Food Safety
GMO Labeling Opponents Contributed $10 Million to Oppose Prop 37
According to a press release from RighttoKnow.org, campaign finance reports show that pesticide and processed foods companies contributed almost $10 million to oppose Proposition 37. That ballot measure would require labeling of genetically engineered (GE) or genetically modified (GMO) foods. Stacy Malkan, Media Director for California Right to Know said in a statement, “They will not prevail. This is America. We have the right to know what’s in the food we eat and feed our children.”
For instance, Dupont Pioneer has contributed $2.4 million. Bayer CropScience has contributed $1 million, and BASF Plant Science gave almost $1 million to defeat Prop 37. Other large contributors include PepsiCo Inc., Nestle USA, Inc., General Mills, Inc., Conagara Foods, Syngenta Corporation, Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., Hormel Foods, Kellogg Company and Campbell Soup Company. The president of the Grocery Manufacturers Association recently said that defeating Prop 37 is the highest priority for that group this election year.
Dr. Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, from Pesticide Action Network, said that “rather than reducing the need for hazardous pesticides, herbicide-resistant seeds have driven a massive increase in herbicide use that has been linked to significant environmental and public health concerns.” A 2009 report showed that farmers used 318 million more pounds of pesticides in the first 13 years of commercial GE crop production, from 1996 to 2008.
Most other countries in the world, including the European Union, Japan, Australia, and China, already requires the labeling of GMO foods. Prop 37 will appear on this November’s California ballot. It would require food processors to label about 80% of all non-organic processed food sold in grocery stores. Food processors would most likely change labels nationwide, since it would cost more to have a separate set of labels for products sold in California.
Canada Will Move to New Single Food Safety Inspection System
Food Poisoning Bulletin
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has released a draft about improving their food inspection model. The single system model would replace the eight different inspection systems currently in place. Now, the inspection models covers dairy, eggs, meat, processed foods, imported and manufactured food, fish and seafood, and fresh fruits and vegetables separately.
Each facility will be issued a single license. Additional licenses will not be required for additional activities or products. The facilities will provide information about their business, such as management’s commitment to meeting regulations, preventative control plans, that key personnel have completed food handling training, and which products will be produced under different processes.
This information will help the CFIA develop a profile of the companies, how they conduct business, and a base of knowledge about the different food sectors. Inherent risk will then be determined, which will set the level of oversight and conditions of licensing.
Agriculture Gerry Ritz said in a statement, “we have a world class food safety system in Canada but we want it to be the best. A single inspection approach will make an even stronger system that will benefit all Canadians.”
The CFIA is seeking comments from consumers and those in industry until October 31, 2012. These are the aspects of the new model under consideration: a single licensing and registration requirement; more consistent oversight and inspection; a scaled approach that adapts to the size and complexity of the business; and distribution of more information to consumers about compliance and enforcement. To comment, visit the Consultation site of the CFIA.
Canada’s conservative government is cutting the budget for the CFIA by $56 million over the next three years. Spending on food safety alone is being cut by $21 million. One hundred inspectors will be laid off, and almost half of the agency’s veterinarians will be “affected” by the budget cuts. The CFIA is going to stop checking nutrition labels for accuracy, and some inspection actions, such as part of the meat inspection process, will be moved to the oversight of provinces.
The Agriculture Union PSAC has started a campaign called Food Safety First to publicize these changes. They want the Canadian government to hire additional inspectors, declare a moratorium on industry self-policing, and remove obstacles preventing inspectors from taking immediate action when serious health problems arise.
One Bad Jar Blamed for Scottish Botulism Outbreak
Test Confirms Hepatitis A Infection in Idaho Restaurant Employee
Local health department issues health advisory to patrons
Lab tests have confirmed that an employee of Tom’s Gyro in Pocatello, Idaho has been infected with Hepatitis A, meaning that restaurant patrons may have been exposed to the virus.
“While the risk to public health is low, the possibility exists that Tom’s Gyro patrons could have been exposed to Hepatitis A,” warned the Southeastern Idaho Public Health Department, which is conducting an investigation into the incident.
Ottawa May Mandate Food Safety Training for Employees at Restaurants with Bad Record
NC State Fair Takes Measures to Prevent Another E. coli Outbreak
McDonald’s Issues Statement on Apple Recall
Missa Bay, LLC recalled almost 300,000 cases and almost 300,000 individually distributed units of fruit, vegetable, and sandwich products this week for possible Listeria monocytogenes contamination. One of their customers is McDonalds.
That company just issued a statement saying they have stopped serving all existing apple products from Ready Pac’s Missa Bay facility and removed them entirely from the restaurant and distribution centers. The recalled foods have use-by dates of July 8, 2012 through August 20, 2012.
McDonalds spokesperson Danya Proud said that this action is taken “in an abundance of caution”. There have not been reports of illness associated with the recalled products. For questions, you can call McDonalds at 1-800-244-6227. Burger King is another customer of Ready Pac and their fresh apple slices were also part of the recall; they have not issued a statement yet.
The recalled apple slices with expiration dates on or before August 19, 2012 were sold in these states: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Diced apples for Fruit and Maple Oatmeal with expiration dates on or before August 19, 2012 were sold in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Snack Size Fruit and Walnut Salad with expiration dates on or before August 20, 2012 were sold in restaurants in these states: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Listeria monocytogenes can cause fever, muscle aches, nausea, and diarrhea. The symptoms can take as long as 70 days to appear after exposure. Anyone who ate contaminated product in August may not become ill under October, so it can be difficult to connect the illness with the contaminated food. If you purchased and ate these products, record it, along with the use-by date and product codes if possible. Contact REady Pac at 800-800-7822 for a refund.
****************************************************************************************************************
Recalls
Vaqueria Tres Monjitas Recalls Pineapple and Guava Beverage for Undeclared Milk
Vaquería Tres Monjitas is recalling pineapple-guava juice beverage (guava-piña) in all of the package sizes available for undeclared milk. The juice may contain sodium caseinate, a milk derivative, that is not declared on the label. Anyone with a sensitivity or allergy to milk may suffer a severe allergic reaction if they consume this product. No illnesses have been reported to date.
Sodium caseinate is a type of protein found in milk. It is usually used as a food additive. The FDA does not consider it to be a dairy product, even though it contains the proteins that cause allergic reactions to milk.
The juice is available in plastic containers in these sizes: 8 ounce, 14 ounce, 32 ounce, 64 ounce, and 128 ounce. When the labels have been corrected, the product will be available again. For questions, or to return the product for a refund, call the company at 787-474-1817 or 787-474-1818.
Apples Recalled for Potential Listeria Contamination
A New Jersey-based company is recalling 293,488 cases and 296,224 individual units of fruit, vegetable and sandwich products because they contain apples that may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
Cilantro Latest in Series of MDP-Prompted Recalls
Produce testing program still slated to be cut at year’s end
****************************************************************************************************************
Articles of Interest
Pew Gives Consumer Reports $2 million for Food Safety Testing
Consumer Reports, the popular monthly product testing magazine, was awarded a $2 million grant by the Pew Charitable Trusts to study food safety, the New York Times reported Monday.
According to the Times, the organization has already received a one million dollar installment. The magazine’s scientific staff will begin their first round of testing of meat, poultry, and other foods this fall.
“We’ll be focusing mostly on pathogens, heavy metals and carcinogens in food,” Jennifer Shecter, a senior policy analyst at Consumer Reports told NYT, which added that the magazine would also be “studying levels of antibiotics and their role in producing resistance to drugs.”
As the NYT reports, lab testing is expensive and Consumer Reports “was limited by its budget. The Pew grant will alleviate that burden.”
Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, recently released a report, “Meat Without Drugs,” and launched a campaign to pressure retailers to sell meat from animals raised without antibiotics.
NYT to White House: Move Forward on Food Safety Rules
‘Such delays call into question the Obama administration’s commitment to reforms’
The New York Times over the weekend called on the White House’s Office of Management and Budget to release food safety rules that the agency has been reviewing for 8 months — adding to a growing chorus of consumer advocates, industry groups, and lawmakers asking for the rules to move forward.
Nineteen months after President Obama signed the landmark Food Safety Modernization Act into law, the critical elements of the law are not in place, but stuck in regulatory limbo.
“If you think the food supply has become markedly safer since then, think again,” wrote the Times.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sent drafts rules for preventive controls, produce safety, feed controls, and foreign supplier verification in December 2011. Major regulations to head to OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), where they undergo a cost-benefit analysis, but the office has only 90 days to weigh the costs and benefits of the rule — though it can be expanded to 120 days with an extension.
“While coordinating suggestions from various agencies can take time, a delay of eight months and counting lends credence to the suspicions of consumer advocates who think election-year politics are at play, with Democrats trying to avoid Republican charges that rules kill jobs,” added the editorial. “The budget office denies this, and can point to many rules that have been approved, including a crucial one reducing mercury emissions from power plants. But several important rules, like those on food safety, remain in limbo.
The Times notes that there are many significant rules languishing at OMB, including clean water regulations, labor protections for home care aides, and creditor regulations aimed at protecting veterans, the poor, disabled from bank garnishments — “Such delays call into question the Obama administration’s commitment to reforms that are needed to make government work better and more effectively.”
Obama’s head of OIRA, otherwise known as the regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein recently resigned from the administration to return to Harvard, leaving many questions about what impact his departure might have on the major rules under review.
In an article over the weekend, the Denver Post also highlighted the longtime delay for food safety rules, noting that it has been about a year since the tragic Listeria outbreak linked to cantaloupes claimed more lives than any other outbreak in nearly a century.
“The law was too recent to prevent last summer’s deadly listeria outbreak (and local growers have since implemented their own safety provisions), but more than 18 months later, it should be a vital safeguard against further illnesses,” wrote Lisa Wirthman for the Post. “Unfortunately, that’s not the case.”
FDA Issues Annual Food Safety Report to Congress
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s annual report to Congress, released this week, offers an overview of what the agency has been up to over the past year.
In FDA’s latest report, which is required by the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act, one thing is immediately clear: FDA has an enormous food safety mandate. The agency regulates $417 billion worth of domestic food and $49 billion worth of imported food. In all, the agency oversees more than 421,121 registered domestic and foreign food facilities.
It’s been about a year and a half since President Obama signed FSMA into law. Though FDA is waiting on drafts of key food safety rules to be released by the White House Office of Management and Budget — where they have now been under review for eight months — the agency has moved forward in a number of other key areas.
In fiscal year 2011, FDA said it used around $190 million for FSMA implementation, $131 million of which was used to inspect domestic food facilities and $33 million for foreign facilities. The agency also gave $25 million to states for food inspections. In its report, FDA noted that the numbers do not include the cost of inspections at the U.S. border, nor did it include the cost of lab analyses or criminal investigations.
Out of 167,033 registered domestic facilities, FDA and states under contract inspected 19,073. Out of 254,088 registered foreign facilities, FDA and states under contract inspected 995. Of the 22,325 domestic food companies FDA has deemed “high-risk,” the agency inspected 11,007, or nearly half of them.
Exactly how much does it cost for FDA to inspect a food maker? For a “high-risk” facility, the average cost is $21,000. For a “non-high-risk” facility, the average is $14,200. Foreign high-risk food facilities cost taxpayers around $24,800 per inspection.
FDA said it is still working on its framework for establishing which food facilities fall into different risk categories.
When it comes to food imported into the United States, through multiple ports of entry, FDA still inspects a small percentage. The agency said it physically examined around 2.3 percent, or 243,400 import lines out of 10,439,236. Field exams cost around $170 each, but if samples are analyzed they cost around $2,800 each.
The agency has also “devoted significant time and resources” to building a more integrated national food safety system. FDA said in the last year they established several working groups to help state, local and tribal stakeholders work to help with the integration. Part of the plan is to integrate response efforts between multiple levels of jurisdiction so that the public health response is “coordinated, faster, and more effective.”
One of the key priorities is creating uniform national standards for program standards, facility inspections, lab testing and outbreak response. In its report, FDA said that achieving more uniformity would “enable greater ability to utilize analyses and observations across jurisdictions to protect public health.”
Sandy Eskin, the director of the Pew Charitable Trusts Food Safety Campaign, said that while the annual report offers a “useful snapshot” of how FDA is implementing FSMA, she remains concerned about “the type of oversight FDA will be giving state contractors as well as the substantial costs associated with traditional ‘pre-FSMA’ inspections.”
“Of course,” she added, “FSMA’s vision for inspection and food import safety will be incomplete as long as the proposed rules regarding the prevention-based requirements for facilities and importers remain bottled up at OMB.”
****************************************************************************************************************
[In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit, for research and/or educational purposes. This constitutes 'FAIR USE' of any such copyrighted material.]
