Foodborne Illnesses
Each year up to 81 million Americans suffer from a foodborne illness; out of this number, 9,100 of them die (Gavzer 1997). By recognizing the specific cases that have involved food poisoning, this number can be put into perspective with much greater ease. In August of 1997, Hudson Foods ordered the largest recall in history-25 million pounds of hamburger patties-which resulted from the deadly bacterium known as E. coli 0517:H7. During the spring of 1997, imported raspberries contaminated with the parasite cyclospora sickened thousands of people in 29 states. Just last year, the United States Department of Agriculture inspectors discovered E. coli 0517:H7 in ground beef that was shipped to a Virginia grocery by Beef America, resulting in yet another large recall. And to add to these incidents, earlier this month, some 746 people were sickened by Salmonella heidelberg after eating ham stuffed with vegetables and spices at a Sunday night church dinner in rural Maryland (Spake 72). The numbers and circumstances involving food poisonings are very distressing, since they directly impact the well-being of the citizens of our nation. Due to its relentless ability to transpire, this issue has demanded more and more focus
One such method of control has become known as the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system (HACCP). Although this system was proposed five years ago, it is just now being put into use, largely due to consumerist response to the incident which occurred at the Hudson Foods plant in Columbus, Nebraska. This program was a crucial part of the Clinton Administration's effort to improve food safety, a $43.2 million program in the 1998 fiscal budget (Janofsky 1997). This plan provides for the Government and the industry to share responsibility for monitoring and testing meat and poultry all along the processing chain from the slaughter house to the grocery shelf. The former system varied in its procedures from plant to plant. As previously mentioned, meat and poultry inspections were subjective tests based entirely on seeing, feeling, and touching. Dan Glickman, the Secretary of Agriculture, states that, "What these [new] rules do is basically say we are moving to a science-based system." Before, there was no modern, systematic monitoring of industry [food processing plants], but with these new rules, the motto will no longer be 'catch as catch can,' as it was using the "sniff and poke" method (Purdum 1996). as time has progressed. Most of its attention has recently been centralized on the food processing plants; in particular, the methods and standard operating procedures under which they provide food for consumption. One of the debates that has been brought up over food processing concentrates on who has the authority to establish and administer to these methods and procedures. While private industries would prefer to have the authority to construct their own protocols and carry out the inspections of their facilities; consumer groups, as well as government agencies, find it unquestionably necessary that the government has absolute authority over the regulation of food processing plants. Instead, we now live in a "culture of plenty," where the demand for consumption is growing day after day. But, as Amanda Spake notes in her article printed by Newsweek, "plenty has its price" (72). Production has grown tremendously; and as a result, so have the outbreaks of foodborne illness. The numbers have become more common, more large, and more international then ever before. As these numbers have increased, so has the demand for a more safe and efficient way to provide consumers with food. Wilder happened to be so fortunate to recover; however, there are still those who don't. About five years ago, four children died as a result of hamburgers that were served at Jack in the Box restaurants in the Northwest. The cause of death, determined later, was E. coli bacteria (Janofsky 1997). Since the plants are where most problems begin, they serve as a prime location to target these disease-causing agents. In the past, bacterial detection was not as simple as it is today. Underdeveloped technology limited the capabilities to catch these food enemies. However, over the years, advances have been made and now we are able to replace the "sniff and poke" method with bacterial testing machines. Plant inspectors take samples of the meat, send them to be tested, and within days the plant knows what is safe and what is not. In addition to this new testing, DuPont Company scientists have developed faster machines such as; the Riboprinter Microbial Characterization System and the Bax System (Sullivan 1996). One way in which modernization has improved food safety is through inspections. Over the past century, the "sniff and poke" method of inspection has been the dominating factor that examiners have relied on
Some common words found in the essay are:
Theodore Bek, Michael Friedman, President Clinton, Hudson Foods, Science Technology, Maryland Spake, Amanda Spake, Barbara Wilder, Department Agriculture, Administration FDA, food processing, processing plants, food processing plants, food poisoning, bacterial pathogens, hudson foods, irradiation meat, sniff poke, food safety, department agriculture, poke method, sniff poke method, critical control system,
Approximate Word count = 2477
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
