Scare-mongering doesn't help

First, reference is made to “adulterated” rice. “Adulterated” is defined thus: “to make improper by adding extraneous, improper or inferior ingredients”. There is no indication that any brand of Thai rice included in the recent Foundation for Consumers survey has been subjected to such a process.

Second, the article states that “some” brands of Thai rice in the survey were found to contain levels of methyl bromide in excess of FAO standards. In fact, only one brand was found to exceed this standard, as reported by The Nation on July 17.

Third, the July 18 article states the level of methyl bromide found in the one brand which exceeded FAO standards amounted to 94.2 milligrams per kilo, whereas the Foundation For Consumers report stated that the level was 67.4 milligrams per kilo. Again, this was correctly reported by The Nation on July 17.

Finally, the July 18 article states that methyl bromide is a “haardous” substance. No doubt it is, in excessive amounts, which is why, presumably, the FAO standard is set at 50 milligrams per kilo. Likewise, its presence at this level is also permitted by many countries including, for example, the US and those within the EU, where food safety standards are exacting and strictly enforced.

It is right that every effort be made to ensure the highest standards of food safety in Thailand. However, it would seem that recently, some groups and individuals have chosen to make irresponsible and unsubstantiated claims regarding the quality of Thai rice, and I would have hoped that The Nation’s reporting of this issue would have been more responsible and properly researched.

Robin Grant

Bangkok