Tongue-twisting names like E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria, Cyclospora and Campylobacter have become household words. Food safety has captured consumers’ interest in the United States and worldwide, and its media coverage has skyrocketed.
Consumers have become very concerned about foodborne illness outbreaks, especially after hearing reports of children becoming severely ill or even dying after eating tainted hamburgers or drinking contaminated apple juice, or stories about adulterated produce.
Americans expect safe food and demand to be protected from food safety risks. So, in 1997, the National Food Safety Initiative was designed to reduce foodborne illness by strengthening and improving food safety policies and practices. Today more than 40 different projects are underway. These steps are positive, but is all this attention by government and the media snowballing to generate the perception of a "food safety crisis" in the United States?
Is foodborne illness a new phenomenon? Or, is science just better able to detect previously unidentified foodborne illnesses? This question has become a focus of debate in recent years. While the U.S. food supply is considered one of the safest in the world, reports of foodborne illness outbreaks seem to have a permanent slot on the evening news. According to "Food For Thought II," the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundations content analysis of food safety and nutrition issues in the news, foodborne illness was the leading topic among news stories last year (see Jan/Feb 98 Food Insight).
Foodborne illness is a serious issue deserving of the headlines and attention it receives. However, the current so-called "food safety crisis" may need some perspective and clarification to assure appropriate future action by the government and media and to provide context for consumers.
Gone are the days when the news was limited to the six-o’clock hour. Similar to The Weather Channel, news channels now run on a 24-hour news cycle, and we can tune in at any time. As a result, more news is reported more quickly—and continuously throughout the day—and the public is more aware. Informing the public through frequent reports of food safety outbreaks is a public service. However, because of the impact news can have on consumers’ decisions, it is important to include context in the messages that reach the public.
Maximizing Choices Among
Food Safety Technologies
A variety of food safety technologies today can help the United States continue to enjoy the designation, "one of the world's safest food supplies." Speakers at the Public Voice National Food Policy Conference held in Washington, D.C. in March 1998 agree that food should be the safest possible-not just the status quo. "We traditionally have looked for processes to eliminate, not to control or prevent, foodborne bacteria," said Nick Nickelson, Director of International Food Safety, IDEXX Laboratories, Inc. "Combinations of technology are available to preserve the United States' good food safety reputation."
New technologies for food safety are simply tools to help preserve the safety of the U.S. food supply and are not considered replacements for other safety practices. "The power of the HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) system is to bring to bear the technology that we have," suggested James Marsden, professor, Department of Animal Science, Kansas State University. Everyone in the food safety process (from farm to table) must be responsible for food safety.
|
"One death from foodborne illness is too many. But, all parties involved in the communications process must ensure accuracy, balance and qualifiers in speaking about and reporting on food safety issues," said Sylvia Rowe, president of IFIC. However, Rowe acknowledged the tremendous time and space pressures on journalists. "Some electronic media outlets strive to give new information every 45 seconds. With such pressures, the challenges to providing critical context are enormous."
The widely used figure for the annual number of deaths attributable to foodborne illness is an example of the importance of providing context in news stories. Many news outlets report that 9,000 deaths occur each year as a result of food poisoning. But, where did this number originate? That question was recently addressed in "Food Poisonings’ Phony Figure," (Columbia Journalism Review, May/June 1998) in which the author suggests that no reliable source could be found for the omnipresent figure.
The Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST), a nonprofit organization composed of scientific societies and individual, student, company, nonprofit, and associate members, reported the 9,000 deaths figure in 1994 in "Foodborne Pathogens: Risks and Consequences." In response to the Columbia Journalism Review article, Tanya Roberts, Ph.D., co-chair of the CAST report states, "As scientists, we have to interpret our findings with great care. Likewise, the media has a tremendous challenge and obligation to do the same. Just because numbers are estimates (especially when careful calculations are used that are made from the best available information) does not mean they are phony. They should be treated as estimates and credit should be given for the research conducted to provide the greatest degree of accuracy possible."
While the 9,000 deaths figure is compelling, it is an estimate. Therefore, it is important to understand the implications of its use as fact. Using the 9,000 deaths figure as fact could possibly lead to a distorted sense of urgency. "Foodborne illness, while a serious matter, is not reportable as such on death certificates," states Morris Potter, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "As a result, the 9,000 number comes from estimates, not from compiled vital statistics."
The CDC has made great strides in the effort to better understand the impact and realistic extent of foodborne illness. For instance, the federal government designed the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet), a component of CDC’s Emerging Infections Program. FoodNet collects reports of foodborne disease outbreaks and is designed to help public health officials better understand the etiology of foodborne diseases in the United States. Among other goals, the purpose of FoodNet is to estimate the frequency and severity of foodborne diseases in the United States each year. FoodNet is better able to track outbreaks, which does not necessarily translate into unearthing more outbreaks. As a result of improved understanding of foodborne disease, including FoodNet data, CDC will be able to reevaluate the data and assumptions used in making the 9,000 deaths estimate.
In addition to FoodNet, the CDC unveiled a new computer database tracking system called PulseNet in May 1998. PulseNet is a national network of public health laboratories that perform DNA "fingerprinting" of pathogens from samples of tainted food.
| The Cutting Edge of Food Safety
Rapid Assays/DNA "fingerprinting": Detects impurities or pathogenic bacteria when placed in or on the food product by comparing the genetic material, or DNA, in the bacteria. The use of "fingerprinting" in food safety utilizes the same techniques that can link a person to a crime with genetic material found at the crime scene.
Irradiation: The process of exposing food products to radiant energy to produce various preservation effects, from delaying spoilage to killing harmful bacteria. Also called "cold pasteurization", because it eliminates harmful bacteria without the use of heat.
Competitive bacteria: Strains of bacteria that compete with and eliminate pathogens such as E. coli or Salmonella from live animals. For example, a "cocktail" of bacteria has been developed for use in chickens to eliminate Salmonella. The bacteria are sprayed onto young chicks, and as they preen they ingest the beneficial bacteria, leaving no room for harmful Salmonella to develop.
Ozone: A food safety technique that is being adapted from its use in water treatment and sanitation. Ozone is used with 98 percent of all bottled water sold in the United States. For food processing applications, ozone may cover a broader range of microorganisms than chlorine.
Chlorine baths; trisodium phosphate sprays or dips: Eliminates bacteria by dipping or spraying poultry during processing. Chlorine dioxide has recently been approved by the FDA for use as an antimicrobial agent in water used to wash certain fruits and vegetables.
|
The intent of these programs—to obtain more accurate foodborne illness data that will lead to more rapid public health actions such as investigations and product recalls—has already proven viable. These surveillance programs are one piece of the whole food safety effort that will lead to changes and policy decisions to help prevent widespread outbreaks and help the public put information on outbreaks into perspective.
Since the highly publicized 1992 outbreak of foodborne illness in ground beef, interest in analytical technologies to detect and identify pathogenic microorganisms in food has grown tremendously. Additionally, exciting advances have been made in technologies to eliminate pathogenic microorganisms from food products during processing. DNA fingerprinting, competitive bacteria and other technologies are helping to uphold the reputation of the U.S. food supply (see sidebar).
It is important to remember that these new technologies that help maintain one of the world’s safest food supplies also make detecting and tracking previously unidentified foodborne pathogens easier. This again begs the presently unanswerable question: Are there more outbreaks of foodborne illnesses, or are we just more capable of detecting, identifying and tracking?
Consumers have become proficient at shopping for food bargains, quality and value—they must also become educated on the fundamentals of "shopping" for food safety. Although consumers have a lot of control over the safety of their food, public opinion research finds that many Americans have an inadequate knowledge of basic sanitation and food handling steps that can greatly reduce foodborne illness risk. Consumers should use one of several credible resources on food safety to make informed decisions about their food storage and preparation methods and their eating habits.
The IFIC Foundation developed a new guide to help consumers understand how to protect themselves from foodborne pathogens. A Consumer’s Guide to Microbiological Risks to Food Safety (available via IFIC Foundation On-Line describes what actions consumers can take to protect themselves from foodborne illness. The guide also provides recent information on the common microbes found in food and water, and lists other resources for further information on food safety. The Partnership for Food Safety Education also has food safety information at www.fightbac.org.
