Regulating food in the united states
Dumpster Diving
We are here to inform the average consumer of the ludicrousness that occurs within the food industry. Likely similar ludicrousness happens in other industries for similar reasons. Once the MBAs and business people get their hands on programs like GFSI, the intent is lost and profit is the only priority. Once the priority becomes profit, the consumer is at grave risk. The average consumer believes that if a consumer packaged good (CPG) is sold at Walmart it is legal, quality, and safe. The average consumer has a general belief that their government is protecting them with food laws and regulations. I would bet that the average reader also believes that food which is imported into the United States from a foreign country is inspected or otherwise, “checked.” I am sure, as I have experienced this countless times before, the average reader is shocked to learn that most shipping containers go completely uninspected by any government agency or individual inspector.
Most of the foods you eat, have little to no Federal oversight. For example, ecommerce and delivery food is not regulated by the FDA. An example of what can happen when a company is not bound by food safety laws (i.e., Food Safety Modernization Act or FSMA) is the Daily Harvest scandal. Over 300 hundred customers were seriously injured when Daily Harvest began putting a toxic ingredient in their food products that they shipped in the mail. E-commerce companies like Daily Harvest are notorious for having their customers sign arbitration clauses which indemnify them from legal responsibility. This arbitration clause was one of the main reasons behind why most of the injured consumers will not even have their medical bills covered with their settlement.
The food supply chain is complex and the operations to support world activities result in countless opportunities for critical food safety failures, which put consumers health and life at risk. The Daily Harvest example is just one of hundreds that have occurred over the last five years in the US.
Food Safety Regulations in the United States
In the United States, food businesses have to comply with respective applicable local, state, and Federal regulations. The local health department inspects retail establishments and the Department of Health and Human Services typically inspect on behalf of the State. The food type dictates which Federal government agency regulates the operation. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates general food items, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulates protein or meat products, and the FDA regulates fish such as Salmon. There are some nuances for items like chicken/beef bouillon, which are of animal origin. The USDA has inspectors on-site or visiting the site operation on a certain frequency, while the FDA generally inspects on random times based on food businesses which are registering with their database under the honor system. For example, meal kit companies are not required to register with the FDA. They have operations on par with full scale manufacturers, but due to some regulatory loopholes there is not a legal requirement to register. See the graphic at the top of this page for a summary and visual of food safety regulations in the US.
The average consumer likely does not know when they go into a retail grocery store which items were physically inspected by a Federal regulator and which items may even be going completely under the radar of any regulator.
It is critical for the average consumer to be aware that just because a brand is popular or well known, does not mean that it is safe or legal. Beautiful packaging and marketing can be extremely misleading. Many consumers believe that certifications assure safety or legality. Thanks to documentaries on Netflix like Poisoned and Seaspiracy consumers are becoming more savvy about where their food comes from and what these "certifications" and stickers truly mean.
Retail stores have requirements of their suppliers, but many times it is a check-box activity and does not assure any safety or compliance to a set of relevant standards. Think of these requirements as legal shields when the Feds show up to their establishment asking for accountability, this is a way for them to "pass the buck" to their customer. It is not wise to assume that because a product has made it to a retail store shelf, that it is compliant with any laws or regulations. Do not assume that these retail stores are conducting effective verifications of the supplier's claims. This is important because if you or your family are injured by a food bought at a retail store, you likely have some means of compensation. Be advised when you order delivery food you have signed an arbitration clause indemnifying the company's responsibility in the event you are injured. The victims of the Daily Harvest poisoning have learned this the hard way.
We hope that after reading this blog, you will have a better understanding of the nuances and complexities of the food industry supply chain and are able to make more informed decisions that benefit your health & well-being.
Our commitment to the consumer is to bring you the unfiltered food safety news. This website is lead by industry thought leaders with high integrity and ethics. We strive to bring the public transparent news and have found on other platforms the truth is often shadow banned. For this reason, we have invested in our own platforms which cannot be taken down.
If you have experienced food poisoning and would like to share your story, we would be honored to hear from you and share it with our audience.
Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI)
What the heck is GFSI anyway?
GFSI or the Global Food Safety Initiative is an industry-driven collaboration with the touted goal of improving food safety management systems. The initiative’s intent was to ensure that those certified meet rigorous criteria for food safety management systems and produce a common framework so that all the different schemes had cohesive recognition. The intent was to harmonize these standards globally and reduce the need for multiple audits and certifications, which would strengthen supply chains.
In reality, a food company pays a certifying body or CB to conduct an audit against a prescribed scheme such as SQF. The company pays for the audit, and the CB sends an auditor. The auditor’s qualifications range from years of relevant experience to business associates that made their way into the quality department because the company was unable to fill a job role. I once sat through an audit where the auditor missed visible black mold and bragged about how they were a school janitor prior to becoming an auditor. No shame in that occupation but it has little to no relevance for food safety auditing. Once you realize that certification is merely a business transaction, the luster of the sales pitches tend to wear off.
Is there any value in a voluntary GFSI certification?
Your salesperson will certainly tell you so. As an auditor and seasoned food safety veteran, I can tell you that it only holds value if the company and individuals implementing the programs are sincere in their intent. Most of the companies I have encountered are implementing programs to meet customer requirements. These sites are distracted from the goal of efficacious food safety. In contrast, I have audited farmers under GFSI schemes and they have the best of intentions and use the certification to their advantage.
Why do we believe the average consumer should understand what these certifications mean?
Have you ever turned over the back of a food package and noticed a bunch of stickers? The tree frog one comes to mind. Do you have any idea what they mean? Prior to entering the food industry, I would have assumed those brands were superior to the others. Having participated in most certification schemes, I now understand that you pay to play. If you paid for the audit, you’re getting the certificate.
Regulatory Requirements vs. Customer Requirements
Regulatory Requirements
Food companies must comply with applicable regulations, in theory. Depending on what agency governs them, they may or may not be inspected so they may not be compliant and may never be reprimanded or face consequences. See the graphic at the top of this page for a general overview of regulation in the United States. US regulations are complex and are the topic of discussion for many food safety professionals as we believe this illogical web of agencies contributes to the food safety failures of this country.
For meat companies, they likely have a USDA inspector on-site inspecting a statistical sample of production over the course of a single shift. USDA inspectors are not paid well and therefore it's logical to assume they do not employ the best in their field. This is not to say they are not qualified, but the fact of the matter is that they are not paid fairly and this will always be a contributing factor to incompetence in any industry.
For general processed foods, the FDA inspects on a random basis. The database of options is limited to companies which are registered with the Reportable Food Registry or RFR. Companies register under principles of the honor system. There are hundreds if not thousands of food companies flying under the radar of the FDA. The last time I checked, there were over 400 ecommerce companies not registered with the FDA.
One might say, "why should I care?" If you were injured by one of these companies, they would have the ability to pack up and disappear overnight leaving you holding the bag with medical bills and more. You would not have the option to take legal action against them. This is why you should care, if not for having compassion for human beings that do not deserve to be assaulted by the foods another company made gross profits off of.
Customer Requirements
Food companies are, in theory, required to comply with all applicable regulations. We will come back to this. For the sake of the discussion, let’s assume that a food company is compliant with all regulatory requirements. Their customers will more than likely have additional requirements beyond what is considered the bare minimum. These requirements could include sending performance and compliance data on a quarterly basis, sending evidence of registration with government agencies, voluntary programs, and other bespoke requests. The most robust and known program in the food industry is one that is GFSI or GFSI-benchmarked such as SQF, BRC, PrimusGFS, etc. The customer requires this of their supplier believing that if a company implements a GFSI food safety system it will be effective. We will argue that not only are these programs ineffective, but they are also a distraction from the goal of efficacious food safety. In some cases, the implementation and/or management of the GFSI clauses contribute to critical food safety failures such as recalls and illness outbreaks.
The problem with this assumption is two-fold. First, most food companies are not compliant with basic and applicable regulations. Most companies fly under the radar of the FDA for years, sometimes even decades. It should be said that food companies register with the Reportable Food Registry under the honor system. A food business might produce food for years before a regulator even knows it exists. The second issue is that in conjunction with a food business which is lacking in meeting the basic requirements, some companies make the grave mistake of assuming a company with GFSI automatically complies with the law. While there are some auditing program modules that review compliance with FSMA, for example, the activity is not a real guarantee of compliance. Further, most auditors are not skilled at an adequate level to conduct such an assessment in less than a few hours during a main scheme audit. This is silly. We are auditors and we conduct these assessments, and we are here to tell you there is NO WAY we are able to guarantee the same as a 5-day regulator visit. (absolutely ridiculous ludicrousness !)