Beijing Watch: Taiwan's Anti-Toxic Oil Scandal Triggers Mainland Anxiety! Chinese Netizens Lash Out: Stop Focusing on Taiwan, When Will You Fix Your Own Problems?

In July 2024, Taiwan's Zhonglian Oils soybean salad oil was found to contain 8.1 micrograms per kilogram of benzopyrene (a), a Group 1 carcinogen, far exceeding the strict limit of 2.0 micrograms per kilogram adopted by both Taiwan and the EU. This triggered a nationwide recall, supply chain investigations, and a large-scale anti-toxic oil mobilization on Ketagawa Boulevard. The incident not only severely damaged public confidence in Taiwan's food safety but also unexpectedly became a major talking point on Chinese social media.

While some official narratives framed the event as 'Taiwan's food safety failing again,' many Chinese netizens instead turned the spotlight on China's long-standing unresolved food safety challenges. Historical incidents such as the 2024 nationwide shock over 'tanker trucks mixing edible oil with industrial oil,' the 'rat head in duck neck' scandal, 'melamine-tainted milk powder,' 'Sudan Red,' and 'gutter oil' were widely revisited and discussed.

Taiwan's strict regulatory approach prompted Chinese netizens to compare cross-strait standards. Many discovered that China's 'National Food Safety Standard for Maximum Levels of Contaminants in Foods' (GB 2762) allows up to 10 micrograms per kilogram of benzopyrene in edible oils—about five times more lenient than Taiwan's limit. In other words, the 'toxic oil' banned in Taiwan might still be considered 'compliant and qualified' on the mainland.

This led to a wave of sarcastic and self-mocking posts on Chinese social platforms. Some users directly pointed out the three numbers '2, 8.1, 10,' sarcastically commenting, 'No wonder the divine race drinks a different kind of oil.' Others questioned, 'Who exactly is drinking toxic oil every day?' These discussions quickly reignited public scrutiny of past food safety scandals in China, including the 2023 'rat head in duck neck' incident and the 2024 exposé by the Beijing News on tanker trucks illegally transporting edible oil in uncleaned tanks—once an 'open secret' in the industry. Public sentiment shifted from comparing standards to demanding, 'When will official food safety problems finally end?'

Food safety has long been a sensitive issue in China. Authorities strive to prevent isolated incidents from escalating into broader social crises while simultaneously demanding that producers strictly adhere to national standards.

In July 2024, the party-affiliated media outlet Beijing News revealed that tanker trucks were routinely transporting soybean oil and other edible oils without cleaning after carrying coal-based industrial oil—an 'open secret' in the industry—shocking Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau. The State Council's Food Safety Office swiftly established a joint investigation team, which ultimately confirmed only two individual cases involving approximately 68 tons of contaminated oil. Two drivers were criminally charged, seven companies were fined, and a mandatory national standard, 'Hygiene Requirements for Bulk Transportation of Edible Vegetable Oils,' was introduced. The investigation report emphasized the 'extremely egregious nature' of the act, calling it a violation of both moral and legal red lines. However, following Taiwan's 'anti-toxic oil' protests last weekend, many Chinese citizens continue to question on social media whether the industry has truly changed or merely gone underground to revert to old practices once the spotlight fades.

This cycle is not unprecedented. In the 'rat head in duck neck' incident at a university canteen in Jiangxi, students discovered a foreign object in their food. Initially, school authorities and local market regulators insisted it was duck neck and demanded the complainants retract their claims. Only under mounting public pressure did a provincial-level joint investigation team overturn the conclusion, identifying it as a rat head, leading to accountability for the involved institutions and companies.

Discussions about Taiwan's 'toxic oil' scandal on Chinese social media platforms (Source: Sina Weibo)

Food safety issues in China have long created a tug-of-war between official stability maintenance and public anxiety. In recent years, Chinese authorities have consistently emphasized the 'four strictest' requirements: the strictest standards, strictest supervision, strictest penalties, and strictest accountability.

However, food safety incidents often involve sensitive factors such as local government oversight, fiscal interests, corporate responsibility, and social stability, making the topic highly politically sensitive. Authorities aim to prevent food safety incidents from escalating and causing public panic, while also requiring enterprises to fully comply with national standards. This dual goal of 'maintaining stability while enforcing regulation' has led to a recurring cycle of 'intensive crackdowns—media cooling down—public attention fading.'

As a result, each new food safety incident easily reignites accumulated public distrust.

China now requires all major food delivery platforms to apply 'seal labels' to deliveries to prevent tampering during transit. This applies not only to food ordered via Taobao, JD.com, and Pinduoduo but also mandates that food items themselves be packaged in thicker wrapping beyond standard courier packaging.

Mainland media focused on 'Taiwan's food safety failure,' downplaying cross-strait standard differences. Notably, while Chinese netizens focused their discussions on domestic food safety issues, official and state-affiliated media outlets consistently framed the story around 'Taiwan's food safety failure.' Outlets such as China.com, local party media, and major portals reported the incident using angles like 'Taiwanese people protest toxic oil,' 'DPP authorities fail on food safety,' and 'toxic oil scandal erupts in Taiwan.' They heavily quoted criticisms from Taiwan's opposition parties, civic groups, and affected consumers, emphasizing the incident's impact on public trust in the government.

However, while extensively covering political infighting in Taiwan, these reports offered limited coverage of technical aspects such as benzopyrene testing standards, international limit differences, and Taiwan's regulatory measures like recalls, recovery, and supply chain tracing. They also rarely explained that China's current limit of 10 micrograms per kilogram for benzopyrene in vegetable oil is higher than Taiwan's and the EU's.

This reporting approach prompted many Chinese netizens to independently research relevant regulations, accidentally discovering that China's benzopyrene limit for vegetable oil is 10 micrograms per kilogram, while Taiwan's is 2 micrograms. Many commented, 'It's not that Taiwan's standard is too low—it's that ours is simply looser.'

More intriguingly, comment sections under many official media posts—originally meant to focus on Taiwan's food safety issues—were gradually 'derailed' by Chinese netizens. Overall, the core of food safety issues lies not in the numerical standards themselves, but in enforcement capability, transparency mechanisms, and a culture of accountability. While official calls for 'industry-wide inspections' and new standards respond to some public demands, the repeated social media references to past scandals highlight that food safety in China remains a highly sensitive and unresolved public issue.