Congress looks to improve FDA's food safety standards

Looks like the U.S. Congress is finally going to start paying attention to the issue of food safety. But as you might have expected, it's money and politics that have caused the issue to be raised - not any real concern for the safety of the American public's food supply.

A recent bill that's already been passed by the House is promoting a massive reform of the FDA's food safety system, giving the already overwhelmed and undermanned agency yet another task it probably can't handle (remember: the monitoring of the entire U.S. tobacco industry is also now their domain). Among the tasks that the FDA will begin pursuing should this new bill pass will be the regulation and review of ALL activities and operations at individual corporate farms, from food processing to pathogen testing.

I hate to be cynical, but don't bet on this going smoothly. Under the current system, these inspections were conducted just once every decade. The new law would have mandatory inspections occurring every six months. I find it hard to believe that such a massive bureaucracy will be able to shift gears to operating on this new schedule.

Don't get me wrong: I don't think this is a bad thing. Dramatically increasing the number and frequency of inspections and shining a nearly continuous spotlight on the food industry can only improve things. Who knows? Maybe this new system will make major strides toward its ostensible goal: the eradication of food-borne contaminants that have caused so the many salmonella and E. coli scares that pop up with frightening regularity.

What's more, this new system would tighten regulation on foreign imports from questionable overseas suppliers (read: China) to ensure that these goods comply with U.S. health standards. If this goes smoothly, I'm all for it.

The other upside is that maybe - just maybe - the increased number of inspections will require a massive staffing boost at FDA. Now I know it seems odd for me to be hoping for more FDA apparatchiks swarming all over, but I'm trying to look at the possible bright side. Maybe with the increased staff required by more frequent inspections, the FDA would be less likely to rely on expediencies like the irradiation of produce to cover its behind. Irradiating food is the cheap, fast alternative to careful inspections and pathogen testing; the only problem is that the gamma rays used on food are just as effective at removing the nutritional benefits from food they are at removing bacteria.

Again … perhaps this is wishful thinking. After all, the reason that this new bill sailed through the House is because food industry lobbyists were so eager to jump on board. How come? Because recent salmonella and E. coli scares, which have in just the past year caused massive recalls of peanut butter, spinach, and tomato products, have cost the industry big bucks. The peanut butter industry saw sales plummet 13 percent because of this year's salmonella outbreak. And spinach growers took a $350 million hit in the wallet after an E. coli outbreak linked to California farms was implicated in as many as five deaths. The theory is that increased government oversight (or even the public perception of increased government oversight) can only be good for business; it will help boost consumer confidence and, theoretically, sales.

As potentially beneficial as this move could be, it's hard not to be jaded by the FDA's past failures. After all, it's estimated that tainted food is the root cause of as many as 5,000 deaths and more than 325,000 hospitalizations every year - a fact that the Congress and the FDA have been conveniently able to ignore before. And of course should this new bill become law, the burden is still on the FDA to make sure it's properly put into effect … and it's not like the FDA has a very good track record of enforcing the laws that are already in place.