Essay On Food Safety

Not to be confused with Food security.

Food safety is a scientific discipline describing handling, preparation, and storage of food in ways that prevent food-borne illness. The occurrence of two or more cases of a similar illnesses resulting from the ingestion of a common food is known as a Food-borne disease outbreak. [1]This includes a number of routines that should be followed to avoid potential health hazards. In this way food safety often overlaps with food defense to prevent harm to consumers. The tracks within this line of thought are safety between industry and the market and then between the market and the consumer. In considering industry to market practices, food safety considerations include the origins of food including the practices relating to food labeling, food hygiene, food additives and pesticide residues, as well as policies on biotechnology and food and guidelines for the management of governmental import and export inspection and certification systems for foods. In considering market to consumer practices, the usual thought is that food ought to be safe in the market and the concern is safe delivery and preparation of the food for the consumer.

Food can transmit pathogens which can result in the illness or death of the person or other animals. The main mediums are bacteria, viruses, mold, and fungus (which is Latin for mushroom). It can also serve as a growth and reproductive medium for pathogens. In developed countries there are intricate standards for food preparation, whereas in lesser developed countries there are less standards and enforcement of those standards. Another main issue is simply the availability of adequate safe water, which is usually a critical item in the spreading of diseases.[2] In theory, food poisoning is 100% preventable. However this cannot be achieved due to the number of persons involved in the supply chain, as well as the fact that pathogens can be introduced into foods no matter how many precautions are taken. The five key principles of food hygiene, according to WHO, are:[3]

  1. Prevent contaminating food with pathogens spreading from people, pets, and pests.
  2. Separate raw and cooked foods to prevent contaminating the cooked foods.
  3. Cook foods for the appropriate length of time and at the appropriate temperature to kill pathogens.
  4. Store food at the proper temperature.
  5. Do use safe water and safe raw materials.

Issues[edit]

Food safety issues and regulations concern:

ISO 22000[edit]

ISO 22000 is a standard developed by the International Organization for Standardization dealing with food safety. This is a general derivative of ISO 9000. ISO 22000 standard: The ISO 22000 international standard specifies the requirements for a food safety management system that involves interactive communication, system management, prerequisite programs, HACCP principles. ISO 22000 was first published in 2005. It is the culmination of all previous attempts from many sources and areas of food safety concern to provide an end product that is safe as possible from pathogens and other contaminants. Every 5 years standards are reviewed to determine whether a revision is necessary, to ensure that the standards remain as relevant and useful to businesses as possible.[4]

Incidence[edit]

A 2003 World Health Organization (WHO) report concluded that about 30% of reported food poisoning outbreaks in the WHO European Region occur in private homes.[5] According to the WHO and CDC, in the USA alone, annually, there are 76 million cases of foodborne illness leading to 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.[6]

Regulations by jurisdiction and agency[edit]

WHO and FAO[edit]

In 1963, the WHO and FAO published the Codex Alimentarius which serves as an guideline to food safety.[7]

However, according to Unit 04 - Communication of Health & Consumers Directorate-General of the European Commission (SANCO): "The Codex, while being recommendations for voluntary application by members, Codex standards serve in many cases as a basis for national legislation. The reference made to Codex food safety standards in the World Trade Organizations' Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures (SPS Agreement) means that Codex has far reaching implications for resolving trade disputes. WTO members that wish to apply stricter food safety measures than those set by Codex may be required to justify these measures scientifically." So, an agreement made in 2003, signed by all member states, inclusive all EU, in the codex Stan Codex 240 – 2003 for coconut milk, sulphite containing additives like E223 and E 224 are allowed till 30 mg/kg, does NOT mean, they are allowed into the EU, see Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) entries from Denmark: 2012.0834; 2011.1848; en 2011.168, “sulphite unauthorised in coconut milk from Thailand “. Same for polysorbate E 435: see 2012.0838 from Denmark, unauthorised polysorbates in coconut milk and, 2007.AIC from France. Only for the latter the EU amended its regulations with (EU) No 583/2012 per 2 July 2012 to allow this additive, already used for decades and absolutely necessary.

Australia[edit]

See also: Food safety in Australia

Food Standards Australia New Zealand requires all food businesses to implement food safety systems. These systems are designed to ensure food is safe to consume and halt the increasing incidence of food poisoning, and they include basic food safety training for at least one person in each business. Food safety training is delivered in various forms by, among other organisations, Registered Training Organizations (RTOs), after which staff are issued a nationally recognised unit of competency code on their certificate. Basic food safety training includes:

  • Understanding the hazards associated with the main types of food and the conditions to prevent the growth of bacteria which can cause food poisoning and to prevent illness.
  • Potential problems associated with product packaging such as leaks in vacuum packs, damage to packaging or pest infestation, as well as problems and diseases spread by pests.
  • Safe food handling. This includes safe procedures for each process such as receiving, re-packing, food storage, preparation and cooking, cooling and re-heating, displaying products, handling products when serving customers, packaging, cleaning and sanitizing, pest control, transport and delivery. Also covers potential causes of cross contamination.
  • Catering for customers who are particularly at risk of food-borne illness, as well as those with allergies or intolerance.
  • Correct cleaning and sanitizing procedures, cleaning products and their correct use, and the storage of cleaning items such as brushes, mops and cloths.
  • Personal hygiene, hand washing, illness, and protective clothing.

Food safety standards and requirements are set out at the national level in the Food Standards Code, and brought Into force in each state by state-based Acts and Regulations. Legislation means that people responsible for selling or serving unsafe food may be liable for heavy fines.

China[edit]

Main article: Food safety in China

Food safety is a growing concern in Chinese agriculture. The Chinese government oversees agricultural production as well as the manufacture of food packaging, containers, chemical additives, drug production, and business regulation. In recent years, the Chinese government attempted to consolidate food regulation with the creation of the State Food and Drug Administration in 2003, and officials have also been under increasing public and international pressure to solve food safety problems. However, it appears that regulations are not well known by the trade. Labels used for "green" food, "organic" food and "pollution-free" food are not well recognized by traders and many are unclear about their meaning. A survey by the World Bank found that supermarket managers had difficulty in obtaining produce that met safety requirements and found that a high percentage of produce did not comply with established standards.[8]

Traditional marketing systems, whether in China or the rest of Asia, presently provide little motivation or incentive for individual farmers to make improvements to either quality or safety as their produce tends to get grouped together with standard products as it progresses through the marketing channel. Direct linkages between farmer groups and traders or ultimate buyers, such as supermarkets, can help avoid this problem. Governments need to improve the condition of many markets through upgrading management and reinvesting market fees in physical infrastructure. Wholesale markets need to investigate the feasibility of developing separate sections to handle fruits and vegetables that meet defined safety and quality standards.[9]

European Union[edit]

The parliament of the European Union (EU) makes legislation in the form of directives and regulations, many of which are mandatory for member states and which therefore must be incorporated into individual countries' national legislation. As a very large organisation that exists to remove barriers to trade between member states, and into which individual member states have only a proportional influence, the outcome is often seen as an excessively bureaucratic 'one size fits all' approach. However, in relation to food safety the tendency to err on the side of maximum protection for the consumer may be seen as a positive benefit. The EU parliament is informed on food safety matters by the European Food Safety Authority.

Individual member states may also have other legislation and controls in respect of food safety, provided that they do not prevent trade with other states, and can differ considerably in their internal structures and approaches to the regulatory control of food safety.

From 13 December 2014, new legislation - the EU Food Information for Consumers Regulation 1169/2011 - require food businesses to provide allergy information on food sold unpackaged, in for example catering outlets, deli counters, bakeries and sandwich bars.[10]

France[edit]

Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l'alimentation, de l'environnement et du travail (anses) is a French governmental agency dealing with food safety.

Germany[edit]

The Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMEL)[11] is a Federal Ministry of the Federal Republic of Germany. History: Founded as Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Foresting in 1949, this name did not change until 2001. Then the name changed to Federal Ministry of Consumer Protection, Food and Agriculture. At the 22nd of November 2005, the name got changed again to its current state: Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection. The reason for this last change was that all the resorts should get equal ranking which was achieved by sorting the resorts alphabetically. Vision: A balanced and healthy diet with safe food, distinct consumer rights and consumer information for various areas of life, and a strong and sustainable agriculture as well as perspectives for our rural areas are important goals of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV). The Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety is under the control of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection. It exercises several duties, with which it contributes to safer food and thereby intensifies health-based consumer protection in Germany. Food can be manufactured and sold within Germany without a special permission, as long as it does not cause any damage on consumers’ health and meets the general standards set by the legislation. However, manufacturers, carriers, importers and retailers are responsible for the food they pass into circulation. They are obliged to ensure and document the safety and quality of their food with the use of in-house control mechanisms.

Hong Kong[edit]

In Hong Kong SAR, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department is in charge of ensuring food sold is safe and fit for consumption.

Hungary[edit]

In Hungary, the National Food Chain Safety Office controls the food business operators including agricultural producers, food processors, retailers, caterers, input material suppliers and private laboratories.[12] Its activities also cover risk assessment, risk communication and related research.[13]

India[edit]

Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, established under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, is the regulating body related to food safety and laying down of standards of food in India.

New Zealand[edit]

See also: Food safety in New Zealand

The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA), or Te Pou Oranga Kai O Aotearoa is the New Zealand government body responsible for food safety. NZFSA is also the controlling authority for imports and exports of food and food-related products. The NZFSA as of 2012 is now a division of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and is no longer its own organization.

Pakistan[edit]

The Pure Food Ordinance 1960 consolidates and amends the law in relation to the preparation and the sale of foods. Its aim is to ensure purity of food being supplied to people in the market and, therefore, provides for preventing adulteration.

Pakistan Hotels and Restaurant Act, 1976 applies to all hotels and restaurants in Pakistan and seeks to control and regulate the standard of service(s) by hotels and restaurants. In addition to other provisions, under section 22(2), the sale of food or beverages that are contaminated, not prepared hygienically or served in utensils that are not hygienic or clean is an offense.[14]

South Korea[edit]

Korea Food & Drug Administration[edit]

Korea Food & Drug Administration (KFDA)[15] is working for food safety since 1945. It is part of the Government of South Korea.

IOAS[16]-Organic Certification Bodies Registered in KFDA: "Organic" or related claims can be labelled on food products when organic certificates are considered as valid by KFDA. KFDA admits organic certificates which can be issued by 1) IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement) accredited certification bodies 2) Government accredited certification bodies – 328 bodies in 29 countries have been registered in KFDA.

Food Import Report: According to Food Import Report,[17] it is supposed to report or register what you import. Competent authority is as follows:

ProductAuthority
Imported Agricultural Products, Processed Foods, Food Additives, Utensils, Containers & Packages or Health Functional FoodsKFDA (Korea Food and Drug Administration)
Imported Livestock, Livestock products (including Dairy products)NVRQS (National Veterinary Research and Quarantine Service)
Packaged meat, milk & dairy products (butter, cheese), hamburger patties, meat ball and other processed products which are stipulated by Livestock Sanitation Management ActNVRQS (National Veterinary Research and Quarantine Service)
Imported Marine products; fresh, chilled, frozen, salted, dehydrated, eviscerated marine produce which can be recognized its characteristicsNFIS (National Fisheries Products Quality Inspection Service)

National Institute of Food and Drug Safety Evaluation[edit]

National Institute of Food and Drug Safety Evaluation (NIFDS)[18] is functioning as well. The National Institute of Food and Drug Safety Evaluation is a national organization for toxicological tests and research. Under the Korea Food & Drug Administration, the Institute performs research on toxicology, pharmacology, and risk analysis of foods, drugs, and their additives. The Institute strives primarily to understand important biological triggering mechanisms and improve assessment methods of human exposure, sensitivities, and risk by (1) conducting basic, applied, and policy research that closely examines biologically triggering harmful effects on the regulated products such as foods, food additives, and drugs, and operating the national toxicology program for the toxicological test development and inspection of hazardous chemical substances assessments. The Institute ensures safety by investigation and research on safety by its own researchers, contract research by external academicians and research centers.

Taiwan[edit]

In Taiwan, the Ministry of Health and Welfare in charge of Food and Drug Safety, also evaluate the catering industry to maintenance the food product quality.[19] Currently, US$29.01 million of budget is allocated each year for food safety-related efforts.[20]

United Kingdom[edit]

In the UK the Food Standards Agency is an independent government department responsible for food safety and hygiene across the UK.[21] They work with businesses to help them produce safe food, and with local authorities to enforce food safety regulations. In 2006 food hygiene legislation changed and new requirements came into force. The main requirement resulting from this change is that if you own or run a food business in the UK, you must have a documented Food Safety Management System, which is based on the principles of Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point HACCP.[22]

United States[edit]

The US food system is regulated by numerous federal, state and local officials. Since 1906 tremendous progress has been made in producing safer foods as can be seen in the section below. Still, it has been criticized as lacking in "organization, regulatory tools, and not addressing food borne illness."[23]

Federal level regulation[edit]

The Food and Drug Administration publishes the Food Code, a model set of guidelines and procedures that assists food control jurisdictions by providing a scientifically sound technical and legal basis for regulating the retail and food service industries, including restaurants, grocery stores and institutional foodservice providers such as nursing homes. Regulatory agencies at all levels of government in the United States use the FDA Food Code to develop or update food safety rules in their jurisdictions that are consistent with national food regulatory policy. According to the FDA, 48 of 56 states and territories, representing 79% of the U.S. population, have adopted food codes patterned after one of the five versions of the Food Code, beginning with the 1993 edition.[24]

In the United States, federal regulations governing food safety are fragmented and complicated, according to a February 2007 report from the Government Accountability Office.[25] There are 15 agencies sharing oversight responsibilities in the food safety system, although the two primary agencies are the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), which is responsible for the safety of meat, poultry, and processed egg products, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for virtually all other foods.

The Food Safety and Inspection Service has approximately 7,800 inspection program personnel working in nearly 6,200 federally inspected meat, poultry and processed egg establishments. FSIS is charged with administering and enforcing the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, the Egg Products Inspection Act, portions of the Agricultural Marketing Act, the Humane Slaughter Act, and the regulations that implement these laws. FSIS inspection program personnel inspect every animal before slaughter, and each carcass after slaughter to ensure public health requirements are met. In fiscal year (FY) 2008, this included about 50 billion pounds of livestock carcasses, about 59 billion pounds of poultry carcasses, and about 4.3 billion pounds of processed egg products. At U.S. borders, they also inspected 3.3 billion pounds of imported meat and poultry products.[26]

U.S. Legislation History[edit]

Recognition of food safety issues and attempts to address them began after Upton Sinclair published The Jungle February 1906. It was a fictional novel of the lives of immigrants in industrial cities in the U.S. Around this time. The novel inadvertently raised public concern about food safety and sanatization of the Chicagomeat packing industry. Upton Sinclair spent nine months undercover as an employee in a Chicago meat plant doing his research for this novel. Upon reading this novel, President Theodore Roosevelt called on congress to pass the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), which passed in 1906 and 1907 respectfully.[27] The preceding two laws were the first to address food safety in the U.S. Misbranding and adulteration were defined as they concerned food additives and truth in labeling. Food preservatives such as formaldehyde and borax used to disguise unsanitary production processes were also addressed.

The first test and major court battle involving the Pure Food and Drug Act was an attempt to outlaw Coca-Cola due to its excessively high caffeine content. [28]The Meat Inspection Act led to the formation of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Between 1906 and 1938 acts were created that monitored food coloration additives, and other chemical additives such as preservatives, as well as food labeling and food marketing. During the winter of 1924-1925, the worst food-borne illness to date in the U.S. Occurred because improper handling of oysters. [29], which produced a typhoid fever epidemic, and food-borne illness outbreaks gained national attention. Unfortunately, it was not until 1969 that the FDA began sanitization programs specifically for shellfish, milk, and its focus and implementation on the food service industry as a whole.

In 1970 the Center for Disease Control (CDC), began record keeping on food-borne illness deaths. This was the beginning of effective record keeping that could be used to control and prevent similar outbreaks in the future. The first major food recall in the U.S. Was caused by canned mushrooms in 1973.[30]This outbreak of botulism produced the National Botulism Surveillance System. This system collected the data on all confirmed cases of botulism in the U.S. This led to processing regulations for low-acid foods to ensure proper heat treating of canned foods. The Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak of 1993 lead the Clinton administration to put $43 million into a food safety initiative[31] to create many of the common specific regulations that we hear about today. This initiative produced regulations on seafood, meat, poultry, and shell-eggs. This initiative also produced a program for DNA fingerprinting to help track outbreaks and to determine their source. This initiative also called for a cooperative detection and response effort between the CDC, FDA, USDA and local agencies called FoodNet.[32] In 2011 the Food Safety Modernization Act, (FSMA), produced what is considered the most significant food safety legislation in over 70 years. The significant difference with this act and previous acts was that it shifted to focus from response and containment of food-borne disease outbreaks to their prevention. This act is still in the early implementation phase but gives the FDA authority to regulate the way foods are grown, processed, and harvested.

Industry pressure[edit]

There have been concerns over the efficacy of safety practices and food industry pressure on U.S. regulators. A study reported by Reuters found that "the food industry is jeopardizing U.S. public health by withholding information from food safety investigators or pressuring regulators to withdraw or alter policy designed to protect consumers". A survey found that 25% of U.S. government inspectors and scientists surveyed have experienced during the past year corporate interests forcing their food safety agency to withdraw or to modify agency policy or action that protects consumers. Scientists have observed that management undercuts field inspectors who stand up for food safety against industry pressure. According to Dr. Dean Wyatt, a USDA veterinarian who oversees federal slaughter house inspectors, "Upper level management does not adequately support field inspectors and the actions they take to protect the food supply. Not only is there lack of support, but there's outright obstruction, retaliation and abuse of power."[33] A growing number of food and beverage manufacturers are improving food safety standards by incorporating a food safety management system which automates all steps in the food quality management process.[34]

State and local regulation[edit]

A number of U.S. states have their own meat inspection programs that substitute for USDA inspection for meats that are sold only in-state.[35] Certain state programs have been criticized for undue leniency to bad practices.[36]

However, other state food safety programs supplement, rather than replace, Federal inspections, generally with the goal of increasing consumer confidence in the state's produce. For example, state health departments have a role in investigating outbreaks of food-borne disease bacteria, as in the case of the 2006 outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 (a pathogenic strain of the ordinarily harmless bacteria, E. coli ) from processed spinach.[37] Health departments also promote better food processing practices to eliminate these threats.[38]

In addition to the US Food and Drug Administration, several states that are major producers of fresh fruits and vegetables (including California, Arizona and Florida) have their own state programs to test produce for pesticide residues.[39]

Restaurants and other retail food establishments fall under state law and are regulated by state or local health departments. Typically these regulations require official inspections of specific design features, best food-handling practices, and certification of food handlers.[40] In some places a letter grade or numerical score must be prominently posted following each inspection.[41] In some localities, inspection deficiencies and remedial action are posted on the Internet.[42]

Vietnam[edit]

The Vietnam Food Administration is reafor managing food hygiene, safety, and quality and has made significant progress since its establishment in 1999. Food safety remains a high priority in Vietnam with the growth of export markets and increasing food imports raising the need to rapidly build capacity of the Food Administration in order to reduce threats of foodborne disease. The Food Administration has demonstrated commitment to the food safety challenges it faces, and has embarked on an innovative capacity building activity with technical assistance from the World Health Organization.[43]

Manufacturing control[edit]

HACCP guidelines[edit]

Consumer labeling[edit]

Main article: List of food labeling regulations

United Kingdom[edit]

Foodstuffs in the UK have one of two labels to indicate the nature of the deterioration of the product and any subsequent health issues. EHO Food Hygiene certification is required to prepare and distribute food. While there is no specified expiry date of such a qualification the changes in legislation it is suggested to update every five years.

Best before indicates a future date beyond which the food product may lose quality in terms of taste or texture amongst others, but does not imply any serious health problems if food is consumed beyond this date (within reasonable limits).

Use by indicates a legal date beyond which it is not permissible to sell a food product (usually one that deteriorates fairly rapidly after production) due to the potential serious nature of consumption of pathogens. Leeway is sometimes provided by producers in stating display until dates so that products are not at their limit of safe consumption on the actual date stated (this latter is voluntary and not subject to regulatory control). This allows for the variability in production, storage and display methods.

United States[edit]

With the exception of infant formula and baby foods which must be withdrawn by their expiration date, Federal law does not require expiration dates. For all other foods, except dairy products in some states, freshness dating is strictly voluntary on the part of manufacturers. In response to consumer demand, perishable foods are typically labelled with a Sell by date.[44] It is up to the consumer to decide how long after the Sell by date a package is usable. Other common dating statements are Best if used by, Use-by date, Expiration date, Guaranteed fresh <date>, and Pack date.[45]

Australia and New Zealand[edit]

Guide to Food Labelling and Other Information Requirements: This guide provides background information on the general labelling requirements in the Code. The information in this guide applies both to food for retail sale and to food for catering purposes. Foods for catering purposes means those foods for use in restaurants, canteens, schools, caterers or self-catering institutions, where food is offered for immediate consumption. Labelling and information requirements in the new Code apply both to food sold or prepared for sale in Australia and New Zealand and food imported into Australia and New Zealand. Warning and Advisory Declarations, Ingredient Labelling, Date Marking, Nutrition Information Requirements, Legibility Requirements for Food Labels, Percentage Labelling, Information Requirements for Foods Exempt from Bearing a Label.[46][47]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Texas Food Establishment Rules. Texas DSHS website: Texas Department of State Health Services. 2015. p. 6. 
  2. ^Shiklomanov, I. A. (2000). "Appraisal and Assessment of World Water Resources"(PDF). Water International. International Water Resources Association. pp. 11–32. 
  3. ^"Prevention of foodborne disease: Five keys to safer food". World Health Organisation. Retrieved 2010-12-10. 
  4. ^International Organization Standards ISO (2017-07-01). "ISO 22000 Revision". International Organization Standards ISO. Retrieved 2017-11-25. 
  5. ^"Several foodborne diseases are increasing in Europe". World Health Organisation. 2003-12-16. Archived from the original on 2005-04-16. 
  6. ^"Food safety and foodborne illness". World Health Organisation. Retrieved 2010-12-10. 
  7. ^"Codex Alimentarius and Food Hygiene"(PDF). Codex Alimentarius. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Retrieved 2007-10-15. 
  8. ^"China's Compliance with Food Safety Requirements for Fruits and Vegetables: Promoting Food Safety, Competitiveness, and Poverty Reduction"(PDF). World Bank and China Agriculture Press. 2005. 
  9. ^Shepherd, Andrew W. (2006). "Quality and safety in the traditional horticultural marketing chains of Asia"(PDF). Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. 
  10. ^Agency, Food Standards. "Allergy and intolerance: guidance for businesses - Food Standards Agency". www.food.gov.uk. 
  11. ^"German Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection". Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz. 
  12. ^Kft., Wolters Kluwer. "2008. évi XLVI. törvény - az élelmiszerláncról és hatósági felügyeletéről". Retrieved 2017-05-09. 
  13. ^"Élelmiszerlánc-biztonsági stratégia 2013 – 2022 - Stratégia az élelmiszerlánc biztonságáért". elbs.hu (in Hungarian). Retrieved 2017-05-09. 
  14. ^Siraj, Mazhar (2004). "Food Safety Legislation in Pakistan"(DOC). Consumer Rights Commission of Pakistan. 
  15. ^"Ministry of Food and Drug Safety". Korea Food and Drug A. 
  16. ^"IFOAM Accredited Certification Bodies"(PDF). International Organic Accreditation Service. Korea Food and Drug Administration. 2008-02-14. 
  17. ^"Foods Import Report Guide"(PDF). Korea Food and Drug Administration. 2010-10-22. 
  18. ^"National Institute of Food and Drug Safety Evaluation". Korea: National Institute of Food and Drug Safety Evaluation. 
  19. ^""Taiwan Ministry of Health and Welfare website 2015.9". www.mohw.gov.tw. 
  20. ^http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aipl/201608300011.aspx
  21. ^"About Us". Food Standards Agency. 
  22. ^"Food Hygiene Guidelines"(PDF). Pip. 
  23. ^Becker, Geoffrey (2010-04-10), The Federal Food Safety System: A primer, Congressional Research Service 
  24. ^"FDA Food Code". Food and Drug Administration. 2007-10-05. Retrieved 2008-09-01. 
  25. ^"High-Risk Designation Can Bring Needed Attention to Fragmented System"(PDF). Federal Oversight of Food Safety. Government Accountability Office. 
  26. ^"FSIS Testimony, March 11, 2009"(PDF). United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service. 
  27. ^Food and Drug Administration (2017-10-05). "Part I: The 1906 Food and Drugs Act and Its Enforcement". Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved 2017-11-24. 
  28. ^Wikipedia (2017-07-29). "United States v. Forty Barrels & Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola". Wikipedia. Retrieved 2017-11-24. 
  29. ^Food Safety News (2012-03-28). "Oyster-Borne Typhoid Fever Killed 150 in Winter of 1924-25". Food Safety News. Retrieved 2017-11-24. 
  30. ^The New York Times (1973-02-19). "F.D.A. Is Recalling More Mushrooms For Botulism Check". The New York Times. Retrieved 2017-11-24. 
  31. ^Wikipedia (1973-02-22). "Food Safety Initiative". Wikipedia. Retrieved 2017-02-24. 
  32. ^Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2017-03-03). "Food Borne Disease Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet)". Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 2017-02-24. 
  33. ^"Industry Has Sway Over Food Safety System: U.S. Study". Reuters. 2010-09-14. Archived from the original on 2010-09-14. 
  34. ^Kuchinski, Kelly. "Can Automation Reduce the Risk of Food Recalls?". Retrieved 27 July 2015. 
  35. ^"FSIS State Inspection Programs". United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service. 
  36. ^

Food and Food Safety

Eating and nutrition are, probably, the most significant events in life of every human being. Eating has become our tradition and part of our culture. In many countries, the process of eating and nutrition is a real ceremony that is accompanied by some bright events. People enjoy delicious food. In reality, eating and problem of healthy food are the most widespread themes of all times. All human beings depend upon eating: the foods are the exclusive source of energy and nutrition. People know so much about eating and useful features of certain types of products. The necessity of food is our inborn feature: people are born with the wish to eat and are brought up with prosperous traditions of eating and preparing food. Nevertheless, people also do not know much information about eating and foods, and all the negative effects that unhealthy nutrition can cause. Nowadays, in the world of modern tendencies and fashion, people are more concerned about the connection between diets and health. We focus on the problems of the usefulness of foods and concern about different questions concerning the quality of foods and its effects on human health and immune system. It is not a secret that many products have negative effect on people’s health and immune system in general. Many of modern popular products can lead to different diseases of heart and nervous system. Eating is an absurdity and a secrecy that our intimates tried and up to date scientists are trying to resolve.

The tradition of studying positive and negative features of food rooted from ancient times when people were interested in the products they eat and herbs that were around hem. On the basis of experiences and traditions, our intimates used foods, herbs and plant materials to care for different types of illness. According to manuscripts discovered in Chine, that dated from 168 B.C. people knew a lot of receipts using about 52 ailments with different herbs, grains, legumes, vegetables, animal parts, and different minerals. They say that there is any herb that is useless for people. Today, the remedies produced from plants and food is still the main medicinal basis for practically 80% of the whole world’s population.

Due to lack of proven systematic validity, the pharmacological roles of daily foods have been neglected for along time by modern medicine. Modern medicine was mainly focused on pharmaceuticals. The scientists came to the conclusion that, despite their helpfulness, modern pharmaceutical means are very hazardous for people’s health and the only way out is to use natural resources, such as herbs in the medicine. This displeasure is focused on the feeling that they are too disease-oriented and maybe too incomplete by their accuracy to cope efficiently with the restrained factors and interrelationships that cooperate human health and illness. In this case more and more scientists tend to use natural sources of treatment as they are more reliable and useful, having no side effects. Surely, the treatment with the help of herbs takes more time, but it is more effective from the point of view of achieved results. More and more modern scientists are coming back to the reality of antique food folk medicines and different dietary practices for clues to medicines and antidotes to modern illnesses.

There were a lot of researches conducted in the sphere of pharmacological effects of food; the results of such investigations are rather exciting. Moreover, the scientists provided a lot of improvements of the fact that food effects people’s health greatly. But it is necessary to take into account that not every kind of food in useful for health and one should pay particular attention to the choice of products for daily life. Unfortunately, people are not aware of all the useful features of the foods they eat. That is why it is necessary to be very careful about the products we buy and use. The choice of foods is very significant. Since curative power of food depends on the content of pharmacologically active components that vary among food, some types of foods should be avoided and excluded from the daily ration because of their illness encouraging activities. Scientists advise study carefully the list of food ingredients as many of them are potentially dangerous for life and health. Fortunately, modern sources of Mass Media and other means of information keep people aware of the latest investigations in the sphere of food, products and nutrition.

Healthy food is a direct source of extreme life energy that is why it is necessary to select products very carefully. Nothing in the world can be compared with health and happiness and health is directly connected with physical activities and surely, healthy food. Everybody should be aware of the products he/she use and know exactly all the negative and positive features of the food. Our energy is directly interconnected with the food we eat. Its energy comes directly from the sun and the nutrients come from the earth. Everything that we consume should be healthy for us to be health as well. Being healthy is not only being without a cold or any disease. It also comprises reproductive health. By eating products polluted with chemicals, the sturdiness of reproductive health is decreased ever so faintly in every generation. Unfortunately, it a well-known fact that the products consumed from modern supermarkets and shops contains a lot of chemical ingredients that effect human health an immune system in the worse possible way. The recently conducted statistics demonstrates very unpleasant and not very soothing results. So, according to the researches, conducted by the institute of health nutrition and immunology, practically 80% of average food that appear in modern supermarkets of large cities, contains genetically modified organisms and chemical substances that can lead to serious diseases. Taking into account the fact that modern products are potentially dangerous for health, there is the necessity of using healthy foods and products that are free from chemicals and dangerous substances. Scientists concluded that eating the organic food is one of the most successful ways out of the problem of unhealthy and dangerous food (Katz 126). It is really so, as organic food is really beneficial from the point of view of value and costs. Organic food is not only very consuming but also very delicious. Obviously, for those who are in habit of eating the foods of non organic origin, it will be rather difficult to get accustomed to the organic foods, but it worse it, as the result will provide you with strong health and high spirits. It was proved by numerous scientists and simple people.

The advantages of organic food are clear to everybody. As the demand for organic products and food has significantly increased all over the world, more people still ask the question if organic food is more nourishing and better tasting than usually grown food, and whether the organic food is better for the environment and health, whether it is possible to prevent some dangerous diseases such as heartbreaks, high pressure and a lot of stomach illnesses that are, unfortunately, the inevitable result of using the no organic food (Kluger, Harrell and Mahr 32). After all, in order to pay a high price for organic food, it is significant to understand completely all the advantages of the organic food and preview all its benefits and good results that it has on our heath. It is true that there is not yet a decisive answer concerning all the advantages of organic products and organic farming, as the most population till give their preference to the conventional food. The first reason is that conventional is cheaper and not everyone can afford buying some expensive food, whatever healthy it may be. However, the studies have demonstrated that many organic products are always more nutritious and tastier than conservatively grown foods, and that there are many distinctive benefits to the environment, animals, and soil used while growing organic products and grass fed meat. The investigations conducted by the independent scientists demonstrated obvious advantages of the organic food over the conventional one. Two groups of individuals were examined by the scientists. People from the first group were fed by the conventional food, containing different chemical substance, while the representatives of the second group were fed by the organic food, grown up in the environmentally clean territories. At the end of the experiment, scientists tried to compare the general health condition of the representatives of both groups. The results of the conducted examination were astonishing. The health condition of the representatives of the fist group was in two times heavier than that of the first group. The scientists came to the conclusion, that food has a direct influence upon the condition of heart and general condition of all body organs. The second group demonstrated excellent results of both, general health condition and good mood.

Organic food has many benefits that were proved by numerous researches. The only disadvantage of the organic products is its high price. Cost is the only real drawback when it deals with buying fresh foods. The cost of organic products is up to three times more than the price of non-organic foods. For instance, chicken, farmed organically can cost about $8 to $12 when the price of non-organic can achieve $4 -$5. The production of such kind of foods is also very expensive. Another problem, connected with the organic food is the difficulty to buy. In some cities that are far from villages and farms it is rather hard to buy organic food, because it is not shipped in the local shops, because of its high price. Still, consumers should decide what is significant to them: health or money, but the answer is obvious. There is a question about the products, containing some organic ingredients. Is it also organic? Yes, it is still organic, in the case if the products contain 70% of organic ingredients, excluding additional water and salt. Pay attention to the fact that organic food does not contain additional sulfites, the rest of 30% of ingredients can be of non-organic production. So, the organic products is a non-chemical, austerely processed, and fresh kind of food.

Among the variety of benefits of organic foods, related to the health improvement and perseverance, this type of food has certain taste benefits. One of the advantages of organic products is that they taste better. The typical taste of a food is based on a partial number of taste feelings, such as sweet, acid, sour and other main flavors. However, the smell of food comprises up to 80% of what we distinguish as taste. Organic food contains a great amount of water in comparison with the sugar and different fats, flour and legumes that include about 10-15% water. Fish and meat include about 70-80% water, moreover 90% of fruit and vegetables is also water that is so important for life and all vital process. Amusingly, products grown conventionally, contains more water than organic products. It happens because conventional methods of fertilization comprise nitrogen leading to more water being absorbed into the cells of the product when it is not fertilized with the usage of nitrogen (Crinnion 14). Nevertheless, studies have demonstrated that that the use of nitrogen leads to the increasing of 5-30% more water in conventional products than in ecologically grown foods. That is why nitrogen is not used as fertilizer while growing of the organic foods. For instance, conventionally grown romaine comprises 94.3% water, when romaine, grown ecologically, contains 92.3% water. Conventionally grown cabbage contains about 1.1% more water than its ecological counterpart, and conventional spinach contains 10% more water than its ecologically grown one (Dangour, Allen, Lock, Uauy and Ricardo 179). What one can see from these figures is that organic food, grown up in the ecologically friendly conditions, has a higher proportion of dry components, it means it has stronger taste and more intense nutrients. Foods, containing more water will be more watery in flavor and in nutrition. In accordance with the research above, the flavor difference may vary between 2-20% less in products grown conventionally, depending upon the increase in the proportion of water in the food. One more reason explaining why organic food is healthier and has better taste is the fact that most organic farms are little operations and they transport their products nearby soon after the process of harvesting (Daugbjerg, Halpin and Darren 400). As a result, consumers are able to buy fresher products, with all the flavor and nutrition intact.

Production of organic food is strictly regulated industry; it requires all the producers to meet certain particular certification, in order to have the opportunity to market their organic product. It means that all organic products must be produced in a way that adheres to the strategies and high standards set by the country they will deliver their products. It is very significant for the organic food production to be strictly controlled, as it is a future of healthy nation.

Works Cited

Crinnion, Walter J.Organic Foods Contains Higher Level of Certain Nutrients, Lower Levels of Pesticides and May Provide health benefits to the Customer”. Alternative Medicine Review, April 2010, Vol. 15 Issue 1, p4-12, 9p

Dangour, Alan D.; Allen, Elizabeth; Lock, Karen; Uauy, Ricardo. “Nutritional Composition and health benefits of Organic Foods, Using Systematic reviews to Question the Available Evidence”. Indian Journal of Medical Research, April 2010, Vol. 131 Issue 4, p478-480, 3p

Daugbjerg, Carsten; Halpin, Darren. “Shapering up Research in Organics: Why We Need to Integrate Sectoral Policy Research into Mainstream Policy Analysis”. Policy Studies, December 2008, Vol. 29 Issue 4, p393-404, 12p

Kluger, Jeffrey; Harrell, Eben; Mahr, Krista. “What’ So Great About Organic Food Time". International (South Pacific Edition), June 2010, Vol. 176 Issue 10, p30-35

Katz, David. “The case for Natural Foods”. Prevention, March 2010, Vol. 62 Issue 3, p124-127, 4p

0 Replies to “Essay On Food Safety”

Lascia un Commento

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *