Mr. Wang Hai, a well-known "anti-counterfeiter", once again exposed a food safety incident. According to the information, on July 4, Mr. Wang Hai purchased the products of a lotus root flour manufacturer and sent them to a third-party testing agency for inspection. However, the test results showed that the purchased product did not contain lotus root powder at all, and was completely disguised with other powders.
Loading...
Mr. Wang Hai went to the original factory with the test report, hoping to get the company to admit the problem and apologize to the consumer. But unexpectedly, the product factory not only did not recognize the test report, but also wanted Mr. Wang Hai to provide his ID card, and claimed that "you have no right to public opinion supervision". What's more, after Wang Hai and his party left the factory, they were chased and beaten by the factory personnel.
After the incident, the company only issued a statement of the alleged "threatening" nature, but never provided an official test report to prove that the product was legitimate. Instead, their behavior exposes what could be a bigger problem. As a professional "anti-counterfeiter", Mr. Wang Hai's action once again defended the legitimate rights and interests of consumers with practical actions.
Subsequently, the incident received more attention. Some netizens shared their unbearable experiences of being hospitalized due to a spike in blood sugar after consuming the company's products. At the same time, the person in charge of a well-known lotus root flour brand also said that even if a small amount of tapioca flour is sometimes mixed in, there is no lotus root flour ingredient at all, and it is still unseen. He expressed surprise at the incident.
However, the local municipal supervision department said that it did not accept the evidence provided by Wang Hai, and also claimed that it needed to be confirmed by multiple tests. This obviously does not quell the pressure of public opinion. No results have been released within 5 days, which also exposes work efficiency problems. Netizens have questioned whether if the final test results are unfavorable to the company, it means that there are loopholes in the original supervision.
In the face of the doubts of consumers and public opinion, product manufacturers should adopt a more responsible attitude. If there is a real problem, it should be explained in time, the problem should be acknowledged and rectified. Delays will only further damage the company's image. At the same time, the work of the regulatory authorities also needs to be more efficient and credible. Only through a comprehensive and impartial investigation can consumers be given an account.
The first-hand information shared by some insiders, as well as the comments of netizens and industry insiders, may provide a more comprehensive and neutral perspective on the incident than the "answer sheet" provided directly by a single entity. This is also one of the important roles of professional "anti-counterfeiters": to highlight problems with practical actions and protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Mr. Wang Hai's action once again demonstrated his professionalism as an excellent "anti-counterfeiter": first-hand information of purchasing products with a realistic attitude, entrusting authoritative third-party institutions to test, and requiring enterprises to take responsibility with factual evidence and due process. His reporting and supervision will allow more consumers to be vigilant and become a reference for future industry self-discipline.
Only with the participation and joint maintenance of the whole people can we truly realize the supervision and improvement of product quality and protect the rights and interests of consumers to the greatest extent. Although this matter has not yet been conclusive, from the perspective of the evidence chain, the possibility of quality problems in the company's products cannot be ignored. As consumers, we would like to see enterprises take the initiative to accept supervision, actively self-examine and self-correct, and effectively improve existing problems.
At the same time, the work of regulatory authorities also needs to be strengthened. Blindly excusing enterprises or prolonging the inspection time will inevitably make people think otherwise, which is also not conducive to consumer trust and corporate self-discipline. After the fact, if the test results verify that the report is established, the department should start to investigate the responsibility and teach a lesson.
Regardless of the verdict of the incident, Mr. Wang Hai's report alerted all sectors of society. As a professional "anti-counterfeiter", he is based on facts and due process to safeguard the public's rights and interests, and this spirit is worthy of recognition. Other companies should also pay attention to it and not take it lightly, otherwise once it is revealed, the consequences will be more serious.
We hope to see that in the future, various industries can be carried out in a conscious and self-disciplined manner. Enterprises take the initiative to implement a product traceability system, consumers widely participate in third-party supervision, and regulatory authorities perform their duties effectively according to standards, so as to jointly create a better quality and more credible system.
This is not only the responsibility of the enterprise, but also the obligation of all parties to uphold. With this vision, I believe that problems can always be solved well.
Welcome to comment in the comment area!