AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia
This article is the first of a 4 part series looking at how the United States' food system may be fueling a global health crisis. Many trust that the Food and Drug Administration can adequately protect them as consumers. A recent report put out by a subcommittee of the FDA itself, however, doubted its ability to serve its mission. Follow parts I-IV through a hypothetical example of how motivated groups could successfully disrupt and undermine the health of the United States and countries abroad.
Part II
Part III
Part IV (References Available)
According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA):
The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nations' food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.
The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer, and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health," (USDHHS, 2009b).
There have been doubts as to the Food and Drug Administration's ability to protect the American public from issues of food safety. It is not uncommon to see stories appearing on the news covering outbreaks of common bacterial pathogens such as E. Coli and Salmonella that have appeared in the food supply. Current, "high priority threats" according to the FDA include anthrax, Burkholderia bacteria, Clostridium botulinum, radiological/nuclear agents, smallpox, typhus, tularemia, various viral hemorrhagic fevers, and volatile nerve agents (USDHHS, 2009a). No one can doubt the potential serious harm that these agents could inflict on the nation, and inquiry into their solutions is warranted. The largest threat, however, may be much trickier: it could be the FDA's frank inability to keep up with the rapidly evolving food industry.
In 2007, a subcommittee put together by the FDA criticized the ability of the FDA to properly oversee food safety issues and protect the American consumer (Food Safety Board, 2007). As new technologies and chemicals are continually introduced to the US market, the FDA is unable to keep up with the scientific research supporting or refuting such technologies. It allows foods to be on the market for considerable time on thin safety data, and then only removes them if problems surface. If someone was to design a bioterrorism scheme, they could focus their efforts on overwhelming the FDA’s capacity to protect the American consumer and dismantling the quality and safety of the global food supply systematically from the ground, to the grocery store, and ultimately on to the consumer plate. Conveniently, it appears as though they would only have to potentiate the current system to achieve their goals.
Read More:
Part II
Part III
Part IV (References Available)
Comments
Frankly, the articles seem perocrial, because the single biggest imminent news in the area of food supply is the prediction in this article: "Catastrophic Fall in 2009 Global Food Production." Sorry to be a troll, but do you understand the significance if that prediction comes true? The biggest threat to US national security is foreign regime instability (which replaced WMD early this year according to the US government):
"Food riots terrify the elites much more than energy riots. Marie Antoinette was beheaded because bread, not wood or20coal, was so scarce for the poor. The Roman Emperors provided free bread to a third of the population of Rome, not free wood, because they were very fearful of the hungry and jobless mob. For an increasing number of third world nations civil unrest, including violence, as a result of food deprivation is now the most significant threat to regime continuity." --Vinod K. Dar, Right Side News, 18 June 2008
Sorry to double post, but this is very pertinent to the discussion on food security:
"Few seem to realise that the present IPCC models predict almost unanimously that by 2040 the average summer in Europe will be as hot as the summer of 2003 when over 30,000 died from heat. By then we may cool ourselves with air conditioning and learn to live in a climate no worse than that of Baghdad now. But without extensive irrigation the plants will die and both farming and natural ecosystems will be replaced by scrub and desert. What will there be to eat? The same dire changes will affect the rest of the world and I can envisage Americans migrating into Canada and the Chinese into Siberia but there may be little food for any of them." --Dr James Lovelock's lecture to the Royal Society, 29 Oct. '07
"We underestimated the risks ... we underestimated the damage associated with temperature increases ... and we underestimated the probabilities of temperature increases." -- Sir Nicholas Stern
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!