The Accidental Hedonist's Guide to:




My Book



99 Drams of Whiskey:The Accidental Hedonist's Quest for the Perfect Shot and the History of the Drink


Communication

Poll

Would you support a soda tax if the revenue went to improving our health care system?

View Results

-->

Spinach Growers were warned of risks in 2005

09/19/06, by Kate Hopkins Email 1366 views • Categories: E.Coli, Spinach

This is the kind of information that makes me upset on so many levels. From the San Fran Chronicle:

In November 2005, the FDA sent a letter to growers, packers, processors and shippers warning them to improve produce safety.

"In view of continuing outbreaks," the agency wrote, "we encourage firms to consider modifying their operations accordingly to ensure that they are taking the appropriate measures to provide a safe product to the consumer."

This makes me angry for two distinct reasons:

  1. Had the warning been heeded, it could have prevented people getting ill (not to mention prevented the economic losses).
  2. It shows how little authority the FDA has in regard to food safety. When confronted with Foodborne illnesses, the best they can do is offer suggestions. Talk about your toothless agencies. What a joke.

We're on day 6 of this mess, and I think it's safe to say that it's been mishandled every step of the way, from the farm(s) responsible for the outbreak to government's response.

Thanks to Marc

Technorati Tags: ,


Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Maureen [Visitor]
I remember viewing a segment on either 20/20 or 60 minutes a couple of years ago on organic food vs regular stuff. At that time samples were tested and organic food had a higher level of bacteria in every sample. I remember this especially in leafy greens and other ground vegetables vs fruit from trees. It would be interesting to view that segment again. I believe organic is good but one needs to know where it is coming from. I prefer small farms where quality control might be better.
PermalinkPermalink 09/19/06 @ 16:30
Comment from: Alysha [Visitor] · http://savorynotebook.blogspot.com/
I'm sure there is always room for improvement, but from the article, it sounds as if they have never been able to pinpoint a definite source of contamination. If over a ten-year period they cannot come up with a concrete contamination source, how is anyone to know how to prevent it in the future?

So, the companies are told that they must make their foods safer, but how?

I would also think that the potential for contamination exists for local growers as well, it's just that their product doesn't reach as many consumers and therefore any resulting illnesses would likely go unnoticed.

PermalinkPermalink 09/21/06 @ 05:22
Comment from: sarah [Visitor] · http://thedeliciouslife.blogspot.com
wow. they "ENCOURAGE firms to CONSIDER..."

even if the firms were "encouraged," they could just consider it, "hmm, we'll consider it," then toss it out.

geezus.
PermalinkPermalink 09/22/06 @ 11:42

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
What color is a red balloon?