In the undertaking a recent history of such a fundamental law as one that deals with food, drugs and cosmetics in its relationship to the human race, we should realize that such a field has a history possibly as old as man himself. There have always been individuals in the good and welfare of others, and there have always been individuals interested in taking advantage of their fellow man for personal gain, frequently in an exceedingly unscrupulous manner. The Solicitor General of the United States, in a recent paper read at the commemoration the the fortieth anniversary of the original Federal Food and Drugs Act of 1906 pointed out that "the attempts of organized society to prevent the adulteration of food and drugs date back to ancient times. The racket implicit in the purveying of adulterated and misbranded commodities is now a new one by any means -- it has been practiced from the commencement of recorded times." The officials goes on and recites specific instances, telling how Pliny the Elder complained of "white earth" in his bread, the pepperers and spicers of London in the year 1316 began to regulate the quality of their produce, brewers were subject to fines for adulterating beer in the days of William the Conqueror, food control statutes were passed in France and Germany in the thirteenth century. The first pharmacopoeia was published in England by the College of physicians in 1613. In the fourteenth century the Provost of Paris forade the artificial coloring of butter. In the United States, Congress enacted a law to prevent the importation of adulterated and spurious drugs and medicine as far back as 1846. The Department of Agriculture through its Division (later Bureau) of Chemistry from 1863 to 1906 in its reports kept calling to the attention of the various Secretaries of Agriculture, and in a measure to the attention of Congress and the people of the United States, the need for remedying conditions of food and drug frauds perpetrated upon the consumer.

It is essential for both employers and employees to know and understand their obligations and rights about occupational health and safety. The study aimed at developing guidelines for the managers of health and safety programmes to promote compliance with OHS Act (No. 85 of 1993) among the food and beverage industry in South Africa. The study sites were from the four selected provinces of South Africa, with twenty three of them located in the Gauteng Province. A quantitative research method which is descriptive in nature was used to obtain in-depth knowledge on compliance to the health and safety legislation. Data was collected from 27 study sites using an inspection checklist and an interview- led questionnaire for the 202 employees. Data was analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21. Most employees on the study sites were young and therefore needed regular supervision, information, instruction and training to promote safe work and reduce injury and diseases. The study sites were male dominated. It emerged that there was general lack of consultation and communication with regards to health and safety matters between the employers and the employees. It was also noted that most study sites did not have a written and conspicuously placed health and safety policy and the OHS Act No. 85 of 1993. Majority of the study sites did not deploy adequate resources to manage problems related to health and safety at work and reduce their incidence. In addition, employees experienced injuries or illnesses at one point or the other as they were exposed to various occupational hazards. Finally, most study sites had poor housekeeping practices. Employers did not have the appropriate control measures, such as baseline risk assessments, in place. This placed employees at an increased risk of injuries and illnesses as well as the possibility of employers facing financial burdens such as higher compensation claims, medical specialist fees, fees involved in the replacement of injured employees or fees for the recruitment and training of new recruits. / Health Studies / D. Litt. et Phil. (Health Studies)

Si le droit connaît les médicaments et les denrées alimentaires, il ne reconnaît pas les alicaments. Or, ces dernières années ont vu l’apparition et le développement, sur le marché de l’Union européenne, de « produits-frontière » c'est-à-dire de produits se trouvant à la frontière entre les médicaments et les aliments. Confrontées à un vaste conflit de qualification causé par l’ambivalence conceptuelle des « produits-frontière », les institutions de l’Union ont, au nom de la libre circulation des marchandises ainsi que de la nécessité d’une protection accrue des consommateurs et de la santé publique, entamé, dès le début des années 2000, une large harmonisation des dispositions nationales relatives à ces produits. Considérés comme aliments, leur nature particulière nécessite cependant une approche adaptative de la part du législateur européen. Cette nouvelle approche de l’aliment par le droit, favorable à la reconnaissance d’une santé alimentaire, tant convoitée par la société contemporaine, ne résout toutefois pas l’ambiguïté quant à la place à accorder aux « produits-frontière » dans le corpus juridique de l’Union européenne. / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished