iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Michael F. Jacobson

Michael F. Jacobson

Posted: November 22, 2010 08:17 AM

Monday, November 29 is our last best hope for the Senate to pass food safety reform. That's something I hope we can be thankful for next week.

Part of the point of Thanksgiving is to appreciate the incredible bounty of foods we enjoy and often take for granted. Imagine what the Pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock would have thought had they walked into a modern supermarket ... filled with an eye-popping variety of exotic fruits and vegetables from all over the world; abundant meat, poultry, and eggs; and what would likely have surprised them the most--the thousands of boxed, canned and frozen packaged foods to choose from.

But for all of our amazing advances in agriculture and food processing, eating--whether on Thanksgiving or any other day of the week--is still a surprisingly risky undertaking. Despite our heroic crop yields, far-flung transportation networks, and high-tech manufacturing systems, one nut seems hard to crack: keeping deadly germs out of our food.

Foodborne illness exacts a staggering physical and financial toll on Americans. It sends millions of Americans to their sick beds, 300,000 to hospitals, and about 5,000 to their graves each year. Most of the ones who succumb are the youngest and oldest of our fellow Americans. And the price tag for all of those foodborne illnesses totals about $152 billion each year, according to the Pew Charitable Trust.

About 80 percent of the people who get a foodborne illness ate a food that is--in theory, at least--regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. I say in theory, because as we often learn after a major outbreak, food processing facilities and farms can often go five or ten years without a visit from a FDA inspector.

That is on the verge of changing, if the Senate does its job. For the past 10 years, we at the 850,000-member-strong Center for Science in the Public Interest have led the fight for reform of our fossilized food safety laws. Victims of foodborne illness--or in some cases, their surviving family members--have provided their gripping testimony. And now the advocates for safer food comprise a broad coalition of health, medical, consumer, and even food-industry groups.

The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act represents the culmination of that long haul. This bill would transform the FDA from an agency that chases down the sources of outbreaks after people get sick into an agency focused on preventing contamination before it occurs. Think back on the headlines: A leaky roof sending bird droppings--and Salmonella--into peanut products at the infamous Peanut Corporation of America. E. coli contaminating fields of spinach. And unspeakably filthy conditions at the DeCoster farm that produced Salmonella-tainted eggs that sickened 1,800 people.

Food may never be totally free of germs. But so many of the horror stories we've read about could have been avoided if the facilities in question had been required to write and follow a food safety plan--and be regularly inspected by the FDA. The Senate food safety bill requires both of those things, and, importantly, it also gives the agency the mandatory-recall authority it now lacks.

Now that small and organic producers as well as big grocers and food manufacturers all support the bill, Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have agreed on a time certain to debate and vote on the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. They intend to start debate in the late afternoon on Monday, November 29, and have a final, up-or-down vote at some point later that night.

American agriculture is never going back to the 1800s. But American food safety law must not remain stuck in the early 1900s. This week--whether you're still thawing your turkey--take a minute to call your Senators at 1-877-481-9966 and insist that they be in Washington to vote "yes" on S. 510 on Monday. Alternatively, use the sample email message you can send from here.

Whether you're a donkey or an elephant or a tea party patriot; whether you shop at the Walmart or Whole Foods, you can help ensure America's agricultural bounty is safer and safer for many Thanksgivings to come.

 
Monday, November 29 is our last best hope for the Senate to pass food safety reform. That's something I hope we can be thankful for next week. Part of the point of Thanksgiving is to appreciate the ...
Monday, November 29 is our last best hope for the Senate to pass food safety reform. That's something I hope we can be thankful for next week. Part of the point of Thanksgiving is to appreciate the ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:40 AM on 12/02/2010
Are we all forgetting that most food bourne illness is caused by the consumer at home? Undercooked food, cross contamination, lack of washing?

My husband works for a heavily USDA regulated chicken entre manufacturer - small by national standards but a major employer in our area. They are already forced to buy expensive machinery to manufacture, for large clients, fully cooked product. This is because although the box clearly says, "Raw Product - cook to an internal temp...", people do not cook it properly and become sick and sue the place where they bought the product.

The FDA and the USDA are underfunded, understaffed and heavily influenced by large food manufacturers/producers who can easily retool facilities. The Federal agencies have chosen to "dummy down" and not hold consumers responsible for their part in food-bourne illnesses.

Can you imagine going to a French market and finding only frozen foods because the French were too stupid to properly cook their own food?

This sounds somewhat "big brother-ish" to me. Soon, only manufactuers of federally approved food pellets will be available - safe and nutritious. Real food will be black marketed and only the elite will be able to eat it in secret.

Frankly, I prefer to go to the supermarket, buy a raw, organic chicken (if I choose) and look up in Joy of cooking to what temp I need to back it. Then I like to add real vegis, properly washed and cooked, a nice apple pie - voila, healthy meal!
08:30 AM on 11/26/2010
On Nov. 29th if the agribusiness boys and there shills succeed in passing this bill both are heath and our rights will suffer. The last few days have shown that that is a the real purpose of this legislation as they have opposed the Tester amendment that would have exempted small farmers who sell locally from the draconian whims of the FDA. There was a time when Democrats advocated for freedom. If a back room deal gets the Tester amendment striped both are freedom and our health will suffer. “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
~Thomas Jefferson, 1778. We will eat dirtier less nutritious foods . The FDA has shown a reluctance to act on either mercury fillings or BPA plastics watch how they plow the road for the big producers. It could even be against the law to grow your own tomatoes .
photo
E4B32787
US Gov: The best that money can buy.
12:41 AM on 11/25/2010
"Foodborne illness exacts a staggering physical and financial toll on Americans. It sends millions of Americans to their sick beds, 300,000 to hospitals, and about 5,000 to their graves each year. Most of the ones who succumb are the youngest and oldest of our fellow Americans. And the price tag for all of those foodborne illnesses totals about $152 billion each year, according to the Pew Charitable Trust."

Anyone know what's up with this PEW? I see $369,098,876 worth of contributions, which seems quite large for a charity I've never heard of. When I looked at the IRS statement they posted, I didn't see the source of these contributions, so needless to say, I did wonder how much money they receive from corporations involved in the food industry.

As far as "It sends millions of Americans to their sick beds,..." millions? I don't know of a single one, other than me two years ago (I took 4 hours off from work) and me, 19 years earlier, 1 day off from work, suspected food borne illness.

I'd like to see some secondary verification about this "millions". Otherwise, I'm wondering whether "Salmonella-tainted eggs that sickened 1,800 people" is being used as a rationale to increase corporate control over food production. 1800 isn't a whole lot. I'd rather the egg producer be sued into oblivion than some government scheme to control food distribution.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Alison Rose Levy
Connect the Dots www.healthjournalist.com
04:28 PM on 11/24/2010
Well, it's too bad that Michael Jacobson is not here with us to give an update on where the Tester Amendment now stands.

According to Citizens for Health-- "For months trade organizations representing the interests of big Agribusiness have supported passage of S.510. - they would get a boost to their public image by appearing to improve food safety practices while protecting themselves from some legal liabilities. They can eliminate the competition: they can easily absorb the compliance costs while local producers and small farms would be levelled by the new regulations.

Local and organic food activists knew this all along, but late last week twenty AG hired-gun lobbying groups wrote the Senate stating that they would oppose S. 510 if it included the Tester-Hagan Amendment, saying "it sets an unfortunate precedent for future action on food safety policy by Congress that science and risk based standards can be ignored.”

Agribusiness opposes the Tester Amendment because it sets a precedent - that small, direct-marketing producers are different, and should be regulated differently, from the giants.

While the amendment is currently part of the updated bill agreed to by six bipartisan sponsors, until the final vote anything can change.

The Citizens for Health action is here: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/750/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5255

For regular health activism updates as, follow me on Twitter, FB, or at www.healthjournalist,cim
09:50 AM on 11/24/2010
Food borne illness is an issue, yes, but it's miniscule compared to the damage done by the mega-tons of worthless, dangerous processed food in the system. If you want real change, to really make people healthier focus on sugar, refined grains, Aspartame, chemicals, soft drinks, HFCS, rancid oils (ALL vegetable oils), etc. That is the real reason people are sicker than ever.

And don't get me started on the hundreds of thousands killed EVERY year by pharmaceutical drugs. Drugs that will never cure anyone of anything. Drugs that hinder or block natural bodily processes.

So, even though bacteria may be an issue sometimes, it pales in comparison to the real reasons people are sick.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mtwa
09:42 AM on 11/24/2010
This bill does not need to be passed at the expense of small farmers who sell their food locally. This author does not mention this part of the bill currently trying to pass. Small farms do not have the problems of factory farming and therefore should be exempt from this bill. Just another way for the FDA to try to get rid of the competition as more and more people are shopping for local foods. Thankfully, it looks as though the bill will be passed with an exemption for small farms. There were many people involved and much effort put into making sure the small farms would not suffer and therefore be put out of business.
photo
E4B32787
US Gov: The best that money can buy.
12:08 AM on 11/24/2010
http://www.naturalnews.com/030418_Food_Safety_Modernization_Act_seeds.html
Says "This would give Big brother the power to regulate the tomato plants in your backyard. It would grant them the power to arrest and imprison people selling cucumbers at farmer's markets."

If that's true, then this bill is a no-go. I'm not vouching for the link, but, I like farmer's markets. So far, they're not broken, and don't need fixing. There's a place where my brother buys milk. He goes into a little building with a refrigerator where the milk is, and deposits the payment into a bucket. There's no one present. It's an honor system that works.

I hate to have to say it, but, by far, the most effective diet I had was in consuming bad Romaine lettuce. Salmonella is an effective weight loss strategy. That was good for 15 to 20 lbs. Gotta say, I've never bought it again. But, if I really had a problem with the lettuce, couldn't I have sued the lettuce producer? I didn't even see the doctor.

I'm not interested in this law, if it requires all food distribution to be corporate.

My chief concern is that a lot of food is sourced in corn. Farm raised fish, cow, pig and chicken all come from corn. I want to see an end to corn subsidies, to increase diversity. I'm a lot more concerned about diversity than I am about salmonella.
11:02 PM on 11/23/2010
There is nothing in SB510 that will make our food supply safer. It fails to even name or address the source of all the food born illnesses that are driving this legislation, that is, confined animal feeding operations CAFOs. The cost of compliance with the new "safety and modernization" regulations will be prohibitive for all but the largest "facilities that manufacture, process, pack, or hold food." And aren't they the ones with millions of dozens of nasty eggs , tens of thousands of bad bagged spinach, hundreds of tons of tainted ground beef, truck loads of contaminated tomatoes, etc. Simply being able to trace and recall unsafe food does not make it more safe.Though it may make it more modern.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pyrum
05:41 PM on 11/23/2010
I'm encouraging my elected officials to vote "no". Expanding the reach of the FDA is the wrong answer.
04:16 PM on 11/23/2010
Interesting story on this can http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/s-510-is-hissing-in-the-grass/ Two interesting quotes from the link “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
~Thomas Jefferson, 1778.
"There is No Right to Consume or Feed Children Any Particular Food; There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health; There is No Fundamental Right to Freedom of Contract."
~US Dept of Health & Human Services and US Food & Drug Administration, 2010
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ronkw
Molon labe
07:45 PM on 11/22/2010
quote-
"Now that small and organic producers as well as big grocers and food manufacturers all support the bill...."

Bulls, They don't ALL support the bill. This bill will put way to much power over our food supply in the hands of bureaucrats. It will do damage to Farmers Markets and the small, local growers that bring their supreior products.
And it will further impower the large industrial agri business. All done once again in the name of "protecting" the American people. S510 is another gov power grab from the Individual that make the wheels of the economy turn.

Write and call your Senators and STOP this dangerous and un-American bill.
photo
BigCatRescue
Founder and CEO of Big
10:32 AM on 11/22/2010
Is there a House Bill number yet?

This bill would stop a lot of the poisoning of big cats by people who use roadkill, downed animals and such to feed their backyard tigers, lions and other inappropriate pets. If the people who buy these big cats had to provide a proper diet, which runs about $1.50 per lb., it might reduce the number of them supporting the trade in wild cats. Carole Baskin, CEO Big Cat Rescue
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Alison Rose Levy
Connect the Dots www.healthjournalist.com
10:22 AM on 11/22/2010
I could not agree more with Dr. Jacobson that cleaning up the food supply chain is long overdue and very needed. We should all highly value the efforts of many organizations and groups that have dedicated themselves to finding solutions. But the public is confused about this bill for good reason. The concern is who should do the cleanup and how.should it be done? This bill glues in an untenable split between food growing policy (USDA) and food dissemination policy (FDA). The FDA has not successfully enforced the regulations currently in force, the hazard inspection system is superficial, and the current bill perpetuates that while failing to address the causes of contamination, and leaving unquestioned and in place the very practices that put the food supply at risk. This obviously represents a political compromise, which may indeed be the best possible under the circumstances. But in that compromise we empower an agency with a well-established industry revolving door, a history of preferential treatment to large industries, and scapegoating smaller ones, and a Food Chief that is a former Monsanto executive. Having reported on this bill since it's inception, and speaking to and for a natural health audience, I see S510 as the perfect breeding ground for disengagement from politics. People sense that there is much wrong with this bill, and there is a lack of straight talk about that from its champions.

Alison
www.healthjournalist.com
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Michael F. Jacobson
04:34 PM on 11/22/2010
Surely it is time to look beyond the more radical blogging about dire consequences of various food safety bills, and recognize how the Senate's S. 510 has addressed legitimate concerns that federal regulations may overburden small, local producers and processors. Importantly, this bill is NOT about protecting or promoting businesses large or small. It is about protecting us consumers from preventable illnesses caused by unsafe practices by producers.

The bill would place responsibility for producing safe food directly on the businesses that make and sell food, and it would allow them to design the plans for achieving that purpose. Even so, the scope of the regulations is limited in the latest version of this bill to specifically ensure that small, local food production is able to thrive -- while still making safety a priority. It does this by exempting a processor or farm that is a very small business or has less than $500,000 in sales made primarily made directly to consumers or through local retailers. That does not mean they get a pass on food safety. Current federal food safety laws and State laws will continue to apply to these small businesses. It is time to put aside conspiracy theories that have bubbled around the Internet and often have no connection to provisions of S. 510.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Alison Rose Levy
Connect the Dots www.healthjournalist.com
01:42 AM on 11/23/2010
I don't appreciate the use of smear terms such as "radical" and "conspiracy" to marginalize legitimate concerns about the efficacy of the hazards inspection process, or the failure to coordinate between the FDA and the USDA structured into this bill. I've never promulgated any conspiracy theories, but hold and represent those with a different viewpoint held by a sizable number of rational and health aware people about the inherent problems of contamination caused by industrial practices. My intention in writing was to open up a dialogue but unfortunately that does not seem possible in this instance because instead of engaging with the concerns I raised, you decided to handle this as you did. It's a shame because I see that we agree on other issues of health and nutrition, though not this one.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slowmotony7
08:01 AM on 11/23/2010
and this exemption is exactly why the bill has stalled for the past year and a half. Because the main backers of the bill were large farm lobbyists attempting to use regulations to control market share...this isn't radical, it's fact.
10:08 AM on 11/22/2010
Call your Senators and vote NO! Of course we need some form of regulations but not to this extreme. It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food.
Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress).
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Michael F. Jacobson
04:38 PM on 11/22/2010
I would not expect a Gandhi to march to the sea and make salt as a protest against requiring food companies to produce safe food. S. 510 does not have any provisions that benefit Monsanto.

Despite all the compromises that one segment of industry or another forced into the bill, this legislation would provide tremendous benefits to consumers by requring that food companies and food importers ensure that the food they sell to us is safe to eat.
03:00 PM on 11/23/2010
This legislation is not about food safety but rather about eliminating the small producer ; those that produce fresh wholesome, healthy product who will be unable to afford the paperwork requirements nor the lobbyist to stay in business. Interestingly it occurs at a time when there is a trend toward locally grow foods,This bill will further consolidate the food supply business . To the same type of CEOs who have looked out for our banking system; had response plans for deep water drilling ect. ect. ect.. It will result in less nutritious food .
09:16 AM on 11/22/2010
Dr. Jacobson is a thousand percent right! The garbage spewed by agricultural-industrial complex lobbyists against cleaning up the American food supply is cynical greed on steroids. Call your senators to vote YES S.510 this Monday, Nov. 29. Your health and that of your family depends on your recognizing this urgency.