Food Safety and Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture Washington, D.C. 20250-3700

Speeches

Food Safety and Inspection Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture

• Slides (Microsoft PowerPoint) to accompany this speech

Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here this morning and to participate in this panel discussion on food safety. My fellow panelists gave us the industry and consumer perspectives on food safety, and now I would like to give you some introductory comments based on my previous professional experience in academics as well as my current position as USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety.

I’ll start with a few global comments about our food system. In the United States we are fortunate to have a food system with products that are often characterized as abundant, safe, nutritious and economical. This food system ranges from primary agriculture production and all of its inputs to processing, transportation, retail, food service, and consumers. Foods can come from local producers as well as regional, national, and international sources. Obviously, the overall food system is large and complex. As we know, this system presents equally complex challenges relative to food safety. In recent years, food safety issues have involved not only local and regional markets, but there are increasing national and international concerns. When I joined Virginia Tech as a faculty member in 1970, the concerns of the day were pathogens such as Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium botulinum, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella. In addition to these pathogens we are now confronted with an increasing list of potential foodborne microbial hazards such as Listeria monocytogenes, Yersinia enterocolitica, E. coli O157:H7, Campylobacter jejuni, Cyclospora, Cryptosporidium, etc

I recall in my early years as a university faculty member hearing about a revolutionary concept, Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP), that was introduced at the 1971 Conference on Food Protection. This concept was based on a preventive approach to food safety. Over the years we have seen HACCP evolve into an internationally agreed upon food safety management system. HACCP has been widely adopted; however, there is still much to be done for its effective use throughout the food system.

While HACCP is playing a very essential role in food safety management, it is very important to understand that food safety doesn’t begin and end with HACCP. There are strategies and associated responsibilities for protecting food at every segment of the food system. We continue to learn more about the importance of agriculture production practices, new processing interventions, and the importance of proper retail and consumer handling of foods. Clearly, there is a shared responsibility when it comes to food safety. It is important to understand that even if a food from one part of the food system is safe, it can become unsafe at another stage of the system through cross contamination, improper handling or some other unsafe practice. Food safety depends on not placing unreasonable burdens on any one link in the food chain.

USDA/FSIS has specific statutory responsibility for the safety of the United States’ meat, poultry, and egg products. In recent years we have seen major changes in FSIS’ regulatory approach to strengthening our food safety system. I would like to briefly discuss with you two areas, the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule and cooperative activities, that are contributing to the strength of our food safety system.

The 1996 Pathogen Reduction/HACCP rule is an important foundation of the Agency’s regulatory approach to protecting public health. As you know, HACCP is a science-based food safety system designed to prevent, eliminate or reduce hazards in food products. Under HACCP meat and poultry plants are required to establish controls for associated foodborne hazards. Therefore, the success of a HACCP system depends on the effectiveness of those controls and the management of the associated HACCP system.

There are over 8,000 federal and state inspected meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments in the United States, and all of them have HACCP systems in place. FSIS has over 7,600 federal inspectors in meat and poultry processing establishments, who on a daily basis, ensure that establishments meet food safety requirements intended to protect public health.

Data released just last week from FSIS and CDC help to demonstrate the strength that the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP rule has added to our food safety system.

FSIS released the latest Salmonella prevalence data for raw meat and poultry products last Friday. Prior to the PR/HACCP rule, FSIS conducted national baseline studies. Following the implementation of HACCP, FSIS has collected samples to verify that specific companies are effectively preventing Salmonella contamination of raw meat and poultry products. Data from these surveys shows that the prevalence of Salmonella in the nation’s raw meat and poultry has decreased in comparison to the baseline studies conducted prior to HACCP implementation. This indicates that HACCP as a food safety management system has played an important role in the reduction of the prevalence of Salmonella in the nation’s meat and poultry products.

This past Friday CDC released a report for FoodNet data on the incidence of foodborne illness. One of CDC’s many responsibilities in protecting public health is the monitoring and reporting of foodborne illnesses. Several agencies, including FSIS, participate in this effort.

The data released by CDC describes the incidence of foodborne diseases and reports the associated trends. Data released by CDC in 2000, the year HACCP implementation was complete, showed reductions in foodborne illness. And the data for 2001, released just last Friday, show continued declines for pathogens associated with meat and poultry products, such as Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter jejuni, E. coli O157:H7, and Salmonella.

CDC noted these declines occurred in context of a number of control measures that occurred in the 1996 to 2001 timeframe, one of which was USDA and FSIS’ Pathogen Reduction/HACCP rule.

These reports are encouraging and indicate that the efforts put forth for reducing foodborne illness are yielding positive results. However, there is much more to be done. For example, we need to better understand the relationship of Salmonella in raw meat and poultry to its contribution to foodborne illness and better target pathogen reduction interventions. In addition, the effectiveness of HACCP systems needs further examination and additional interventions for pathogen reduction in raw meat and poultry implemented. Using HACCP jargon – validated interventions and CCPs are needed for preventing, reducing or eliminating pathogens of concern. Dr. Murano will be discussing in her presentation, new initiatives that FSIS is taking in this area.

USDA’s cooperative work with other food safety agencies and organizations is very important to the strength of our food safety system. Two words I used earlier to describe our food system – large and complex – make it clear that cooperation is essential by all parties involved in protecting public health from foodborne illness.

Within Government, there are joint efforts between Agencies within USDA, such as FSIS and APHIS. An example is a joint training effort in foreign animal diseases for FSIS and APHIS Veterinarians. There are also joint efforts between FSIS and other agencies outside of USDA, such as the Food and Drug Administration and CDC. An example of this is the FoodNet active surveillance system for foodborne diseases.

Additionally, FSIS and FDA have had an agreement in place since 1999 to exchange information on an on-going basis about dual jurisdiction establishments, of which there are more than 1,000 of these types of establishments.

USDA also coordinates food safety efforts with our international partners. For example, this is done through participation in the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The decisions made by Codex have profound effects on the economies and the health and well being of citizens around the world.

One important advantage of the Codex process is that international standards help individual countries establish norms, so Codex helps to strengthen national systems as well. This serves to improve consumer confidence in food safety worldwide.

As Deputy Under Secretary, I am taking an active role in the international food safety arena. Included in my international areas of responsibility I serve as chair of our government’s Codex Policy Committee.

From what I’ve said so far today, hopefully you’ll agree that we do have a strong food safety system. Strong – yes. Perfect – no. For example, the USDA and CDC data I presented indicates that improvements have been made, it also shows additional improvements are needed.

To further contribute to fulfilling FSIS’ food safety obligations Dr. Murano and I share five goals that she will discuss further in her presentation.

1. Secure our meat, poultry, and egg products supply from intentional harm.
2. Base policy decisions on science.
3. Improve management of agency programs.
4. Improve coordination with sister agencies.
5. Engage in aggressive education programs.

Dr. Murano will talk in more depth about some of the specific actions to be taken by USDA in relation to these goals.

To conclude, we have a strong food safety system in place today, but even so we are not there yet. We need to work together in furthering the safety of meat, poultry, and egg products. Improving food safety and protecting public health is a goal we all share. No matter how different our thoughts are on getting there, we are all working toward the same end. I look forward to working with you toward this goal, for it is through the exchange of input and ideas from all stakeholders that this Administration will take food safety to a new level. Thank you.

For Further Information:
FSIS Congressional and Public Affairs Staff
Phone: (202) 720-3897
Fax: (202) 720-5704

Speeches Menu | FSIS Home Page | USDA Home Page