Who should be in charge of food inspections?
The New York Times reported this morning on the California leafy greens industry’s hiring of government inspectors in lieu of government-imposed visits by inspectors.
The almond industry and the Florida tomato industry have also instituted their own safety measures that invited oversight by federal agencies when the government did not independently provide it.
“It’s an understandable response when the federal government has left a vacuum,” said Michael R. Taylor, a former officer in two federal food-safety agencies and now a professor at George Washington University. But, he added, “it’s not a substitute” for serious federal regulation.
Is it the government’s responsibility to ensure that food is safe to eat, or is it the responsibility of those producing, processing, and selling it? Both, of course, in addition to those choosing to consume it and feed it to their loved ones.
Then, what’s so great about government-imposed inspections as opposed to inspections the food industry asks for? After devastating outbreaks in each industry awakened them to their invested interest in food safety, these three have been vigilant about minimizing the microbial risks to their commodities. Would the feds do a better job?
According to the Washington Post, a report by Taylor and his colleagues at George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services determined that federal regulation of the inspection system and others is necessary to provide cohesion (and presumably increase efficacy) among safety-assuring efforts. In the report the authors urged Congress to “create a single cohesive food safety network composed of local, state and federal agencies and accountable to the secretary of health and human services.”
Some coordination certainly might move the country toward reducing the number of people who get sick from the food they eat. But each link in the food supply chain must remain proactive in their role in assuring food is safe to consume—regardless of who’s the boss.
Conspiracy alert: Safe almonds are part of big food agenda
The new regulation applies to growers who sell more than 100 pounds per day to an entity, typically retailers and restaurants. Generally, farmer's markets and roadside stands will remain unaffected.That exception is not enogh for some folks. Vinicio Penate says that eating a raw almond is like eating the almond tree, stating,,
"All that strength, all that force, all that information, all the genetics. They're all there. They're just untouched."
Jean Chevalier of Taber Ranch in Yolo, whose almonds will now be pasteurized, called the regulation ridiculous, adding,
"I eat 'em raw right out of the field. I still have both legs and I'm not sick."
Judith Redmond, owner of Full Belly Farms in Capay Valley, who has grown organic almonds since 1985, said,
"The mode of industrial agriculture is that instead of addressing the cause, they deal with the problems.''
Apparently the cause is being a farm larger than an acre. And while we're all delighted to know that Chevalier still has both legs, those who have barfed on almonds in the past may prefer the pasteurization approach.
Almond board spokeswoman Marsha Venable said,
"As an industry, we have our consumer's health and safety in mind."
