Monday, September 29, 2008


Allowed Level of Melamine
American dog food: 0 ppm
Chinese pig fodder: 2 ppm
Taiwanese human food: 2.5 ppm

Taiwanese opposition MP said Taiwan's health authority had treated the Taiwanese people worse than how American dogs and Chinese pigs were treated - 台湾人猪狗不如。

Tell me, what do you think Singapore's allowed level of Melamine is?
Singapore human food: 5 ppm!!!

Yeah, Singaporeans are worse than the Taiwanese people who are worse than dogs and pigs.


(Updated 8/10/08:
EU human food: 2.5 ppm
American human food: 2.5 ppm)


Anonymous said...

ya AVA is no standard one...

Chee Wai Lee said...

Um ... guys, before you make such a statement, please at least find out and inform readers about scientific facts supporting acceptable levels of various substances in various different creatures of the animal kingdom.

For example, dogs apparently cannot take any significant amounts of chocolate. Cats apparently tend to be lactose-intolerant (contrary to popular believe and even though, ironically, they really like milk).

Anyway, to put things in perspective, please read:

with a relevant quote:

"The European Union recently stipulated that food containing at least 15 percent or an unknown percentage of dairy products must not contain more than 2.5 ppm of melamine.

In New Zealand, the safety standard for melamine for most food products is 5 ppm, and 1 ppm for baby formula.

As to the United States, the Food and Drug Administration issued a guideline noting that eating 2.5 ppm of melamine would not raise health concerns, even if a person ate melamine-tainted food every day.

But it refused to set any permissable level of melamine in infant formula, saying "there is too much uncertainty to set a level in infant formula and rule out any public health concern.""

As you can see, there's actually disagreement on the acceptable values. What people do know is that for babys, melamine is bad, which is probably why New Zealand imposes a 1 ppm requirement for baby food.

I can understand the frustration and we should question the government on why 5 ppm is considered ok. Also, we should ask if there is a separate basis for baby food. Making an emotive statement saying that the Singapore government treats Singaporeans worse than pigs and dogs is, imho, not very helpful.

young-pap said...

Chee Wai Lee,
Thank you for taking the time to find out the following relevant information:
EU human food: 2.5 ppm
United States: 2.5 ppm

You have certainly put things in perspective. I have added these 2 new info the the article. With these 2 new info, we can all understand better why saying that the Singapore government treats Singaporeans "worse than the Taiwanese people who are worse than dogs and pigs", is *not* an emotive statement, but a statement of fact.

Please help us find out the figures for many more other countries, even though 4 continents have already been covered with EU, USA, Taiwan, and New Zeland. I am sure when all 7 continents are covered, it will help us decide with absolute certainty if the statement is emotive or not. Thank you very much!