9 Comments

1. This situation makes a good argument for point of origin labeling for ingredients. In our kitchen, we have a few containers of products like cocoa mix that contain milk powder, cocoa, sugar, other powdered ingredients that could easily be adulterated by melamine or any other powdered substance. The labels all simply say the products were made for Brand X or distributed by Brand X. None of the labels indicate whether the ingredients all came from within the US or not. I am now reluctant to consume or serve these products. It would seem that even if the distributing company is in the US it would be possible for them to have imported one or more of the component ingredients, as did the pet food companies, or the zoo food companies, or the candy company.

   Comment by Sheila — September 28, 2008 @ 8:45 am

2. Yes, as Marion pondered in the prior post, soy products are now involved according to a story from Reuters India. The report I just read indicated Indonesia detected melamine in 12 of 19 milk products for sale in the country that were imports from China. This report said the products involved included soybean milk.

   Comment by Sheila — September 28, 2008 @ 9:01 am

3. […] Marion Nestle ~ Melamine in Coffee Creamer? […]

   Pingback by A Pretty Mess » Blog Archive » September 30: The Day Your Grocery Store Gets COOL — September 30, 2008 @ 1:14 pm

4. I found this while searching this topic. It made me think, maybe a bit too deeply. Coincidence or bottom-line? It’s an annual report for Borden, Inc. from a decade ago. The second paragraph is where it gets interesting. I won’t make any accusations. You judge for yourself:

   “The following is an excerpt from a 10-K405 SEC Filing, filed by BORDEN CHEMICAL INC on 3/27/1998

   1997 vs. 1996

   Chemical

   Chemical had a successful year from a sales perspective. Improved sales in 1997
   reflected increased consumer demand for products coupled with increased capacity
   to meet that demand due to plant expansion and an acquisition. Sharply higher
   raw material costs and intense industry competition, which kept a ceiling on
   selling prices, contributed to narrower margins and correspondingly lower
   operating income.

   Chemical sales increased $116.6 million or 10% in 1997. Modest selling price
   increases contributed $6.2 million to this improvement. The remainder was
   primarily due to volume increases in virtually all product lines. Demand was
   particularly strong for plywood and oriented strand board due to continued
   strong housing starts in the U.S. Formaldehyde volume also improved as a result
   of increased capacity from the start-up of a new formaldehyde plant in 1997 and
   two other plant expansions. This increased capacity allowed Chemical to meet
   existing customer demand. Also contributing $7.4 million to the increased sales
   was the acquisition of Melamine Chemicals in November 1997.

   The addition of Melamine Chemicals secured the supply of a crucial raw material
   for the Company’s current business and allowed the Company to expand in the
   growing specialty business of melamine resins. In February 1998, the Chemical
   business also acquired a Sun Coast Industries, Inc. division that manufactures
   melamine-based products, which will further expand the Company’s growth in this
   market.

   Operating income for the Chemical business decreased $17.4 million or 14% for
   1997, despite 10% sales growth. The decline was mainly the result of a $16.0
   million impairment charge related to certain international operations, offset,
   in part by the absence of non-recurring charges and improved business processes
   in Latin America. The remaining decline was due to lower margins, caused by a
   steep rise in raw materials costs. Efforts to pass on the cost increase to
   customers were only partially successful because of intense industry competition
   coupled with customers’ resistance to large price increases because of difficult
   operating conditions facing them in the forest products industry. Although
   margins have dropped, Chemical has maintained market share and its management is
   currently working on a strategy to improve margins. Management does not believe
   raw material costs will continue to rise in 1998. Also contributing to the
   operating income decline were infrastructure costs incurred to implement
   worldwide information systems and for plant consolidation costs. Both
   investments were made to improve operating efficiency and synergies, allowing
   Chemical to further its global focus strategy.”

   Comment by Horatio Strange — October 1, 2008 @ 7:53 am

5. Thanks for sending. This isn’t necessarily troubling. Melamine has plenty of legitimate purposes (plastic dinnerware, for example). Lots of companies in China make melamine and advertise it on the web. The real question is what they do with the scrap. It can - and should - be used for fertilizer. But just the fact that melamine is manufactured and so widely available means that everyone should be testing for it.

   Comment by Marion — October 1, 2008 @ 8:48 am

6. Of course, and it is ubiquitous nowadays Marion. With all the questionable business practices across the board and the recent failures of the U.S. FDA, it makes you wonder if the scrap needs to be utilized or if the chemical itself is used for purposes outside its original scope. The more used the more made ($$$). As a follow up here is info concerning Nestle’s acquisition of Borden Int’l Foods Division in 1998. Here is a link explaining this deal:

   http://findarticles.com/p/arti…..i_20152007

   Things that make you go, “hmmmm…”

   Comment by Horatio Strange — October 1, 2008 @ 8:25 pm

7. Has melamine been found in any creamers sold in the U.S.? I buy creamers from the dollar stores and large discount stores and use them in my tea and coffee. None of the labels indicate where the products are manufactured. Last month a yearly blood lab test my doctor gave me indicated I had kidney failure. Now I wonder what foods in the U.S. are contaminated and what foods and ingredients should I avoid.

   Comment by marcus — November 26, 2008 @ 4:34 am

8. See my post on the FDA’s Import Alert (click on Melamine to find it). That document lists the products from China that are likely to contain melamine. It’s a long list.

   Comment by Marion — November 26, 2008 @ 11:12 am

9. Hi Marion: So what do you think? Is there cause for concern now? You know it does not take a genius or super sleuth to surmise what these companies may be doing with their excess melamine. Regardless of what the FDA claims, why not ASSUME any ingested melamine is potentially injurious? Better to be safe than sorry. Come on now. Empiricism and intuition are very rare qualities nowadays, don’t you think? Even with so-called scientists hope and assumption seem to outweigh basic logic. It’s a shame and quite perplexing.

   Marcus- Who’s to say, but I feel for you man. Population control, unchecked capitalism and sociopathy seem to go hand-in-hand. It’s “Social Darwnism” at its worst. I hope your nephropathy is reversible. Maybe your doctor can check for melamine levels with a blood test, assay or biopsy. Good luck and may Serendipity be with you!

   Comment by Horatio Strange — November 27, 2008 @ 10:21 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Topics

This is a list of keywords related to posts. The bigger the keyword, the more related posts there are. Click one to view all such posts.