Remarks prepared for delivery by
Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Merle Pierson, at
the Food Safety Conference: From the Surface Up Conference Hosted
by Clemson University, February 24, 2005, Myrtle Beach, SC
Introduction
It is a pleasure to be able to join you for at least a part
of your meeting. I would like to express my gratitude to Clemson
University for hosting this conference and to the organizers
for developing an agenda that covers a range of critical areas
in food safety. I missed the first part of your meeting since
I am just coming from a meeting on Campylobacter which
is being held in Atlanta. It is always enjoyable to see many
of my colleagues that I have known for quite some time as well
as meet those of you who are embarking on a career in the area
of food safety. The reports that are being presented at this
meeting provide a very important foundation for furthering the
protection of public health.
I would also like to thank Mindy Brashears of Texas Tech for
inviting me to speak at this meeting. As several of you know,
I spent most of my professional career at Virginia Tech. However,
for the past three years I have had the pleasure to serve as
Deputy and now Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety. This
has been both an exceptionally rewarding experience as well
as challenging one. It is especially exciting to have the opportunity
to apply scientific advances in food safety to protecting public
health. Of course I had a tough choice in coming to a dynamic
conference like this in Myrtle Beach versus returning to the
snow in Washington, DC. Seriously, I am very pleased to have
this opportunity to discuss with you how we have been able to
advance the protection of public health.
Many Contact Surfaces, Many Potentials
I believe and I'm sure all of you would agree that here in
the United States we do have the safest food supply possible.
It is essential that we strive for the safest food supply in
the world and the broader assurance of food safety throughout
the world. Having the safest food supply is something that millions
of consumers take for granted every day. Many consumers do not
realize the variety and number steps or contact surfaces their
food has passed through in order to reach their tables. Even
the most basic raw food locally raised and marketed involves
multiple points of contact and handling.
It's really mind-boggling to think about the complex routes
that each food item takes to end up on our plates. Ending up
on our plates safe is a compliment to the many producers, processors,
distributors, handlers and regulators involved in the food chain.
However, this same farm-to-table continuum also presents us
with potential challenges that can compromise the safety of
our food. This is why we at USDA value the importance of working
with partners all along this chain to ensure that our food is
safe and secure from intentional and unintentional contamination.
I realize that with you I'm "preaching to the choir," but all
of us play a vital role in protecting public health by ensuring
that our food is safe. We need to keep reminding not only others,
but ourselves, of this simple, yet true reality. We all make
up integral threads of the complex fabric of food safety.
Our responsibility at USDA's Office of Food Safety is to ensure
the safety of meat, poultry and egg products. While most of
our resources are focused on slaughter and processing, our jurisdiction
allows us to extend into other areas of the continuum, such
as testing ground beef for E. coli O157:H7 at the retail
level, conducting recall verification duties among distributors
beyond the processing plant, and auditing other countries' food
safety systems.
But for this evening's discussion, I'll focus on some of our
food safety advances, challenges, and initiatives for assuring
that food coming from slaughter and processing establishments
is safe. These advances in protecting public health came about
through careful prioritization of issues and planning.
Accomplishments
Let me start with accomplishments. The crux of our public health
challenge centers on combating biological, chemical and physical
hazards that range from the easily understood hazards to those
that evolve and present new and complex challenges. Thus, we
must not only rely on existing knowledge and strategies for
food safety, but also continue to introduce and evaluate new
approaches.
While there are many approaches to measuring success, we looked
at indicators related to public health outcomes and pathogen
reduction. Such an evaluation is essential in determining the
success of our strategies and developing new ways to combat
threats to public health. In our high-speed, fast-food world,
it can be difficult for some to understand that successful science
is not immediate gratification and it is not easily measured.
But over time, positive results, or I should say, dramatic declines
in foodborne illnesses and incidence of pathogens in products,
show that our risk-based approach is working.
One indication of our progress is that we have seen a break
in the annual cycle of multi-million pound recalls. Through
the use of risk assessments, working with our partners along
the farm-to-table continuum, training our workforce and basing
our policies on sound science, we have been able to break this
vicious cycle. Let me explain by discussing our E. coli
O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella
policies.
E. coli O157:H7
After a comprehensive risk assessment on E. coli O157:H7
was completed, we developed additional strategies to eliminate
this pathogen in beef production establishments. We required
all beef slaughter and processing establishments to reassess
their HACCP plans relative to the potential presence and control
of E. coli O157:H7 in raw beef. Nearly 2,100 plants
reassessed their plans. Then our scientifically trained personnel
conducted the first-ever comprehensive reviews of the reassessed
HACCP plans. Sixty percent of those plants made major improvements
based on their own reassessments. Our policies also resulted
in the widespread introduction of validation interventions early
in the slaughter process as well as enhanced verification testing
throughout the beef industry.
I believe this type of forward thinking will continue to contribute
to the dramatic improvements we have been seeing. For instance,
let's take a look at results from our regulatory compliance
testing program for E. coli O157:H7 from 2001 through
2004.
- In CY 2001, our testing program yielded 59 positive results
out of 7,010 samples - 0.84%;
- In CY 2002, there were 55 positive results from 7,025 samples
- 0.78%;
- In CY 2003, there were 20 positives out of 6,584 samples
- 0.30%; and
- In CY 2004, there were 14 positives out of 8,009 samples
- 0.17%.
Listeria monocytogenes
The effectiveness of planning and applying the best available
science in making policy decisions is also evident when we look
at Listeria monocytogenes (Lm). Our 2003 interim
final rule on control of Lm in ready-to-eat (RTE) meat
and poultry products, based on a thorough risk assessment, outlined
three strategies that an establishment could choose from to
control the pathogen depending on its product(s) and the environment
in which it operates.
The effect of our Lm policy is encouraging. The latest
data from 2003 showed a 25 percent drop in the percentage of
positive Lm regulatory samples from the year before,
and a 70 percent decline compared with years prior to the implementation
of HACCP.
Last month, we revised our sampling verification procedures
so that more product samples are collected when an establishment
relies solely on sanitation practices for Lm control,
while fewer samples are analyzed in situations where an establishment
has more aggressive process control measures and interventions.
Salmonella
Our science-based initiatives, including those used to counter
E. coli O157:H7, have played a significant role in
also reducing the prevalence of Salmonella in many
of the raw products we regulate. If we look at the percentage
of regulatory samples positive for Salmonella from
our HACCP verification testing program, we see an overall aggregate
downward trend from 1998 through 2003. For Salmonella
presence in raw meat and poultry regulatory samples collected
and analyzed by FSIS in 2003, 3.8 percent tested positive for
Salmonella, as compared with 4.29 percent in 2002;
and 10.65 percent in 1998.
Challenge with Salmonella
But despite the overall downward trend in Salmonella,
we do face a challenge in controlling this pathogen in certain
processing environments. According to the Department of Health
and Human Service's Healthy People 2010 objective, we need to
have no more than 6.8 cases of Salmonella infections
per 100,000 people. The latest FoodNet data from the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention tells us that in 2003, we
had 14.5 cases per 100,000, so you see we have quite a way to
go in only five years!
If we do our part with respect to meat, poultry and egg products,
I believe we stand an excellent chance of meeting, or even surpassing
this goal. There is a substantial reduction in Salmonella
prevalence to be achieved in ground chicken and turkey.
We are giving further emphasis to fresh broilers. We've seen
a gradual upward trend of Salmonella prevalence in
this category over the years. For example, from 2002 to 2003,
the percent positive regulatory compliance samples increased
from
- 11.5% in 2002 to
- 12.8% in 2003.
This is not good news, and I mentioned this yesterday at a
meeting held by the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association. We are
challenging the poultry industry to consider what the causes
of this upward trend could be and to examine any new technologies
and processes to reverse it. Keep in mind that the FSIS performance
standard for fresh broilers is 20%. However, we still expect
the trend in positives to be downward.
Declining Foodborne Illnesses
Addressing our Salmonella challenge will help in our
overall campaign to continue lowering the rate of foodborne
illness. One of the most significant measures of our policies'
impact on public health comes from the annual report published
by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) every
spring. In last year's report, there were significant declines
from 1996 to 2003 in illnesses caused by E. coli O157:H7,
Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Yersinia.
Specifically to the products we regulate, the CDC reported
that illnesses caused by Salmonella Typhimurium,
typically associated with meat and poultry, decreased by 38
% from 1996 to 2003. Human illnesses caused by E. coli
O157:H7, often associated with ground beef, declined 42 % from
1996 to 2003. The decrease in E. coli O157:H7 infections
occurred primarily from 2002 to 2003. Furthermore, cases of
campylobacteriosis decreased by 28% in this seven year period
as well.
The CDC attributes the changes in the incidence of these infections
in part to the control measures implemented by government and
industry leaders, enhanced food-safety education efforts, and
increased attention by consumer groups and the media. We are
hopeful that if we continue on our current course, this reduction
will not be just for one year, but will continue from now until
we have achieved the greatest reduction possible in the illnesses
caused by these pathogens.
Earlier I mentioned the ratio of Salmonella cases
per 100,000 people and the 2010 goal. The CDC's FoodNet data
also show that there were 12.6 cases of Campylobacter
associated illness and 1.1 cases of E. coli O157:H7
infections per 100,000 in 2003. Assuming that the declines in
illnesses caused by these pathogens continue, it is highly likely
that we will soon meet, or even surpass, the 2010 national health
objectives of 12.3 and 1.0 per 100,000 persons.
USDA's Food Safety Initiatives
We are taking a science-based approach to improve food safety
even further by working through four major initiatives outlined
in our strategy document published last summer titled Fulfilling
the Vision: Initiatives in Protecting Public Health.
Enhanced Data Integration
The first initiative, which is actually a challenge that we
have given ourselves, is to anticipate and predict food safety
risks through enhanced data integration. One significant way
to accomplish this is through the analysis of FSIS regulatory
sampling data, as well as other sources of data, including baseline
studies, in order to detect trends and identify connections
between persistence, prevalence, and other factors such as practices
employed by plants, seasonal variations, and establishment size.
However, there is a missing link here. We need access to industry
data. Including data collected by the establishment would add
robustness to our own information and improve the quality and
validity of decisions that are made. Ensuring the availability
of data to USDA from industry, academia, consumers, as well
as the states will be necessary to help us protect food safety
risks. One way to accomplish this may be through the establishment
of a repository to provide data integrity and confidentiality.
We are currently examining this initiative and will have more
details available in the near future.
Associate Program Outcomes to Public Health Surveillance
Data
Our next initiative is to improve the association of program
outcomes to public health surveillance data. We are working
closely with the CDC and the Department of Health and Human
Services' (HHS) Food and Drug Administration to improve our
ability to link foodborne illness estimates with different food
groups. Data on foodborne illnesses due to specific pathogens
need to be connected with prevalence data for different pathogens
in specific foods.
The Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network, or FoodNet,
allows USDA and our federal, state and local food safety partners
to integrate this data by determining the burden of foodborne
disease, monitoring foodborne disease trends, and determining
the extent of foodborne diseases attributable to specific foods.
By comparing and contrasting the characteristics of pathogens
recovered from food samples with those recovered from foodborne
illness patients we will be able to improve our ability to link
foodborne illness data with specific foods.
Apply Risk into Regulatory and Enforcement Activities
The next initiative is for improved application of risk into
regulatory and enforcement activities. We are beginning to field-test
the Hazard Control Coefficient, or HCC, which is a measurement
of the effectiveness of pathogen controls used by individual
establishments. The HCC establishes the level of plant compliance
through an analysis of in-plant and Agency verification testing,
as well as inspection data.
The HCC will help us better understand the frequency and types
of food safety failures so that more appropriate responses,
based on risk rather then a one size fits all mentality, can
be designed and implemented.
Improving Food Safety Beyond Our Borders
The final initiative I will mention is our continued
dedication to improving food safety beyond our borders. Our
goal is to work with our partners in the western hemisphere
to develop common food safety standards and to harmonize food
safety education, information and communication throughout the
region.
To achieve this we established a Food Safety Institute of the
Americas last October. This institute serves as a cooperative
educational and research organization designed to promote food
safety and identify and develop educational programs throughout
the Americas. This institute is another way for USDA to work
with other governments to raise the level of food safety activities
and become active participants in international food standard
setting bodies like the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
Conclusion
As indicated from my overview earlier of our accomplishments,
USDA, along with its partners have made significant and dramatic
improvements in food safety since the implementation of HACCP
as the driving component of FSIS' enforcement of the Federal
Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act.
The number of foodborne illnesses attributed to USDA-regulated
products has declined markedly as have the rates of contamination
in regulatory samples.
Challenges do remain, such as controlling Salmonella
in poultry processing. However, USDA will continue on its visionary
path of pathogen reduction using science-based initiatives and
working with all partners along the farm-to-table continuum.
I'm very optimistic that we will continue to see our food safety
infrastructure strengthen even more.
But, let's not forget one thing. Let us never take for granted
the safety of our food. It took the hard work and dedication
of many, including all of us in this room, to ensure that it
is safe to eat in the first place.
Thank you again for your attention, and if you have any questions,
I'll be glad to answer them for you now. |
