Last Friday I spoke at the Government Accountability Project Food Integrity Campaign conference. During the lunch break, food safety attorney and advocate Bill Marler hosted a press event with 10 family members of victims of the 2009 Salmonella outbreak in peanuts. Hundreds of companies recalled thousands of products made with peanuts from Peanut Corporation of America (PCA). At least 700 people became ill with Salmonella infections after eating those products, and 9 died.

Earlier that day, Marler and his clients had met with attorneys from the Department of Justice to demand that criminal charges to be brought against former CEO of PCA, Stewart Parnell.

The facts of the case are staggering. The Congressional investigation that followed the outbreak uncovered internal emails suggesting Parnell knew his company was shipping Salmonella-contaminated peanuts.

“In my many years of handling food safety cases, I’ve yet to see a circumstance that has so clearly warranted criminal prosecution as the corporate mismanagement involved in the PCA outbreak,” said Marler.

But what will forever stick in my memory about attending this press event is the faces and voices of the family members whose lives were changed forever as a result of one company’s greed.

Shirley Hullett, from North Carolina, broke down in tears as she described how her 67-year-old husband Bobby Ray suffered excruciating pain before he was even diagnosed correctly, but by then it was too late. Now she’s a widow struggling to make ends meet. Her son and daughter-in-law also spoke, calling for justice to be done, during which Mrs. Hullett continued to cry as she sat listening to them. (I am crying as I remember it now.)

Gabrielle Meunier, the Vermont mother of a seven-year-old boy who got very sick, talked about the pain her son went though. “Mommy, it hurts so much I want to die,” little Christopher told her. And yet this mother was unable to even touch him to comfort him because his skin was so inflamed.

But this family was “lucky” because Christopher survived. Still, his immune system remains compromised such that even the slightest illness could turn into a serious condition.

Randy Napier came from Ohio to talk about how he lost his mother, Nellie Napier (age 85) who he was obviously very close to. He described how she scraped by in her younger years working for very little to help support her family. He finished by holding up a dollar bill, his hands shaking, saying: “To Stewart Parnell, this was worth more than my mother’s life.”

Lou Tousignant, from Minnesota, lost his father Clifford Tousignant (age 78), a Korean War veteran who was awarded three Purple Hearts during his service. This son didn’t want to talk about the pain his father went through; instead he told us who his father was and what he meant to him. After sharing a few stories, he said the hardest part was how his own young son wouldn’t be able to know his grandfather, that he was deprived of that special relationship.

So many thoughts ran through my head as I watched these victims bravely share their deepest emotional wounds, in the hope others would not have to suffer a similar fate. Several of them were obviously patriotic and seemed betrayed by their country, which in a way they were.

Of course, they didn’t have to fly to Washington DC from all over the nation (some had done so numerous times before), they didn’t have to publicly relive such horrific experiences of watching a loved one suffer. I doubt they wanted to.

Yet they did. Why?

Because they want to see justice done. Just like the victims of a drunk driver or other obvious crime want the perpetrator to be held accountable. They are rightly frustrated that it has been two years and still no action. I got the sense they would not give up.

It also struck me how crazy it is that we have gotten to the point in our very broken food system where the innocent act of eating peanuts (or peanut butter or peanut-flavored granola bars) can make you sick or even kill you. How can this be? It seems more mind boggling than getting sick from eating a hamburger, which shouldn’t happen either of course, but somehow makes more sense. Perhaps because peanut butter is something I associate with childhood, which is also innocent. It’s just insanity.

While sending the former CEO to jail won’t turn back the clock for these families, it will still send a powerful message to the food industry that individuals can and will be held accountable for their greed when it puts lives at risk; that they cannot keep hiding behind (in legal terms) the corporate veil, which shields them in civil liability. Charging the CEO with a crime puts a name and a face to this tragedy in a powerful way that we haven’t seen before.

And maybe, just maybe, other CEOs will take notice.

Originally published on Appetite for Profit

In a blockbuster-worthy hearing, complete with partisan bickering, a photo slideshow, and a witness pleading the Fifth, Congress yesterday grilled the executives responsible for two Iowa egg farms linked to over 1,600 illnesses.

Though Jack DeCoster, who owns the company at the center of the investigation, apologized to anyone “who may have been sickened by eating our eggs,” he and his son, Peter, who now runs the Iowa facility, were met with tough questioning from lawmakers.

“You have a history of over 30 years of Salmonella in eggs and a pretty sordid record,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, after a series of U.S. Food and Drug Administration photos of the facilities were shown. “Your facilities were not clean, they were not sanitary. They were filthy. You are a habitual violator of safety standards.”

Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) echoed a similar sentiment: “Mr. DeCoster clearly has no regard for regulations until the point at which he actually gets caught,” he said. Markey also compared the conditions at the Iowa farms to the revelations in Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle.”

Jack DeCoster, his voice shaky at times, said that the history of violations were “complicated.” He and his son Peter disputed some of the FDA’s findings in their inspection report. They blamed Iowa weather for causing a backup in the removal of manure, causing the pile up cited by inspectors. They also said they believe the contamination likely originated in a bone meal ingredient they sourced for their chicken feed.

FDA officials maintain that the feed is only one of many possible ways Salmonella bacteria could have entered the Iowa facilities. The dozens of positive environmental tests, rodents, loose chickens, and open piles of manure the FDA found make it difficult to pinpoint the mode of contamination.

Orlando Bethel, president of Hillandale Farms of Iowa, was also on the list of witnesses but pleaded the Fifth before the committee, declining to answer any questions from lawmakers. In lieu of Bethel, the company’s production representative, Duane Mangskau, testified.

The Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Government Oversight and Investigations heard emotional testimony from victims, whose Salmonella infections were positively linked to the multistate outbreak and traced to the Iowa egg farms.

Sarah Lewis, a 30-year-old mother and wife from California, told her story and called for more regulation of the egg industry.  She became violently ill after eating tarts served at a graduation party and ended up in Intensive Care. “Your whole body from head to toe is in agony,” she said.

The three and a half hour long hearing–full of traditional political theater and dozens of repeated questions–was kept lively with some partisan outbursts.  Members of the panel dueled over the Senate food safety legislation, which has remained stalled for over a year.

“Please lift your hold and allow this vital safety legislation to move forward,” said Waxman, appealing to Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), who has objected to moving the food safety bill forward under Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) rules for debate. Waxman joined several other panel members in appealing to the Oklahoma Republican to remove his hold.

When ranking member Michael Burgess (R-TX), who supports the food safety legislation, tried to submit a Coburn statement to the record he was shut down by the Democrats in the room.  When he continued to object, subcommittee chairman Bart Stupak (D-MI) turned off his microphone.

For more of the most colorful moments of the hearing, use the hashtag #eggrecall on Twitter.

Photo: Austin J. DeCoster and his son Peter DeCoster with protesters behind, via AP. Conditions at a DeCoster facility, photos submitted for the record (h/t Bill Marler)

Originally published on Food Safety News

Right now people are a little fearful of eggs, and who can blame them? The recent salmonella outbreak that resulted in the recall of half-a-billion eggs and sickened more than a thousand people across the country has left people wondering just how safe our food supply is. As a nutritionist, people ask me about this a lot—and what’s most important to understand is that all eggs are not created equal. The industrial food industry has taken our foods and made many of them unsafe. Not only this, but the nutritional value of our foods is intricately tied into this same industry. Which leads to another question I often hear: What are the healthiest foods? This should be an easy question to answer, but with the industrial food complex wrecking havoc on our food supply, things have become far more complicated.

Eggs prove to be the perfect example, something that can be an extremely healthy food. I wish I could stop there, but the great variation in the quality of eggs makes this impossible. If we are talking about local, small-scale, farm-raised eggs from chickens that live on pasture and spend plenty of time outside, then yes, eggs are quite possibly the perfect food. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans don’t have access to eggs produced this way. On the other hand, if we are talking about the average egg that you pick up in a supermarket, then no, eggs are not very healthy at all. Not only are they unhealthy, but they can actually be unsafe to eat as this most recent recall illustrates.

So what makes industrially-produced eggs so different? Let’s start with the safety issues. Eggs that come from hens confined to battery hen houses are not produced in sanitary conditions. Tens of thousands of cramped chickens spend their short lives either lined up in tiny cages or crowded into open henhouses, standing in their own feces, unable to move around or gain access to fresh air or sunlight. They are stressed and often sick.

Since the late 1980s, salmonella has been a major problem in these giant warehouses. One giant producer in particular, Austin DeCoster of Wright County Egg, has been responsible for multiple outbreaks of salmonella over the years, according to yesterday’s New York Times article. State regulators were so concerned, that for a period of time, New York and Maryland even banned the sale of DeCoster eggs. Salmonella can be quite serious to those with a weakened immune system, babies, young children, the elderly, and pregnant women. According to the Times article, in one of the earlier DeCoster egg outbreaks, nine people died. Salmonella has also been linked to a host of chronic ailments, including reactive arthritis, Reiter’s syndrome, Miller-Fisher syndrome, and ulcers.

When it comes to nutrition, it is not widely known or understood that the industrial egg is significantly less healthful than the egg from a pasture-raised chicken. The industry has managed to take real foods, like eggs, and make them not only unsafe, but also less nutritious. Mother Earth News completed a study in 2007 that compared the nutritional profiles of industrial eggs versus eggs from pasture-raised chickens and found substantial nutritional differences. According to the study, eggs from pasture-raised chickens contained two-thirds more vitamin A, three to six times more vitamin D, two times more omega-3 fatty acids, three times more vitamin E, and seven times more beta-carotene than their industrial counterparts.

Why? Industrial eggs are fed processed grains (usually genetically modified corn that is heavily sprayed with pesticides). This is not the chicken’s natural diet. Chickens are omnivores and will eat grass, seeds, insects, grubs and whatever else they find while roaming on pasture. This varied diet results in a more nutrient-dense egg, which is higher in omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin A and beta-carotene. In addition, chickens that live outdoors convert sunlight into vitamin D and other nutrients that store in their eggs.

Something else I often hear is: But don’t eggs raise cholesterol? The answer is no. People are often shocked by this since the government, dieticians, and doctors have spent years telling people to eat fewer eggs or to eat egg whites alone. But this is a fallacy, as studies have consistently shown that dietary cholesterol is not what influences blood cholesterol levels. In fact, findings from a study published in The Journal of the American Medical Association found that people who ate four eggs per week had significantly lower mean serum cholesterol levels than those who ate one egg per week. Plus, the daily nutrient intake of people who ate eggs was much higher than the non-egg eaters. And you won’t get these benefits from the egg white alone. The egg exists as a whole for a reason, the nutrients in the yolk and the white work in concert to make the egg the perfect food. I would recommend eating at least one high quality egg a day and for children and pregnant women, two or more.

The challenge is making pasture-raised chickens and their eggs available to everyone. Sometimes access and availability are the issue and sometimes it’s cost. Pastured eggs are much more expensive than industrial eggs and this is something that must change. But consider that you are getting more nutritional bang for your buck when you eat pastured eggs. Plus, coming down with a bout of salmonella as a result of a factory farm’s irresponsibility and carelessness is something no one deserves.

Visit your local farmer’s market to find pastured eggs and ask the farmer about his or her practices. To find pastured producers near you go to Eat Wild or Local Harvest.

This is the first piece in a regular column by holistic nutrition expert, Kristin Wartman. She will examine food, nutrition, and the way the industrial food industry affects our food system and our health.

Photo: Tina Negus on Flickr

Jake came down with flu-like symptoms in January 2009. We cared for him as such until we noticed blood in his diarrhea. We took him to the pediatrician who dutifully ran tests of his stool sample. As we waited for the lab results we were encouraged by the pediatrician’s office to give him food if he would eat it and keep it down. We were given the green light by our doctor for him to eat his favorite comfort snack food: Austin Toasty Crackers with Peanut Butter, manufactured by Kellogg.

Jake was sick for 11 days and eventually got better; but we were devastated to find out thereafter that while he was sick, we had unknowingly been continuing to feed him the very food that had poisoned him. It was not until 15 days after he became ill that we found out that he had become one of the more than 700 Americans from 46 states to be sickened by a major outbreak of Salmonella-contaminated peanut products from the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA)-which ultimately killed at least nine people.

Over time, we came to find out the outbreak was not just a random occurrence, but a part of a pattern of outbreaks impacting tens of millions of Americans every year. Like many Americans who are impacted by foodborne illness, I was shocked to find out that the nation’s food-safety system is based, in large part, on century-old laws. Furthermore, the agency charged with overseeing about 80 percent of the U.S. food supply–the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–inspects domestic food-processing facilities on average only once every 10 years. In the area of inspections, as well as other components of our food-safety system, the laws and regulations are severely lacking and simply unsatisfactory in successfully managing what has evolved into a complex global food supply.

Americans were alarmed by the peanut product outbreak. Over 3,000 products were recalled–one of the largest single food recalls in U.S. history. Outraged lawmakers convened hearings and promised to implement meaningful food-safety reforms. President Barack Obama and Congressional leaders from both parties have called for action. According to a bipartisan poll commissioned by The Pew Charitable Trusts, nine out of 10 Americans favor legislation to strengthen our food-safety laws. Yet, here we are, one year after the outbreak was identified, and Americans are still waiting for Congress to enact comprehensive FDA food-safety legislation.

Since Jake’s illness, we have become food-safety advocates. Last year, Jake and I testified at the PCA Congressional hearing. We later returned to D.C. to meet with Congressmen Walden and Schrader to discuss and lobby for the House of Representatives’ Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 (H.R. 2749). The House has since passed this bill. Jake and I then returned to D.C. for a third time to meet with Oregon’s Senators Merkley and Wyden’s staff to push for the passage of the Senate’s version of the bill, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510). We’re headed to D.C. next week to lobby for food-safety reform–again.

Recently, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions unanimously approved S. 510. This bill is strongly supported by Senators on both sides of the aisle–something that is not often seen in Washington these days. This says to me that the time has come to make food safety a priority and enact sweeping changes to the nation’s food oversight system.

Last month–on the anniversary of the peanut butter outbreak–many of the victims of food borne illness, including myself, wrote a letter to lawmakers, asking them to keep their promise of reform. My son’s firsthand account is a painful reminder that despite continued outbreaks–from peanut butter, hazelnuts, fresh fruits and vegetables, to cookie dough, and many other foods–Congress has yet to pass food-safety legislation.

Had legislation been in place a year ago, things could have been different for Jake and for tens of thousands of other Americans. The legislation under consideration shifts the FDA’s regulatory approach from reaction to prevention, establishes minimum inspection frequencies for processing plants and requires processors to establish food-safety plans. If these measures had been in effect, PCA would have been required to develop a food-safety plan and FDA would have been inspecting its plants more frequently. Instead, hundreds were sickened, dozens will have life long health issues, and nine families have lost a loved one.

It is outrageous that a company and its employees could knowingly allow tainted product to go out the door and into the nation’s food supply, as it appears PCA did. We need to strengthen the FDA and its ability to oversee our food supply. Without doing so, the outbreaks of contaminated food are sure to continue, causing millions more Americans to suffer the devastating and sometimes fatal consequences. We were lucky–it could have been very different for us. On behalf of all Americans, our whole family, Jake and I ask that our government be given the power to put our public health and food-safety first. The American people deserve better; as a nation, we cannot continue to let this happen.

Historic reform to protect Americans is in sight. I am asking my Senators Merkley and Wyden to urge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring S. 510 to the floor for a vote as soon possible. I’m asking you do the same with your senators. The longer it takes Congress to pass this comprehensive legislation, the more consumer confidence in our food supply will erode, and the more people will get sick.

Originally published on Huffington Post

Consumer Reports’ latest tests of packaged leafy greens found bacteria that are common indicators of poor sanitation and fecal contamination, in some cases, at rather high levels. The story appears in the March 2010 issue of Consumer Reports and is also available free online. Consumers Union today also issued a report [PDF] urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to set safety standards for greens. FDA food safety legislation pending in the Senate, and passed last summer by the House of Representatives, would require the FDA to create just such safety standards.

The tests, which were conducted with financial support from the Pew Health Group, assessed for several types of bacteria, including total coliforms and Enterococcus—“indicator organisms” found in the human digestive tract and in the ambient environment that can signal inadequate sanitation and the potential for the presence of disease-causing organisms. While there are no existing federal standards for indicator bacteria in salad greens, there are standards for these bacteria in milk, beef, and drinking water. Several industry consultants suggest that an unacceptable level in leafy greens would be 10,000 or more colony forming units per gram (CFU/g).

Consumer Reports found that 39 percent of samples exceeded this level for total coliform, and 23 percent for Enterococcus. The tests did not find E. coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes or Salmonella—sometimes deadly pathogens which can be found in greens, although it was not expected given the small sample size. According to Consumers Union, the goal was to investigate other markers of poor sanitation that should be used in the food safety management of produce.

“Although these ‘indicator’ bacteria generally do not make healthy people sick, the tests show not enough is being done to assure the safety or cleanliness of leafy greens,” said Dr. Michael Hansen, senior scientist at Consumers Union, nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. “Levels of bacteria varied widely, even among different samples of the same brand. More research and effort is needed within the industry to better protect the public. In the meantime, consumers should buy packages of greens that are as far from the use-by date as possible.”

For its latest analysis, Consumer Reports had an outside lab test 208 containers of 16 brands of salad greens, sold in plastic clamshells or bags, bought last summer from stores in Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York. Among the findings:

• 39 percent of samples exceeded 10,000 CFUs (or another similar measure) per gram for total coliforms and 23 percent for Enterococcus, the levels industry consultants deemed unacceptable.
• 2 percent of samples exceeded French and 5 percent Brazilian standards for fecal coliform bacteria.
• Many packages containing spinach, and packages which were one to five days from their use-by date, had higher bacterial levels. Packages six to eight days from their use-by date generally fared better.
• Whether the greens came in a clamshell or bag, included “baby” greens, or were organic made no difference in bacteria levels.
• Brands for which there were more than four samples, including national brands Dole, Earthbound Farm Organic, and Fresh Express, plus regional and store brands, had at least one package with relatively high levels of total coliforms or Enterococcus.

CU is calling on the Senate to pass pending FDA food safety reform legislation that requires the agency to set performance standards as well as develop safety standards for the growing or processing of fresh produce. It’s also asking that FDA formally declare certain pathogenic bacteria—such as E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella, and Listeria—be considered adulterants when found in salad greens.

Until packaged salad becomes cleaner, consumers’ best line of defense involves following these procedures in stores and kitchens:

• Buy packages far from their use-by date.
• Wash the greens even if the packages say “prewashed” or “triplewashed.” Rinsing won’t remove all bacteria but may remove residual soil.
• Prevent cross contamination of greens by keeping them away from raw meat and poultry.

Consumer Reports has been measuring contamination in store-bought chickens since 1998. The recent test shows a modest improvement since January 2007, when the magazine found these pathogens in 8 of 10 broilers, but the numbers are still far too high. The findings suggest that most companies’ safeguards are inadequate. Consumer Reports also found that most disease-causing bacteria sampled from the contaminated chicken were resistant to at least one antibiotic, potentially making any resulting illness more difficult to treat.

Each year, salmonella and campylobacter from chicken and other food sources infect at least 3.4 million Americans, send 25,500 to hospitals, and kill about 500, according to estimates by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While both salmonella and campylobacter are known to cause intestinal distress, campylobacter can lead to meningitis, arthritis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome, a severe neurological condition.

“Our tests show that campylobacter is widespread in chicken, even in brands that control for salmonella,” said Dr. Urvashi Rangan, Director of Technical Policy at Consumers Union, nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. “While one name brand, Perdue, and most air-chilled chickens were less contaminated than others, this is still a very dirty industry that needs better practices and tighter government oversight.”

For its latest analysis, Consumer Reports had an outside lab test 382 chickens bought last spring from more than 100 supermarkets, gourmet- and natural-food stores, and mass merchandisers in 22 states. Among the findings:

• Campylobacter was in 62 percent of the chickens, salmonella was in 14 percent, and both bacteria were in 9 percent. Only 34 percent of the birds were clear of both pathogens. That’s double the percentage of clean birds Consumer Reports found in its 2007 report but far less than the 51 percent in the 2003 report.
• Among the cleanest overall were organic “air-chilled” broilers (a process in which carcasses are refrigerated and may be misted, rather than dunked in cold chlorinated water). About 60 percent were free of the two pathogens.
• Perdue was found to be the cleanest of the brand-name chicken: 56 percent were free of both pathogens. This is the first time since Consumer Reports began testing chicken that one major brand has fared significantly better than others across the board.
• Tyson and Foster Farms chickens were found to be the most contaminated; less than 20 percent were free of either pathogens.
• Store-brand organic chickens had no salmonella at all, but only 43 percent of those birds were also free of campylobacter.
• Among all brands and types of broilers tested, 68 percent of the salmonella and 60 percent of the campylobacter organisms analyzed showed resistance to one or more antibiotics. All of the antibiotics were effective against 32 percent of salmonella samples and 40 percent of the campylobacter samples, as compared to just 16 and 33 percent in 2007.

USDA recently released a survey [PDF] testing these same pathogens in chicken, and reported finding much lower numbers. The method CR used for campylobacter presence is one of two methods cited in the USDA study and the method used for salmonella presence in the USDA study is the same used by CR. The difference is that CR obtained its samples at retail stores while the USDA samples were obtained at two points in the processing plant.

According to CR, there is more likelihood that chicken can be further contaminated once it leaves the processing plant and travels to the store. Testing chicken bought from a retailer is in all likelihood a better indicator of what consumers will be exposed to and more reflective of what the consumer will encounter with these pathogens.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) requires Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) a consumer’s primary protection against chicken contamination. HACCP requires companies to identify potential points of contamination and take measures to eliminate them. The USDA has a standard that requires chicken producers to test for salmonella but it has yet to set a standard for campylobacter.

The USDA has said that a risk assessment for campylobacter and draft performance standards would be ready by the year’s end. It could take months to a year or more, however, for a proposed standard to become a final regulation and take effect.

“USDA has been pondering new standards to cut the prevalence of bacteria in chicken for more than five years but has yet to act,” said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives at Consumers Union. “Consumers shouldn’t have to play roulette with poultry; the USDA must make chicken less risky to eat.”

Until chicken becomes cleaner, the magazine offers tips for consumers to protect themselves, including thawing frozen chicken in a refrigerator; cooking chicken to at least 165° F; and refrigerating or freezing leftovers within two hours of cooking.

Yesterday, more than 20 victims of foodborne illness, including surviving family members of those killed by contaminated food, gathered at the U.S. Capitol to share their stories, meet with legislators and voice support for legislation to reform our nation’s food safety system. These victims and their families urged Congress and the Obama administration to pass food safety legislation that will improve consumer protection. The families came together as part of the Make Our Food Safe Campaign, launched by major consumer and food safety groups in an effort to put a human face on the food safety crisis in the U.S. and to set a list of priorities for food safety reform.

Collectively, the stories of these victims span over a decade—from E.coli in lettuce and spinach to the recent outbreak of salmonella in peanut butter—underscoring years of food safety failures.

Karen Hibben-Levi, 67, nearly died in 2006 from E. coli poisoning after eating a burrito that was made with tainted lettuce. She met with Sen. Tom Harkin and Rep. Bruce Braley and aides to Sen. Charles Grassley. All told her that Congress is on track to pass a major overhaul of FDA.

Lyndsey Jennings was a senior at the University of Michigan when she contracted E. coli, apparently from lettuce on a sandwich. She was in the hospital for two weeks with a potentially deadly condition called pancolitis, or inflammation of the entire colon.

In 2007, Bend, Oregon-based Chrissy Christoferson’s then 10-month-old son, Beck, contracted salmonella after eating a bag of Veggie Booty. Today, Beck is a healthy 3-year old, but it’s still not clear whether he will have any long term medical conditions from the salmonella infection.

Randy Napier’s 80-year-old mother, Nellie Napier’s death was traced to peanut butter from Peanut Corp. of America’s Georgia plant, which the company sent nationwide despite repeated positive salmonella tests. Napier has struggled to understand why it took so long to remove the product from the market. “These laws must be changed,” he said.

“The stories of these victims illustrate why Congress must act now to fix our ailing food safety system,” said Representative Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, who attended a press briefing with the victims yesterday morning. “We cannot afford to wait. Seeing a strong food safety bill enacted will be one of my highest priorities this Congress.”

Waxman is pledging to move ahead with overhauling the FDA and said that creating a new food-safety agency is off the table for now. “Right now we want to get FDA going on this and not spend any time at all on a new bureaucracy. FDA, which regulates 80 percent of the food supply, needs authority to inspect plant records and stiffer penalties with which to punish bad operations, he said, but didn’t set a timetable for moving legislation.

More than 5,000 Americans die annually from foodborne illness—from outbreaks linked to spinach, lettuce, and peanuts. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates, in that same year, there one in four Americans were victims of foodborne illness, causing 325,000 hospitalizations.

“These victims, their families and their stories must serve as the final wake-up call,” said Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Chairwoman of the House Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations, who also attended the press briefing. “We must act now to make it happen, transform the FDA, and begin a new movement that puts public health first.” DeLauro has introduced the Food Safety Modernization Act to separate food safety regulation from drug and device approvals.

President Obama made a commitment to improve food safety in the U.S. within his first 100 days in office. Several bills have been introduced in the 111th Congress that would give the FDA the tools and authority it needs to keep our food safe, including clear regulatory oversight and accountability, safety standards for imported foods, and mandatory recall authority.

Yesterday, Waxman told FDA Week that the House Energy and Commerce Committee plans to begin marking up a food safety bill as soon as lawmakers return from the Memorial Day recess, and the legislation will almost surely include user fees. A legislative hearing is likely within the next few weeks. Their bill includes hefty user fees, which prompted staunch opposition from the food industry. Waxman acknowledged that fees are controversial but said they’re necessary to ensure a workable bill and said the food legislation needs to be “self-funding.”

In recent months, deadly food poisoning outbreaks involving spinach, pistachios and two incidents with peanuts emphasized the need for systemic reform, said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports. Over the last two decades, she said, the FDA has lost 90 percent of its inspection force. The consequence: Inspections at facilities have fallen to an average of once every 10 years.

The lack of government oversight has resulted in some retailers demanding food facilities do their own testing. But Halloran said voluntary efforts proved ineffective after a company tested its food positive for salmonella, failed to report it, then conducted additional tests until it found a negative.

“Food is completely fundamental. Everybody has to eat; we have no choice about it,” Halloran said. “We should not have a food supply that kills people.”

Given this obvious connection between food production and health, it is surprising how few in the health field are interested in food, much less the system that produces that food.  Recently, thanks to the strength of the sustainable agriculture movement, there have been some promising signs that this is changing: Health Care Without Harm, a multinational not-for-profit, has spearheaded a healthy food in hospitals program and so far 168 hospitals across the country have pledged to buy regional foods whenever possible. And for the first time, in 2007, health care professionals began to take an interest in the content of our Farm Bill. But even so, a large fissure remains between the system that is supposed to feed us, and that which is supposed to keep us healthy.

This fissure is seen at every level: Historically the department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Welfare have had little to do with each other. Similarly, the American Medical Association has hardly concerned itself with issues of agriculture and food production. While most state and city health departments do have programs to help low income families gain access to food, disinterest or red tape has hobbled most efforts to require that these foods be from a local source. And when I discuss sustainable agriculture with medical colleagues, especially those that work with under-served patients, I am often told that this is an elite issue or simply an environmental concern with negligible heath implications. I wonder if this latest round of Salmonella poisonings might finally prompt us all to reassess; after all, physicians across the country are seeing the damage that can be wrought by one peanut processing plant in Georgia and our business-as-usual food chain.

My neighborhood market sells locally roasted peanuts and provides a mill so that customers can grind their own peanut butter. Suddenly this seems less like a frivolous foodie activity and more like a prudent public health measure. Would it not be similarly advisable to use this fresh-ground peanut butter to prepare my own Thai style chicken satay rather than selecting a prepackaged brand from the freezer case? And maybe an in-season apple would be a better snack choice than that Clif Bar. In fact, I can safely say that anyone making food choices based on the principles of “fresh and local” would have nicely side-stepped all the recent major outbreaks of salmonella, listeria, botulism and E coli.

Of course, there are many reasons beyond the threat of food-borne illness why health officials should join the effort to build a sustainable agricultural system. A large body of research now identifies regionally produced foods as being more nutrient rich, less chemical-laden and more affordable. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that populations around the world who still eat their local foods are relatively free of most modern chronic diseases.

Who knows. Perhaps this latest outbreak of salmonella, along with a will for change, is finally the catalyst we need. We will become a much healthier nation if our community health programs and community food systems team up, if our family doctors and family farmers link arms and, most importantly, if the two Toms, our Secretary of Health and our Secretary of Agriculture, take each other out for lunch and discuss ways to collaborate—hold the chicken satay, please.