Watch the milk that you drink

With India now celebrating November 26 as National Milk Day to commemorate Verghese Kurien’s birthday, it’s high time the adulteration of milk and milk products was treated as a grave offence. Indeed, food adulteration may be one of the world’s oldest illegal professions.

Recently, the discovery of hydrogen peroxide in milk caused uproarious scenes in the Telangana Assembly. In another instance, detergent and hydrogen peroxide were detected in loose milk.

Neither hydrogen peroxide nor detergent either expand the volume of milk or boost its quality.

As adulterants, both chemicals act as preservatives to extend the shelf life of milk.

This is cheaper than the practice of chilling raw milk as soon as possible before despatch to the main dairy plant for processing and packaging.

Taking cognisance of such cases, the Supreme Court reprimanded the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India for categorising milk adulteration as an offence that attracts a minor penalty of six months’ imprisonment under the Food Safety Act 2006.

The Supreme Court sought amendments to the Act that would provide life imprisonment, observing that many milk samples were laced with “white paint, caustic soda, detergents, shampoo, urea, starch and blotting paper”.

Earlier, the Supreme Court noted that the government was taking the issue lightly.

Rather than waiting for a calamity to occur, the Court said “the Centre must come out with the necessary amendment to the Act to curb adulteration. We hope the government will take appropriate decisions during the winter session of Parliament”.

The Court wondered whether the government was waiting for the culprits to adulterate milk with cyanide.

It is imperative to comprehend the reasons for the malpractice to combat it. For instance, cases of adulteration surface during summer when production dips but the availability and consumption of milk and milk products is, yet, high.

Moreover, the scourge of synthetic milk production is highest in areas with higher milk processing capacity than the marketable surplus of milk.

The number of factories processing milk and their total processing capacities are very high in Haryana, eastern Rajasthan and western Uttar Pradesh, with maximum adulteration occurring in these areas.

The most notorious areas for synthetic milk production are Bulandshahr in UP and the Mewat region of Rajasthan and Haryana, as well as Kurukshetra in Haryana.

Some years ago, reports were rife about baby milk foods being adulterated with melamine (a protein-like contaminant) in China. Use of the adulterated baby food caused the deaths of some infants while almost 3,00,000 fell gravely ill.

The Chinese government cracked down and at least three persons were executed.

In India, speedy justice is never delivered. It is rare that those involved in food adulteration are severely punished, leave alone being given capital punishment.

In 1998, mustard oil was adulterated with cheaper argemone oil. Scores of people in Delhi and elsewhere across north India were afflicted with dropsy after consuming the adulterated oil.

But apparently, no serious action was taken against the perpetrators.

All stakeholders should stand up to stop this nefarious practice.

If dairy plants stop accepting adulterated milk, the practice will wane. Most private dairy plants lack their own milk collection network, depending heavily on middlemen for milk supplies via road tankers.

Often, the middlemen practice adulteration. It is common knowledge that a milk-like substance is produced by mixing urea, vegetable oil and sugar. Milk producers selling 5 to 10 litres daily don’t possess the wherewithal to make synthetic milk.

Farmers also do not adulterate milk with anything except water. It is the middlemen — suppliers who sell milk in large volumes of 10,000 litres or more — who indulge in adulteration. It is therefore important that dairy owners establish their own network to collect milk directly from farmers.

Private dairies should replicate the cooperative milk procurement model by creating rural networks of milk producers that act as self-help groups. The private sector baulks from this cumbersome exercise because of the large investments involved — the purchase of electronic milk-testing machines, electronic weighing systems as well as chilling and transportation equipment.

But if this is accomplished, the milk collected directly from farmers will be qualitatively better, unadulterated and cheaper. Above all, milk producers will be at the centre of the system — not middlemen. Verghese Kurien would surely have approved.

The writer is the director of Kwality Ltd. The views are personal

COMMENT NOW