Aug 2008
Putting produce safety into context
01 August 2008 12:15
Maura Maxwell
As the salmonella Saintpaul scare rumbles on it seems futile to waste any more column inches on the subject of the FDA's much-documented incompetence. Having killed two people, sickened another 1,300+, cost the US tomato industry an estimated US$250m and caused untold damage to the FDA's already precarious reputation, there can be little doubt that the outbreak will go down as one of the worst in the produce industry's recent history.
Taken in a wider context, however, an altogether different picture begins to emerge. According to a 2007 report by the Government Accountability Office food-borne illnesses kill an estimated 5,000 people in the US every year. Of these, fresh produce is believed to be responsible for 29.4 per cent- or around 1,500 deaths.
Meanwhile, the most up-to-date figures published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reveal that heart disease caused 652,091 deaths and cancer another 559,312 deaths in America in 2005 (the most recent statistics available). Diabetes, Alzheimer's and strokes also feature on the CDC's top ten leading causes of death. One thing all these diseases have in common is that the risk of developing them can be cut significantly by sticking to a diet rich in fruits and vegetables.
As well as food, the FDA is responsible for ensuring the safety of drugs, cosmetics and medical equipment. Give or take the odd teenager turning themselves into a human fireball through the combination of a lit cigarette and the overzealous application of hairspray, today's cosmetics are by and large considered safe.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for drugs. Even the most conservative estimates put the number of deaths caused by adverse reactions to prescription and OTC drugs at 32,000 a year and some studies suggest the true figure could be three times higher.
Critics of the FDA have long argued that the agency's cozy relationship with the drugs companies prevents it from responding quickly enough to reports of potentially lethal side effects in medications that it has already approved. Vioxx, the arthritis drug manufactured by Merck that caused strokes, heart attacks, and deaths probably numbering in the tens of thousands before it was finally taken off the market, is a case in point.
If only the FDA could have applied a little such restraint in its handling of the recent salmonella scare, perhaps the US tomato industry would be in better health today. The financial fallout for Mexican growers remains to be calculated.
And spare a thought for Agrolibano, the Honduran melon company caught in the middle of the previous outbreak. Despite categorically failing to prove the company's cantaloupes were behind the illnesses, an import ban remains in place as the new season approaches, putting thousands of jobs and livelihoods on the line. Will they simply be written off as "collateral damage" in the FDA's war against foodborne illnesses?
As the salmonella Saintpaul scare rumbles on it seems futile to waste any more column inches on the subject of the FDA's much-documented incompetence. Having killed two people, sickened another 1,300+, cost the US tomato industry an estimated US$250m and caused untold damage to the FDA's already precarious reputation, there can be little doubt that the outbreak will go down as one of the worst in the produce industry's recent history.
Taken in a wider context, however, an altogether different picture begins to emerge. According to a 2007 report by the Government Accountability Office food-borne illnesses kill an estimated 5,000 people in the US every year. Of these, fresh produce is believed to be responsible for 29.4 per cent- or around 1,500 deaths.
Meanwhile, the most up-to-date figures published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reveal that heart disease caused 652,091 deaths and cancer another 559,312 deaths in America in 2005 (the most recent statistics available). Diabetes, Alzheimer's and strokes also feature on the CDC's top ten leading causes of death. One thing all these diseases have in common is that the risk of developing them can be cut significantly by sticking to a diet rich in fruits and vegetables.
As well as food, the FDA is responsible for ensuring the safety of drugs, cosmetics and medical equipment. Give or take the odd teenager turning themselves into a human fireball through the combination of a lit cigarette and the overzealous application of hairspray, today's cosmetics are by and large considered safe.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for drugs. Even the most conservative estimates put the number of deaths caused by adverse reactions to prescription and OTC drugs at 32,000 a year and some studies suggest the true figure could be three times higher.
Critics of the FDA have long argued that the agency's cozy relationship with the drugs companies prevents it from responding quickly enough to reports of potentially lethal side effects in medications that it has already approved. Vioxx, the arthritis drug manufactured by Merck that caused strokes, heart attacks, and deaths probably numbering in the tens of thousands before it was finally taken off the market, is a case in point.
If only the FDA could have applied a little such restraint in its handling of the recent salmonella scare, perhaps the US tomato industry would be in better health today. The financial fallout for Mexican growers remains to be calculated.
And spare a thought for Agrolibano, the Honduran melon company caught in the middle of the previous outbreak. Despite categorically failing to prove the company's cantaloupes were behind the illnesses, an import ban remains in place as the new season approaches, putting thousands of jobs and livelihoods on the line. Will they simply be written off as "collateral damage" in the FDA's war against foodborne illnesses?
|