Consumer Agency Refuses Explanation for Document Inconsistencies: Administrative Review Requested

In a significant move, a company has sought administrative review after the Consumer Agency's Document Management Division (CRO) declined to provide an explanation regarding discrepancies between two public documents. This refusal came despite clear indications that the documents significantly contradicted each other.

The issue arose when the company's inquiries uncovered that three administrative documents issued by the Consumer Agency on April 20, 2026, concerning the terminology related to Puberluric Acid (プベルル酸), involved conflicting information provided by the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare. While the Consumer Agency documents stated that the Puberluric Acid references were sourced from materials provided by the Ministry, the Ministry's own document on April 22 explicitly denied having issued any statements regarding Puberluric Acid as a cause of health concerns.

Faced with this logical contradiction, the company contacted the CRO via email on May 18, 2026, seeking a detailed explanation of which agency's understanding influenced the use of Puberluric Acid in the consumer documents, as well as the basis for this decision. The CRO's subsequent response on May 28, which only reiterated that the agency accepts reports concerning public document management from agency employees and confirmed the appropriateness of previous responses, failed to address any of the specific contradictions raised.

The company argues that such inconsistencies in public documentation represent a serious issue. Considering both documents were issued under the authority of agency heads, the accuracy of their content is critical for public information, especially concerning the Kōji health incident planned for March 10, 2026. According to the company, the CRO’s insistence that previous responses were adequate does not answer the critical questions regarding the observed discrepancies.

In raising the administrative review request on July 4, 2026, the company underscored the importance of transparency and accountability in governing bodies. They emphasized that leaving such contradictions unaddressed undermines public trust and the obligation of government entities to justify their communications.

The company contends that the commitment to address public inquiries demands a thorough investigation of documented inconsistencies between governmental bodies. This review will not only clarify the agency's stance on the usage of Puberluric Acid but also ensure that the public is provided with accurate information. The ongoing engagement with the Consumer Agency through this administrative review represents the eighth formal request since the inception of inquiries into this matter.

For ongoing updates and related releases, the company maintains transparency through their press release series, which can be accessed online. The series documents their efforts in uncovering the truth behind the health impacts linked to Kōji products.