Welcome to PesPro

24 April 2014


Have A Healthy Day

Farm to Fork Food Safety – a research oriented science concept  based on integration of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), Good Hygienic Practices (GHP) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)  - is the basis for Safe and Healthy food. 


This blog attempts to enrich the knowledge of various stake holders in Food chain with  emphasis on world class technology - Integrated Pest Management for managing pests, which can be implemented by trained, certified and licensed Pest Professionals.

Food for thought

Thirukkural – திருக்குறள்

அதிகாரம்/Chapter/Adhigaram: கேள்வி/Hearing/Kelvi 42 
இயல்/ChapterGroup/Iyal: அரசியல்/Royalty/Arasiyal 5 
பால்/Section/Paal: பொருட்பால்/Wealth/Porutpaal 2
குறள் 413
செவியுணவிற் கேள்வி யுடையார் அவியுணவின்
ஆன்றாரோ டொப்பர் நிலத்து
குறைந்த உணவருந்தி நிறைந்த அறிவுடன் விளங்கும் ஆன்றோர்க்கு ஒப்பாகக் கேள்வி ஞானம் எனும் செவியுணவு அருந்துவோர் எண்ணப்படுவர்
Couplet 413 
Who feed their ear with learned teachings rare,
Are like the happy gods oblations rich who share
Those who in this world enjoy instruction which is the food of the ear, are equal to the Gods, who enjoy the food of the sacrifices
Seviyunavir Kelvi Yutaiyaar Aviyunavin
Aandraaro Toppar Nilaththu


              TULIP GARDEN KASHMIR - Asia’s largest tulip Garden in bloom this time






Leave a comment

Posted by on April 19, 2013 in Pest Management Training


HC panel split on school junk food ban

Industry Comes Up With Policy Putting Onus On Student; Experts Not Sure If It’s Feasible

New Delhi:

A Delhi high court panel to look into dietary habits of school-going children is split on the question of banning sale of junk food in and around educational institutions. 

The panel of experts has to examine harmful effects of junk food and recommend guidelines to make available good quality, safe food to students in school canteens. It includes environmentalist Sunita Narain, nutritionists, doctors, scientists and representatives of the food industry. In its draft guidelines to be submitted in court, fissures have emerged over the need to completely ban food items commonly categorized as junk food in and around 500 yards of schools. 

The differences have emerged in a draft report prepared for regulating Food High in Fat, Sugar and Salt (HFSS), popularly known as junk food. The report was prepared earlier this year by an expert group set up under the high court-appointed committee. 

 A lack of consensus within the expert panel arose from the view taken by the representatives of food processing industry and restaurants who came up with their own list of recommendations on improving dietary habits of school-going children. Instead of a ban on junk food as demanded by Narain and others, the industry body suggested an indicative list of recommended food in schools.

The food industry further promotes the policy of “eat less/eat just right/eat judiciously” in which the onus is on the student to be careful of how much and what they consume in school canteens. Other suggestions by them included improving the wholesomeness of foods made available in schools and putting in place a ‘school health team’ to ensure quality and safe food is made available to them. 

However, Narain and other experts on the panel contested the recommendations. At the outset, they pointed out that the HC order is explicit in expressing concern over ill effects of junk food in dietary habits of school kids. Secondly, they questioned feasibility of implementing and monitoring guidelines proposed by the industry body wondering to what extent it will be possible to monitor conversion of unhealthy junk food to healthy food. Nutritionists on the panel also highlighted the fact that the industry failed to mention rising incidence of obesity in children and its direct correlation to junk food. 

The panel is also divided on the importance of exercise for children to offset illeffects of junk food. Some of the experts countered the industry body’s stress on exercise to argue that no amount of exercise can negate problems due to overeating. Narain and others also attacked the policy of eating right/ eating judiciously propagated by food industry representatives saying it suffers from lack of clarity and is very open-ended. 

HC is likely to take up the case on Wednesday to take stock of progress made in finalizing guidelines.

The PIL filed by Uday Foundation through its founder Rahul Verma had sought an immediate ban on junk food and carbonated drinks in all unaided and private schools. It further wanted HC to initiate measures to discourage availability of fast food within 500 yards of schools in Delhi, apart from a canteen policy.



Leave a comment

Posted by on April 24, 2014 in Court cases


CSE Presentation: Junk food guidelines – Working group versus FSSAI version.


Leave a comment

Posted by on April 24, 2014 in Food Safety


Junk games and schoolchildren

There is nothing called junk food. The problem with obesity lies with children who do not exercise enough. What is needed is for them to run and jump, and to do this they need to consume high-calorie food. So, food high in salt, sugar and fat is good for them.” This is what was argued vehemently and rudely by representatives of the food industry in the committee, set up under directions from the Delhi High Court to frame guidelines for junk food in the country.


On the face of it there was no one from the junk food industry in the committee. In the early meetings, we only knew that there were members of two associations who were representing the food industry in the committee. But as discussions got under way, it became clear that the big junk food industry was present in the meeting. We learnt that the member representing the National Restaurant Association of India was a top official from Coca-Cola—the world’s most powerful beverage company that is at the centre of the junk food debate globally. The other grouping, All India Food Processors Association, was represented by Swiss food giant Nestle, which has commercial interest in instant noodles and other junk food.

images (1)

The other members of the committee were eminent paediatricians, nutritionists and public health specialists. The committee had been set up because of a case filed in 2010 by Delhi-based NGO Uday Foundation, which asked for a ban on junk food in schools and in their vicinity. In September 2013, the High Court ordered the government to set up a committee to frame guidelines for food as the “ill effects of eating junk food have been documented by public health experts and also paediatricians”.

The first move by the junk food industry was to block the setting up of the committee itself. But the court rejected this. The industry then changed tactics to argue that the problem was not junk food but lack of physical activity.

images (2)

For the rest of us in the committee the issues were: what makes food junk; why is it bad for our health; and what is being done to regulate junk food in other parts of the world? A working group was set up to frame the guidelines to present to the expert committee, which in turn would then report to the court.

The Hyderabad-based National Institute of Nutrition has defined junk food as food that contains little or no protein, vitamin or minerals but is rich in salt, fat and energy. There is also robust evidence of the linkage between consumption of this food and non-communicable diseases like diabetes, hypertension and heart diseases. Childhood obesity has become the most serious health concern; even in our part of the world were malnutrition is a big concern. Study after study points to high-calorie intake because of unrestricted access to energy-dense fast food in school canteens and neighbourhoods. While exercise is vital, it is not a substitute for a balanced diet.


World over governments are acting to tax junk food, ban it in schools and restrict its advertisement. All this is adding up to high-profile campaigns, where celebrities shun endorsement of this food and push for healthier options. In the US, first lady Michelle Obama has taken on the mantle to campaign against junk food.

The question before the working group was not whether action was needed, but how to address these concerns. The first step was to build the criteria to define and identify junk food—how much of sugar or fat or salt in food is unhealthy. Based on this, a list was prepared of the most common junk food that would need to be regulated. It included chips and other fried packaged food; carbonated beverages; instant noodles; and confectionery.

images (2)

The working group was unanimous in its position: children are not the best judge of their food and are aggressively targeted by ads and seduced by celebrities. Moreover, schools are the right place to learn right values about nutrition. We, therefore, recommended a ban on junk food in and around schools, and also a canteen policy that foods categorised as green (healthy) would constitute over 80 per cent of the choices available. We said that non-standardised junk food, like samosa, would be available sparingly in the canteens. There would be efforts to “green” this food through better ingredients and cooking mediums. This food was categorised as orange. Red category food—common junk food—would not be available at all.

But all this would not work unless people are informed about what they are eating. To do this, labelling on food should specify how much fat, sugar or salt it contained in relation to their daily diet. The working group also recommended strongly against celebrity endorsement.

images (1)

But this was clearly unacceptable to big business. They struck back. By now they could not argue that nothing should be done. The health evidence was overwhelming. Their position was that instead of banning such food, children should be asked to “eat responsibly”. But they could not explain what eating responsibly meant. The final report of the committee has two positions: the industry says the availability of junk food should be restricted or limited in and around schools; the rest say junk food should be banned. Now the report is with the High Court for it to take a decision.

Article: Sunita Narain – Director General of CSE




Leave a comment

Posted by on April 24, 2014 in Food Safety


Storing Fruits & Vegetables


Leave a comment

Posted by on April 24, 2014 in Fruits & Vegetables


Verdict on junk food ban – April 23


Leave a comment

Posted by on April 23, 2014 in Food Safety


இயற்கை உரத்தில் விளைந்த.. புடலை

ChandraSekaran Sonof PV Nathan<br />
8அடிக்கும் மேல் வளர்ந்து கொண்டிருக்கும் நண்பர் முத்துவின் தோட்டத்தில் முற்றிலும் இயற்கை உரத்தில் விளைந்த.. புடலை..</p>
<p>மேலும் இதில் கவனிக்க வேண்டியது செலவு செய்து ரசாயன உரம் போட்டு விஷம் தெளித்து ஒரு கொடியில் ஒரு அடி நீள குட்டை புடலை 50 காய்கள், மொத்தம் சுமாராக 50 அடிநீள புடலை கிடைக்கும்…</p>
<p>குட்டைபுடலை குண்டாக இருப்பதால் ஒரு அடிக்கு அரைக் கிலோ என்றால் 25கிலோ…கிடைக்கும்</p>
<p>இயற்கை வழியில் அதுவும் குறைந்த செலவில்,  பாம்புப் புடலை சுமாராக 15 காய்கள் மட்டும் காய்க்கிறது என வைத்துக் கொண்டாலே, 15 பெருக்கல் 7 அடி என்று போட்டால் 105அடி நீள புடலை கிடைக்கும்…</p>
<p>பாம்பு புடலங்காய் ஒல்லியாக இருப்பதினால் அடிக்கு 350 கிராம் வீதம் மொத்தம் 35 கிலோ..  கிடைக்கும்…</p>
<p>இயற்க்கை விவசாயத்தில் மகசூல் 10 – 20 கிலோ அதிகம் தான்… செலவு பல மடங்கு குறைவு…” width=”228″ height=”395″ /></h3>
<h3><span style=8அடிக்கும் மேல் வளர்ந்து கொண்டிருக்கும் நண்பர் முத்துவின் தோட்டத்தில் முற்றிலும் இயற்கை உரத்தில் விளைந்த.. புடலை..

மேலும் இதில் கவனிக்க வேண்டியது செலவு செய்து ரசாயன உரம் போட்டு விஷம் தெளித்து ஒரு கொடியில் ஒரு அடி நீள குட்டை புடலை 50 காய்கள், மொத்தம் சுமாராக 50 அடிநீள புடலை கிடைக்கும்…

குட்டைபுடலை குண்டாக இருப்பதால் ஒரு அடிக்கு அரைக் கிலோ என்றால் 25கிலோ…கிடைக்கும்

இயற்கை வழியில் அதுவும் குறைந்த செலவில், பாம்புப் புடலை சுமாராக 15 காய்கள் மட்டும் காய்க்கிறது என வைத்துக் கொண்டாலே, 15 பெருக்கல் 7 அடி என்று போட்டால் 105அடி நீள புடலை கிடைக்கும்…

பாம்பு புடலங்காய் ஒல்லியாக இருப்பதினால் அடிக்கு 350 கிராம் வீதம் மொத்தம் 35 கிலோ.. கிடைக்கும்…

இயற்கை விவசாயத்தில் மகசூல் 10 – 20 கிலோ அதிகம் தான்… செலவு பல மடங்கு குறைவு...

Facebook share

Leave a comment

Posted by on April 23, 2014 in பசுமை வழி


Consumers Union Praises Vermont’s Senate for Passing GMO Labeling Bill

Consumers Union Praises Vermont’s Senate for Passing GMO Labeling Bill, Would be First State in Nation to Enact Such a Law

Group Urges Governor Shumlin to Sign Bill Immediately

Yonkers, NY—Consumers Union, the public policy arm of Consumer Reports, praised the Vermont Senate today for voting 26-2 for a bill that would require labeling of foods that contain genetically modified ingredients, a strong indication that Vermont would become the first state in the nation to enact such a law.


“The action by the Vermont Senate is a huge step forward for consumers’ right to know, and we hope Governor Shumlin will quickly sign the bill into law,” said Michael Hansen, Ph.D, Senior Scientist with Consumers Union, who testified at several hearings in favor of the measure.

The bill would require labeling as of July 2016 and still needs approval in the House, which passed a slightly different version. Two other states—Connecticut and Maine—have passed labeling laws, but delayed implementation until neighboring states join them. Half the states in the U.S. have bills in the works that mandate labeling of genetically engineered foods.


Genetically engineered foods coming rapidly down the pike are all of great concern in the Northeast, as the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is poised to approve a GE salmon, which is design to grow to maturity twice as fast as normal salmon.

“FDA’s safety assessment of the salmon was highly inadequate–their analysis of the allergy-causing potential of the salmon was based on a look at just six fish,” said Dr. Hansen. Nearly two million people sent comments to the FDA, vehemently opposing the approval of the GE salmon.


Leave a comment

Posted by on April 23, 2014 in Consumer Awareness


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 365 other followers

%d bloggers like this: