Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Spinach Scare's Larger Warning

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Spinach Scare's Larger Warning

Tight FDA budgets have cut produce inspection. Compliance with

safety rules is voluntary.

By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Times Staff Writer

September 22, 2006

---

-----------

Related Stories

- E. Coli Scare May Have Wider Impact

- Another Supplier Recalls Spinach

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-

spinach22sep22,0,1170752.story?coll=la-home-headlines

---

-----------

WASHINGTON — Even as government health experts urge Americans to eat

more fruits and vegetables, federal rules for protecting consumers

from such hazards as the current E. coli outbreak from contaminated

spinach are weaker than for meat and poultry.

 

And as food-borne illnesses attributed to produce appear to be

rising, budget squeezes have federal regulators retreating rather

than attacking. Compliance with safety guidelines on the handling of

produce is voluntary and federal inspectors conduct fewer and fewer

checkups, according to government documents and interviews with

consumer groups and a top former Food and Drug Administration

official.

 

For example, since the FDA hired inspectors in the wake of

bioterrorism concerns after the Sept. 11 attacks, the government has

been steadily thinning their ranks. The number of FDA staff in field

offices around the country shrank from 2,217 in 2003 to 1,962

currently, budget documents indicate.

 

In the 1970s, the agency conducted about 35,000 food inspections a

year, said William Hubbard, former FDA associate commissioner for

policy, planning and legislation. More recently, that has fallen to

about 5,000 annual inspections, with state officials carrying out

about another 4,000.

 

" There are more than 100,000 food processors in the country. It

doesn't take a rocket scientist to do the math, " said Hubbard, whose

tenure at the agency spanned nearly 30 years.

 

The FDA tries to set priorities for inspections, so that risky

operations are checked more often. Even so, a processed food

facility may not see an FDA inspector for years at a time.

 

" The bottom line is that the food safety effort at the agency grows

smaller and weaker year by year, despite continuing food safety

problems, " Hubbard said.

 

FDA officials, asked to comment on the problems, said they were too

focused on the California spinach problem to discuss broader issues.

But they acknowledge something is wrong.

 

" Clearly we're not where we need to be, " said Dr. David Acheson,

chief medical officer of the agency's food division. " If we were,

this outbreak wouldn't have happened. "

 

" If there is a need to change the regulations, tighten the

regulations, invoke new regulations … then certainly FDA would be

open to that and looking to do that to protect public health, "

Acheson said.

 

Such regulations are often not embraced by produce farmers. In

Salinas on Thursday, in the spinach industry's first formal response

to the E. coli outbreak that has sickened 156 and killed one,

industry leaders said they were working to meet an FDA request for

stronger voluntary guidelines to prevent illnesses.

 

The presidents of two major trade groups announced the effort after

meeting Thursday morning in Salinas with FDA officials and 200

growers, processors, shippers and others.

 

Thomas Nassif, president of the 3,000-member Irvine-based Western

Growers, vowed to swiftly come up with a plan focusing on 'the three

Ws' — potential contamination from water, the workforce and wildlife.

 

Nassif said that it was a cooperative effort and that the FDA was

not trying to impose tough new regulations on farmers. He said that

the FDA had requested the food safety guidelines. Industry groups

hope to present their proposal to the federal agency within a week

to hasten the lifting of the fresh-spinach warning.

 

" The FDA is not trying to muscle the industry, " he said.

 

Some industry officials say their standards are as good as any

federal regulation would be.

 

" The industry isn't sitting around waiting for federal regulators to

show up and regulate them. They are being regulated already by their

own customers, " said David Gombas, vice president for scientific and

technical affairs with the United Fresh Produce Assn. " It's not

unusual to have a customer auditor show up once a month … to make

sure they are following safe practices. "

 

But Gombas also said that industry would not necessarily oppose

mandatory regulations.

 

" Whatever it's going to take to make the produce supply safe, we are

in support of, " he said. " If ultimately it turns out that additional

regulations are necessary, we would support that. However, the

question becomes one of what those regulations would be. "

 

The government takes different approaches to different categories of

foods.

Graphic

Processing spinach

click to enlarge

 

---

-----------

Related Stories

- E. Coli Scare May Have Wider Impact

- Another Supplier Recalls Spinach

 

---

-----------

Meat, fish and poultry are subject to mandatory government standards

designed to prevent contamination at each step of the process that

carries those foods to consumers.

 

But the government issues only voluntary guidelines for produce.

Even the current spinach recall is voluntary.

 

And although the safety guidelines are broadly supported by the

agricultural industry, there is no system to ensure that they are

always followed by every grower, processor and shipper.

 

Also, the FDA faces increasing financial pressure.

 

An FDA analysis last month found that modest increases in the

agency's budget had failed to keep pace with inflation in personnel

costs, and that the burden had fallen disproportionately on the food

division — the equivalent of a 28% cut in its budget from 2004 to

2007.

 

" As long as the resources available to FDA do not keep up with the

realities of increasing costs … it is increasingly difficult for FDA

to perform in a way that meets public expectations, " the Aug. 10

analysis concluded.

 

The E. coli O157:H7 infections from tainted spinach started turning

up in August. The outbreak has spread to 23 states.

 

As government resources have dwindled and consumption of fresh

fruits and vegetables has increased, some data suggest a rise in

problems with contaminated produce. In 1998, there were 44 such

outbreaks; and in 2004 there were 86, according to data compiled by

the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which advocates

tougher regulations.

 

" What we are dealing with in this outbreak is consumers awakening to

the idea that produce is a raw food that can carry harmful bacteria,

just like meat or poultry, " said Caroline Smith DeWaal, food safety

director for the center. " The trend in produce is quite significant

to us. It definitely indicates a growing problem. "

 

The fragmentation of the government's food safety system makes it

harder to identify emerging problems, some critics say. The

Agriculture Department has jurisdiction over meat and poultry. The

FDA, which is part of the Health and Human Services Department, is

responsible for produce and seafood.

 

Meat-processing plants have on-site federal inspectors, a practice

rooted in an earlier era when refrigeration was rudimentary. The

tradition of looser regulation of the fruit and vegetable industry

dates to a time when fresh produce was locally grown, not a

commodity shipped cross-country or around the world.

 

The FDA guidelines — known as " good agricultural practices " —

include irrigating with clean water, providing toilet facilities for

pickers, making sure animals don't contaminate produce in packing

sheds, properly washing fresh produce, and maintaining correct

temperatures during shipping.

 

Since 2004, the FDA has been urging closer adherence to these

practices among California growers of leafy greens, including

spinach. Officials are clearly frustrated that the current outbreak

occurred despite their admonitions.

 

In Congress, some lawmakers say the FDA had repeatedly insisted it

didn't need to impose new food safety requirements.

 

" They always come back and tell us they don't need mandatory

regulations, " said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), ranking Democrat on

the appropriations subcommittee that oversees FDA funding.

 

" We need to examine whether federal agencies have the authority to

go on the farms to regulate food safety. "

 

Voluntary guidelines have proven ineffective, said DeWaal, the

consumer activist. Cleanliness standards and other

safeguards " should be mandated, and government should have the

authority to enforce them, " she said.

 

But as things stand, the FDA lacks the resources to formulate and

enforce new regulations, according to Hubbard, the former agency

administrator.

 

" When people started to eat more fresh stuff and organics, the FDA

didn't have the capacity to do the regulations, educate the

industry, and enforce the regulations, " he said.

 

" It didn't have the money to do the research on things like test

methods. For many of these contaminants, there is no simple test.

Adequate funding over the years would have kept the agency ahead. "

 

 

---

-----------

ricardo.alonso-zaldivar@

 

latimes.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...