New food import inspections to have wide-ranging impact
May 18, 2011 | 01:08 PM | Filed in: Food safety Food Safety and Inspection Service Food and Drug Administration USDA
By JERRY HAGSTROM
The biggest impact of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act will be on the inspection of imported food, the federal official in charge of implementing the new bill and a key food safety advocate agree.
The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for inspection of seafood, fruits and vegetables and most other foods except the meat, poultry and processed egg products that the Agriculture Department Food Safety and Inspection Service inspects. The 2008 farm bill requires that the inspection of catfish be moved from FDA to FSIS, but that provision has not been implemented yet.
“In terms of a paradigm shift, the import part represents the biggest shift,” FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor said in a recent speech to the North American Agricultural Journalists.
The bill holds importers accountable for the safety of the food they import, Taylor said, noting that FDA expects to have more resources for foreign inspections in the future.
Eric Olson, the deputy director of the Pew Health Group, an arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts, said last week that the bill’s impact will be “huge.” Speaking at the CropLife America annual policy conference, Olson said the requirements for traceability “will be felt through the U.S. food industry and also in India, China, South America — places producing significant amounts of food for the United States.”
FDA has held informational sessions in Washington and in Geneva for officials from countries that export to the United States, but embassy agricultural attaches in Washington say that farmers and companies in their countries are worried about meeting the new requirements, and fear they could be used to protect American products from foreign competition.
“There is a huge need for outreach to the international community,” Taylor said. “No one wants to disrupt trade.” Taylor noted that in addition to the meetings, FDA is reaching out electronically to inform foreign countries of the new rules.
“We want to rely on the work of foreign governments when they are providing a meaningful level of inspection,” Taylor said. FDA will rely on certified private inspectors, he added, but will monitor their work.
The State Department recently sent a cable to U.S. embassies telling officials they should inform officials in the countries they cover about the new law.
Speaking more broadly, Taylor noted that the core of the new approach is prevention rather than dealing with food safety violations when they occur. FSIS has always had a prevention mandate, but FDA has not had that mandate until now.
“We have never implemented a prevention system systematically,” Taylor said, adding that building a new system will take many years.
Taylor also noted that the industry reached a consensus that the new law was needed. The fruit and vegetable industry pushed for the bill, believing that public knowledge of a higher level of inspection would increase consumer confidence after food safety incidents involving spinach and imported jalapeño peppers.
Taylor said the implementation of the law will be risk-based and science-based, and will focus on the inspection of facilities where food safety problems have occurred or are more likely to occur.
He acknowledged that the FDA budget will be an issue in successful implementation and noted that the agency had proposed increased fees but that they were not included in the final bill.
Olson said one of the contradictions of modern agriculture is that while centralization produces a lot of food, it also allows illness to spread more quickly.
“There is a tension between getting a lot of food to people that contamination of one plant also affects a lot of people,” he said.
The biggest impact of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act will be on the inspection of imported food, the federal official in charge of implementing the new bill and a key food safety advocate agree.
The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for inspection of seafood, fruits and vegetables and most other foods except the meat, poultry and processed egg products that the Agriculture Department Food Safety and Inspection Service inspects. The 2008 farm bill requires that the inspection of catfish be moved from FDA to FSIS, but that provision has not been implemented yet.
“In terms of a paradigm shift, the import part represents the biggest shift,” FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor said in a recent speech to the North American Agricultural Journalists.
The bill holds importers accountable for the safety of the food they import, Taylor said, noting that FDA expects to have more resources for foreign inspections in the future.
Eric Olson, the deputy director of the Pew Health Group, an arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts, said last week that the bill’s impact will be “huge.” Speaking at the CropLife America annual policy conference, Olson said the requirements for traceability “will be felt through the U.S. food industry and also in India, China, South America — places producing significant amounts of food for the United States.”
FDA has held informational sessions in Washington and in Geneva for officials from countries that export to the United States, but embassy agricultural attaches in Washington say that farmers and companies in their countries are worried about meeting the new requirements, and fear they could be used to protect American products from foreign competition.
“There is a huge need for outreach to the international community,” Taylor said. “No one wants to disrupt trade.” Taylor noted that in addition to the meetings, FDA is reaching out electronically to inform foreign countries of the new rules.
“We want to rely on the work of foreign governments when they are providing a meaningful level of inspection,” Taylor said. FDA will rely on certified private inspectors, he added, but will monitor their work.
The State Department recently sent a cable to U.S. embassies telling officials they should inform officials in the countries they cover about the new law.
Speaking more broadly, Taylor noted that the core of the new approach is prevention rather than dealing with food safety violations when they occur. FSIS has always had a prevention mandate, but FDA has not had that mandate until now.
“We have never implemented a prevention system systematically,” Taylor said, adding that building a new system will take many years.
Taylor also noted that the industry reached a consensus that the new law was needed. The fruit and vegetable industry pushed for the bill, believing that public knowledge of a higher level of inspection would increase consumer confidence after food safety incidents involving spinach and imported jalapeño peppers.
Taylor said the implementation of the law will be risk-based and science-based, and will focus on the inspection of facilities where food safety problems have occurred or are more likely to occur.
He acknowledged that the FDA budget will be an issue in successful implementation and noted that the agency had proposed increased fees but that they were not included in the final bill.
Olson said one of the contradictions of modern agriculture is that while centralization produces a lot of food, it also allows illness to spread more quickly.
“There is a tension between getting a lot of food to people that contamination of one plant also affects a lot of people,” he said.
- FDA Food Safety Modernization Act
- FDA Food Safety Legislation Key Facts
- Pew Charitable Trusts Interactive Graphic on Food Safety Modernization Act
