Local food is not inherently safer food
The idea that food grown and consumed locally is somehow safer than other food, either because it contacts fewer hands or any outbreaks would be contained, is the product of wishful thinking.
(1).jpg)
Barry Estabrook of Gourmet magazine is the latest to invoke the local is pure fantasy, writing,
“There is no doubt that our food-safety system is broken. But with the vast majority of disease outbreaks coming from industrial-scale operations, legislators should have fixed the problems there instead of targeting small, local businesses that were never part of the problem in the first place.”
As soon as someone says there’s “no doubt” I am filled with doubt about the quality of the statement that is about to follow.
Foodborne illness is vastly underreported -- it's known as the burden of reporting foodborne illness. Someone has to get sick enough to go to a doctor, go to a doctor that is bright enough to order the right test, live in a state that has the known foodborne illnesses as a reportable disease, and then it gets registered by the feds. For every known case of foodborne illness, there are 10 -300 other cases, depending on the severity of the bug.
(1).jpg)
Most foodborne illness is never detected. It’s almost never the last meal someone ate, or whatever other mythologies are out there. A stool sample linked with some epidemiology or food testing is required to make associations with specific foods.
Newsweek has an excellent article this week about the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and its Disease Detective Camp, where teenagers learn how to form a hypothesis about a disease outbreak and conduct an investigation. The key lies only partly in state-of-the-art technology. At least half the challenge is figuring out the right questions to ask. Who has contracted the disease? Where have they been? Why were they exposed to this pathogen?
Maybe the vast majority of foodborne outbreaks come from industrial-scale operations because the vast majority of food and meals is consumed from industrial-scale operations. To accurately compare local and other food, a database would have to somehow be constructed so that a comparison of illnesses on a per capita meal or even ingredient basis could be made.
CRAIG ANDREW-KABILAFKAS: This article made me barf
I'm usually immune to many of the crazy notions that appear in FSnet, but having been touched by the recent and tragic Pseudomonas aeruginosa-linked death of Brazilian model Mariana Bridi, reading Eating dirt can be good for you - just ask babies made me barf. Surely it's not too hard to understand that the evolutionary advantage Jane Brody references is Darwin's survival of the fittest. This means that the weak do not survive, they die. Yes, it is better for humanity in the long run, but are there really parents alive today that want to play Russian roulette with their infants?
Not me.
I know that 99% of the food that my kids eat is not sterile. If tested it in a food microbiology lab there will be a bacterial count, but hopefully no pathogens. I know that my mouth has trillions of bacteria resident in it even though I brush and floss my teeth twice daily. I know that the air is not sterile and that my nose connects to my throat. Some of the bacteria filtered by my nostrils will make their way into my throat and stomach. Same with my kids. I want my kids to survive and thrive so I get them to practice good personal hygiene. I teach them about understanding and avoiding risk. I think that it is an instinctive behaviour for children to crawl, but I prevented my children from crawling on the road because they had no concept of the risk of being hit by a car.
I also stopped them from putting dirt into their mouth. They are still alive, strong and healthy today. Bacteria don't have discretion. Mariana Bridi was in her prime and yet could not withstand the attack of a potent and pathogenic invader. All of our knowledge, technology, and intellectual effort could not defeat her Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. Is society better off for her passing? 
Bridi's untimely death has affirmed my knowledge that survival of the fittest is still in play. It can also serve to remind that we are not good judges of what is truly meant by "fittest". Your child may look healthy and robust, but by exposing her to pathogens that are readily found in dirt and pet faeces you are conducting a life threatening experiment. You are playing Russian roulette with your child's life and that is not the way to ensure survival.
Practice good personal hygiene, good parenting and just hope that you and your family are fortunate enough to avoid the deadly, painful and destructive pathogenic bacteria that surround us.
Craig is a food microbiologist working as a food safety consultant across the Australasian region.
