CQR Food Safety
Transcription
CQR Food Safety
CQ Researcher Published by CQ Press, a Division of SAGE www.cqresearcher.com Food Safety Would new legislation make the food supply safer? Y our food can kill you. Every year, about 3,000 Americans die from salmonella and other foodborne illnesses, and an estimated 48 million are sickened. Recent scandals over abysmal sanitary conditions in food processing plants that led to large disease out- breaks in eggs and peanuts have pushed Congress to overhaul the food-safety system for all foods except meat and poultry. A lastminute hitch, however, has left the fate of that bipartisan legislation uncertain, despite support from an unusual alliance of industry and consumer advocates. If it wins enactment, advocates may push for revamping meat regulation. Far more disagreement exists A USDA medical officer checks eggs for salmonella bacteria. Massive health violations by Iowa egg processors led to salmonella contamination that sickened at least 1,600 people nationwide this year and sparked the biggest egg recall in U.S. history. on the controversial genetic frontier of food safety. Scientists can now genetically modify fruits and vegetables as well as livestock I and other food animals. But debate over the safety of genetic N modification among lawmakers, food safety officials, consumer S groups and the food industry shows no sign of quieting down. I D E CQ Researcher • Dec. 17, 2010 • www.cqresearcher.com Volume 20, Number 44 • Pages 1037-1060 THIS REPORT THE ISSUES ..................1039 BACKGROUND ..............1046 CHRONOLOGY ..............1047 CURRENT SITUATION ......1051 AT ISSUE......................1053 OUTLOOK ....................1054 RECIPIENT OF SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE ◆ AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL AWARD BIBLIOGRAPHY ..............1058 THE NEXT STEP ............1059 FOOD SAFETY CQ Researcher THE ISSUES 1039 1046 1046 1049 1050 • Would new legislation make food safer? • Are imports a bigger problem than domestically produced food? • Are genetic modifications and livestock hormones as dangerous as salmonella and other pathogens? 1040 1041 Reducing the Risk of Food-borne Illness Poultry, meat and eggs should be cooked thoroughly. BACKGROUND 1042 Outrage and Regulation Revelations about Chicago’s meatpacking plants led to federal food inspection. Millions Sickened by Food-borne Illness An estimated 5,000 Americans die each year. 1044 A System Transformed Globalized food production changed Americans’ eating habits. Common Food-borne Diseases Bacterial pathogens cause the most prevalent illnesses. 1047 Chronology Key events since 1905. 1048 Contaminated Food’s Toll: Sickness, Agony and Maybe Death “A lot of survivors are faced with lifelong illness.” Genes and Drugs In the 1970s consumer advocates warned about genetic engineering. Outbreaks Food-borne illnesses have cropped up repeatedly over the past 20 years. CURRENT SITUATION 1051 1054 Law Stalled Efforts to give the FDA more power have stalled. Genetically Modified Salmon Environmentalists oppose FDA approval for altering the fish. OUTLOOK 1054 Down to the Wire Prospects for a food-safety bill this year are dim. Cover: U.S.D.A./Stephen Ausmus 1038 SIDEBARS AND GRAPHICS CQ Researcher Recalls Occurred in Every State More than 2,500 occurred last year. 1050 Small Fraction of Food Imports Are Inspected Most shipments pass. 1052 How to Handle a Recalled Product Here are tips from the Food and Drug Administration. 1053 At Issue Would strengthening FDA regulatory authority improve food safety? FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 1057 For More Information Organizations to contact. 1058 Bibliography Selected sources used. 1059 The Next Step Additional articles. 1059 Citing CQ Researcher Sample bibliography formats. Dec. 17, 2010 Volume 20, Number 44 MANAGING EDITOR: Thomas J. Colin tcolin@cqpress.com ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITORS: Kathy Koch kkoch@cqpress.com Thomas J. Billitteri, tjb@cqpress.com ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Kenneth Jost STAFF WRITERS: Marcia Clemmitt, Peter Katel CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Roland Flamini, Sarah Glazer, Alan Greenblatt, Reed Karaim, Barbara Mantel, Tom Price, Jennifer Weeks DESIGN/PRODUCTION EDITOR: Olu B. Davis ASSISTANT EDITOR: Darrell Dela Rosa FACT-CHECKING: Eugene J. Gabler, Michelle Harris INTERN: Maggie Clark A Division of SAGE PRESIDENT AND PUBLISHER: John A. Jenkins DIRECTOR, REFERENCE SOLUTIONS: Todd Baldwin Copyright © 2010 CQ Press, a Division of SAGE. SAGE reserves all copyright and other rights herein, unless previously specified in writing. No part of this publication may be reproduced electronically or otherwise, without prior written permission. Unauthorized reproduction or transmission of SAGE copyrighted material is a violation of federal law carrying civil fines of up to $100,000. CQ Press is a registered trademark of Congressional Quarterly Inc. CQ Researcher (ISSN 1056-2036) is printed on acidfree paper. Published weekly, except; (Jan. wk. 1) (May wk. 4) (July wks. 1, 2) (Aug. wks. 2, 3) (Nov. wk. 4) and (Dec. wks. 4, 5), by CQ Press, a division of SAGE Publications. Annual full-service subscriptions start at $803. For pricing, call 1-800-834-9020. To purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronic format (PDF), visit www. cqpress.com or call 866-4277737. Single reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing are also available. Periodicals postage paid at Washington, D.C., and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to CQ Researcher, 2300 N St., N.W., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20037. Food Safety BY PETER KATEL THE ISSUES state inspectors, found after the outbreak that Peanut Corp. of America’s own factory tests he report made for had turned up salmonella 12 poor breakfast reading times since 2007. The Virginia— especially if eggs based company has filed for were on the menu. bankruptcy protection. 5 “Chicken manure located Most victims of a foodin the manure pits below borne illness suffer nothing the egg laying operation was more serious than a stomach observed to be approxidisorder that they can shake mately 4 feet high to 8 feet off, but thousands of others high,” government inspecaren’t so lucky. “I spent 12 tors wrote in August. “The hours in the ER, so sick they outside access doors to the were scared to move me,” manure pits . . . had been Sarah Lewis, 30, of Freedom, pushed out by the weight Calif., told lawmakers of her of the manure.” 1 experience after she ate a And the list of food-safety custard tart at a banquet. hazards didn’t stop there, as Eggs in the custard were U.S. Food and Drug Administraced to the Iowa farms. tration (FDA) investigators “They thought they were roamed farms in Clarion and going to have to do emerGalt, Iowa. “Live and dead flies gency bowel surgery because too numerous to count were the CT scan showed bowels observed,” they reported. “In that were so inflamed and so Packages of recalled peanut butter crackers await pickup at an Indianapolis food bank last year. Nine addition, live and dead magsick I was put in ICU.” 6 people died in 2008-2009 after eating salmonellagots too numerous to count After recovering, Lewis had contaminated peanut products from a Georgia were observed,” as well as to be hospitalized again less processing plant where inspectors found “holes appearing to be rodent than three weeks later. And blatant violations of food-safety standards. burrows located along the seceven after that, she testified, ond floor baseboards.” 2 “I had to be on antibiotics DeCoster insisted that the farm main- every six hours for the next 14 days. The report made prime fare for a September congressional hearing into tained salmonella-prevention mea- And all during this I found out that the outbreak of egg-borne salmonella sures beyond those required by the the salmonella was still present and poisoning that sickened at least 1,600 FDA. He blamed an outside animal raging in my body. I still have severe people nationwide starting in May. feed supplier for the outbreak. cramping, diarrhea, fevers.” 7 Joshua Sharfstein, principal deputy The bacteria apparently had migrated The U.S. Centers for Disease Confrom chickens’ innards to eggshells, FDA commissioner, later disputed the trol and Prevention (CDC) estimates though egg farms are supposed to re- feed-supplier hypothesis. “The FDA has that 3,000 people a year die from taintnot reached that conclusion at all,” he ed food or drink, and that 48 million move salmonella. “Why did companies with a record of told reporters outside the hearing. 4 are sickened. And, like Lewis, an esThe egg scandal marked the second timated 128,000 are hospitalized. prior violations not ensure their facilities were clean and free of rodents?” Rep. such major episode in as many years These numbers are noticeably lower Michael Doyle, D-Pa., asked as a House involving salmonella-tainted food. Nine than previous estimates from 1999, but panel grilled Peter DeCoster, chief oper- people died in 2008-2009 after eating CDC scientists wrote that improved ating officer of his family’s Wright Coun- contaminated peanut products. They data collection and more accurate staty egg operation, and other witnesses. came from a Georgia processing plant tistical techniques have lent greater pre“Why did positive tests for salmonella not where inspectors found blatant viola- cision to the estimating process. What cause the producers to go into overdrive tions of elementary food-safety standards. hasn’t changed is that pathogens — The FDA, which had relied on lenient bacteria and viruses that cause illness to clean up their premises?” 3 AP Photo/The Indianapolis Star/Michelle Pemberton T www.cqresearcher.com Dec. 17, 2010 1039 FOOD SAFETY Recalls Occurred in Every State More than 2,500 recalls of food products occurred nationwide in the past year. Every state had at least 41 recalls, with the most in California, Texas, New York and Oregon. Wash. N.D. Mont. Ore. Idaho Nev. Utah Wyo. Colo. Calif. Ariz. N.M. Minn. Wis. S.D. Neb. Kan. Okla. Texas Iowa Ill. Vt. Mich. Ky. La. Miss. Ala. Hawaii Va. N.C. Ga. S.C. R.I. Conn. N.J. Del. Md. D.C. No. of Recalls Fla. Alaska Mass. Pa. W.Va. Tenn. Ark. Maine N.Y. Ind. Ohio Mo. N.H. 41 to 50 51 to 60 61 to 70 More than 71 Sources: Center for Science in the Public Interest, U.S. PIRG and Consumer Federation of America — have evolved to meet modern conditions. At least four of today’s most dangerous pathogens weren’t known to be problematic only three decades ago. (See box, p. 1044.) 8 Revelations of appalling conditions behind the egg- and peanut-borne outbreaks re-energized longstanding efforts to expand federal regulation of food cultivation and production — the first overhaul of a system that’s been in place with few fundamental changes since 1906. Shortly after the Thanksgiving holiday, the Senate passed the bipartisan, comprehensive Food Safety Act that — unusually — had backing from both consumer advocates and most major food-industry lobbies. The House had passed a nearly identical bill last year. But the prospects for enactment before year-end have turned complicated. A technical problem with the legislation has led to the need for new votes in both chambers. If those votes would not occur, some experts rate the 1040 CQ Researcher chances of a food-safety bill passing next year as dim. Anti-regulatory Republicans, some with Tea Party backing, will dominate the House when the new Congress is seated in January. And the Senate, though still controlled by Democrats, may lack the votes to pass a major regulatory overhaul of the food industry. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., summarized opponents’ objections to the legislation. “The bill . . . will grow the government, increase food prices and drive small producers out of business without making our food any safer,” he said after failing to block passage of the bill on its first vote. 9 Opponents outside Congress include small-farm boosters who distrust regulators and major food companies in equal measure. “The bill gives big firms a competitive advantage over local food,” says Peter Kennedy, a Sarasota, Fla., lawyer who is board president of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, which advocates on behalf of small farms and raw milk producers and consumers. He points to what he calls burdensome paperwork requirements in the proposed federal law. “The big firms will be able to comply better than small ones will.” Nevertheless, the enormity of the U.S. food system, the speed with which products move from farm or processing plant to dinner table and the rising volume of imports all argue for updating the regulatory system, proponents of the legislation say. They cite the system’s origins in an age when farms grew a variety of crops, food manufacturers tended to be local or regional businesses and most households depended on their own cooking. “Our agriculture is much more of a monoculture, and manufacturing processes have become much more integrated, so when there’s a mistake it gets amplified quickly,” says William Marler, a Seattle lawyer who has specialized in representing victims of food-borne illness outbreaks since a deadly 1993 episode involving hamburgers from the Jack in the Box fastfood chain. To be sure, Marler says, outbreaks of illness, for all of their sometimes tragic outcomes, aren’t the norm. “We have a surprisingly safe food supply,” he says. “Businesses do a good job of not poisoning the vast majority of us.” The pending legislation attempts to match the speed with which contaminated food can reach consumers by granting the FDA power to order food recalls. Consumers may assume otherwise, but the government now lacks recall authority, though officials can usually pressure firms into withdrawing food from the market when contamination is suspected or proved. 10 Other provisions would require adoption of a method for preventing contamination that is already widely used in the food industry. And inspections of companies shipping food to the United States would be stepped up by authorizing “third parties” — foreign governments or private firms — to do the work. Advocates of the food-safety bill argue that today’s conditions demand increased government authority, combined with a strategy of curbing outbreaks by emphasizing prevention. “Our food-safety strategies historically have relied upon finding the needle in the haystack,” says Scott Faber, vice president for federal affairs at the Grocery Manufacturers of America. “The bill reflects a new philosophy which tries to reduce the likelihood of contamination in the first place.” Over the past 20 years, as consumers have become accustomed to fresh produce and processed foods from all over the world, outbreaks have routinely covered big regions. In one 2006 case, the FDA warned U.S. consumers nationwide not to eat fresh bagged spinach while investigators traced a contaminant that had killed three people and sickened hundreds. The following year, pet owners reported thousands of dog and cat deaths from Chinese pet food deliberately tainted with a deadly industrial chemical meant to resemble protein concentrate. Humans weren’t harmed — except in China, where the same chemical was included in powdered milk and baby formula. But no one looking at food imports from China, which tripled to $5.8 billion from 2001 to 2008, could take much reassurance from the fact that harmful ingredients hadn’t yet been found in Chineseproduced food for people. 11 Food-safety advocates don’t see the 2010 legislation — if it passes — as the culmination of all their efforts. Some point to a need to update the meat and poultry regulatory system that the Agriculture Department runs. And many are demanding tougher government scrutiny of genetically modified foods (often known as GMOs, genetically modified organisms), the use of growth-inducing substances fed to livestock and certain plastics used in food packaging. www.cqresearcher.com Reducing the Risk of Food-borne Illness The following simple precautions can make food safer, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control: Cook: Cook meat, poultry and eggs thoroughly. Getty Images/Frazer Harrison Measure the internal temperature of meat to ensure it is cooked sufficiently to kill bacteria. For example, ground beef should be cooked inside to 160o F. Eggs should be cooked until the yolk is firm. Separate: Avoid cross-contaminating foods Getty Images/David McNew by washing hands, utensils and cutting boards after they have been in contact with raw meat or poultry and before they touch another food. Put cooked meat on a clean platter, rather than back on one that held the raw meat. Chill: Refrigerate leftovers promptly. Bacteria Getty Images/Frank Polich can grow quickly at room temperature, so refrigerate leftover foods if they are not going to be eaten within four hours. Large volumes of food will cool more quickly if they are divided into several shallow containers for refrigeration. Clean: Rinse fresh fruits and vegetables in AFP/Getty Images/Romeo Gacad running water to remove visible dirt and grime. Discard the outermost leaves of a head of lettuce or cabbage. Because bacteria can grow well on the cut surface of fruit or vegetables, do not contaminate these foods while slicing them on the cutting board, and avoid leaving cut produce at room temperature for many hours. Report: Report suspected food-borne Digital Stock illnesses to your local health department because it is an important part of the food-safety system. Often calls from concerned citizens are how outbreaks are first detected. Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork. org/assets/ec6570b6b60abd0c70670d5706aee031/Recipe-for-Disaster---Recalls.pdf. Nevertheless, some safety advocates don’t view high-tech food engineering as threatening as pathogens. “There’s an emotional argument against GMOs, but I haven’t seen any scien- tific literature that they’re dangerous,” says Marler, the food-safety lawyer. “But maybe that’s because I’m focused on pathogens killing people on a daily basis.” Dec. 17, 2010 1041 FOOD SAFETY As food-safety officials and consumers study the food supply system, here are key questions: Would new legislation make the food supply safer? Questions about the adequacy of federal food-safety regulation have dominated news coverage of food-borne illness outbreaks over the past 20 years. Doubts grew even more insistent following the two most recent major outbreaks. In this year’s egg contamination case, federal and congressional investigations showed that health issues were nothing new for the DeCosters’ Wright County Egg operation. The farm had been declared a “habitual violator” of environmental laws by the state of Iowa as far back as 2001 and paid $219,000 in fines. 12 Since 2008, state inspectors had found 426 positive test results for salmonella, including 73 potential indicators of the precise strain that sickened at least 1,600 people. 13 Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Pa., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, and Sharfstein, the FDA official, used the September hearing as a forum to urge Congress to finish work on the food-safety legislation. Both the House bill and the similar measure the Senate passed on Nov. 30 would require the FDA to order food recalls if a company refuses to do so. They would also require all producers and processors to maintain food-safety plans covering every step of their operations. Whistleblowers in food facilities would get legal protection for disclosing information about safety violations. And imports would be subjected to the same requirements as domestically produced food. 14 Sharfstein argued that mandatory recall authority, as well as steady funding from fees imposed on food producers, would ensure more extensive oversight. “Here’s my bottom line,” he said. “We need this bill. We need this 1042 CQ Researcher Millions Sickened by Food-borne Illness An estimated 3,000 Americans die and 48 million are sickened each year from tainted food. (in millions) 50 48 million 40 30 2 1 0 128,000 3,000 Illnesses Hospitalizations Deaths Sources: “Food Safety in the 111th Congress: H.R. 2749 and S. 510,” Congressional Research Service, Dec. 1, 2010; based on Paul S. Mead, et al., “Food-related Illness and Death in the United States,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, September/October 1999 bill to protect the safety of the food supply. We need this bill to help us prevent another egg outbreak just like the one that we’ve experienced.” 15 Changes in the food system make the legislation essential, says Marler. “If you look at the last several years, the overriding problem has been the fact that the food industry has gotten so complex, with all these inputs from a variety of places — small and larger farms — that industry was only as strong as its weakest link,” he says. “What the bill is trying to accomplish is to deal with all of it, so that industry is not taken down for the bad practices of one part of the puzzle.” That overall benefit aside, Marler says the single most crucial part of the legislation is often overlooked in the political debate over regulatory authority. The provision (contained in both Senate and House versions) would order FDA to develop methods to rapidly track raw fruits and vegetables, enabling quick identification of the source of a contamination outbreak. 16 “Right now, there are some states that do a great job of surveillance, like Minnesota, and others — mostly in the South — that do an incredibly crappy job of surveillance,” Marler says. The project, he says, would lead to “a more unified and efficient system for food-borne illness surveillance.” Nevertheless, some argue that beefing up the FDA would defeat the purpose of instilling more efficiency in the food-safety process. Even the legislation’s proposed requirement of a food-safety methodology known as Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point, or HACCP — in which each step in a process where contamination can occur is rigorously monitored — would become less effective if the legislation were enacted, argues Gregory Conko, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a pro-business research and advocacy organization. (See “At Issue,” p. 1053.) “When you get a regulatory agency involved, in order to make it at all practicable for them, you’ve got to make it uniform, so that regulators understand what they’re looking at and how to go about enforcement and inspection,” Conko says. “Instead of allowing the plan to be highly flexible, it ends up instilling rigidities that eliminate the benefits you might otherwise have gotten.” And mandatory recall authority likely would make the response to contamination outbreaks less effective, Conko says. “The benefit of the current situation is that when the FDA identifies a potential problem, they’ve actually got to go explain to the manufacturer, ‘Here’s why we think the problem is in your food, and here’s why we think you should engage in a recall of these lots,’ ” he argues. “Recalls, when they happen, are more targeted and precise. If FDA can order recalls with no pushback from industry, then political incentives will force it to order lots of recalls, even where there is limited evidence that a problem exists in a particular lot or product line.” Getty Image/Alex Wong But advocates of the legislation main- there is no case of illness, still be orIn that case, U.S. pet owners retain that the voluntary-recall system has dered to recall a product.” ported the deaths of as many as 4,000 outlived its usefulness. They point to Moreover, despite evidence that the dogs and cats. And FDA investigators this year’s contaminated egg scandal as egg producers this year tolerated health found that melamine also had been an example. “Having that many eggs hazards, Kennedy asserts that the FDA an ingredient in feed for 6,000 hogs going out to as many states as they doesn’t need recall authority. “If a firm and almost 3 million chickens inwere going to, you can’t contain an out- thinks its products have made people tended for human consumption in the break” without more intensive regula- ill, they’re going to get them off the United States. Moreover, in the Chition, says Elizabeth Hitchcock, public market ASAP,” he says. “They’re look- nese market, melamine in baby forhealth advocate for the U.S. Public In- ing at tremendous civil liability dam- mula killed six infants and sickened terest Research Group (USPIRG), a con- ages they could have to pay. The firm an estimated 300,000 in 2008. (Two sumer advocacy organization. “It’s a has an incentive to act.” Chinese businessmen convicted of sellproblem that we can ing the adulterated prodaddress by requiring ucts to boost profits were more frequent inexecuted last year.) 18 The melamine episode spections and by showed that food-borne giving the FDA auillness could stem from thority to order the deliberate use of manrecall rather than made substances, as well spending time neas carelessness or indifgotiating back and ference about protection forth, which slows from bacteria and virusdown the process of es. In that light, the ingetting unsafe food creasing globalization of off store shelves and the U.S. food market beout of pantries.” came an even bigger Outbreaks would worry. Following the still occur if FDA melamine episode, The power were exWashington Post reportpanded, Hitchcock ed that some foods from acknowledges. “But Carol Lobato, left, a Colorado grandmother, told a congressional panel in September that she fell violently ill after eating a rattlesnake-cake China that FDA inspecwe can curb the appetizer containing tainted eggs traced to two Iowa farming tors had turned away inspread of an outoperations. Sarah Lewis, 30, the California mother of two children, cluded juices and fruits break and get food right, told the panel she “spent hours in the ER” after eating a described as “filthy,” off shelves more custard tart made with contaminated eggs. prunes colored with quickly,” she says. chemical dyes banned for human con“When people buy a can of whatev- Are imports a bigger problem er it is — ravioli, say — they ought than domestically produced food? sumption, and frozen breaded shrimp to have some assurance that the food Most food recalled during the past preserved with nitrofuran, a carcinogenic was grown safely, packed safely, and, 20 years was domestically grown or antibacterial drug. 19 As those FDA moves show, the if there is a problem, that the prob- produced. Nevertheless, a 1996 outbreak lem can be resolved quickly.” traced to Guatemalan raspberries and agency inspects imports. In addition But “the FDA has a tendency to a 1997 rash of cases involving Mexi- to inspectors at U.S. ports of entry, shoot first and ask questions later,” can strawberries illustrated the grow- the FDA has deployed 38 personnel argues Kennedy, of the the Farm-to- ing role that imports play in the U.S. to offices in Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai, China; New Delhi and MumConsumer Legal Defense Fund. “For a food supply. big firm, recalling product is written The contaminated produce in those bai, India; Brussels, London, and Parma, off as a cost of doing business, but episodes came from nearby countries. Italy; San Jose, Costa Rica; and Mexico with small firms, just one recall can The 2007 emergency involving pet food City. However, the volume of imports put them out of business. Giving the deliberately tainted with melamine — far outstrips the agency’s capacity. FDA FDA this recall power poses risk to a coal-derived industrial chemical — inspectors physically examine only about 1 percent of all food imports, firms who might, in instances where centered on China. 17 www.cqresearcher.com Dec. 17, 2010 1043 FOOD SAFETY Common Food-borne Diseases The most commonly recognized food-borne infections are caused by the bacterial pathogens campylobacter, salmonella and E.coli O157:H7, and by a group of viruses called calicivirus, also known as the Norovirus. Campylobacter causes fever, diarrhea and abdominal cramps. It is the most commonly identified bacterial cause of diarrheal illness worldwide. These bacteria live in the intestines of healthy birds, and most raw poultry meat has campylobacter on it. Eating undercooked chicken or other food that has been contaminated with juices dripping from raw chicken is the most frequent source of this infection. Salmonella is also a bacterium that is widespread in the intes- tines of birds, reptiles and mammals and spreads to humans via a variety of different foods of animal origin. The illness it causes, salmonellosis, typically includes fever, diarrhea and abdominal cramps. In persons with poor underlying health or weakened immune systems, it can invade the bloodstream and cause life-threatening infections. E.coli O157:H7 is a bacterial pathogen found in cattle and other similar animals. Human illness typically follows consumption of food or water that has been contaminated with microscopic amounts of cow feces. The illness it causes is often severe and bloody diarrhea and painful abdominal cramps, without much fever. In 3-5 percent of cases, a severe complication called hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) can occur weeks after the initial symptoms, with temporary anemia, profuse bleeding and kidney failure. Calicivirus, or Norovirus is an extremely common cause of food-borne illness, though it is rarely diagnosed because the laboratory test is not widely available. It causes an acute gastrointestinal illness, usually with more vomiting than diarrhea, that resolves within two days. Unlike many food-borne pathogens that have animal reservoirs, it is believed that Noroviruses spread primarily from one infected person to another. Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/ diseaseinfo/foodborneinfections_g.htm#mostcommon the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports. (See graph, p. 1050.) 20 The food-safety legislation would hold imported producers to the same stepped-up safety requirements that domestic producers would have to meet. 1044 CQ Researcher Proponents call that change essential. “We are importing more and more food, much of it coming from countries that have less than what we consider to be sanitary practices,” says Michael Doyle, a microbiologist who is director of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety and has served on FDA and Department of Agriculture advisory panels. “It’s going to be an even greater challenge to ensure the safety of those foods unless we do something — the sooner the better.” Doyle, whose center serves food companies as a research facility, adds, “Not to say we don’t have problems here in the United States in terms of food processing and production, but percentage-wise what we see coming in from other countries, when you see how they process food, there’s likely to be greater problems.” Other experts argue that emphasizing problematic imports can distract attention from problems in the domestic food industry. Marler, the foodborne illness lawyer, noting that he’s worked on every major outbreak since 1993, says, “If there had been a trend of imported products poisoning us, I would have noticed.” Contamination in imports “is not 10 percent of the outbreaks” overall, Marler estimates. To be sure, risks do increase as imports rise, Marler says. But he adds, “People freaking out about imported food is a little bit nationalistic, and a defense of U.S. corporate interests.” Faber, of the Grocery Manufacturers of America, acknowledges that imports can be problematic. “Many countries simply lack the regulatory tools we take for granted in the United States and the European Union,” he says. “It’s easier to set and enforce standards for spinach grown in the United States than to audit food coming from 175 other countries.” However, Faber argues that imports overall are more to be welcomed than feared. “Importing food from around the globe provides us with a wider variety of food at less cost,” he says. And he adds that U.S. food exports have surpassed imports for the third year in a row (the most recent figures available show that the United States exported $48.5 billion in processed foods in 2008 and imported $40 billion). 21 “Globalization in food supply has also provided jobs in the United States,” he says. Kennedy of the small-farmers organization, though, argues that the growth in imports “is not a positive trend.” He believes that imports are more dangerous to consumers’ safety but acknowledges he has no data to support that conclusion. But he does point to what he calls a dangerous environmental trend set in motion by globalization. “Look how far food is traveling to get to market,” he says, citing the effects of the energy consumption involved in transporting and storing the imports. Are genetic modification, livestock hormones and plastic packaging as dangerous as salmonella? As politicians and advocates fight over whether to ratchet up FDA authority, conflicts are stirring over an entirely different set of food-safety issues. Questions about the health effects of genetically modified food and the use of medication and hormones on livestock and similar processes have surfaced in regulatory and political settings. Already, most Americans are eating genetically modified foods. These take the form of ingredients in a large number of processed foods. Soy lecithin, corn syrup, cotton seed (a protein source in candy) and other grain derivatives have been genetically modified, mostly to resist insects. Modifications occur when scientists remove a specific DNA strand from one organism and implant it in another, where it does the same work that it did in its original site — building a plant’s resistance to a certain insect, for instance. 22 Scientists learned in the 1970s how to transfer genes. By 2002, genetically modified (GM) crops represented 26 percent of corn, 68 percent of soybeans and 69 percent of cotton planted in www.cqresearcher.com the United States. Only four years later, 61 percent of corn, 89 percent of soybeans and 83 percent of cotton had been genetically modified. 23 The FDA approved those modified crops for human consumption. More recently, the agency has approved the sale of salmon genetically modified to grow faster. Nevertheless, public skepticism about the safety of such food is rising. One reason is growing awareness that the European Union (EU) has banned the sale of GM foods. Conflicts also are intensifying concerning the use of certain chemicals in livestock-raising and food packaging. Most recently, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., gave up an attempt to attach an amendment to the Senate foodsafety bill that would ban Bisphenol A (BPA) from baby bottles and sippy cups. The industrial chemical also is used as a hardening agent in plastic food and beverage containers, and in the linings of some food cans. 24 Feinstein bowed to what she called overwhelming industry pressure. Her amendment reflected concerns that have circulated for years among health advocates who cite studies linking BPA to cancer and growth and reproductive disorders. Some cite evidence that BPA and other chemicals used in food are “endocrine disrupters” that can bring on early puberty. 25 The FDA is assessing BPA’s effects but so far has rejected calls to ban the chemical. Food manufacturers cited that stance in opposing Feinstein’s proposed amendment. “We trust the FDA to complete a safety assessment for BPA, and we don’t think the Senate should short-circuit and undermine the FDA,” Faber of the Grocery Manufacturers Association told The Washington Post. 26 But some consumer advocates argue against allowing industry to use products and processes while their overall effects are under study. “There is a consumer right to know what we are eating,” says Hitchcock of U.S. PIRG. “There are questions of what you are mixing with what.” She cites the possibility that genetic modification of a fruit or vegetable, such as peanuts, could introduce genes to which many people are allergic. “Industry will certainly tell you that the issue requires more study,” Hitchcock says, adding that studies should be done in laboratories, not in the kitchens of unknowing consumers. “If something requires more study, it requires more study before we expose human beings to it, before we unleash the whirlwind. Don’t study on me, don’t study on my kids.” Doyle of the University of Georgia argues that the FDA screens genetically modified foods for allergens and other new elements before approving them for sale. He acknowledges that the rigor of other countries’ evaluation processes isn’t certain. “We don’t know what goes on in China and some of these other countries,” he says. “That I could see as a potential concern.” On another issue of heated debate — the use of a synthetic version of a naturally occurring growth hormone to stimulate milk production in dairy cows — Doyle argues that safety is assured. “The data I’ve seen is that the levels in animals are so low you don’t even see any difference from normal levels,” he says. “It is not thought to be a safety issue.” The substance in question is recombinant bovine somatropin (BST). As in the case of genetically modified foods, BST is banned in the EU. And in the United States, consumer distrust of human-introduced substances in milk — whatever the quantities — is significant enough that some dairyproduct makers — notably Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream — shun BST and announce its absence on their labels. 27 But some argue that those who decry BST, as well as food re-engineering in general, are rejecting valid scientific arguments for human intervention in the food chain. “Recombinant genetics often can result in an end product that is Dec. 17, 2010 1045 FOOD SAFETY much safer than what obtains from conventional breeding,” says Conko of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He cites pre-1970s cross-breeding of potato and tomato species with wild varieties, some of which had concentrations of the toxin produced by the nightshade plant that were higher than found in food for human consumption. Nightshade is a relative of the tomato and potato. As for BPA and other plastics, Conko (who is not a scientist but co-wrote a book on bio-engineering with a physician/molecular biologist) argues that the quantities of chemical products that migrate into bodies are tiny — far smaller than quantities of naturally occurring endocrine disrupters. “We humans are exposed to orders of magnitude greater levels of hormonally active substances — endocrine mimickers that occur naturally in foods, such as anything with soybeans in it,” he says. “The only retort critics can come up with is that if they occur naturally in food plants, our bodies have evolved to be immune. But there’s no scientific basis to that claim.” BACKGROUND Outrage and Regulation arly American food consumers were taking their lives in their hands. In 1859, a group of civic activists who had gathered in Boston began investigating the ingredients of some commonly purchased prepared foods. Historian Stephen Mihm of the University of Georgia recounts that their unappetizing finds included: arsenic in candy; extract of “nux vomica” — which contains the deadly poison strychnine — in beer; copper sulfate in pickles; lead traces in custard powder; and chalk and sheep’s brain in milk. 28 E 1046 CQ Researcher In an America on the verge of civil war, the would-be reformers failed in their mission to promote safety standards in the fledgling food-processing industry. Outrage by importers of American foods in the final decades of the 19th century made a much bigger impression on food producers and politicians. European buyers of what was labeled as American butter found it to be a concoction of beef fat, cattle stomach and the udders of cows, hogs and ewes. By the mid-1880s, after importers realized what they’d been buying, sales fell, not surprisingly. Meat exports to Europe also ran afoul of importers’ vigilance. In 1879, Germany charged that the United States was allowing meatpackers to export pork infected with cholera, as well as worms that spread trichinosis. A boycott of U.S. pork ensued. Another export scandal arose over contaminated beef. During the same period, Peter Collier, chief chemist of the U.S. Agriculture Department, was investigating adulterants in foods, a project that led him in 1880 to propose the first food and drug regulation bill. The measure was defeated. About 100 other bills to impose federal regulation on food (and drug) production also failed. It took a muckracking journalist to decisively alter the political climate in favor of government supervision of food production. Upton Sinclair’s bestselling The Jungle, a 1905 exposé in the form of a novel, shocked the nation with its gruesomely detailed accounts of Chicago slaughterhouses. Other journalists had been mining the same theme, but Sinclair produced such a compelling narrative that it seized the nation’s attention. “The workers fell into the vats; and when they were fished out,” Sinclair wrote about the sausage-making and meat-grinding process, “there was never enough of them to be worth exhibiting — sometimes they would be overlooked for days, till all but the bones of them had gone out to the world as Durham’s Pure Leaf Lard!” State inspectors on the premises, Sinclair wrote, didn’t do much inspecting. 29 Having written the book as a call to arms, Sinclair took full advantage of the sensation it created by calling for a law that would assign full-time federal inspectors to all slaughterhouses. In 1906, Congress acted on that demand, passing the Meat Inspection Act. The Pure Food and Drug Act, passed at the same time, set up a regulatory system for most other foods. The separate spheres for meats and non-meats persist to this day. At the time the law was enacted, both sets of inspectors worked for the Agriculture Department — the meat inspectors for the agency’s Bureau of Animal Industry, and the non-meat inspectors for the Bureau of Chemistry. In 1931, Congress created the FDA Meat inspectors were made responsible for detecting animals or carcasses that were “filthy, decomposed or putrid.” But, as Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, writes, those criteria exclude inspectors from searching for microorganisms that could endanger consumers. “They could not possibly ‘see’ bacteria and infections that did not make the animal sick.” 30 A System Transformed hen Congress established foodsafety regulatory systems, most of the food that most Americans ate came from their own or neighboring states. 31 The industrialized, globalized system of today took its present shape in the final decades of the 20th century. That transformation allowed a change in eating habits. Americans began consuming more fruits and vegetables, and far less red meat, largely because doctors and dietitians were urging consumers to adopt “heart-healthy” eating habits. W Continued on p. 1048 Chronology 1900s-1930s Exposure of scandalous foodsafety conditions leads to federal regulations. 1905 Journalist Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, a novelized investigation of Chicago slaughterhouses, shocks the nation. 1906 Passage of Meat Inspection Act and Pure Food and Drug Act creates parallel food regulatory systems for meats and all other foods. 1931 Congress creates separate Food and Drug agency, later transferring it from Agriculture Department to forerunner of Health and Human Services Department. • 1970s-1990s Americans change their eating habits and diets, scientific advances enable new forms of human intervention in food cultivation and a wave of widespread food-borne illness begins. 1970s Scientists transfer specific genes from one organism to another, leading to development of crops that resist pests, and other innovations. 1970 Americans spend 34 percent of their food dollars on food prepared outside the home — a practice that would later become far more prevalent. 1977 FDA orders limits on use of antibiotics in cattle feed, based on evidence the practice increases www.cqresearcher.com bacterial resistance to infectionfighting medication in humans. . . . Industry-backed Farm Belt lawmakers persuade FDA to cancel the directive. 2003 Hepatitis A outbreak kills three and sickens more than 550 others who ate contaminated scallions at a Pittsburgh-area Chi-Chi’s restaurant. 1993 Pathogen-contaminated hamburgers sold at Western Jack in the Box fast-food outlets kill four and sicken nearly 1,000. 2006 Before source is found of an E. coli outbreak that kills three and sickens at least 200 others, FDA warns consumers nationwide not to eat fresh spinach sold in bags. 1995 Consumption of fresh fruit is up by 24 pounds per capita, and of fresh vegetables by 31 pounds. 1997 An outbreak of hepatitis A hits hundreds of public school students and teachers in three states who had consumed Mexican strawberries. 1998 Listeria contamination in Ball Park brand hot dogs sets off outbreak that spreads across 22 states and kills 21 people. • 2000s Agribusiness steps up use of genetically modified crops; widespread outbreaks of illness from pathogens continue, prompting increased congressional interest; industry and consumer advocates team up on a legislative proposal for new food-regulation system. 2002 Genetically modified soybeans account for 68 percent of U.S. soy crop and genetically modified corn 26 percent of corn crop. . . . United States suspends importation of Mexican cantaloupes following a salmonella outbreak that kills two and sickens dozens. 2007 Chinese pet food tainted with an industrial chemical added by unscrupulous manufacturer kills as many as 4,000 dogs and cats in the United States. 2008 U.S. food imports from China triple from 2001 to $5.8 billion a year. . . . Americans spend 49 percent of their food money on meals prepared outside the home. . . . FDA approves sale of meat and milk from cloned animals, though the products do not immediately go on sale. 2009 Salmonella-tainted peanuts in snack foods found to have killed nine people since 2008; investigations show numerous health violations at Georgia plant where the nuts were processed. . . . House passes comprehensive food-safety legislation that would give FDA mandatory recall power over non-meat foods. 2010 Salmonella-contaminated eggs that sicken an estimated 1,600 people are traced to two Iowa farms where FDA inspectors find numerous health violations. . . . Senate passes foodsafety legislation similar to House version. . . . Technical hitch in Senate version makes new vote necessary but that possibility hangs in balance as Congress nears adjournment. Dec. 17, 2010 1047 FOOD SAFETY Contaminated Food’s Toll: Sickness, Agony and Maybe Death “A lot of survivors are faced with lifelong illness and other consequences.” lexander Thomas Donley was 6 years old when he ate a hamburger made from ground meat contaminated with E.coli from cattle. He died after a four-day agony that doctors were helpless to stop. “Alex’s last words to me were, ‘Don’t worry Mommy,’ ” Nancy Donley wrote in a tribute to her only child. “His last act before slipping into a coma was to mouth a kiss to his father.” 1 Alexander’s shattered parents, recalling their son’s concern for others, asked that his organs be donated, only to learn that the bacteria had essentially destroyed his body’s internal systems. “They had liquefied entire portions of his brain,” Donley wrote. A real estate agent by profession, Donley became a foodsafety activist, co-founding Safe Tables Our Priority, which played a key role in the establishment of stricter meat-inspection regulations in 1996. The rules, adopted by the Clinton administration, require a Hazard Analysis and Critical Point (HACCP) system at all meat-processing sites. 2 But the regulations don’t confer recall authority for meat. And E.coli contamination of ground beef continues to loom as a major problem. Proposed legislation now before Congress would grant recall authority to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for non-meat foods. The legislation would also require HACCP monitoring at all non-meat farms and food-processing facilities — in effect, imposing by law a system that was established by regulation for meat. “It just makes sense for regulatory agencies to have recall A Continued from p. 1046 By 1995, the Institute of Medicine reported that Americans ate, per capita, about 31 pounds more vegetables, and 24 pounds more fresh fruit, than they had in 1970. During the same 1970-1995 period, consumption of chicken per capita nearly doubled from 27 to 50 pounds, while beef consumption per capita dropped from 79 to 64 pounds. One result was that contaminated chickens, in which campylobacter and salmonella pose a constant threat, grew into a bigger potential threat than infected beef, which is susceptible to salmonella and E.coli contamination. Meanwhile, Americans were doing less and less cooking. As women entered the non-home workplace in massive num- 1048 CQ Researcher authority,” Donley says in an interview. “The public is absolutely stunned any time that they learn the agencies don’t have it.” The consequences of food-borne illness remain largely unknown, Donley says. The public record bears out her observation, even when victims don’t suffer Alexander’s fate. Stephanie Smith, a young dance instructor in Cold Spring, Minn., ate a contaminated hamburger at a family meal in 2007. She is now partially paralyzed from the waist down and suffering cognitive impairment. Cargill Meat Solutions Corp., which produced the burger, settled a lawsuit for an undisclosed amount that will, her lawyer and the company said in a joint statement, “provide for Ms. Smith’s care throughout her life.” The meat company is a unit of Cargill Inc., a Minnesota-based agribusiness and food multinational that is the largest privately owned American corporation. 3 Her future in dance is, of course, at best a work in progress. “She’s still wheelchair-bound,” attorney William Marler told The Associated Press in May. “She’s making progress. She has been able to walk with braces and a walker. She’s continuing to work very, very hard at her rehabilitation for both her cognitive issues and her physical issues.” 4 Carol Lobato, a 77-year-old grandmother from Littleton, Colo., told a congressional hearing in September about her experiences last July after she tasted a rattlesnake-cake appetizer made with insufficiently cooked egg at a Morrison, Colo., restaurant that specializes in wild game. The egg was later traced to two Iowa farming operations — Wright County Egg and Hillandale bers, households came to depend on restaurant take-out fare for much of what they consumed. In 1970, according to the Institute of Medicine, 34 percent of Americans’ food purchases were for meals prepared elsewhere. By 1996, that had climbed to 46 percent, and by 2008 to about 49 percent, worth $565 billion. At the same time, the growing American appetite for fruits and vegetables, and for foods and ingredients from other countries, propelled a major expansion in food imports. In 1999-2009, vegetable imports increased from 4.6 million to 7.2 million metric tons, and fruit imports increased from 8.2 million to 9.9 million metric tons, while fish and shellfish imports went from 1.7 million to 2.3 million metric tons. 32 As diet and eating habits changed, food production became ever more industrialized, down to the farm level. From 1994 to 1995 alone, for instance, the number of hog farms nationwide fell from 207,980 to 182,700, but the number of hogs — about 58.2 million head — didn’t change, and pork production increased. “Technological advances in disease control, genetics and management practices in the feeding and raising of hogs,” was the reason, an economist for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago reported in 1996. “Hog farmers today can produce the same amount of pork as in 1980 — the peak year for per capita pork production — using less labor, less feed, and an inventory of 20% fewer hogs.” 33 The New York Times/Ben Garvin if the new national health care law’s Farms — later found to have been prohibition against denying insurance highly contaminated by salmonella. coverage for preexisting conditions is By the next day, she had been rushed upheld. to the emergency room with chills, “I don’t think we’ll ever get to pervomiting and diarrhea. Her symptoms fection — a totally risk-free food supply,” worsened upon release, and she was Donley says. Given that reality, she says, hospitalized for another five days. consumers should support rigorous regLobato’s husband and grandson had ulation and take their own food-handling also tasted the dish but suffered only precautions seriously. “Most people think mild illness. Unlike them, she takes it’s just that someone has diarrhea and medication for rheumatoid arthritis, Stephanie Smith, a young dance instructor from Minnesota, was partially then it’s done. But when things go wrong, which weakened her immune system’s paralyzed after eating a contaminated they can go horribly wrong.” defenses against bacterial infection. hamburger produced by Cargill Meat “I have lost my stamina,” Loba— Peter Katel Solutions Corp. to told the House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee in Sep1 “Alexander Thomas,” Nancy Donley, 1999, www.safetables.org/victim_wall/ tember. “I often experience indigestion, and it is difficult for display.cfm?id=2. me to enjoy certain foods. I feel very tired and require rest 2 Rick Weiss, “President Orders Overhaul of Meat Safety Inspections,” The during the day. . . . My doctors told me that I almost cer- Washington Post, July 7, 1996, p. A1. 3 “Stephanie Smith and Cargill Meat Solutions Settle E. coli Lawsuit,” press tainly would have died without aggressive intervention.” 5 Overall, Lobato testified, “the salmonella infection is not over release, May 12, 2010, www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/stephanie-smith-andcargill-meat-solutions-settle-e-coli-lawsuit; “Cargill Inc. Company Profile,” Yahoo! for me.” Finance, undated, http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/40/40079.html. That uncertain outcome would surprise many members of 4 Quoted in Steve Karnowski, “Stephanie Smith, Cargill Settle E. Coli Case the public, Donley says. “A lot of survivors are faced with life- After New York Times Story About Tainted Meat,” The Associated Press, May 12, 2010, www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/stephanie-smith-cargilllong illness and other consequences — arthritis, high blood s_n_574290.html. pressure, bad eyesight, reproductive problems,” she says. And 5 “House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investimany of them have become uninsurable — which could change gations Holds Hearing on the 2010 Egg Recall and Salmonella Outbreak,” CQ Congressional Transcripts, Sept. 22, 2010. Another effect of stepped-up industrialization was that the effects of a single contamination episode could spread wide and fast. Experts point to a 1994 event in which thousands of people nationwide suffered salmonella poisoning after eating ice cream produced by Schwan’s Sales Enterprises, a Marshall, Minn., company. In Minnesota alone, the ice cream made an estimated 32,000 people ill. The vast majority didn’t suffer symptoms severe enough to warrant medical attention. But the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported at least 645 serious cases in 28 states. 34 Investigation traced the salmonella to tanker trucks that delivered ice cream mix to the company’s production www.cqresearcher.com plant. The trucks previously had carried raw, unpasteurized liquid eggs. These are easily contaminated by salmonella, because the bacteria are found in chickens’ intestinal tracts and often migrate to shells. And if the unbroken eggs aren’t sanitized, the bacteria easily migrate to whites and yolks once the shells are shattered. 35 Genes and Drugs et another major change overtook the food industry starting in the 1970s. Consumer and small-farmer advocates began sounding alarms over biological engineering, especially on animals being fed for slaughter. 36 Y Cattle-raisers had been using one of the techniques at issue since the 1950s, when they started feeding their livestock low doses of antibiotics. Curing or preventing disease wasn’t the point. The drugs were used to stimulate growth, though scientists didn’t understand why they had that effect. But scientists did recognize that bacteria routinely exposed to antibiotics would develop immunities to the drugs, thereby defeating their purpose. As the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria began growing into a global danger to humans during the final decades of the 20th century, the use of bacteria in animals bred for slaughter came under scrutiny. Dec. 17, 2010 1049 FOOD SAFETY In 1977, data showing that cattleborne bacteria were building antibiotic immunities persuaded the FDA to propose limiting antibiotics in animal feed. But Congress intervened, under pressure from Farm Belt lawmakers as well as pharmaceutical and livestock industry lobbies. Nevertheless, the issue didn’t go away. In 2004, the General Accounting Office, now the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress’ investigative agency, reported that data from a variety of scientific sources showed that bacteria resistant to certain antibiotics were appearing in humans who had eaten meat from animals fed the relevant antibiotics. “Strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria infecting humans were indistinguishable from those found in animals, and the researchers concluded that the animals were the source of the infection,” the GAO said. 37 The GAO researchers acknowledged that the magnitude of the problems caused by drug-resistant bacteria transference was uncertain. And one study carried out in 1997-2001 concluded that no clear trend could be detected of heightened antibiotic resistance of salmonella bacteria. Another study said that banning a specific antibiotic (virginiamycin) in animals in the United States would only lower the number of human deaths by less than one in a five-year span. However, studies that found only minimal health risks from antibiotic use were greatly outnumbered by studies concluding that antibiotics in animals pose a significant risk to humans. The use of antibiotics is a relatively straightforward issue — if only by contrast with the more complicated question of genetic modifications and cloning in food crops and animals. As the new century opened, scientists at Texas A&M, the University of Connecticut and the University of Tennessee produced cloned cows. The FDA began studying whether meat and milk from cloned farm animals 1050 CQ Researcher Small Fraction of Food Imports Are Inspected Only 1.5 percent of the more than 9.5 million non-meat food imports into the United States were physically examined by Food and Drug Administration inspectors in 2009. Non-Meat Food Inspections, 2009 Import Shipments 9.5 million Import physical exams 146,200 Percent of shipments physically examined 1.5% Source: “Appendix II: FDA Field Examinations,” Fiscal Years 2006 through 2009, Government Accountability Office was safe to eat. In 2003, the agency tentatively approved that meat for human consumption. But an advisory panel formed by the agency led the FDA to withdraw that decision on the grounds that scientific evidence of safety was lacking. 38 Then, after issuing another tentative approval in 2006, the FDA decided in early 2008 to allow the sale for human consumption of meat and milk from cloned cows, pigs, goats and their offspring. “Food from cattle, swine, and goat clones is as safe to eat as that from their more conventionally bred counterparts,” the FDA said in a formal risk assessment. 39 Food from cloned animals wasn’t expected to go on sale for some time, but the decision prompted angry reactions from consumer advocates. “At a time when we have a readily ac- knowledged crisis in our food-safety system, the FDA is spending its resources and energy and political capital on releasing a safety assessment for something that no one but a handful of companies wants,” Joseph Mendelson, legal director of the Center for Food Safety, an advocacy organization, told The Washington Post. 40 Outbreaks utbreaks of serious food-borne illness have cropped up repeatedly over the past 20 years, though most have attracted little attention. For example, the number of outbreaks with known origins ranged from 239 in 1990 to 258 in 1997 but the number of outbreaks whose origins weren’t determined was higher for every year in that range, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 41 In 2007, according to the CDC’s most recent analysis, 1,097 outbreaks were reported, with cause established in 497 cases. The outbreaks killed a total of 18 people — five of whom died from salmonella contamination, three from listeria, two from E.coli, one from botulism, two from norovirus, one from mushroom toxin and four from unknown contaminants. 42 The first widespread deadly outbreak of food-borne illness to attract national attention occurred in 1993. Hamburgers sold by the Jack in the Box fast-food chain in the states of Washington, Idaho, California and Nevada were contaminated with E.coli. Four children died and nearly 1,000 people were sickened, many requiring hospitalization. The Marler Clark law firm in Seattle, which represented the biggest group of victims, reported that the restaurant firm paid more than $50 million in settlements. 43 The outbreak led the Clinton administration to adopt new meat-inspection regulations, which required a HACCP plan in each processing plant. But the regulations were subject to interpretation O Getty Image/Christian Peterson and did not entirely mination of packaged prevent meat-borne sliced turkey killed outbreaks. eight people and sickThree years later, ened at least 54. 49 In 2003, Pennsylvania an outbreak of inand CDC investigators testinal illnesses traced the single biggest traced to cyclospora outbreak of hepatitis A in contamination in U.S. history to a Chi-Chi’s Guatemalan raspberrestaurant in a Pittsburgh ries hit about 850 suburb. Three people died people in more than and 565 were registered 20 states, as well as as ill after eating contain Ontario, Canada. minated scallions. 50 Later in 1996, more Fresh, raw foods than 60 people in were also the source of Colorado and elsetwo later, major contamwhere became ill and ination episodes. In 2004, one child died from Four children died and nearly 1,000 people were sickened after eating Paramount Farms of CalE.coli in unpasteurhamburgers tainted with E.coli bacteria that were sold by the Jack in ifornia recalled more than ized apple juice. 44 the Box fast-food chain in four Western states. A law firm representing In 1997, an out13 million pounds of victims said the chain paid more than $50 million in settlements. break of hepatitis A raw almonds, found to that sickened hunhave been the source of dreds of public school students and teach- monella contamination of Mexican can- an outbreak of salmonella that hit at ers in Michigan, Maine and Wisconsin taloupes. In 2002, after finding sources least 25 people in six Midwestern and was traced to a 1.7 million-pound ship- of bacterial infection at many cantaloupe Western states. And in 2006, raw spinach grown at ment of Mexican strawberries. The pres- growing and packing operations in Mexident of a San Diego food broker plead- ico, the FDA suspended U.S. importa- Earthbound Farm in California’s San 47 Joaquin Valley and accidentally contaed guilty to fraud for not disclosing tion of the fruit from Mexico. E.coli contamination in ground beef minated with cow droppings was idenwhere the strawberries had been grown, in an attempt to evade a requirement prompted major recalls in 2007. Topps tified as the source of an E.coli contathat school lunch food be grown and Meat of New Jersey recalled 21.7 mil- mination in which three people, including lion pounds of frozen hamburger after a 2-year-old boy, died. At least 200 othprocessed in the United States. 45 U.S.-produced meat was the source a positive test for the pathogen. And ers fell seriously ill. While investigators of the deadliest outbreak of the 1990s. Cargill Meat Solutions pulled 845,000 hunted for the pathogen’s source, the In late 1998 and early 1999, listeria in pounds of ground beef after an out- FDA warned consumers not to eat fresh Ball Park brand hot dogs killed 21 break in which more than a dozen spinach sold in bags. 51 people and sickened at least 100 oth- people were sickened. The following ers. The victims were spread across year, the potential for an outbreak led 22 states. Government investigators then to the biggest beef recall in U.S. hisdiscovered that the USDA failed to tory — 143 million pounds — pulled issue a press release announcing a re- from the market by the Westland/Hallcall of the franks after they had been mark Meat Co. of Chino, Calif. The identified as the cause of the first four move followed release of an underdeaths. And the Bil Mar meat pro- cover video by the Humane Society of cessing plant — which produced the the United States showing plant workhot dogs for Sara Lee Corp. — issued ers forcing sick cows — “downers” — only a low-key recall announcement, to walk. Meat from some of them 48 s the post-election “lame-duck” with no indication of the deadliness ended up in the food supply. 46 That same year, a deadlier outbreak congressional session winds up, of the contamination. In the early 2000s, two deaths and surfaced in New York and other the fate of comprehensive food-safety dozens of illnesses were traced to sal- Northeastern states, as listeria conta- legislation remains unclear. CURRENT SITUATION Pending Legislation A www.cqresearcher.com Dec. 17, 2010 1051 FOOD SAFETY How to Handle a Recalled Product The Food and Drug Administration as well as Food Safety News regularly publish the names of recalled food products on their websites (www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ArchiveRecalls/2010/default.htm; www.foodsafetynews.com/sections/food-recalls/). Consumers of a recalled product should follow the guidelines specific to each recall. This generally entails discarding the product and contacting the company for a refund. If the product has already been consumed, a physician should be visited immediately. When recalls relate to product-dating codes, it is important to note that “best by” dates are dates recommended for best flavor or quality, and are not purchase or safety dates. Similarly, “sell by” dates refer to how long the product should be displayed in stores. “Use by” dates are the last dates recommended for use of a product. Although recalls such as those of Iowa eggs in August make headlines, many smaller recalls largely go unnoticed by the general public. Below are a few recent examples: • Dec. 8, 2010 — Mojave Foods Corp. recalls packages of walnuts because of potential exposure to salmonella. • Dec. 6, 2010 — Bumble Bee recalls canned chicken salad to correct “best by” date on package. • Nov. 17, 2010 — Cheese manufacturer Del Bueno recalls several varieties because of potential contamination by listeria bacteria. • Nov. 4, 2010 — Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene orders recall of Baugher’s apple cider amid investigation of E.coli infections. • Oct. 22, 2010 — Nestlé USA recalls Raisinets, which may contain undeclared peanuts. Sources: Food and Drug Administration; Food Safety News As recently as Nov. 30, politicians and consumer advocates backing legislation to expand the FDA’s powers were celebrating what seemed to be a decisive moment in attempts to overhaul the food-safety system. “We applaud the U.S. Senate’s passage of historic bipartisan food-safety legislation,” Erik D. Olson, director of the nonpartisan Pew Health Group food programs, said following Senate passage of the bill on a 73-25 roll call vote. 52 The fact that 15 Republicans joined 58 Democrats seemed to signal a rare moment of cooperation between the parties, especially on issues involving government 1052 CQ Researcher regulation. 53 “I don’t get it,” liberal blogger Kevin Drum of the Mother Jones magazine website wrote hours after the vote. “Is food safety genuinely different?” But a problem popped up that very night. Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee noticed that one section of the Senate bill lists a set of fees. In constitutional terms, these are taxes. And the Constitution requires all tax measures to originate in the House. “We expect the House to assert its rights under the Constitution to be the place where revenue bills begin,” a Republican House staffer told Roll Call, a Washington political newspaper. 54 One mechanism for correcting the problem — bringing the bill back to the Senate to approve a fixed version — seemed impractical. That move would require unanimous consent of the members, and Republican Sen. Coburn, a staunch opponent, was certain to deny his approval. 55 By early December, a Republican cosponsor said the bill’s immediate prospects were dim. “I would imagine with the hurdle they are up against, it probably is dead for this year,” Sen. Richard M. Burr, R-N.C., told CQ Today. Later, congressional staffers said that chances of passage had improved. 56 In the new Congress the bill’s prospects would be uncertain. In the House, the new Republican majority will include a contingent of Tea Party members, who generally oppose government regulation. And the mood in the Tea Party grass roots is that the food-safety bill represents a government attack. “The FDA will have such sweeping regulatory powers they will be able to back-door their way into repressive regulations of small farmers anytime they please,” a Roanoke, Va., Tea Party group declared on its website, urging supporters to push their representative into voting against the bill if it comes up for a second vote. “Freedom affects all of us whether we grow organic veggies . . . or collect guns. When the government seeks to violate your right to pursue happiness. . . . they effectively destroy the fabric of this nation.” 57 Those views are being promoted by figures influential on the Tea Party right. “How much money is this going to cost? And who pays for it in the end?,” asked Fox News TV commentator Glenn Beck on his radio show (a nonFox production that’s distributed by Premiere Radio Network), speaking on Nov. 19, when the Senate bill was being readied for passage. “It’s passed on to the consumer. . . . You’re going to do something that causes the price of food to go up even faster? What, Continued on p. 1054 At Issue: Would strengthening FDA regulatory authority improve food safety? yes l CHRIS WALDROP GREGORY CONKO DIRECTOR, FOOD POLICY INSTITUTE, CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA SENIOR FELLOW, COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, DECEMBER 2010 WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, DECEMBER 2010 egislation pending before Congress would modernize the 100-year-old law that created the Food and Drug Administration, greatly empowering the FDA to improve the nation’s food safety. The most important and basic change to the FDA’s authority would be a specific, statutory mandate to prevent food-borne illness rather than waiting to act until people become sick and die. This is a fundamental shift for the agency, and food experts say it is critical to improving food safety. First, food processors will be required to identify where contamination may occur in the food production process and take steps to prevent it. This will help reduce the chance that food is contaminated before it leaves the plant. Second, the FDA will be required to implement science-based minimum standards for the safe production of fresh fruits and vegetables. FDA has never before issued such mandatory standards, despite a series of nationwide outbreaks linked to leafy greens, green onions, sprouts, peppers and other fresh produce. Third, FDA will have greater authority to assure imported food meets the same safety standards as domestically produced food. Americans consume an increasing amount of imported food, yet FDA inspects less than 1 percent of imported food and has limited reach beyond the border. The new authority will allow FDA to hold importers accountable for verifying that imported food meets safety standards and to develop systems for assuring food is produced safely overseas. These new standards will be accompanied by greater oversight of food processing facilities through increased frequency of inspections. Previously, FDA had no mandate for inspections and only inspected food facilities on average once every 10 years, hardly sufficient to deter bad actors. Finally, FDA will be granted authority to develop a foodtraceability system and mandate a recall of contaminated food, which will improve the government’s ability to respond to a problem and reduce the time it takes to remove contaminated food from the market. The necessity of mandatory recall authority became clear when, during the 2009 salmonella outbreak linked to peanut butter products caused 714 illnesses and nine deaths, Westco Fruit and Nut Co. refused FDA’s request that it recall suspect peanut products. Food contaminated with deadly pathogens is the very essence of a market failure, as consumers cannot determine for themselves whether food is contaminated. Providing FDA with enhanced food-safety authority will help reduce the tens of millions of illnesses and thousands of deaths that occur each year as a result of food-borne illness. c onsumers would benefit from safer food, but expanding the FDA’s authority is unlikely to help reach that goal. Pending legislation would increase inspections, extend Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) rules to farms and other food producers and give FDA authority to mandate recalls. These would waste taxpayer money and put huge burdens on small and mid-sized producers, but not deliver safer food. More frequent inspections seem appealing, as current law only requires facilities to be inspected every 10 years. But the new law would merely require inspections for most producers every five years, and every three years for high-risk facilities. But even with more frequent visits, inspectors would still be thwarted by a practical inability to find microbial pathogens. Inspectors can examine whether facilities appear clean and check the producer’s records of risk-reduction efforts. But records are only as good as the record keeper, and a facility that looks clean can still harbor pathogens. It’s worth remembering that slaughterhouses must have a USDA inspector on the premises every day they operate, but meat and poultry still account for about half of all food-borne illnesses. In theory, expanding HACCP could generate improvements. That program currently requires meat, poultry and seafood producers to identify points in their production streams where pathogens or other hazards may enter the system and take steps to make those processes safer. At the margin, it probably has resulted in modest improvements in those industries. As envisioned, the concept lets producers tailor efforts to their individual circumstances. As implemented by regulators, however, HACCP sets costly, rigid and out-of-date requirements that disincentivize firms from adopting innovative processes that could deliver genuine safety improvements. Finally, granting FDA the power to order recalls is a solution in search of a problem. Supporters would be hardpressed to identify a single case in which producers refused to honor a recall request based on evidence that a product was actually or likely to be tainted. But with public and media pressure for authorities to “do something” any time there is a food-borne illness outbreak, an FDA with unchecked power could be expected to order recalls on countless products that are perfectly safe, with negative impacts on prices and consumer choice. Increasing FDA’s authority would waste taxpayer money on activities unlikely to improve safety, while driving many small and medium-sized producers out of the market and raising the cost of the food we eat. yes no no www.cqresearcher.com Dec. 17, 2010 1053 FOOD SAFETY Continued from p. 1052 are you out of your mind? No, no. This is what Stalin did.” 58 Besides, Beck said, “Show me the country that has a safer food supply than us, can you, please?” 59 A rival TV-radio host, liberal Ed Schultz, later responded on MSNBC: “Everything goes back to Stalin with this guy. . . . Let’s talk about the 5,000 Americans who die each year from food illnesses.” Legal judgments and settlements in death and illness cases, Schultz argued, are the real food-price inflators. “Let’s talk about the billions of dollars American farmers and manufacturers lose in cases of tainted eggs or spinach or meat,” Schultz said. “You don’t think that leads to higher prices, do you?” 60 Engineered Salmon s the FDA weighs approval to sell genetically modified salmon, opposition is rising among environmentalists, food-safety advocates and some politicians. Democratic Sen. Mark Begich and Republican Rep. Don Young, both of Alaska, have introduced bills to bar the FDA from giving final approval to a recently developed breed of salmon that has been genetically engineered by a Waltham, Mass., firm, AquaBounty. As a fallback, the lawmakers — from a state whose coastal waters are rich in naturally spawned salmon — are demanding that the FDA require the altered salmon to be labeled as genetically modified. “Our main objective is to stop the FDA from ever approving this science project that will potentially harm wild Alaska salmon, while posing human and other environmental health risks,” Begich said in a press release. “But, at the very least, any type of genetically engineered fish has to have a label. If the FDA decides this is safe for human consumption, it should be clear to the public what’s in and not in the package.” 61 A 1054 CQ Researcher The salmon that AquaBounty developed contains a gene from the ocean pout, a species found both in inshore and offshore waters, and a growth hormone from a Chinook salmon. In combination, they stimulate growth to full size in about 700 days from first feeding, versus about 850 days in unmodified salmon, according to the company. 62 If the company gets FDA approval to begin raising the fish, they would be cultivated at two inland fish farms, in Panama and Canada. Further expansion would require additional FDA approval. 63 Begich and Young made their moves amid indications from the FDA that it would approve the AquaBounty salmon. The agency’s veterinary medicine advisory committee gave preliminary approval in September: “The food from AquAdvantage salmon . . . is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon, and . . . there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from the consumption of food from this animal.” 64 Opponents are not pointing to hard evidence of potential harm to people who eat modified salmon. But some critics are raising environmental objections to the salmon proposal. Adding to the world salmon stock would increase demand for the wild fish on which salmon feed, Martin Smith, a professor of environmental economics at Duke University, told Canada’s CBC News in early December. “If you increase demand . . . you can exacerbate problems with overfishing in some places,” he said. 65 Present FDA rules wouldn’t require the modified salmon to be labeled as such. But the agency said it would consider requests to require that consumers be informed. 66 “One side of the argument says let’s give consumers sovereignty over their food choices,” said William K. Hallman, director of the Food Policy Institute at Rutgers University in New Jersey. “The other says we’ve done the science on this and it’s no different, so if we put a label on it, we’re implying it’s somehow risky and that’s like governmentimposed false advertising.” 67 Indeed, the Biotechnology Industry Association said in a statement that because AquAdvantage salmon “are nutritionally and biologically the same as any other Atlantic salmon . . . there is no reason for it to be labeled as different.” 68 But some food-safety specialists argue that shoppers are entitled to be informed. “The public wants to know,” said food expert Nestle at New York University, “and the public has a right to know.” 69 OUTLOOK Down to the Wire or many food-safety experts and advocates, the near future depends on events in the closing weeks of 2010. Some supporters of the foodsafety bill pending in Congress argue that if it doesn’t get enacted this year, its prospects are poor. “2010 is almost over, and realistically 2011 is shaping up to be the most politically contentious year since Obama took office,” food-safety lawyer Marler wrote on the liberal Huffington Post website. “For any legislation, that means more roadblocks and more politics. Translation, ‘Anyone who believes this bill will pass if it is introduced during the next congressional session is in ‘La-La Land.’ ” 70 For Marler and others, the legislation would mark a fundamental change in food-safety oversight. “It would put the FDA in a proactive stance,” said Ami V. Gadhia, policy counsel at Consumers Union, a longtime New York-based advocacy and research organization. Like others on her side of the debate, Gadhia would eventually like to see creation of one F agency to regulate the safety of all food, ending the division between FDA and USDA jurisdiction. “I see that as something that is still off in the distance as a policy goal,” she adds. Regulation opponents are hoping that the 2010 food-safety legislation dies, a development that they argue would be important in setting the stage for a growth in local agriculture. In their view, small farms would thrive if the proposed new regulatory system isn’t put in place. “The trend is toward local food,” says Kennedy of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund. “Unless there’s some type of government overregulation or if an agency like FDA expands on its power, that trend isn’t going to change.” If that trend were to continue, Kennedy argues, it would generate enormous economic and demographic changes. “Government policies over the years have hurt the small farmer and led to at least some of the population migration into the cities,” he says. “Strengthening local agriculture would remake the country.” Kennedy and other local-food advocates tend to oppose genetic modification and other forms of food bioengineering, putting them in the same camp with some advocates of steppedup government regulation. Bioengineering advocates are unsure if public opinion will shift in their favor. “Ten years ago I thought for sure, after 10 years of positive examples with biotech crops, that public reluctance would ease,” says Conko of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “But the general public is not even aware of biotech. And on the level of politically active advocates, it is a big enough issue, and I think one that is resistant to rational discussion.” Nevertheless, “There are now about 25 countries growing biotech crops; 10 years ago it was about 10 countries,” Conko says. “These tend to be lesser-developed countries primarily www.cqresearcher.com growing cotton. As they’re adopting these plants, they’re seeing firsthand that they’re not the agents of calamity that the “green” activists have been saying.” Still, Conko concedes, “Consumer acceptance is a big hurdle.” Others in the food-policy world remain focused on food-borne illness and how to prevent it. Doyle of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety notes that information-gathering on outbreaks and their causes has improved as reflected in the latest foodborne disease estimates. CDC uses state and local health departments as “sentinels” to track outbreaks as soon they surface. “The surveillance system has gotten incredibly better over the last three to five years,” Doyle says, “and it’s going to get even better, because the CDC has invested in five new sentinel sites that will be using even better surveillance and investigation protocols.” Though estimates of disease incidence have gone down, Doyle says, “that’s not necessarily because we’re getting better, but because we’ll have greater precision for estimating.” Notes 1 “Inspectional Observations,” U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Aug. 12-Aug. 30, 2010, www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/Centers Offices/ORA/ORAElectronicReadingRoom/UCM 224399.pdf. 2 Ibid. 3 “House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Holds Hearing on the 2010 Egg Recall and Salmonella Outbreak,” CQ Congressional Transcripts, Sept. 22, 2010. 4 Quoted in Philip Brasher, “Egg recall: DeCoster defense says it’s complicated,” Des Moines Register, Sept. 23, 2010. 5 Michael Moss, “Peanut Case Shows Holes in Food Safety Net,” The New York Times, Feb. 9, 2009, p. A1. 6 “House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee,” op. cit. 7 Ibid. 8 The three are E.coli 0157:H7; listeria monocytogenes, cyclospora cayetanensis; and campylobacter jejuni. Elaine Scallan, et al., “Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States — Major Pathogens,” and Elaine Scallan, et al., “Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States — Unspecified Agents,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2011, cdc.gov/eid. 9 “Dr. Coburn Says Food Safety Bill Won’t Make Food Safer,” press release, Sen. Tom Coburn Web site, Nov. 30, 2010, http://coburn. senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?Con tentRecord_id=1198e228-79c8-4f29-a958-d7fc 90de977e. 10 Ibid., pp. 8-10; Lisa Shames, “FDA Could Strengthen Oversight of Imported Food by Improving Enforcement and Seeking Additional Authorities,” Government Accountability Office, May 6, 2010, p. 13, www.gao.gov/ new.items/d10699t.pdf. 11 Marla Cone, “Stalking a killer in our greens,” Los Angeles Times, Aug. 13, 2007, p. A1; David Brown, “E. Coli Blamed on Spinach,” The Washington Post, Sept. 15, 2006, p. A4; David Barboza and Alexei Barrionuevo, “Filler in Animal Feed is Open Secret in China,” The New York Times, April 30, 2007, www.nytimes. com/2007/04/30/business/worldbusiness/30food. html; Fred Gale and Jean C. Buzby, “Imports From China and Food Safety Issues,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, July, 2009, www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EI B52/EIB52_ReportSummary.pdf. For background, see Peter Katel, “Consumer Safety,” CQ Researcher, Oct. 12, 2007, pp. 841-864. 12 Clark Kauffman, “Supreme Court gives DeCoster partial win,” Des Moines Register, April 26, 2001, p. B6. 13 Ibid. 14 Adjoa Adolfo and Melissa Attias, “S 510,” CQ bill Analysis, Nov. 25, 2009; Lyndsey Layton, “Food safety bill,” (sidebar), The Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2010, p. A11. 15 Ibid. 16 “S. 510,” U.S. Senate, March 3, 2009, p. 74, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc. cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s510is.txt. pdf. 17 David Barboza and Alexei Barrionuevo, op. cit. 18 Abigail Goldman and Don Lee, “Reported pet deaths at 8,500, FDA says,” Los Angeles Times, May 4, 2007, p. C3; a later correction by the Associated Press put the number of deaths at 4,000. Also see Sharon LaFraniere, “2 Executed in China For Selling Tainted Milk,” The New York Times, Nov. 25, 2009, p. A10. 19 Rick Weiss, “Tainted Chinese Imports Common,” The Washington Post, May 20, 2007, p. A1. Dec. 17, 2010 1055 FOOD SAFETY 20 Laurel Adams, “FDA Overseas Offices Struggle to Meet Growing Import Demands,” Center for Public Integrity, Oct. 26, 2010, www.publicintegrity.org/daily_watchdog/entry /2576/; Lisa Shames, op. cit., p. 1. 21 “Food Manufacturing NAICS 311,” U.S. Department of Commerce, February 2010, www.ita.doc.gov/td/ocg/outlook10_food.pdf. 22 “Genetically Modified Foods —“Experts View Regimen of Safety Tests as Adequate but FDA Evaluation Process Could Be Enhanced,” General Accounting Office [now Government Accountability Office], May 2002, p. 4, www.gao.gov/new.items/d02566. pdf. 23 Rick Weiss, “U.S. Uneasy About Biotech Food,” The Washington Post, Dec. 7, 2006, p. A16; “Genetically Modified Foods . . . ,” ibid., pp. 4-7. 24 April Fulton, “Senate Lurches Ahead on Food Safety Bill, But Hurdles Remain,” Shots (blog), NPR, Nov. 18, 2010, www.npr.org/blogs/ health/2010/11/18/131407187/senate-lurchesahead-on-food-safety-bill-but-hurdles-remain; “Draft Assessment of Bisphenol A For Use in Food Contact Applications,” FDA, Aug. 14, 2008, pp. 2-3, www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ AC/08/briefing/2008-0038b1_01_02_FDA%20 BPA%20Draft%20Assessment.pdf. 25 Feinstein quoted in Fulton, ibid.; Lyndsey Layton, “Food safety bill’s ban on BPA resisted,” The Washington Post, April 26, 2010, www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ article/2010/04/25/AR2010042503408.html. 26 Quoted in Layton, ibid. 27 Jane Black, “Ice cream maker to adjust labeling,” The Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2010, p. A22; Steve Connor, “Bovine growth hormone ‘could cut CO2 emissions,” The Independent (U.K.), July 1, 2008, p. 4. 28 Except where otherwise indicated, this subsection is drawn from Stephen Mihm, “A nation of outlaws,” Boston Globe, Aug. 26, 2007, www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/ 2007/08/26/a_nation_of_outlaws/; Marion Nestle, Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety (2010). “Significant Dates in U.S. Food and Drug Law History,” U.S. Food and Drug Administration, updated Oct. 14, 2010, www.fda.gov/About FDA/WhatWeDo/History/Milestones/ucm1283 05.htm; John P. Swann, “About FDA,” U.S. Food and Drug Administration, updated June 18, 2009, www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/ Origin/ucm124403.htm. 29 Quoted in Nestle, op. cit., p. 51. 30 Nestle, op. cit., p. 52. 31 Unless otherwise indicated, material from this subsection is drawn from Ensuring Safe Food: From Production to Consumption (1998), Institute of Medicine, pp. 51-62, www.nap.edu/ openbook.php?record_id=6163&page=51; and Robert B. Wallace and Maria Oria, eds., Enhancing Food Safety: The Role of the Food and Drug Administration (2010), Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, pp. 35-72, http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_ id=12892&page=35. 32 “U.S. Food Imports,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, updated April 21, 2010, www.ers.usda.gov/Data/food imports. 33 Gary L. Benjamin, “Industrialization in Hog Production: Implications for Midwest Agriculture,” Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, March 8, 1996, www.chicagofed.org/digital_ assets/others/events/1996/changing_rural_econo my/1996_changing_rural_economy_of_the_mid west_benjamin.pdf. 34 Tony Kennedy, “Schwan’s paying customers who agree not to sue,” Star Tribune (Min- About the Author Peter Katel is a CQ Researcher staff writer who previously reported on Haiti and Latin America for Time and Newsweek and covered the Southwest for newspapers in New Mexico. He has received several journalism awards, including the Bartolomé Mitre Award for coverage of drug trafficking, from the Inter-American Press Association. He holds an A.B. in university studies from the University of New Mexico. His recent reports include “New Strategy in Iraq,” “Rise in Counterinsurgency” and “Caring for Veterans.” 1056 CQ Researcher neapolis), Nov. 19, 1994, p. A1; “Salmonella Victims Settle With Ice Cream Maker,” The Associated Press, Nov. 18, 1994; Barnaby J. Feder, “Obscure Company Gains Unwelcome Prominence,” The New York Times, Nov. 23, 1994, p. A26; Thomas W. Hennessy M.D., et al., “A National Outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis Infections From Ice Cream,” New England Journal of Medicine, May 16, 1996, www.nejm.org/ doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199605163342001#t= articleBackground. 35 Ibid. 36 Unless otherwise indicated, this subsection is drawn from Nestle, op. cit.; Rick Weiss, “FDA Rules Override Warnings About Drug,” The Washington Post, March 4, 2007, www. washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ 2007/03/03/AR2007030301311.html; “Antibiotic Resistance: Federal Agencies Need to Better Focus Efforts to Address Risk to Humans from Antibiotic Use in Animals,” General Accounting Office, April, 2004, www.gao.gov/new.items/ d04490.pdf. 37 “Antibiotic Resistance,” op. cit., p. 17. 38 “Scientists use simpler method to create third U.S. cloned cow,” Florida Times-Union, Aug. 30, 2000, p. A6; Andrew Pollack and Andrew Martin, “F.D.A. Tentatively Declares Food From Cloned Animals to Be Safe,” The Washington Post, Dec. 29, 2006, p. A1. 39 Quoted in Rick Weiss, “FDA Says Clones Are Safe for Food,” The Washington Post, Jan. 15, 2008, p. A1. 40 Quoted in ibid. 41 “Annual Listing of Foodborne Disease Outbreaks, United States, 1990-1997,” in “Outbreak Surveillance Data,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Updated Sept. 19, 2010, www. cdc.gov/outbreaknet/surveillance_data.html. 42 “Surveillance for Foodborne Disease Outbreaks — United States, 2007,” U.S. Centers for Disease Control, Aug. 13, 2010, www.cdc.gov/ mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5931a1.htm?s_ cid=mm5931a1_w. 43 “Jack in the Box E.coli Outbreak — Western States,” Marler Clark attorneys, undated, www. marlerclark.com/case_news/view/jack-in-thebox-e-coli-outbreak-western-states; Daniel P. Puzo, “On the Hamburger Trail,” Los Angeles Times, Sept. 22, 1994, p. H1. Rick Weiss, “President Orders Overhaul Of Meat Safety Inspections,” The Washington Post, July 7, 1996, p. A1; Michael Moss, “The Burger That Shattered Her Life,” The New York Times, Oct. 3, 2009, A1. 44 “Guatemalan Raspberries Cited By CDC in Spring Illness,” The Washington Post, July 19, 1996, p. A4; Tom Lowry, “Tainted food trend poses alarming problem,” USA Today, Aug. 11, 1997, p. 4B. 45 Tony Perry, “Food Firm Pleads Guilty to Fraud,” Los Angeles Times, Nov. 14, 1997, p. A3. 46 Peter Perl, “Poisoned Package,” The Washington Post Magazine, Jan. 16, 2000, p. W8. 47 “U.S. Halts Imports of Mexican Canteloupes,” Reuters (Los Angeles Times), Oct. 29, 2002, Business Section, p. 3. 48 Victoria Kim and Mitchell Landsberg, “Huge beef recall issued,” Los Angeles Times, Feb. 18, 2008; Andrew Martin, “Stopping Deadly Bacteria,” The New York Times, Dec. 6, 2008, p. C1. 49 “USDA Investigates Deadly Outbreak of Listeria in Northeast,” Reuters (Los Angeles Times), Oct. 4, 2002, p. A36; “OutbreakNet, Foodborne Outbreak Online Database,” U.S. Centers for Disease Control, updated regularly, http://wwwn.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/ Default.aspx. 50 Sandra G. Boodman, “Raw Menace; Major Hepatitis A Outbreak Tied to Green Onions,” The Washington Post, Nov. 25, 2003, p. F1; “OutbreakNet,” ibid. 51 Marla Cone, op. cit.; David Brown, op. cit. 52 “Pew: Historic U.S. Senate Food Safety Vote Will Greatly Improve Protections From Foodborne Illness,” Pew Health Group, Pew Charitable Trusts, Nov. 30, 2010, www.pewtrusts. org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=61869. 53 “Senate Vote 257 — To Overhaul of Food Safety Regulations,” Inside Congress, The New York Times, Nov. 30, 2010, http://politics.ny times.com/congress/votes/111/senate/2/257. 54 Quoted in John Stanton, “House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error,” Roll Call, Nov. 30, 2010, (subscription required), www.roll call.com/news/-201012-1.html. 55 Ibid. 56 Quoted in Ellyn Ferguson, “Objections to Food Safety Bill Could Prove Insurmountable in Lame-Duck,” CQ Today, Dec. 8, 2010, p. 14. 57 “Protest is On against the ‘Food Police Act,’ ” Roanoke Tea Party, Dec. 8, 2010, www.roanoke teaparty.com/tag/food-safety-bill/. 58 www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/arti cle/198/48351/. 59 Ibid. 60 “Ed Schultz on Beck’s ‘Psycho Talk’ about food-safety bill,” The Ed Show, MSNBC, Dec 2, 2010, http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/20101202 0042. www.cqresearcher.com FOR MORE INFORMATION American Meat Institute, 1150 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036; (202) 587-4200; www.meatami.com. Represents major meat-processing companies to Congress and regulators, and helps industry stay abreast of regulatory and scientific developments. Consumers Union, 101 Truman Ave., Yonkers, NY 10703; (914) 378-2000; www.consumersunion.org/food.html. Advocacy organization favors more effective regulation of food safety. Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, 8116 Arlington Blvd., #263, Falls Church, VA 22042; (703) 208-3276; www.farmtoconsumer.org. Opposes what it calls unjust and burdensome regulation of small farmers, especially producers of raw milk and other unprocessed foods. Food Safety News, www.foodsafetynews.com. News website sponsored by Seattle law firm Marler Clark LLP that covers nationwide food-safety developments, including product recalls. Grocery Manufacturers Association, 1350 I St., N.W., Washington, DC 20005; (202) 639-5900; www.gmaonline.org. Food-industry trade association. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA 30333; (888) 232-6348; www.cdc.gov/foodsafety. Government’s leading medical agency helps trace outbreaks of major food-borne illness to their sources and maintains detailed statistics of outbreaks and causes. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, DC 20250; (888) 674-6854; www.fsis.usda.gov. Federal agency responsible for inspecting production and packaging of meat and poultry, supplies data on policies, recalls and the science of pathogen detection. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20903; (888) 463-6332; www.fda.gov/Food. Federal regulatory agency responsible for the safety of 80 percent of the food supply (not meat and poultry) and a source of information on disease prevention. 61 “Begich Introduces Legislation to Stop ‘Frankenfish,’ ” press release, Nov. 18, 2010, http:// begich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Press Releases&ContentRecord_id=41963cf7-1579487a-8cbd-acbaec6950a7&ContentType_id= ef710aa. 62 “Growth Curves (Growout),” AquaBounty, undated, www.aquabounty.com/products/ products-295.aspx. 63 Paul Voosen, “Begich introduces bill to ban modified salmon,” Environment and Energy Daily, Nov. 19, 2010. 64 “Briefing Packet,” Center for Veterinary Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Sept. 20, 2010, p. 62, www.fda.gov/downloads/ AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMa terials/VeterinaryMedicineAdvisoryCommittee/ UCM224762.pdf. 65 Quoted in “Genetically Modified Fish Review Flawed: Economist,” States News Service, Dec. 2, 2010. 66 Lyndsey Layton, “FDA rules won’t require salmon labels,” The Washington Post, Sept. 19, 2010, p. A6. 67 Quoted in ibid. 68 “Genetically Engineered Salmon Need Not Be Labeled,” States News Service, Nov. 22, 2010. 69 Quoted in Layton, op. cit. 70 William Marler, “Get Food Safety Done!,” Huffington Post, Dec. 2, 2010, www.huffing tonpost.com/william-marler/get-food-safetydone-once_1_b_791302.html. Dec. 17, 2010 1057 Bibliography Selected Sources Books Miller, Henry I., and Gregory Conko, The Frankenfood Myth: How Protest and Politics Threaten the Biotech Revolution, Praeger, 2004. A scientist and a conservative policy advocate argue that objections to genetically modified foods reflect fear and ignorance of science. Nestle, Marion, Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety, University of California Press, 2010 edition. A microbiologist with a long career in academia and nutrition policy analyzes the major issues affecting food safety. Wallace, Robert B., and Maria Oria, eds., Enhancing Food Safety: The Role of the Food and Drug Administration, National Academies Press, 2010. The non-governmental Institute of Medicine examines the workings of the FDA and proposes improvements. Articles Konrad, Walecia, “In the Age of Recalls, Tips for a Pathogen-Free Kitchen,” The New York Times, Sept. 4, 2010, p. B5. The Times reports on measures that the seriously safetyconscious take — including washing possibly contaminated kitchen surfaces with hydrogen peroxide. Layton, Lyndsey, “Salmonella-tainted eggs linked to U.S. government’s failure to act,” The Washington Post, Dec. 11, 2010, www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ 2010/12/10/AR2010121007485_pf.html. A food-policy specialist investigates a contaminated-egg episode. Moss, Michael, “The Burger That Shattered Her Life,” The New York Times, Oct. 3, 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/ 10/04/health/04meat.html. In one of the most hard-hitting and influential food-contamination stories of recent years, a Times correspondent traces failures in ground-meat processing to the outbreak that left a young dance instructor unable to walk. Reports and Studies Harris, Gardiner, and William Neuman, “Salmonella Found in ’08 At Egg Farm,” The New York Times, Sept. 15, 2010, p. B1. Signs of health hazards that led to this year’s egg recall were evident two years ago, an account by two specialist reporters makes clear. Hughlett, Mike, “The Fight To Keep Your Burger Safe From E. Coli,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, Sept. 12, 2010, p. A1. In a long and detailed account from the floor of a Colorado slaughterhouse, a correspondent reports on efforts to keep pathogens out of ground beef. Neuman, William, “After Delays, Vaccine to Counter Bad Beef Is Being Tested,” The New York Times, Dec. 3, 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/business/04vaccine.html. A science correspondent reports on the technical and regulatory complications in the search for a cattle vaccine against E.coli. “Agencies Need to Address Gaps in Enforcement and Collaboration to Enhance Safety of Imported Food,” Government Accountability Office, September 2009, www.gao. gov/new.items/d09873.pdf. Major deficiencies exist in the government program to inspect imports for contaminants and other dangers, Congress’ nonpartisan investigative arm reports. Becker, Geoffrey S., “The Federal Food-Safety System: A Primer,” Congressional Research Service, April 20, 2010, www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RS22600.pdf. A food-policy specialist for Congress’ nonpartisan research arm provides an overview of a system that is far more intricate than the public may realize. Huffstutter, P. J., “Raw-food raid highlights a hunger,” Los Angeles Times, http://articles.latimes.com/print/2010/ jul/25/business/la-fi-raw-food-raid-20100725. Believers in the benefits of raw milk and other unprocessed foods are among opponents of increased FDA regulation. Gurian-Sherman, Doug, “Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops,” Union of Concerned Scientists, April 2009, www.ucsusa.org/assets/ documents/food_and_agriculture/failure-to-yield.pdf. A staff scientist for a longstanding advocacy organization concludes that genetically modified crops fail to live up to their billing as solutions to food scarcity, especially in developing countries. Judd, Alan, “States to grade their own inspectors,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 19, 2009, p. A1. Georgia state inspectors didn’t report violations that led to a peanut-borne salmonella outbreak last year, but the financially strapped FDA wants state inspectors to evaluate their own work. Johnson, Renée, “Food Safety in the 111th Congress: H.R. 2749 and S. 510,” Congressional Research Service, Oct. 7, 2010, www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40443.pdf. Similarities and differences in House and Senate food-safety bills are analyzed in depth by a specialist for Congress’ nonpartisan research office. 1058 CQ Researcher The Next Step: Additional Articles from Current Periodicals Genetically Modified Food Bauers, Sandy, “Suit Seeks to Halt Engineered Crops at Refuge,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 2, 2010, p. B2. Several environmental and food-safety groups are seeking to stop the Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Delaware from allowing farmers to plant genetically engineered crops on refuge land near a major waterfowl sanctuary. Dininny, Shannon, “Researchers Asking U.S. to Approve Apple That Won’t Turn Brown,” Detroit Free Press, Dec. 12, 2010, p. E10. A Canadian biotechnology company has asked the United States to approve a genetically modified apple that won’t turn brown after it has been sliced. Obra, Joan, “Farmers Wrangle Over Organic Dairy Standards,” Fresno (California) Bee, Feb. 23, 2010. Farmers in favor of biotech crops are facing opposition from those who fear genetically modified organisms. Imports “Aussie Honeybees May Be Wiping Out U.S. Hives,” Salt Lake Tribune, June 19, 2010. Disease-carrying honeybees imported from Australia may be responsible for a mysterious disorder that has infected beehives across the United States. Belsie, Laurent, et al., “How to Keep Our Global Menu Off the Recall List,” The Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 23, 2010. As food imports flood into the United States, it may be time to revamp the country’s regulations on food safety. Olson, David, “Leave Chicharrones Snacks at Border,” Press Enterprise (California), Jan. 19, 2010, p. C4. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has implemented new regulations that ban the importation of pork skins from most Mexican states unless accompanied by an official declaration that they were cooked in ways that eliminate the swine flu virus. Eisler, Peter, “Egg Crisis Piques Interest in Bill,” USA Today, Aug. 25, 2010, p. 5A. The outbreak of salmonella in eggs has energized efforts to enact legislation that could prevent or mitigate such problems. Lochhead, Carolyn, “Feinstein’s Call to Ban Chemical Riles Lobbies,” The San Francisco Chronicle, July 12, 2010, p. A1. Food and chemical industries have promised to fight any food-safety bill that includes a provision to ban bisphenol A, a chemical widely used to line food cans. O’Keefe, Ed,“Official Blows Whistle On Food-Safety Agency,” The Washington Post, March 5, 2010, p. B3. A Food Safety and Inspection Service veterinarian has told lawmakers that managers have repeatedly failed to heed his warnings concerning unsafe slaughterhouse practices. Recalls Jalonick, Mary Clare, “Tainted Ingredient Sold After Salmonella Found,” The Associated Press, March 10, 2010. A Las Vegas company continued to manufacture an ingredient after tests confirmed it was made using contaminated equipment, according to an FDA report. Mills, Steve, “Recalls Don’t Get All Tainted Groceries,” Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2010, p. A1. Most food-recall warnings reach only a fraction of the consumers who may have already eaten the product. Willis, Elizabeth, “Recalls Aid Local Food Safety Efforts,” Battle Creek (Michigan) Enquirer, Aug. 26, 2010. The bureaucratic nature of food inspections has led to many recalls that could have been prevented. CITING CQ RESEARCHER Sample formats for citing these reports in a bibliography include the ones listed below. Preferred styles and formats vary, so please check with your instructor or professor. MLA STYLE Sullivan, Bartholomew, “Stakes High in Catfish Fight,” Commercial Appeal (Tennessee), Oct. 31, 2010, p. C1. The Catfish Farmers of America says Vietnamese imports of catfish follow questionable food-safety standards. Legislation Blumenthal, Les, “Food-Safety Bill Wins Senate OK,” Buffalo (New York) News, Dec. 1, 2010, p. A5. The U.S. Senate has passed a bill designed to give the Food and Drug Administration new power to protect consumers from unsafe food. www.cqresearcher.com Jost, Kenneth. “Rethinking the Death Penalty.” CQ Researcher 16 Nov. 2001: 945-68. APA STYLE Jost, K. (2001, November 16). Rethinking the death penalty. CQ Researcher, 11, 945-968. CHICAGO STYLE Jost, Kenneth. “Rethinking the Death Penalty.” CQ Researcher, November 16, 2001, 945-968. Dec. 17, 2010 1059 In-depth Reports on Issues in the News ? Are you writing a paper? Need backup for a debate? Want to become an expert on an issue? For more than 80 years, students have turned to CQ Researcher for in-depth reporting on issues in the news. Reports on a full range of political and social issues are now available. Following is a selection of recent reports: Civil Liberties Education Health/Safety Cybersecurity, 2/10 Press Freedom, 2/10 Government and Religion, 1/10 Closing Guantánamo, 2/09 Affirmative Action, 10/08 Housing the Homeless, 12/09 Bilingual Education, 12/09 Value of a College Education, 11/09 Preventing Bullying, 12/10 Preventing Obesity, 10/10 Health-Care Reform, 6/10 Caring for Veterans, 4/10 Crime/Law Death Penalty Debates, 11/10 Drone Warfare, 8/10 Prosecuting Terrorists, 3/10 Prisoner Reentry, 12/09 Legalizing Marijuana, 6/09 Environment/Society Politics/Economy Animal Intelligence, 10/10 Impact of the Internet on Thinking, 9/10 Income Inequality, 12/10 Social Networking, 9/10 Blighted Cities, 11/10 Abortion Debates, 9/10 U.S.-British Relations, 11/10 Reality TV, 8/10 Democrats’ Future, 10/10 Water Shortages, 6/10 Financial Industry Overhaul, 7/10 Teen Pregnancy, 3/10 Jobs Outlook, 6/10 Upcoming Reports Career Colleges, 1/7/11 Cameras in Courtrooms, 1/14/11 ACCESS CQ Researcher is available in print and online. For access, visit your library or www.cqresearcher.com. STAY CURRENT For notice of upcoming CQ Researcher reports or to learn more about CQ Researcher products, subscribe to the free e-mail newsletters, CQ Researcher Alert! and CQ Researcher News: http://cqpress.com/newsletters. PURCHASE To purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronic format (PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing are also available. SUBSCRIBE Annual full-service CQ Researcher subscriptions—including 44 reports a year, monthly index updates, and a bound volume—start at $803. Add $25 for domestic postage. CQ Researcher Online offers a backfile from 1991 and a number of tools to simplify research. For pricing information, call 800-834-9020, or e-mail librarymarketing@cqpress.com. Genetics and Medicine, 1/21/11
Similar documents
MON-FRI 9:00 AM - Saint Anthony Parish, San Gabriel
Intellectual Disabilities. This annual event, also known as the Tootsie Roll Drive, is for those who need support to live, learn and develop to their full God given potential.
More information