FOOD PRODUCTION
Initial Statement: Food grown and produced in the U.S. is as safe or safer than food grown outside the U.S.

One often hears the statement  “The food supply of the United States is the safest in the world”.   This is a hard statement to support in view of the fact that the food supply of the United States is comprised of both domestically produced foods and imported foods and ingredients from over 150 countries.  Should we be concerned about the safety of foods imported into the U.S. or is imported food just as safe as the food we produce ourselves?

Foods produced and processed in the most industrially developed countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia/New Zealand and the European Union (EU) are similar in quality and safety.  However, food produced, processed and exported from developing nations varies widely in quality and safety depending on the standards implemented and enforced by their governments or trade associations.  The US imports approximately 78% of fish and seafood products and approximately 31% of all fruit, fruit juices and nuts. (5)  These items are primarily imported from countries where sanitary standards may, or may not be up to US standards.  One of the most common causes for rejection of seafood imports is “filth”. (4)  This can create valid concerns about the safety of imports from developing countries.

Chile is a good example of a less developed country that has taken steps to protect their massive fruit and vegetable export market.  They have established food safety programs based on and comparable to those of the US Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) (1).  Chile has some of the most comprehensive GAP programs in the world. They include use of modern production and handling practices, strict control of pesticides, residue monitoring, state-of-the-art packaging, well maintained storage facilities and a constant emphasis on worker hygiene and sanitation. 

Producing high quality and safe foods in every country, especially developing countries presents additional challenges.  For example, developing countries may lack sanitary water supplies or be faced with extreme levels of pollution in their water supply.  Neither the food safety infrastructure nor the educational programs regarding food safety and sanitation may be comparable to the US. 

Programs like GAP  and  Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems are widely used in the U.S. to help ensure safe transportation, production and processing practices in handling food but getting them established and implemented in developing countries exporting to the U.S. is often difficult.   In addition to industry and regulatory commitment, all of these food safety programs depend on one paramount source to achieve implementation - revenue.   With the current global recession, finding additional funding for safety inspectors and services is often put on the back burner. 

For a country to produce, process and export safe high quality food, a stable government is essential. (7)  Countries that have these standards - like the US, Canada, the EU nations, Australia and New Zealand - tend to base their consumer protection programs on three key areas:  (1) food safety legislation, (2) regulations based on sound science and (3) enforcement of food laws-- particularly laws that control safety and sanitation.  Producing safe food requires shared understanding among government agencies and clear communication between government and industry.   A stable and responsible regulatory infrastructure certainly enhances the efforts to keep food safe - not always an easy task – even for highly developed countries.  (7)

With the increasing number of recalls in the news lately, many Americans are wondering if their food supply is safe.  The massive number of recalls involving products containing peanut butter produced by the Peanut Corporation of America (largely recalled in 2008) underscores these trepidations.  Food products and feeds produced with ingredients from China involving the use of melamine—a toxic nitrogen based chemical – added to the fears.  American consumers turn on their TV and computers nightly to watch and read about these problems – and they worry - rightfully so. People got sick and people died from eating unsafe food.  

In the weeks between May 1 and May 31, 2009, there were at least 20 recalls associated with food products announced by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or USDA.  Recalls of pistachio nuts, alfalfa sprouts and cantaloupe - all positive for Salmonella - voluntarily recalled by food companies – with no reported illnesses were announced (4).   Some of these products came from countries like Chile (lemon pistachio) and some came from the U.S.

There are routinely recalls due to labeling and allergen issues such as unlabeled additions of milk and peanuts to food products. (4)    Over $1.5 million of adulterated (filthy) food ingredients was seized by US Federal Marshals from the American Mercantile Corp of Memphis, Tennessee at the request of the FDA  on May 7, 2009.  (2)  The most important point to remember is that there have been no reports of illness from these foods. (4)   Our food safety system is working even though it is not perfect.

The US imports food from over 150 countries in the world - through approximately 300 ports of entry including land, sea and air. (5)   Examination of data on imports  refused by the FDA  just in the month of April 2009 (3),  showed that 250 were
rejected from China -  mostly for melamine contamination.  Other countries had sizable number of exports rejected in the month of April including India (122), Mexico (146), Japan (53), Korea (50), Viet Nam (48),  EU countries (~133),
Canada (89),   Chile (33) and Australia (7). 

So, the FDA and USDA are keeping a lot of harmful food products out of the US. However, as diligent as their efforts are, it is a daunting task to keep everything that might be harmful from entering America.  This is mainly due to the cost and lack of personnel required to police such massive shipments of food and the time and resources needed to test each shipment of food – some of which is highly perishable such as fruits and vegetables.
           
Proponents of the EU food system argue that the EU  has higher standards of food safety than the US.  Genetically modified foods,  animal hormone use and standards for certain toxic chemicals like aflatoxins are more strict in the EU.  However, the EU is hampered in establishing and enforcing both these and traditional food safety regulations since the 27 countries of the EU sometimes lack a shared understanding or uniformity in enforcement of regulations. (7)  Food safety regulatory authorities in each EU country are not identical and the languages of the law. . not to mention translation. . often impede efforts in uniformity of enforcement.  The EU thrives on a global flow of goods. (7)  Anyone who tries to block that flow risks criticism and occasionally opposition by the “offended” country.   

Through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the United States has the best and most transparent foodborne disease surveillance and documentation of foodborne illnesses in the world.  The  CDC has led the way in developing methods to identify and track foodborne disease outbreaks with their PulseNet USA system. (6) Initiated in 1996, PulseNet provides a means to identify DNA fingerprints of bacteria involved in foodborne illnesses. This data is provided to the CDC by public health departments.  Once this data is collected and analyzed,  the CDC and regulatory agencies alert the public to a pattern of illnesses.   It was the CDC that sounded the warning that Salmonella was involved with the Peanut Corporation of America products.  It was a timely warning indeed!

Thousands of illnesses and deaths have been avoided by this early warning system.    Health Canada has joined the CDC and formed PulseNet Canada (2000-2003).  PulseNet shares information freely between Canada and the US to track and identify disease outbreaks.  The goal of the developers of these systems is to have an international warning system.  PulseNet Europe was born in 2004. (6)  Certain countries within the EU have excellent surveillance systems – primarily developed by independent and dedicated scientists but prior to 2005 the EU did not have a counterpart to the U.S. CDC (established in 1946).  (7)  The U.S. is fortunate to have an established agency like the CDC with over 50 years of experience in protecting public health and their early warnings help to protect the food supply. 

Providing a high quality and safe food supply for Americans and other people of the world  is a daunting task as the world’s population continues to grow unchecked.  Furthermore, less and less people are involved in the production and processing of food products which means that food production and processing is centralized requiring lengthy transportation of food .  Many of the foods US consumers enjoy travel an average of 1100 miles to reach dinner tables.

Large volumes of food are processed centrally and stored regionally.  Foods and ingredients arrive in the US from over 150 countries using every imaginable type of transportation.  Consumers expect variety, fresh foods, convenience, long shelf-life, optimal taste and nutrition. . .all for inexpensive prices.  Keeping these foods safe while meeting consumer demands is a challenge!

Nonetheless, the USDA and the FDA work consistently with producers and processors in the U.S. and in other countries to set and enforce the standards that provide for safe high quality food.  We help supply the world’s markets and give generously to the poorer nations often rift with famine and hunger.  We set the standards and help monitor the way food is grown, processed, shipped and distributed around the world. 

There is still a lot of room for improvement but overall,  the U.S. food system works as well or better than most countries.  Salmonella remains a constant threat but salmonellosis outbreaks are detected or prevented much more effectively than in the past decade.

Thanks to the efforts of  the U.S. government, regulatory agencies, producers, the food industry and dedicated scientists, the food produced and processed in the US is as safe or safer. . .as that produced anywhere in the world and the U.S. is committed to continually making the food supply safer.

References:

Chilean Fresh Fruit.  About Our Fruit Food Safety Standards.  (http://www.cffausa.org/dev/about_fruit/food_standards/index.php).  Accessed 5/12/09.

FDA.  Over $1.5 million of adulterated (filthy) food ingredients was seized by US Federal Marshals from American Mercantile Corporation of Memphis, TN http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2009/NEW02012.html. Accessed 5/21/09.

FDA.  OASIS refusals by Country of Manufacture for April 2009.  Food and Drug Administration.  Operational and Administrative System for Import Support (OASIS)   http://www.fda.gov/ora/oasis/4/ora_oasis_cntry_lst.html.  Accessed 5/24/09.

FDA Recalls.  (http://www.fda.gov/opacom/7alerts.html.  Accessed 5/26/09

Jerardo, Alberto.  The US Ag Trade Balance – More than Just a Number.  US Economic Research Service.  Amber Waves 2 (1):  36-41.  2004.

Swaminathan et al.  Building Pulse-Net International:  An interconnected system of laboratory networks to facilitate timely public health recognition and response to foodborne disease outbreaks and emergency foodborne diseases.  Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 3 (1):  36-50.  2006.

Wong, Lo Fo et al.  Food Contamination Monitoring and Food-Borne Disease Surveillance at the National Level.  Proceedings of the 2nd WHO/FAO Global Forum on Food Safety Regulators.  20 pages.  http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/008/y5871e/y5871e0n (accessed 5/26/09)

FOOD PRODUCTION
Initial Statement: Food grown and producd in the U.S. is as safe or safer than food grown outside the U.S.

“Today's food safety system responds to crises.  We need a system that prevents contamination in the first place.”
–Kathleen Sebelius, HHS Secretary. May 13, 2009

 

For many years, the assertion that the U.S. has the safest food supply in the world has gone unchallenged.  For a variety of reasons, we can no longer assume this is true:  

• As the American food industry has become more globalized, raw commodities and ingredients enter our food system from throughout the world.  Foods may become commingled or repackaged, making supply chains complex and difficult to track in the event of an outbreak.
• Pathogenic microbes are more virulent and occupy new ecological niches, so foods once considered safe and healthy, such as spinach and alfalfa sprouts, are now seen as risky.
• The leaves of a relatively few lettuce plants harboring pathogens can spread contamination widely in packages of bagged salad greens, giving rise to a multistate outbreak.
• After years of decline, the number of beef recalls is again rising –  the largest such recall in history, involving 143 million pounds of ground beef, occurred in 2008.  In fact, today’s practice of raising beef and poultry under crowded conditions is inherently unsafe, as diseases can spread easily among animals and the routine administration of antimicrobials has lead to antibiotic resistance. 
• A single small peanut company, as was recently and dramatically demonstrated, can be responsible for tainting thousands of products. 

As the U.S. food production system has undergone sweeping changes, the agencies responsible for overseeing food safety have failed to modernize.  The regulatory authority of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) resides in a 1938 law which focuses on food adulteration and inspections, rather than on prevention.  Thus, FDA tends to react to food safety problems after they occur, an approach that is inefficient and ineffective.  

It is widely recognized that FDA lacks sufficient resources to adequately inspect foods and ingredients, both domestically produced and imported.  According to the Economic Research Service, about 15% of the U.S. food supply is imported, including 60% of its fresh fruits and vegetables and 75% of its seafood.  Yet FDA inspects only about 1% of imported food shipments.  Furthermore, the agency conducts about 100 inspections per year among the thousands of foreign manufacturing plants that export food to the U.S.  The situation with respect to domestic inspections is similarly ominous. Even more astounding is that when a safety problem is discovered, FDA cannot order a mandatory recall, but instead must rely on the company at fault to initiate a voluntary recall. 

Today, food safety responsibilities in the U.S. are dispersed among 15 federal agencies that collectively administer more than 30 laws related to food safety.  A 2007 report by the General Accountability Office stated “the current fragmented federal system has caused inconsistent oversight, ineffective coordination, and inefficient use of resources” and recommended that Congress consider a fundamental reexamination of the entire system.  Similarly, a 2008 report by Trust for America’s Health found that a “strategic approach to protecting the nation’s food supply through state-of-the-art technologies, practices, and policies” is lacking. 

Clearly, the U.S. urgently needs to implement a comprehensive national food safety system that focuses on preventing foodborne illnesses, beginning on the farm and continuing throughout production until the time of consumption.  Amid a growing consensus that the entire U.S. food safety system is in desperate need of an overhaul, four food safety bills are currently pending in the 111th Congress.  States are not waiting for federal action, however, but are enacting their own legislation.  Dozens of bills aimed at adopting tougher food safety laws have been introduced in state legislatures in 2009. 

It is difficult to maintain confidence in the safety of the U.S. food supply when the system has not been fundamentally modernized for over 100 years, is plagued by  misallocation of resources, and lacks coordinated leadership.  But is the situation any better in other countries? 

Foodborne illness arising from pathogenic microorganisms contaminating food, or the water used to prepare food, affects people in all nations.  However, the full global impact of foodborne diseases is unknown.  It is not possible to rank countries according to the safety of their food supplies because most cases of foodborne illness are not reported or even recognized, and outbreaks are inadequately investigated.  In fact, surveillance systems for monitoring foodborne illnesses are not available in many countries. 

Nevertheless, it can be assumed that wealthier industrial countries generally have safer food supplies than those of developing countries.  According to the World Health Organization (WHO), people living in poorer countries are more likely to lack safe methods for transporting and storing foods, safe water for washing and preparing foods, and sufficient knowledge about safe food handling practices.  In poorer nations, government regulations and inspection systems also are typically inadequate.  

In today’s global economy, many nations share similar food safety concerns.  Ingredients manufactured in one country may become incorporated into foods produced in many other countries.  New or emerging pathogens can spread from one country to another, such as occurred with prions associated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in England.  So, how does the prevalence of foodborne illness in the U.S. compare to other industrialized countries?  In Canada, an estimated 10 million people suffer food-related illness each year, which is roughly proportional to the U.S. incidence.  As in the U.S., food safety responsibilities are shared among multiple agencies, including the Public Health Agency of Canada (epidemiology and surveillance), Health Canada (food safety standards), and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (food industry inspections). 

In Europe, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) located in Parma, Italy provides scientific guidance on a range of food safety issues, including risk assessment.  The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) based in Stockholm conducts surveillance.  According to statistics from the European Union, there were 2,025 verified foodborne disease outbreaks in Europe in 2007, involving nearly 40,000 cases.  However, the 27 member states of the EU are not consistent in how they investigate and report foodborne disease outbreaks, making comparisons within Europe and with other countries problematic.

Despite the shortcomings and recent failures of the U.S. food safety system, progress is being made on several fronts.  Researchers are breaking new ground in understanding  pathogens and the origins of foodborne diseases, surveillance methods are improving as genetic techniques allow cases in different geographical areas to be linked to a common food source, and food safety education efforts are continuing.  Therefore, it is plausible to assume that the U.S. has a safe food supply relative to other countries.  However, because solid data on the magnitude of foodborne illnesses among nations are lacking, it is not plausible to conclude that our food supply is necessarily safer than that of other industrialized countries such as those of Europe, Australia, or Canada.

“While Americans enjoy one of the safest food supplies in the world, we have witnessed too many outbreaks that make us worry that the food on our dinner plate or in our child's lunch box will harm instead of nourish. This is not acceptable.”
– Tom Vilsack, USDA Secretary. May 13, 2009