• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

New FSIS Testing on all Imports including Trim

PORKER

Well-known member
AIIS, import inspection personnel are to sample imported meat and poultry products for species verification. Import inspection personnel are to refer to the specific instructions in this section when selecting import samples for species testing.

This is interesting as the Aussies tried to slip in roo and if I remember the Algerian shipped in donkey for beef.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
GAO Finds Gaps in Import Safety
by Helena Bottemiller | Oct 18, 2009
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued another report highlighting problems with the federal food safety system, this time focusing on the gaps in food import regulation.


The report, which the GAO released at the Global Food Safety Policy Forum on Capitol Hill last Wednesday, emphasizes the need for agencies to "address gaps in enforcement and collaboration to enhance the safety of imported food."


"A high and growing portion of the American food supply is imported, so it is essential that those foods meet U.S. safety standards," said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal, who also presented at the forum. "Border inspection provides an important--and sometimes the only--food safety checkpoint."


The GAO found ineffective collaboration between Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) in their efforts to oversee imported food.

GAO cited several examples of enforcement gaps in its 78-page report. To start, CBP's computer system does not notify FDA or FSIS when imported food shipments arrive in U.S. ports, which does not give the two public health agencies forewarning to meet and inspect shipments.


In addition to lack of coordination on food shipments, the GAO found that CBP and FDA fail to provide unique identification numbers to firms--in fact, according to Lisa Shames, the author of the report, they found one firm that had 75 identification numbers in the system.


Lack of unique identification makes it easier for shipments to slip through the cracks, "As a result, these manufacturers, and their shipments, may evade FDA review, which increases the possibility that high risk foods may enter the U.S. market," said the report.


The FDA's limited authority to ensure importer compliance was also listed as a key concern. According to the GAO, current procedures are not sufficient to deter the importation of goods that the FDA has not yet cleared for entry.


The report also found problems with the FDA's information technology strategy and its lack of evaluation processes for current computer systems. GAO also noted that state officials would like more collaboration with FDA--currently, FDA does not fully share certain details, like retail distribution lists, with states during recalls.


With approximately 15 government agencies overseeing some 30 food laws in a federal food oversight system that the GAO has listed as "high-risk" since 2007 the report did not come as a surprise, but it offers another report to back up the push for FDA food safety reform legislation, which is currently hung up in the Senate.


The FDA food safety reform bill that passed the House in July--similar to the one being considered by the Senate--addresses some of the problems highlighted in the GAO import food safety report. The bill would require closer collaboration between CBP and FDA, mandate the use of unique identification numbers, and give the FDA the authority to impose civil fines.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
For good or for bad---Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety at the Center for Science in the Public Interest is rumored to be on top of the administration's shortlist to head up USDA's FSIS.

The other one mentioned is Lynn Silver, assistant commissioner of the New York City Health Department's Bureau of Chronic Disease and Prevention.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Thread title: " New FSIS testing on ALL imports including trim"

I seemed to have missed the part in the directive about testing "ALL" imports?

Seems to me it is mostly about re-testing suspected lots of imports.

We have been randomly checking imports for quite a while.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Food Safety: Majority in U.S. feel food industry doesn't do enough
Posted on October 20, 2009

On the heels of the largest product recall in U.S. history, an American Society for Quality survey reveals that although the majority of the food industry may be following safe production procedures, the majority of the public doesn’t feel it does enough. Food safety is still igniting widespread concern according to the survey of U.S. adults conducted by Harris Interactive on behalf of ASQ.

ASQ conducted the survey to gauge how consumers feel about food safety, food recalls and where responsibility lies when it comes to tainted food. The survey finds:

1. 93 percent of adults say food manufacturers, growers or suppliers should be held legally responsible when individuals are fatally sickened by tainted food.
2. 61 percent of U.S. adults feel the U.S. food recall process is only fair or poor.
3. 73 percent of adults say they are as equally concerned about food safety as the war on terror.
4. 82 percent of adults believe that the food industry should be required to follow international standards on food safety.

“The United States overall does have a safe food supply,” said Steven Wilson, member of ASQ’s board of directors and ASQ food safety expert. “However, whether food manufacturers have process controls in place or not, some have plant sanitation issues that they need to address.”

Wilson said there are also other issues to consider. “The problem lies with a specific outbreak. Determining its root cause is often difficult and necessary, otherwise correcting the root cause and preventing future outbreaks can’t be achieved.”

Government’s Role in Food Safety

Eighty percent of adults believes that the federal government should select the agencies that inspect the facilities of food manufacturers. Interestingly, less than half (48 percent) said that they actually trust the government’s ability to ensure the safety of food products. Also, only half believe the federal government does a good job enforcing laws that ensure our nation’s food supply is safe.

Concern Over Product Recalls Remains High

Ninety-three percent of adults are aware of instances of food recalls due to health and safety concerns in the last three years. This is up from a 2007 Harris Poll showing 79 percent were aware of food recall occurrences in the last three years.

1. Food recalls have become even more of a serious concern for adults (47 percent) vs. the 2007 Harris Poll data (29 percent). A total of 92 percent of Americans are at least somewhat concerned about recalls.
2. When recalls on brands adults usually purchase do occur, 47 percent would temporarily purchase another brand and then purchase the recalled brand once it was safe. This is down from 55 percent in 2007.
3. Twenty-seven percent of adults would avoid using any brand made by the manufacturer of a recalled product. This is up from 21 percent in 2007.

Wilson also says “The cost of a recall does not just concern lost revenue and charges for the recall but also in loss of respect for the brand or the product. In this way, all members of the food chain are hurt by the actions of bad players. A majority of recalls can be prevented with due diligence by all parties, including following their implemented control systems and communicating with the other segments of the food chain.”

About the study

This survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Interactive on behalf of ASQ from February 25-27, 2009, among 2,078 adults ages 18 and older. This online survey is not based on a probability sample and therefore no estimate of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. For complete survey methodology, including weighting variables, contact Lynda Nicely at 414-298-8789 x7587.

About ASQ

ASQ, www.asq.org, has been the world’s leading authority on quality for more than 60 years. With more than 90,000 individual and organizational members, the professional association advances learning, quality improvement and knowledge exchange to improve business results and to create better workplaces and communities worldwide. As a champion of the quality movement, ASQ offers technologies, concepts, tools and training to quality professionals, quality practitioners and everyday consumers, encouraging all to Make Good Great. ASQ has been the sole administrator of the prestigious Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award since 1991. Headquartered in Milwaukee, ASQ is a founding partner of the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), a prominent quarterly economic indicator, and also produces the Quarterly Quality Report.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Re. # 4. 82% of adults believe that the food industry should be required to follow international standards on food safety.

Isn't NAIS, or some similar REQUIREMENT necessary to assure trace-back to the original owner of an animal what the International Standards requires?

Further, how is it possible to absolutely find the "root cause" without NAIS?

Maybe more effort to STOPPING the 'bug' is required, or even (HORRORS!) irradiation as a final step in processing, if the proposed whole carcass irradiation turns out to NOT be the final word in food safety.

mrj
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
How does the "bug" get stopped? Meat is not contaminated until it goes through the processing plant.

I talked to my processor after the Greeley recall. He was buying trim and ground beef from the big packers to make patties and repackage to sell in local stores. I told him, to protect himself, he should test every batch he bought BEFORE he used it. He told me that if the packer/supplier found out he was testing, the would stop supplying him. So he stopped doing any kind of labeling of beef...which left me with 3000 worthless labels at his plant and the lose of a profitable market.

The large packers/importers do the same thing to the grind plants. They are afraid to test the bought batches BEFORE they are put into the grind. This strong hand tactic insulates the big packers from liability recourse of a recall because there is no way to trace the "bug" back up the supply line.

I will guarantee that if/when we get NAIS, it will be written in a way that liability will be passed back to the producers...again, insulating packers from liability.
 
Top