We take this opportunity to invite Industrialists, bakers and those who are interested in this Project to communicate with us.

The Competition Forum was represented by 153 Delegates from European Union, USA, Japan, China, India, Pakistan and from other countries mostly from UN", states Sarath Wijesinghe, Chairman, Consumer Affairs Authority.

Questions and Answers

Q1:- How do you assess food safety?

Ans:- Food safety is determined by the levels of contaminants, adulterants, naturally occurring toxins or any other substance injurious to health existing in food.

Q2:- What are the major food hazards?

Ans:- Micro bio, contamination, chemical residues, physical hazards, decomposition, adulteration, etc

Q3:- Name few chemical contaminants?

Ans:- Natural toxins, industrial chemicals, agricultural chemicals, veterinary drugs, food additives, processing aid, packaging material etc.

Q4:- Give some examples of physical contaminants?

Ans:- Glass, insects, hair, sand etc.

Q5:- Where are micro contaminants?

Ans:- Bacteria, moulds, viruses, parasite.