Are regulators endangering our food supply?

The FDA comes under fire as reports of mismanagement come to light.

Last December, Dr. Gail Cassell of Eli Lilly met with the media to provide a preliminary update on a soon-to-be-issued report entitled FDA Science and Mission at Risk.  The report was the result of a year’s worth of work by an expert panel appointed to evaluate the agency’s ability to meet present and future needs. Among the findings:

  • Inadequate inspection of manufacturers, especially food manufacturers, which must be inspected only once every 10 years

  • A broken food import system that grows riskier every year

  • A depleted staff

  • A workforce whose scientists are not fully informed of current technologies, and

  • An obsolete information technology system.

    The report implied that, without additional financial support for increasing staff and  resources, public health could be in jeopardy.

    Various FDA programs have been developed for different sectors based on risk, experience and regulatory pressures including: 

    1. Inadequate Inspection of Food Manufacturers. This is not the concern so many think. Regulatory inspection does not guarantee food quality or safety. The US meat and poultry industry is under continuous inspection, yet it continues to have recalls. Topps Beef mounted a 21 million-pound recall, yet it was under continuous inspection when the problems occurred.

    Could inspectors in the fresh-cut operations have prevented the E. coli 0157:H7 outbreaks last autumn? Definitely not. The real question is “Have the industry and regulators learned from this incident?” I think they have, and that learning will be applied to minimize future outbreaks.

    What many people, including consumer advocates, do not understand is that food safety and quality equal good business. Also, most food processors are subject to at least one, and often as many as 20, stringent audits by clients or audit firms working on behalf of clients.

    Finally, there are some food processing operations that simply do not warrant regular inspections. These products are safe, based on risk assessments.

    2. Broken Import System. We have seen melamine in ingredients, malachite green in seafood and illegal antibiotics in honey. Does this mean the system is broken? Maybe yes, maybe no. The melamine issue would be a no.

    Product evaluations are based on past experiences and problems. If there has never been a concern with a chemical or a pathogen, it will not be included in a testing protocol. And, there has to be a level of contamination that is detectable using normal sampling protocols. HACCP was initially developed because traditional sampling procedures were inadequate in ensuring safety. The solution lies in building safety into the process, not testing procedures.

    3. Depleted Staff. The FDA needs more people at all levels, especially scientists who not only understand analytical methods, but can also develop better screening tools for field personnel. The industry has grown, but the FDA has not grown with it.

    4. Lack of Expertise. People who truly understand the industry are essential.

    5. Obsolete Information Technologies. One issue cited in the report was that there are vast numbers of records (clinical trial data, process filings, etc.) filed but apparently not accessible in storerooms. As to whether its computers are obsolete or employees are forced to hand write reports is something I cannot validate.

    Another problem is that the FDA data systems do not communicate seamlessly with other agencies (e.g., Customs, USDA, etc.).

    I don’t think the FDA is broken, but more funding, staffing and improvements are needed. Any business, agency or firm can never accept the status quo. All operations must strive for continuous improvement.
  • Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to Food Engineering Magazine.

    Recent Articles by Richard Stier, Contributing Editor

    You must login or register in order to post a comment.



    Image Galleries

    Food Engineering's Food Automation & Manufacturing Conference and Expo 2015

    Images from Food Engineering's Food Automation & Manufacturing Conference and Expo in Clearwater Beach, Florida, April 12-15, 2015. The event brought food and beverage processors and suppliers together to gain valuable information on the latest trends and technologies in manufacturing, automation, sustainability and food safety.


    Burns & McDonnell project manager RJ Hope and senior project engineer Justin Hamilton discuss the distinctions between Food Safety and Food Defense as well as the implications for food manufacturers of the Food Safety Modernization Act.
    More Podcasts

    Food Engineering

    Food Engineering May 2015 Cover

    2015 May

    The May 2015 issue of Food Engineering explores effective tools for hitting manufacturing targets. Also, read how processors are looking for faster ways to detect harmful pathogens in food and beverages without sacrificing accuracy or reliability.

    Table Of Contents Subscribe

    Plant Facility/Site Issues

    What issue about your current plant facility/site keeps you up the most at night?
    View Results Poll Archive


    Food Authentication Using Bioorganic Molecules

    This text provides critical tools and data needed to augment routine food analysis and enhance food safety by aiding in the detection of counterfeit, and potentially deleterious, foods.

    More Products

    Clear Seas Research

    Clear Seas ResearchWith access to over one million professionals and more than 60 industry-specific publications,Clear Seas Research offers relevant insights from those who know your industry best. Let us customize a market research solution that exceeds your marketing goals.


    FE recent tweets

    facebook_40.pngtwitter_40px.pngyoutube_40px.png linkedin_40px.pngGoogle +

    Food Master

    Food Engineering Food Master 2015Food Master 2015 is now available!

    Where the buying process begins in the food and beverage manufacturing market. 

    Visit to learn more.