Consumers Union of Japan – Page 51 – Sound and Healthy Future for Our Children

Lecture Series: Consumers’ Perspective on the TPP Problem

Consumers Union of Japan and other organizations have jointly started a lecture series to discuss the problems with free trade agreements from the consumers’ perspective.

During the APEC meeting in the fall of 2011, the Noda Administration expressed that Japan will participate in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. Mass media made it appear as if only farm groups are opposed to trade liberalization, belittling the difficulties while emphasizing the potential economic benefits. It seems that there are many people who do not understand what kind of influence the TPP will have over citizens’ daily lives, also among ordinary consumers. Consequently, we started this lecture series with the theme “Food safety is being threatened.” (more…)

By fridfrid | 08/02/2012 | Biotechnology, Civil Rights, Food, Food Additives, Food Security, TPP, Trade |

Consumers Protest Against the Radiation Limits for Food

Consumers protest against the radiation limits for food:
We strongly protest against the old provisional limit for radioactive contamination of food, while asking the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) to reexamine the new limits

Protest Letter

To:
Komiyama Yoko
Minister of Health
December 27, 2011

First of all, we protest against the provisional limit which was set by MHLW as high as 500 Bq per kg, and which have been applied for an extended period of time.

Regarding the new limits for Caesium in food proposed by MHLW on December 21, 2011 there will be 4 categories: “General foodstuffs” (100 Bq/kg), “Food items for babies” (50 Bq/kg, a new category), “Milk” (50 Bq/kg), and “Drinking water” (10 Bq/kg).

Furthermore, these values were intended as a “proposal” to reduce the maximum allowable dietary intake of radioactive Caesium from 5 millisievert to 1 millisievert. Below, we will point out what we regard as the problems with this “proposal.”

We are also concerned that it may take a long time before this interim measure will be reexamined.

We ask the government to consider these points seriously, and to create strict rules according to the suggestions below:

Suggestions

1 Ensure that the annual amount of contamination will be below 1 millisievert
Contamination by radioactive materials should be as low as possible. If we go by the recently proposed regulations by MHLW, the annual exposure of ordinary people will not be reduced to below 1 millisievert, which ICRP is advocating. Instead, the government should make every effort to reduce the internal exposure from food to as close to zero as possible.

In addition to radioactive Caesium, internal exposure also occurs due to radioactive Strontium, radioactive Iodine, Uranium, and Plutonium, etc. In addition, there is the added contamination due to external exposure. By suppressing the annual contamination by radioactive Caesium from food to below 1 millisievert, the total annual contamination can not be suppressed below the 1 millisievert level.

Although it has been reported that it is difficult to convert measurements of Strontium and Plutonium into Caesium, these nuclides also have a large impact on human health. Original standards and levels are thus needed for these as well.

It is our view that the premise by the Food Safety Commission to deal with additional contamination that is due only to food has not been fulfilled under the present circumstances.

There are many areas in Fukushima where the external exposure will be exceeding 1 millisievert due to the radioactive plume as people are breathing radioactive dust. The internal exposure due to food has also been made clear, and it is obvious that children must not be exposed to excessive contamination beyond the external exposure. Therefore, the government should aim at suppressing the internal exposure from food to zero as much as possible.

In order to protect children to the highest degree possible, there is a proposal to use 40 Bq/kg as a an independent limit for school lunches. We regard it as unacceptable that the new provisional limits from MHLW ignores this proposal.

2. Consider the food habits of people
After the Chernobyl accident in Ukraine, strict levels were introduced for staple foods like potatoes and vegetables that are eaten on a daily basis. The levels are 60 Bq/kg for potatoes and 40 Bq/kg for vegetables. Such consideration has not been shown by the Japanese government. We urge MHLW to take people’s eating habits into consideration.

3. Consideration for children is needed: Set strict limits especially to protect infants
Special consideration is needed for children, and the limits for infants should be set as strict as possible. In addition to radioactive Caesium, internal exposure also occurs due to radioactive Strontium, radioactive Iodine, Uranium and Plutonium, etc. There is also external exposure, but the provisional limits for food are set equally to people of all ages. Moreover, even in the case of the limit for food items intended for babies, the limit is too high. For food for babies, the limit is 200 Bq/kg which is not proportional to the weight of babies compared to adults, for whom the limit is 500 Bq/kg.

The US National Academy of Sciences has clearly stated that children and also embryos are 10 times as susceptible to radiation compared to adults, which Japan’s Nuclear Safety Commission has pointed out should be taken into consideration. We regret that MHLW has not sufficiently reflected this in the recent proposal.

4. Careful, public verification needed
Foods should be carefully tested for radioactive materials, and the results should be made public. Especially children, and coming generations yet to be born, need to be protected by the strictest possible regulations.

We demand that the testing should be carried out promptly according to the precautionary principle.

Consumers Union of Japan:
Amagasa Keisuke
Koga Masako
Mashimo Toshiki
Yamaura Yasuaki

Citizens Food Safety Watch:
Kamiyama Michiko

11,500 Participants In Yokohama Want Japan To Change Its Thinking About Nuclear Power

Change is needed for Japan to stop relying on nuclear power

The large Yokohama conference on January 14-15 for a nuclear power free world was a very well organized two day event with hundreds of lectures by speakers from Japan and abroad. I was impressed by the number of different groups and NPOs that came together to share information and experiences, 10 month after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, and the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant.

Held at the Pacifico Yokohama by the harbour, the event was an opportunity to think about energy issues. German MEP Rebecca Harms noted that Japan is now running its huge cities and industries on only 6 nuclear reactors out of 54. She pointed out that Germany decided to phase out nuclear power after the conservative government lost an important local election directly after March 11, 2011. Clearly angry after having just visited Fukushima, she said, “With the majority of public opinion in Japan now standing solidly against nuclear power, why the hell would Japan ever consider promoting it again?”

At one of the workshops, Swedish expert Goran Bryntse, PhD, who has led the anti-nuclear movement for a long time, talked about how citizens can change the energy policy. First of all, he noted, energy efficiency is the best and cheapest alternative to nuclear power. For example, a country can save up to one third of its energy consumption through heatpumps, more efficient engines, LED lights, and new whitegoods such as the latest refrigerators.

In the case of Sweden, these measures would be able to replace 4 nuclear reactors, according to Dr Bryntse. Additionally, 6 more nuclear reactors can be replaced by wind power (3), biomass and co-generation (2), and solar energy (1). Thus, all of Sweden’s current 10 nuclear reactors can easily be phased out. Of course this is a lesson that Japan should also take note of.

At another talk session there was a panel discussion about creating a “New Japan.” There is now a debate about whether to stop nuclear power immediately, or to phase it out gradually, but all of the panelists agreed that what Japan needs is clean and sustainable energy. For this shift to happen, mass media needs to change and become more accountable. The lack of democratic policies is also regrettable. There is some hope that Japan’s new Green Party can put forward its first candidates in 2013. I was also impressed that people are now collecting signatures for a referendum on nuclear power.

I talked to Mr. Hideyuki Ban from Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center who was deeply moved by the large turnout. He was also glad so many foreign guests were able to attend. There were many peace groups and groups representing the hibakusha from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and many old-timers who have campaigned even back when campaigning was not very popular in Japan. There were new groups of people who have been forced to deal with the unthinkable: mothers in Fukushima, worried about their kids, and lawyers trying to do the right thing to support the citizens – and shareholders – of TEPCO.

The Yokohama Declaration (pdf) that was adopted sounds like something a lot of people may want to read and sign. The declaration asked for support for the people in Fukushima, and said Japanese nuclear power plants that are currently idled should not be restarted.

Peace Boat and the other NGOs that made this event happen should all be applauded for their organizing skills. I met a lot of young people who attended both days. The friendly staff and genki volunteers made every effort to guide everyone to the right venue, offering simultaneous interpretation to anyone who asked for it. The organizers had hoped for a nice round 10,000 to attend, so this event was a huge success.

Martin Frid, Consumers Union of Japan

By fridfrid | 25/01/2012 | Energy, Energy Efficiency, Nuclear, Renewable Energy |

Japan Resources No 154

CUJ JR 154 (pdf) Japan Resources No 154

Thank you for visiting the English web site of Consumers Union of Japan. We have recently renewed our Japanese web site to better reflect all our campaigns both domestically and internationally.

Consumers Union of Japan (NPO Nihon Shohisha Renmei)

As we prepare to celebrate the bonenkai to end 2011, we also look forward to 2012, the year of the dragon!

Feel free to download the pdf file of Japan Resources No 154 and print it for your library.

– Editors

Contents:

GMO Free Zone Registration Status Report (2001)
Organic Farming in Japan: Lessons for the World
Consumers Against TPP Negotiations
Genetically Modified Papaya: Consumer Reaction
BSE: Keep Strict Rules to Eradicate Mad Cow Disease
Protest Letter: Withdraw Plans to Reexamine Japan’s Strict BSE Measures!
Don’t forget the people who survived the tsunami in Tohoku

By fridfrid | 20/12/2011 | Japan Resources |

BSE: Keep Strict Rules To Eradicate Mad Cow Disease

Withdraw Plans to Reexamine Japan’s Strict Measures against Mad Cow Disease

December 9, 2011

Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) decided on December 9, 2011 to consider reexamining the legal measures against Mad Cow Disease and to ask the BSE committee of the Food Safety Commission to deal with the issue by the end of the year.

We regard the easing of the present BSE inspection standards to have only one purpose, namely to make it possible to resume beef imports from the United States.

Food Safety Citizens’ Watch and Consumers Union of Japan have sent the following letter of protest on December 9, 2011, demanding that the Japanese government should withdraw its reexamination plans and instead continue to protect consumers against BSE.

Protest Letter: Withdraw Plans to Reexamine Japan’s Strict BSE Measures!

On October 31, 2011, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) raised the issue of reexamining the countermeasures against BSE, and submitted this request to the Food Safety Commission on December 9, 2011.

We regard this as a politically motivated decision that only serves to accept expanded imports of beef products from the United States. We find this to be premature and strongly urge the Japanese government to withdraw its reexamination process, for the following reasons:

1) Japan introduced countermeasures against BSE in 2001, implementing a strict system to safeguard against this terrible disease.

Japan’s domestic system includes the testing of all cattle and a traceability system that identifies each cow, as well as the removal of Specified Risk Material (SRM) after slaughter, in addition to feed regulation. This is a system that serves as a global model for countermeasures against BSE and its importance has not been diminished.

However, during the time of the reelection campaign of president George W. Bush in 2005, Japan agreed to change its strict rules so that beef products from cattle aged 20 months or younger could be imported from the US based on a simplified BSE countermeasure system. This concession followed intense US pressure on Japan’s government.

Even so, careful testing of each and every cow has continued domestically here in Japan in order to protect consumers.

2) As part of the proposed new countermeasures against BSE, the age limit will be raised to 30 months, and it will thus become unnecessary to test any cows that are younger than 30 months. However, there is no scientific basis for changing the age limit for BSE inspection from 20 months to 30 months.

In fact, we regard this as a purely political decision as Japan attempts to join the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade negotiations. It is simply a concession to US domestic standards that has set the age limit arbitrarily at 30 months for its own cattle testing program. It would mean that 90% of US beef products, rather than 20% today, will become eligible for export to Japan.

Japan made this concession to remove what trade negotiators call a “non-tariff barrier” to US president Obama as he tries to get reelected for a second term, and needs the support of and contribution for his electoral campaign from the powerful US beef industry. This also helped Japan get the US to accept that it would be allowed to participate in the TPP negotiations.

3) While BSE infection rates have decreased around the world, there is no evidence that the US system to combat the disease has had any such effect.

Moreover, questions have still not been answered regarding the spreading of the disease, the cause of development of symptoms of BSE, and the issue of prions inside the bodies of cows.

In order to completely eradicate BSE from the world, it is indispensable that research based on Japan’s system that tests all cows should be implemented in all countries, and that data collection should be further expanded.

Since there have been 15 confirmed cases of US beef product export program violations with regards to Japan, it is also necessary to strictly verify the US compliance with countermeasures against BSE.

4) We are concerned that if non-tariff barriers are further deliberated in the TPP negotiation process, we will end up with a similar situation that South Korea is now facing as part of its free trade agreement with the US. This system explicitly makes it impossible for a country to stop imports of beef products from a country even if BSE should occur in the exporting country (This is also known as the “ratchet effect” and implies that any new liberalization measures would be “locked in” so they cannot be rescinded or nullified over time, for example by improved consumer protection legislation). Such deregulation is unacceptable to consumers in Japan.

Additionally, we are strongly opposed to having the rules and standards of OIE (Office International des Epizooties) as mandatory provisions that override Japan’s food safety measures that are based on the precautionary principle. We regard this as a serious and unacceptable affront to Japan’s sovereignty.

Food Safety Citizen’s Watch

Kamiyama Michiko

Consumers Union of Japan

Amagasa Keisuke, Koga Mako, Mashimo Toshi & Yamaura Yasuaki

By fridfrid | 20/12/2011 | BSE, Food, FTA, TPP, Trade |