Chicharon: Exempted from nutrition facts label requirement?

CEBU, Philippines - The yuletide season is almost over. As tradition suggests, it shall start on December 24 and ends on January 6 the following year. Historically, it was celebrated as a winter festival by the “Germanic people” as a “pagan religious festival”. Through the years, however, it has evolved and is largely likened with the Christians’ celebration of Christmas. In fact, today, we have synonymously called the “Christmas season” - the “yuletide season”.

The celebrations-then and now-may have differed a lot considering the religious belief of these two distinctively different groups of believers. Regardless, however, of the contrasting rituals that come along with their beliefs’ peculiarities, these celebrations have one thing in common. In both occasions, they relish on mouth-watering dishes with reckless abandon. 

Aware of the consequences the celebration brings, health practitioners today (apart from discouraging revelers from using firecrackers) have emphatically reminded everyone to keep a very close watch of their diet.    The state’s health department is never lacking in reminding us of the downside of uncontrolled diet. With the rise in death rates on hypertension and cardiovascular related diseases, they have constantly reminded consumers to be more prudent in their daily food choices. 

Rationally, we can’t just ignore this warning from our health practitioners. After all, nurturing our physical well-being is a solemn vow they have so faithfully upheld.

Indeed, in an evening where the health warning sinks in and with a table overflowing with red and white meat, processed foods, desserts, juices, sodas, etc., we can’t help it but pause for awhile. As we pause, we can somehow reflect on issues that concerns food and health warnings. Hotly argued in the middle of November last year, the issue raised by Provincial Board Member Arleigh Jay Sitoy regarding the mandatory printing of a nutritional content label on packages of chicharon comes to mind.

If we recall, due to this proposed measure, Hon. Sitoy caught the ire of Gov. Gwen Garcia. In the exchange of barbs, the invective word “silly” became so pedestrian and ordinary. As we are not a party to this intramurals nor have we become avid fans or supporters of their personal causes (or their popularity contests), let us look into this issue with utmost objectivity. 

Most of us haven’t read the proposed legislation. However, as scribes have written, it seems that the proposed measure requires, among others, the mandatory printing of a nutritional content label on packages of chicharon and a health warning statement.

First and foremost, we have to be aware that congress passed Republic Act No. 7394, otherwise known as “The Consumer Act of the Philippines” on April 13, 1992.   It was passed “to protect the interest of the consumer, promote his general welfare and to establish standards of conduct for business and industry”.   Specifically, in fulfilling such mandate, the law urges the state to implement measures to achieve the following objectives: (a) protection against hazards to health and safety; (b) protection against deceptive, unfair and unconscionable sales acts and practices;  

(c) provision of information and education to facilitate sound choice and the proper exercise of rights by the consumer; (d) provision of adequate rights and means of redress; and (e) involvement of consumer representatives in the formulation of social and economic policies.

With this, clearly, the country is not lacking in laws as far as protecting the interest of the consuming public is concern. The issue is, as has always been the norm, this law is never religiously implemented. 

Going back to the so called “silly” piece of legislative proposal of Hon. Sitoy, the measures he raised were geared toward achieving objectives (a) and (b) of R.A. 7394. In his proposal, however, two areas of concerns are raised. These are the mandatory printing of a nutritional content label on packages of chicharon and the “health warning” statement.

On the health warning issue, R.A. 7394 has singled out only one product for such a requirement. Specifically, Art. 94 (Labeling Requirements of Cigarettes) provides that -All cigarettes for sale or distribution within the country shall be contained in a package which shall bear the following statement or its equivalent in Filipino: "Warning: Cigarette Smoking is Dangerous to Your Health".   Seemingly, therefore, should anyone wishes chicharon to have such “health warning” label, this law has to be amended.

On the other hand, the issue regarding mandatory printing of a nutritional content label in the packages of chicharon is totally different. Art. 77 of the same law establishes the minimum labeling requirements for consumer products. Among others, as the law requires, the packages shall indicate among others the following information: (a) its correct and registered trade name or brand name; (b) its duly registered trademark; (c) its duly registered business name; (d) the address of the manufacturer, importer, repacker of the consumer product in the Philippines; (e) its general make or active ingredients; and (f) the net quality of contents, in terms of weight, measure or numerical count rounded of to at least the nearest tenths in the metric system.

On top of these, additional labeling requirements are established for food. Art. 84 of the same law requires that (a) expiry or expiration date, where applicable; (b) whether the consumer product is semi-processed, fully processed, ready-to-cook, ready-to-eat, prepared food or just plain mixture; (c) nutritive value, if any; (d) whether the ingredients use are natural or synthetic, as the case may be; and (e) such other labeling requirements as the concerned department may deem necessary and reasonable.

With this law on hand, certainly, we can judge better whether Hon. Sitoy’s proposed measure is silly or not. However, let us set aside that issue for awhile. The most pressing question now is, whether or not, the manufacturers of chicharon or any food product shall comply with the nutrition labeling requirements clearly established under R.A. 7394.

In a country where budget for health care is so inadequate, prevention is, first and foremost, relevant. However, prevention will only be rendered useful if one is well-informed. Definitely, the absence of a nutritional content label in a product’s packaging does not inform any. If it doesn’t inform, how can we prevent? 

Irrelevantly, Gov. Gwen Garcia emphasized the healthiness of chicharon by gorging on it in front of the camera in November last year. In a sense, this is not “healthy information” for general public’s use but pure political stunt. We have a law and it should be followed. Displaying one’s indulgence in a product for and in behalf of the manufacturer is definitely not a substitute of the law’s compliance. Worst, conditioning consumers that it is good (regardless of serving size) just because a governor is feasting on it is downright baloney.  

For your comments and suggestions, please email to [email protected]. (FREEMAN)