<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Foreign Pressure Driving China&#8217;s &#8220;Green Ink&#8221; Industry</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/02/11/foreign-pressure-driving-chinas-green-ink-industry/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/02/11/foreign-pressure-driving-chinas-green-ink-industry/</link>
	<description>Environmental Leader</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 22:05:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: john daugherty</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/02/11/foreign-pressure-driving-chinas-green-ink-industry/comment-page-1/#comment-155900</link>
		<dc:creator>john daugherty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=9963#comment-155900</guid>
		<description>To All Readers of Foreign Pressure Driving China&#039;s &quot;Green Ink&quot; Industry,
Please be advised that the references to &quot; printing ink is one of the most polluting materials used in packaging&quot; is completely inaccurate. It is so generalized and vague to the point of being technically unsupportable, subjective, inflammatory, and unprofessional.The other statement, &quot;water-based ink is the only qualified ink for food and pharmaceutical packaging in the west&quot; is again a false statement. Currently packaging is being printed with oil-based, solvent-based, energy curable and water-based inks without issue. In the United States the FDA only regulates inks used on packaging when they are either a direct or indirect food additive. FDA does not regulate inks when there is an effedctive functional barrier between the printed substrate nd the food product. The National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers (NAPIM) has contacted Frost &amp; Sullivan to take corrective action on this document. It is very unfortunate that this type of misinformation is distributed in the public media.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To All Readers of Foreign Pressure Driving China&#8217;s &#8220;Green Ink&#8221; Industry,<br />
Please be advised that the references to &#8221; printing ink is one of the most polluting materials used in packaging&#8221; is completely inaccurate. It is so generalized and vague to the point of being technically unsupportable, subjective, inflammatory, and unprofessional.The other statement, &#8220;water-based ink is the only qualified ink for food and pharmaceutical packaging in the west&#8221; is again a false statement. Currently packaging is being printed with oil-based, solvent-based, energy curable and water-based inks without issue. In the United States the FDA only regulates inks used on packaging when they are either a direct or indirect food additive. FDA does not regulate inks when there is an effedctive functional barrier between the printed substrate nd the food product. The National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers (NAPIM) has contacted Frost &amp; Sullivan to take corrective action on this document. It is very unfortunate that this type of misinformation is distributed in the public media.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

