ARS on Twitter
RSS
A single agency in charge of what people eat
Posted by Heather on December 31st, 2006
Expect more regulation and the costs associated with it, and thank it for what will be an increase in the cost of all our food.
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — In light of food poisoning outbreaks involving spinach and lettuce, the government and the produce industry are scrambling to make leafy greens safer before the spring planting season.
New guidelines from the industry are due in April on how to prevent contamination throughout the food chain, from before greens are planted until they reach the dinner table.
Members of Congress are asking federal agencies to report on what went wrong and how to fix the problem. Some lawmakers want to replace the patchwork system of federal food regulation with a single agency in charge of what people eat.
It’s not necessary. More regulation will lead to lower quality food. Regulatory practices have proven to be ineffective in most industries, but have proven to be very expensive. Businesses will drop entire lines of production because it will no longer be worth the money. While food borne illness is nasty, it’s no where near as bad as it once was. I believe it would more effective to set guild lines and ask businesses to follow them. Ask them to be a part of the solution and inform the public of this. People can then decide where to buy their food, at competitive prices. Don’t regulate what we eat. Once we start going down that road, our choices will become more and more limited.
January 1st, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Yet one more attempt to control the food supply. Remember the tylenol scare about 15 years ago. Over reaction to one occurance. Triple coverings for bottles. If someone wanted to infiltrate, they would. This is a case of personal hand washing and using clean water.
January 1st, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Yes it is. Too bad the media doesn’t push THIS more.
Being clean is something that prevents 90% of these foodbugs that go around. It’s really simple.
January 2nd, 2007 at 6:20 am
Ok, so we ask corporations nicely to follow the rules. They don’t, and people die. Many corporations have shown little incentive to follow the rules if it can save them money. What is there to keep companies following the rules in the first place?
January 2nd, 2007 at 6:24 am
If you look at the situation from the perspective of individuals, then government shouldn’t be involved. If you look at it from the perspective of collective individuals, or society, then government should be involved.
But either way, giving unenforced guidelines with no legal power combines the worst of both views.
January 2nd, 2007 at 10:11 am
Here’s an interesting article about food safety.
January 2nd, 2007 at 10:10 pm
I can accept that, Suricou
January 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
Most people will boycott- intentionally and not- those businesses who do not meet fed standards- esp when it comes to food safety. Stores- that sell food- will not purchase from these places either. The market will crush those who don’t adhere to the excepted normal safety guildlines.
January 3rd, 2007 at 5:15 am
You assume all the violations will be obvious. Most of them will be subtle intra-factory things that no one will ever know about.
Look how well self-regulation worked during the gilded age, or have you never read the Jungle?