Health & Fitness >
Nutrition & Health Issues
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedAre our foods safe?
Results so far:
| Yes | 34% | 46 votes | Total: 136 votes | |
| No | 66% | 90 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesIn recent years, several highly publicized illness outbreaks and the subsequent recalls of food products associated with them have led consumer advocacy groups, members of congress, and others to question the integrity of our nation's food supply. Many have been quick to criticize big business, claiming negligence on the part of the fast food industry and the large slaughter and processing plants that supply it. The common theme of these complaints is that industry has compromised food safety in its never-ending quest for higher production yields and increased profits. Others lay the blame at the feet of the federal government, charging them with failure to properly regulate the food industry. These arguments often cite inconsistency and confusion created by having one agency, the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service, regulate meat and poultry products while almost all other food products fall under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration. Concerns have also been raised about whether USDA's role in promoting the nation's agricultural industry presents a conflict of interest when it comes to regulating the production of safe food. As stakeholders scramble to assign blame and defend their positions, and congress considers measures such as creating a single agency to regulate the entire food industry, the question remains: Are our foods safe? In short, the answer is yes, they are. In spite of the constant stream of alarmist rhetoric coming from some factions within the vegetarian/animal rights world, in spite of sensational media stories about deadly illnesses contracted from the consumption of contaminated foods, and in spite of congressional inquiries into the causes behind massive food recalls, Americans can purchase their food with the confidence that if they handle and prepare it properly, they run an extremely low risk of getting sick from eating it.
In considering the safety of our nation's food supply, many factors can be taken into account. There are limitless statistics available concerning the rise and fall in the rate of foodborne illness outbreaks, the detection of pathogens in samples taken during food production processes, the number of regulatory enforcement actions taken at food processing plants, the number of food recalls in a given year, and so on. While these figures can be arranged in a myriad of ways to underscore whatever argument an interested party wants to make, perhaps the most telling way to measure food safety would be to gauge consumer confidence. After all, if was likely that eating hamburgers would cause illness or injury, we would probably choose something else to give the kids for dinner, right? While you could research the latest trends in the sales of hamburger meat and try to factor in the effect of the rising cost of beef, an easier method of assessing consumer confidence would be to simply ask yourself, "Am I scared to eat a hamburger?" Really, it's that simple. We often take it for granted, but most of us dine at restaurants and shop at grocery stores without giving a second thought to food safety. That's because experience has taught us that our food supply is safe. When deciding what to eat for breakfast, most of us base our decisions on what our stomachs tell us. If bacon and eggs sound good, it's not likely we'll opt for a bowl of oats because we're afraid of contracting trichinosis or salmonella. We may choose the oats if we're concerned about our waistline or our pocketbooks, but foodborne illness is rarely a consideration.
Of course, concerns about recent foodborne illness outbreaks and imperfections in regulatory oversight are not unjustified. We'd certainly feel better if the routine cluster of E. coli illnesses didn't pop up on the evening news every now and then. That being said, it should be understood that most foodborne illnesses can be attributed to improper preparation and handling of products after they leave the processing facilities. For example, if raw ground beef is cooked to an internal temperature of 160 degrees Fahrenheit and handled in a sanitary manner, E. coli is not a concern. And while there is no denying that the current regulatory bureaucracy is confusing and often impractical, lacking sufficient oversight in some areas of industry and over-scrutinizing others, acknowledgment should be given to the advances that have been made in the identification of illness outbreaks and contaminated foods. Agencies at all levels of government are coordinating more closely than ever to link illnesses and trace them back to their source. Without question, it is much more likely that an illness will be definitively linked to a specific food today than it was just a few years ago. Additionally, recently developed sampling programs mandated by the USDA have resulted in recalls of meat and poultry products to which no illnesses were ever linked. Ironically, these improvements could conceivably have a negative impact on the public perception of the regulators that fostered them since contaminated products are more likely to be identified and brought to our attention by the media. When the USDA first began inspecting meat products in the early 1900's, Inspectors relied primarily on sight, smell, and touch to determine wholesomeness. Today's world is very different. A better understanding of pathogenic microorganisms and their role in foodborne illness has led to a complete restructuring of the regulations that govern the food processing industry. New regulations focus on pathogen reduction and microbiological testing, requiring producers to develop and implement food safety systems and sanitary operating procedures to address these concerns.
Not surprisingly, there is a lot of room for improvement on the part of both food processors and the government agencies that regulate them. But if we stop and think about it, most of us are confident enough in the safety of our nation's food supply to base our meal selections solely on taste and price as opposed to the danger they may present. Both industry and government have made significant improvements in the last several years in response to advances that have been made in the understanding of food safety. They will continue to do so because it is in their best interest. After all, they are eating the same food as the rest of the country.
Learn more about this author, R.Q. Bane.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
High-profile examples of food dangers are last year's tainted pet food scandal and the halting of questionable food products from China and India. A salmonella outbreak caused Dole Fresh Fruit Co. to recall roughly 6,104 cartons of imported cantaloupes from Costa Rica. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that 13% of the American diet is imported. There is almost no documentation as to food sourcing and little supervision in the supply chain to the market. Where is the food being grown? Is food being grown with safe practices in quality soil or is food being grown on discarded land from mining processes that contain mercury? You will never know. Hepatitis-A is a common by-product of improperly grown or handled fresh food and an increasing problem from imported foods. You may have noticed more and more food recalls in the marketplace. This is a symptom of larger problems with the American food supply.
Since business is not regulating itself, the officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reacted to the latest outbreaks of neglect with a sweeping set of proposals they call "the Food Protection Plan". This plan calls for legislation that would give the FDA more expansive powers including mandatory food recall along with increased financing. The new powers of the Food and Drug Administration would insure improved cooperation with producers, importers and foreign governments to stop tainted food at the source. The plan is pending action in Congress.
Without question, contaminated food is more likely to be imported than grown in the United States. A report issued by the agency a few years ago found traces of salmonella or the dysentery-linked bacteria shigella in 4% of imported fruits and vegetables that were checked. 1.1% of domestic produce checked showed this contamination. Pesticide violations were reported in 6% of imported produce that was checked as well. All produce is not being monitored. Based on 2001 information from the FDA, less than 2% of imported produce is ever inspected. Some sources site inspection as low as 1%. A few politicians have sought to address existing deficiencies in the nation's food safety and take appropriate steps to protect the nation's food supply from new threats of terrorism since the twin towers disaster. This writer is not certain how this could be remotely possible with so much imported food and so little inspection.
In the past, grapes from Chile, raspberries from Guatemala and onions from Mexico have sickened and even led to the deaths of consumers. A farm in Ojos Negros, Mexico, the source of a 2003 green onion contamination had never been inspected by U.S. authorities before the incident. The report from December 2003, states that inspectors noted dirty runoff from the farm workers' windowless, mud-floored shacks and crude showers seeping directly onto fields where produce was grown. Photos of the site "show evidence of soiled diapers, soiled feminine hygiene products, and domestic waste" lying nearby. The growing fields were irrigated with water from a pond that doubled as a dumping ground for human sewage and animal manure. 80 percent of seafood, 50 percent of tree nuts and 45 percent of fruits eaten in this country come from elsewhere says Michael Doyle, director of the center for Food Safety at the University of Georgia. This is the real threat faced by the American population everyday all in the name of good business practices.
In order to eat safer food, Americans face the prospect of curtailing their diet to seasonal fare and avoiding most imported foods, meeting the cost of increased FDA monitoring and trusting in that monitoring or mandating a reduction in imported food. Ingredients from other countries added to processed foods are also of concern. Where does it come from? Only seafood is required to carry a label showing the country of origin.
The FDA has jurisdiction over 80 percent of food produced in this country, including seafood, fresh produce and processed foods and has only several hundred inspectors for at 60,000 food processing plants across the nation. The USDA, which oversees meat and poultry, has 7,600 inspectors for 7,000 U.S. plants. The inspection figures are even worse for imported food, even with as many as 1500 rejected shipments monthly.
With constant pressure to cut costs, U.S. food companies increasingly turn to foreign suppliers for lower priced soy, corn and wheat protein ingredients. In 2005, the United States became a larger importer of food than an exporter for the first time. The conflict of interest is huge and the danger to public safety is immense. Very little is being done to remedy the situation. The primary interest of business seems to meet demand and raise prices, while reducing costs using imported foods. The expectation of Americans for the latest in fresh food regardless of the season or circumstances also plays into the hands of questionable safety. All food is not equal. Undercutting American sources of available quality food and using government subsidies to manipulate market pricing while importing the same foods is irresponsible and dangerous.
Learn more about this author, E. Manning.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Nutrition & Health Issues
- Truth or fiction: Too much cholesterol in whole eggs
- Truth or fiction: Red wine has health benefits
- Should artificial sweeteners be banned?
- Should people take vitamins every day?
- Truth or fiction: Dessert is bad for you
- Are genetically modified foods (GMF) safe or dangerous to consume?
