|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Food Safety: Industry Fights New Regulations The U.S. food industry has fought to prevent or weaken new food safety measures, even though officials have warned that the U.S. food supply could be a terrorist target, the Washington Post reported today. A mass biological warfare attack on the U.S. food supply, such as widespread poisoning of food processing plants, would be nearly impossible, according to bioterrorism experts. Terrorists could cause panic, however, by infecting even a small amount of food shipments or U.S. livestock and crops, the Post reported. “While you would certainly inflict some casualties, what you’re really doing with agriculture bioterrorism really is attacking our economy,” said Jerry Jaax, a bioterrorism expert at Kansas State University. “It’s an assault on our way of life.” The U.S. food industry, led by the National Food Processors Association, the National Growers Association and the American Frozen Food Institute, however, has argued that existing food safety standards are enough to combat any terrorist threat, according to the Post. Instead of new regulations, what are needed are more inspectors and more funding for them, industry officials said. “I think we’ve already got the system in place to deal with terrorism, said Kelly Johnston, chief lobbyist for the food processors. “We just need more information from the government to make sure we can address any potential threat.” The food industry opposes new security measures because they add to operating costs, force companies to give inspectors access to their financial records and could result in shipping delays, the Post reported. Industry officials have blocked or weakened several Congressional proposals in the past, including plans to consolidate all federal food inspection agencies for better coordination (see GSN, Nov. 26), continuation of new limits for salmonella in meat and poultry and plans to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration greater authority over domestic and international food processors, according to the Post. “What this says is, Congress is willing to protect us but only to the extent that the new law doesn’t offend the food industry, change existing federal bureaucracy or cost much money,” said Carol Tucker Foreman, of the Consumer Federation of America. “In the end, Congress will do a lot of talking and flapping and then bring forth a very small egg” (Eric Pianin, Washington Post, Dec. 6).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
