China has a problem — a big problem.

And the only reason the problem isn't an even bigger one is that most U.S. consumers aren't paying attention to where ingredients in their food, toothpaste and medications come from.

But some nasty incidents recently may change that. They involve ingredients made in China — and deaths.

The most well-publicized in the United States was the tainted pet food that killed dozens of dogs and cats. An ingredient imported from China, wheat gluten, had been laced with melamine, a plastic. A New York Times article in April quoted Chinese workers saying it was common to adulterate animal feed with melamine.

Just because you're not chowing down on pet food doesn't mean you're unaffected. The tainted pet food spread through the U.S. food chain when it was sold to hog, chicken and fish farmers.

There's more. Last year, at least 51 people died in Panama after using cough syrup made with glycerine, a sweetener, imported from China. It turned out not to be glycerine but a poison used in brake fluid and antifreeze, diethylene glycol.

After diethylene glycol was found in Chinese toothpaste in several other countries, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently stopped imports of it.

Other, less-publicized examples abound. In China's Anhui province in 2004, at least 13 babies died of malnutrition after being fed fake milk powder with no nutritive value.

Still not worried? Consider: 90 percent of vitamin C sold in the U.S. was made in China. Vitamin C isn't even manufactured here any more.

China exports more than $30 billion in agricultural and drug products. Is its government worried? You bet. It announced its first recall system for unsafe food and promises tougher inspections. In a move widely seen as signaling its seriousness, last week a former head of the Chinese Food and Drug Administration was sentenced to death for taking $800,000 in bribes.

Reassured? We aren't, either.

At this point in a typical editorial, we'd urge consumers to pay attention when they buy food or drugs and notice where the ingredients came from. We can't urge that. U.S. food and drug-makers aren't required to label the country of origin of their ingredients. It's time to require that.

Apparently dead pets and dead people haven't been enough to force the Chinese government to get tough on sloppy manufacturers. Maybe wary U.S. consumers will apply the needed pressure.

— The Charlotte (N.C.) Observer

Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was sentenced Tuesday to 30 months in prison for perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to FBI agents. That left many of his friends gasping and has them pressing for President Bush to pardon Libby.That shouldn't happen.During his sentencing Tuesday, Libby neither acknowledged his crime nor expressed remorse. Instead, he asked U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton to "consider, along with the jury verdict, my whole life." The judge received more than 150 statements from Libby friends and colleagues pleading for leniency. Those supporters, including former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, often cited Libby's dedication to and long years in public service.But by his actions, Libby undermined the very system to which he dedicated his life. A jury found he did not allow the system to work to ferret out truth. He lied under oath. He lied repeatedly and boldly. He wasted federal investigators' time and resources. He obstructed justice.In the words of the special prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald: "When someone doesn't tell the truth to the system, everyone suffers. The legal system suffers because we don't know what the actual facts are. And, frankly, lots of other people suffer since, when you don't know what the truth is, people draw all sorts of conclusions."A question for those who seek to spare Libby from prison for lying under oath — what did you have to say when President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for lying under oath? Most likely, you wanted Clinton punished.Thirty months (and a $250,000 fine) is a stiff sentence for Libby. He has a legal process to appeal. But Bush should steer clear of this matter. First, because he has a conflict of interest—Libby was serving the political interests of the administration when he committed his crimes. Second, because a pardon would be as indefensible as some of the pardons Clinton issued as he exited the White House.Bush shouldn't add to the taint — now or in the final days of his term.<B><I> — Chicago Tribune</i></B>