Reported By:
| Edited By: |Source: DNA |Updated: May 28, 2016, 08:15 AM IST
Two-time Olympic medal winner Sushil Kumar’s impassioned plea for a trial to decide the contestant who will represent India in the 74 kg weight category for the Rio Olympics has put everyone in a fix. Sushil is an Indian sporting legend and his contribution to Indian wrestling will be remembered for a long time to come. However, the lone spot is being claimed by Narsingh Yadav, who going by recent form and fitness, has a better claim. While Sushil has not turned out for any contest in the past two years, Narsingh won the bronze at the World Championships last year, which ensured that the quota spot went to him. Both Narsingh and the Wrestling Federation of India have rejected Sushil’s demand for a trial prompting the unrelenting wrestler to petition the courts. Nevertheless, some of the top countries in wrestling do conduct trials to determine which athlete qualifies for the Olympic spot. Merely because the WFI has not institutionalised a system of trials is no reason to junk Sushil’s demand. Narsingh will have reason to be disappointed, but it will be an opportunity for the younger man to prove that he is the best in the business today.
It is not just Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump who stand between Hilary Clinton and the US presidency. Her journey to the White House just got tougher with a State Department probe contradicting her claim that she took permission to set up a private email server for official and personal business while she was secretary of state. The probe also noted that her decision posed “significant security risks”. Both findings raise doubts about her trustworthiness and her Republican rivals will not be as generous as Sanders has been. Sanders has refused to target Hilary on this issue and preferred to engage her on more weighty policy-related matters. However, Republicans allege that her action cannot be termed an honest mistake. Most governments are wary about the use of private e-mail servers because there is no way to monitor hacker attacks or the communication of classified information.
The Centre for Science and Environment’s revelations that many commonly available brands of pre-packaged breads contained traces of potassium bromate and potassium iodate underscores the pathetic state of food safety regulation in India. Potassium bromate has been identified as a possible carcinogen and potassium iodate has been linked to thyroid problems leading many countries to ban their use. The CSE study revealed that both these chemicals were listed as permissible additives by the Indian food regulator, FSSAI. The health ministry ordered a probe. The FSSAI quickly moved to take these two off the list of permissible additives after the expose. Now, the All India Bread Manufacturers Association has said that its members will voluntarily stop the use of potassium bromate and FSSAI has hailed the decision. Caught napping, these “quick” responses to a potential crisis by the stakeholders can only be termed as knee-jerk responses. After being told by an NGO that the bread they ate was not safe, long-time bread eaters who are just digesting the news, are being told in double quick time that precautionary action has been taken. With due diligence going for a toss, do we trust an NGO, the government, the regulator, or the manufacturer? The FSSAI must review its list of permissible additives and take note of new studies in other countries. More importantly, the FSSAI must sanction its own research into all additives in food items.
