Tag Archives: Focus Article

Kroger

Kroger to Sell Groceries in China Via Alibaba

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Kroger

The Cincinnati-based supermarket chain Kroger has entered into a pilot partnership with Alibaba’s Tmall Global platform to sell its “Our Brands” products online to consumers in China. This platform is China’s largest business-to-consumer marketplace, and helps retailers that don’t have physical operations in the country build virtual storefronts and send products to China.

The pilot will start with Kroger’s Simple Truth products, which are positioned as natural and organic, and are also the second-largest brand sold in Kroger stores. This year alone the brand generated more than $2 billion in sales, earning it the title of largest natural and organic brand in the United States, according to Kroger.

“Kroger is the world’s third largest retailer by revenue–$122.7 billion in sales in 2017,” said Yael Cosset, chief digital officer at Kroger in a news release. “We are creating the grocery retail model of the future by focusing on digital and technology.”

The partnership also supports the company’s “Restock Kroger” pillars of redefining the grocery customer experience by elevating “Our Brands” and creating customer and shareholder value through promoting top line growth via alternative revenue streams.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part IV

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part III here.

Create your own user feedback survey

Allen Sayler, EAS
FST Soapbox

Fast Track to FDA FURLS—Expediting or Impeding Access to Overseas Markets

By Allen Sayler
No Comments
Allen Sayler, EAS

Is the FDA Unified and Listing Systems (FURLS) system with its newly updated electronic Export Listing Module (ELM) a pathway to overseas markets or just one more regulatory hurdle that has been put in place by the U.S. government to impede export of U.S.-processed foods? A review of the new updates is needed to provide the answer to this question.

Regardless of the answer to this question, whether your company is already participating in this program or is looking for new markets outside the United States in countries that do not require the FDA listing of U.S. food companies, you must understand how the FURLS system works, how to electronically register and better understand the regulatory challenges of the importing country.

The FDA recently released a notification that their FDA Unified and Listing Systems (FURLS) system has been updated to include an Export Listing Module (ELM). This update allows U.S. food manufacturers to electronically submit, and for FDA to receive and process requests for inclusion on the export lists for FDA-regulated food products and present these lists to countries that require them, whether your company is already participating in this program or is looking for new markets outside the United States.

As background, the FDA has established and maintains export lists for countries that require some assurance that U.S. food manufacturers exporting to these countries, at a minimum, meet all applicable food safety regulations enforced by FDA. These lists, in an unofficial way, serve as a “certification” by the FDA, representing the U.S. government, that either included facilities have provided information to the FDA to assert they are in compliance with the importing country’s regulations and requirements or, more likely, that the U.S. food manufacturer is meeting the currently applicable U.S. laws and regulations.

Other options for U.S. food manufacturers that are interested or already exporting to countries that do not require the FDA lists, include the FDA’s export certificates, which give the agency’s official attestation concerning a product’s regulatory or marketing status. The fact that FDA has issued an export certificate does not preclude FDA from taking appropriate regulatory action against a product covered by the certificate. CFSAN issues “certificates of export” for seafood, food additives and food contact substances. CFSAN issues “certificates of free sale” for land food, dietary supplements, infant formula, medical foods and foods for special dietary use. U.S. firms wishing to apply for an export certificate for a food product may log in to FDA Industry Systems and submit an online application through the Certificate Application Process.

TraceGains, verifying suppliers Need to learn more about supplier verification? TraceGains is here to help! Download our Foreign Supplier Verification Program Guidebook to learn the ins and outs of this complicated FSMA addition. TraceGains enlisted the help of Marc Sanchez, regulatory attorney specializing in FDA and USDA law, and Shawn Stevens, a global food safety lawyer, to provide insight and break down some of the confusion.

Back to the FDA list option. It is important to note that companies may request to be included on these lists at any time; however, updates to the lists are only published quarterly by the FDA. Additionally, final listing decisions are made by the competent authority of the importing country. This is to say, there can be a short or lengthy process between the time when FDA updates the list for a particular country and when that country formally accepts the updated list. Since there is no downside for a company to appear on one FDA list or many (lists maintained for each country), this potential delay in official acceptance of the list should drive U.S. food companies to apply to be on all of the country lists, before there is a specific need to do so. Remember the old adage, “When you are in a hurry, inevitably you end up standing in the slowest line.”

Market access for U.S.-manufactured dairy products to the EU, China and Chile, for example, are subject to these listing requirements in order to gain market access. Do ensure you have verified that your dairy product meets the standards and labeling requirements for the country to which you wish to export, as it is likely that a foreign country’s dairy product requirements will not necessarily be the same as what is found in the United States. Another example is that in order to export U.S.-manufactured collagen and gelatin products to the EU, companies must provide a laboratory report from an accredited, private laboratory demonstrating that the products comply with the established criteria. For exporters of U.S.-manufactured/processed seafood products to the EU or China, inclusion on the FDA-maintained list is required, as well as an export certificate which is provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Seafood Inspection Program after FDA listing has been completed.

Finally, U.S.-manufactured infant formula exports to China are also subject to listing requirements. It should be noted that the China Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA) defines infant formula as food intended for children up to 36 months of age, known as “infant and young children formula”. This differs from the U.S. definition. Please be advised that CNCA requires new applicants to submit evidence of third-party certification of compliance with Chinese laws and regulations as part of the application process. CNCA also requires that infant formula manufacturers/processors submit an Establishment Registration Application with additional information to CNCA.

One of the most important keys to gaining access to overseas markets is to get your company enrolled on as many of these FDA lists as possible, obtain FDA certificates of free sale ahead of time, and make sure you update your information and keep it current within the various FDA electronic database systems.

Whether your company faces a foreign market access challenge via being a part of the FDA List or needing to get an FDA “Certificate of Free Sale” or just have questions related to moving product out of a U.S. port and into a foreign port, contact a reputable consulting firm for assistance.

Francine Shaw, Savvy Food Safety, Inc.
FST Soapbox

Would Your Team Know How to Handle a Crisis?

By Francine L. Shaw
No Comments
Francine Shaw, Savvy Food Safety, Inc.

In 1993, Jack in the Box put foodborne illnesses and food safety “on the map” when their undercooked burgers led to an E. coli outbreak that infected more than 700 people. 171 people were hospitalized and four children died.

Don’t miss the Plenary Discussion on Crisis Management at the 2018 Food Safety Consortium | Learn moreUnfortunately, this infamous outbreak wasn’t an isolated incident. Foodborne illness outbreaks are on the rise in the United States. The CDC reports that 48 million Americans become sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die from foodborne diseases each year in the United States.

A string of unprecedented outbreaks at Chipotle occurred at multiple locations, beginning in 2015. Recently, there was widespread concern when romaine lettuce tainted with E. coli was shipped, served and sold at restaurants, stores and institutions nationwide. Earlier this year, approximately 2,000 7-Eleven customers at a Utah location were exposed to hepatitis A due to an infected employee who worked (and handled the convenience store’s food) while sick. The state’s local health department announced that anyone who used the restrooms, drank a fountain drink, ate fresh fruit or any item from the store’s hot food case was at risk for infection from the highly contagious illness.

Keep in mind that a crisis isn’t necessarily a foodborne illness. Think about other unexpected crises that could impact your organization, staff and customers, like natural disasters (hurricanes, blizzards, tornados, etc.) What if there’s a robbery, shooting or bombing at your venue? What if a guest chokes and dies? Perhaps there’s an unexpected power outage or a fire? Yes, unfortunately, these are all real possibilities.

If a crisis were to occur at your establishment, would your team know what to do?

As the saying goes, if you fail to prepare, prepare to fail. It’s extremely important to be prepared for every type of crisis imaginable—before anything bad actually happens.

When developing a crisis plan, consider and implement the following:

  • Form a crisis management team. Assign roles and responsibilities. Ensure all designated crisis team members understand what’s expected of them in the event of a crisis. For most food businesses, the crisis team will consist of a corporate attorney, company leadership, food safety team, crisis management consultant, a public relations expert, a trained media spokesperson and applicable government agencies.
  • Know how your local health department operates. The role of the local health department varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so get to know your local inspectors. Work with your regulatory agencies, who will want to help.
  • Create honest, authentic and apologetic messaging. This will, of course, need to be developed to meet the specifics of your situation. Regardless of what happened, honestly describe the situation and explain the solutions-focused plan you’ve created to move forward. Transparency is important, otherwise key audiences (customers, employees, media, investors, advertisers, etc.) will lose confidence and trust in your company.
  • Work with the media to disseminate information about the incident. The media want to report what has happened, and it’s in your best interest to be straightforward with them. If there was a breakdown in your process, identify it, whether you received tainted merchandise from a vendor or experienced an error in the kitchen. Explain the concrete steps you’re taking to fix it and prevent a reoccurrence (e.g., selecting different vendors, re-training your staff, adjusting your food allergy protocols, etc.).
  • Train (or re-train) your staff on food safety protocols. Be certain that everyone is knowledgeable about food safety (e.g., how to prevent cross-contamination, how to properly prepare allergy-friendly meals, how to cook foods to proper temperatures, etc.) to avoid similar crisis situations in the future.
  • Use social media wisely. Monitor social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) and respond to negative and/or erroneous comments. Messages on social media (as well as in real life) should always be positive, professional and honest. Don’t get defensive and don’t allow yourself to get sucked into toxic, negative message spirals.
  • Communicate with your customers, employees and other key stakeholders to win back their trust. Be honest, sincere and apologetic. Explain how/why their loyalty is so important to you, and vow to earn their trust again.
  • Change vendors, if necessary. Did a vendor mislabel ingredients, causing an allergic reaction in one of your guests? Did they source tainted products and sell them to you? Change vendors, and be clear in your communications (to media, via social media platforms, etc.) that you identified the vendor as the source of the problem, explaining that you’ve cut ties to them to eliminate similar events in the future.
  • Thank the responders that helped. Perhaps your crisis wasn’t a foodborne illness –it was a customer dying of natural causes, a bomb threat, a weather emergency, or an electrical fire. Use the media and social media platforms to thank the police, fire department and/or paramedics—whichever responders helped defuse the situation.
  • Designate a media spokesperson. When facing a serious crisis, your restaurant’s CEO/owner/president should be the spokesperson. The public wants the head of the company to speak authoritatively about the incident and the concrete plans to resolve the problem. Practice your messages before going in front of the cameras, anticipate the most challenging questions you may receive, and determine how you’ll respond professionally, politely and non-defensively.
  • Stay calm. While it’s upsetting (and terrifying!) to be in a crisis situation, remain calm as you work to recover from the incident. Follow your crisis plan and communicate your key messages. Make certain that important audiences (including customers, prospects, employees, the media, vendors, health inspectors, etc.) recognize how hard you’re working to prevent similar incidents in the future.
  • Debrief after the crisis is over. Regardless of what happened and the severity of the situation, after any kind of incident, get the crisis management team together and debrief. Review your plan and see if there is any room for improvement.

It is critical to have a plan established just in case a crisis occurs. Hopefully, you’ll never have to use it, but it’s always wise to be prepared. A crisis can hit any business at any time—how well you handle the situation could make a monumental difference in the court of public opinion.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part III

No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part II here.

Create your own user feedback survey

Stuart Gavurin, Misson Data
Retail Food Safety Forum

The Internet of Things: More Than Just Food Safety

By Stuart Gavurin
No Comments
Stuart Gavurin, Misson Data

When it comes to food safety and temperature monitoring, the appeal of automation is crystal clear. Why continue to depend on a costly and unreliable manual process with clipboards, binders, spreadsheets and guesswork when the latest Internet of Things (IoT) technology continuously monitors conditions and sends actionable alerts in real time?

Industry experts note that temperature sensors are the most likely IoT devices to scale throughout the enterprise. While food safety and temperature monitoring are critically important and must meet health code regulations, it is not the only information that needs to be tracked and monitored in a restaurant, grocery store or other foodservice facility.

Although the cost of IoT technology has dropped significantly, the challenge for many newcomers to IoT technology lies in building a business case that the C-suite will accept. To solidify an understanding of the value, organizations should consider the variety of critical operations that can be optimized by IoT connectivity.

Beyond installing a few smart devices IoT platforms are designed to provide a set of common but critical functionality and services—broadly, a software-based infrastructure that can be used as a utility. For IoT, this means the software platform can support interactions with distributed sensors and automation. It is the software that tracks and interprets things like temperature, humidity, energy or movement data and then integrates in a manner that can be incorporated into core business processes that are executed by staff.

The platform approach has the effect of reducing complexity, shortening the learning curve, and enabling the enterprise to focus on its core competencies, rather than getting bogged down trying to understand how to implement, use and maintain the IoT components and technology. The benefits of this approach are that it reduces time to deploy, investment and risk. The result is a business operations-focused IoT-enabled platform that abstracts the complex details, is easy to use, and intelligently focused on delivering maximum value.

For instance, consider a large supermarket chain outfitted with a variety of sensors and gateways that goes beyond monitoring cold and hot food storage temperatures. The suite of hardware and software deployed can be expanded to monitor functions such as: lighting and energy usage, HVAC conditions, customer wait times, open/closed doors, water levels, and fluid flow volume at beverage dispensers. All of this data can be integrated with other back-office software, such as employee scheduling, inventory management, business intelligence, and more, achieving a true 360-degree view of foodservice operations.

Condition tracking systems can be combined with task management functionality to ensure that data is not just monitored, but action is taken as needed. Text message (SMS) or email alerts can be set for anomalies based on customizable threshold values and complex rules. Task flow checklists can be automated, and a digital record is available to bring transparency to execution timing, stop violations, and ensure critical problems are remediated.

Ultimately, as IoT evolves, the enterprise becomes focused less on devices and infrastructure and more on platforms supporting functionality and improving customer experience. As your organization considers investment in IoT, look for solutions that go beyond hardware to encompass software platforms, applications and, most importantly, the business goals of delivering great services and products while making and saving money. Before you spend the money and effort to deploy connected things, decide how IoT will help your business increase efficiencies and provide new value propositions.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part II

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part I here. 

Create your own user feedback survey

PattyMcDermott, ThermoFisher Scientific
In the Food Lab

How Digital Solutions Support Supply Chain Transparency and Traceability

By Patricia McDermott
No Comments
PattyMcDermott, ThermoFisher Scientific

Ensuring the safety and authenticity of food is a key responsibility of growers, producers, manufacturers and suppliers. With so many partners involved in the journey from farm to fork, tracking chain of custody data and maintaining a clear, unbroken record are essential to safeguard the quality and provenance of products. However, without proper systems to maintain transparent supply chain audit trails, businesses operating within the food industry run the risk of being responsible for adverse events that could result in health, economic or even legal consequences.

One of the biggest challenges associated with maintaining a clear chain of custody is the need to monitor the flow of raw materials, ingredients and products across increasingly global distribution networks. To successfully track food products throughout the value chain, information on product movements and quality control data must be accessible to those who need it. These systems must also remain compliant with the latest regulations, as well as ensure stakeholders can achieve the highest levels of productivity to meet consumer demand.

For players within the food supply chain to achieve transparent processes and complete traceability, robust information exchange mechanisms and integrated data management systems are key. The latest digital solutions are ensuring the integrity of supply networks by capturing and making available data from any stage of this journey for regulatory or product quality assurance purposes.

Food Safety: A Global Responsibility

The global nature of modern supply networks can make ensuring the safety and quality of food challenging. From honey and juice to yogurt and cheese, tracking the lifecycle of food products is essential to combat food fraud and adulteration, as well as safeguard consumers from harmful food contaminants, such as pesticides and bacteria. Unscrupulous behavior from businesses operating within the supply chain can, for example, cause consumers to purchase products that are not what they claim to be, and even put customers’ health at risk through exposure to potentially unsafe batches.

Given the global expansion of the food supply chain, regulatory bodies are putting increased focus on ensuring that products that pass through multiple channels and regions comply with the same regulations. By focusing on enforcing standards through audits and reviews, it becomes possible to prevent and therefore reduce the potential for adverse events occurring.1 As a result, voluntary standards such as the ISO 22000 guidelines, and mandatory regulations such as FSMA and EU 178/2002, have been put in place to set clear benchmarks for stakeholders’ responsibilities and better enforce food quality and safety.

Regulations such as these require extensive record keeping, transparent audit trails and accountability for all processes. While end-to-end monitoring of one process may be relatively straightforward, ensuring visibility for every process within a complex food supply network can quickly become an overwhelming task. In order to achieve regulatory compliance across all aspects of a supply chain, businesses must be able to integrate their data management systems to achieve full oversight. Moreover, with effective data management tools in place, businesses can organize and incorporate data from all aspects of a food product lifecycle in a compliant manner, enabling them to expand globally.

Integrating Digital Solutions for Better Outcomes

To preserve consumer confidence and brand integrity, businesses operating within the food industry are recognizing the need for automated infrastructures that can manage data, streamline processes, and ensure traceability and accountability for every product. By integrating all monitoring processes into a single system and enabling access to this information via the cloud, the latest digital data management platforms are working to alleviate the challenges associated with operating global supply networks.

Manually organizing inventory management, standard operating procedure (SOP) use, and product traceability can be difficult and time-consuming, especially if operations are on a global scale. Setting up automated processes to manage fail points using a laboratory information management system (LIMS), where they can be itemized and protocols established for potential hazards and preventive measures, can boost speed and efficiency while ensuring the highest levels of data integrity.

Routine food safety testing requires the consistent replenishment of supplies, and the failure to keep on top of inventory use can cause operations to grind to an unexpected stop. Automatic supply level monitoring and automated ordering using a LIMS can eliminate inventory fail points and help to ensure uninterrupted productivity. Furthermore, introducing electronic SOPs as part of a LIMS can define and outline workflows to prevent unintended errors and ensure reliability. Additionally, tracking and logging products using barcode readers throughout their lifecycle gives stakeholders confidence in the products they handle, and can simplify quality control and regulatory review processes.

With the need to monitor so many processes across the food supply chain, there are large volumes of instrument data, workflows and records that must be maintained. Leveraging a LIMS to collect and manage disparate data from all aspects of every process can help stakeholders to streamline workflows. From evaluating potential hazards to eliminating possible issues, having procedures tracked automatically not only transforms processes, but also simplifies quality assessment.

The latest LIMS are able to aggregate all of this data in a single cloud-based system, making this information available at the tap of a tablet or smartphone. Integrating a LIMS with laboratory equipment across food safety testing protocols allows for automated data transfer and increased lab efficiency. Data can be captured from laboratory equipment using a connected scientific data management system (SDMS), which is generated using the approved methods and SOPs available from a laboratory execution system (LES). Interfacing to each instrument using the LES ensures there are no input or copying errors. Subsequently, as process results are entered into the system, any out of specification parameters can be flagged and reported automatically.

The value of an LES within a LIMS can be seen in food safety labs where global demand drives time to market and thus the need for high production efficiency. By giving lab managers control over method and protocol management from any location, the actions of users can be easily recalled for performance monitoring and accountability purposes. And with protocols, regulations and corrective actions defined through the LIMS, labs can achieve faster and more effective decision-making.

Digital solutions such as LIMS are enabling food safety scientists to perform analyses based on readily available SOPs using LES platforms, collect and store data in its original form using an SDMS, and evaluate how the data is being collected, transferred, stored and accessed from a centralized, cloud-based LIMS. These integrated digital solutions offer comprehensive support for the organization of chain of custody data, ensuring full traceability and compliance, and protecting consumer safety and food integrity.

Improved Traceability for Regulatory Compliance

Current regulations are enforcing the quality and safety of food products using well-defined standards for laboratory processes, ensuring the transparency of data handling processes, from raw materials to packaged products. ISO 22000 sets recommendations for food safety management systems and requires businesses to implement hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) to ensure the highest levels of quality control and assurance throughout the product lifecycle.

Regulations such as EU 178/2002 and FSMA include mandatory requirements for the traceability of food, feed and any other food-related substance or animal through identification and food tracking programs. Given the unfortunate growth of food fraud, traceability and authentication are becoming increasingly important. The latest regulations are helping the food industry to maintain optimal production practices to safeguard public health, maintain consumer confidence and preserve brand integrity.

Systems that are fully harmonized with these guidelines can be used to maintain data in organized archives, simplify audit trail recording for proof of compliance, and enable easy-access for users to review data. The latest LIMS can support HACCP compliance by automatically alerting users to deviations in expected processing parameters. In this way, issues can be quickly identified, and corrective action can be taken to prevent potentially dangerous products from reaching the consumer.

Digital lab and data management solutions are helping food supply chain stakeholders to simplify tracking, improve transparency and ensure the highest levels of accountability to protect both product authenticity and consumer safety. The integration and implementation of these systems helps to fulfill production demands as well as meet future challenges, allowing the food industry to expand and develop services and checks with the growing global market. Moreover, the potential for food fraud or adulteration is greatly minimized, giving consumers additional confidence in the products they purchase.

Reference

  1. Charlebois, S. Sterling, B. Haratifar, S. and Naing, S.K. (2014). “Comparison of Global Food Traceability Regulations and Requirements,” Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1104–1123.
Deirdre Schlunegger, Stop Foodborne Illness
Food Safety Culture Club

How We Use the Word ‘Recall’ Matters

By Deirdre Schlunegger
No Comments
Deirdre Schlunegger, Stop Foodborne Illness

“Recalls”. This topic got me thinking, what is the literal meaning of recall? So, I looked it up:

Verb

  1. Bring (a fact, event or situation) back into one’s mind, especially so as to recount it to others, remember.
    “I can still vaguely recall being taken to the hospital”
  2. Officially order (someone) to return to a place
    “the Panamanian ambassador was recalled from Peru”

Noun

  1. An act or instance of officially recalling someone or something
    “the recall of the ambassador”
  2. The action or faculty of remembering something learned or experienced.
    “their recall of dreams”

Many people think of FDA when hearing the word “recall”, and many consumers believe that the FDA often or even always orders recalls. In fact, the FDA relies on responsible parties to voluntarily recall food products when a threat exists, but FSMA’s mandatory recall authority allows FDA to mandate a recall only when the criteria under section 423 of the FD&C Act are met.

For most, the word “recall” is all too familiar. We hear it so often that I wonder if we are becoming desensitized to it. Almost daily we hear this item or that item has been recalled due to XXX, allergy, Salmonella, Listeria, foreign matter, and the list goes on. I counted 45 human and three pet food-related recalls just since May 1, 2018—that’s in just 84 days as I write this. So, for consumers (and we are all consumers), how do we hear the word recall and what is our visceral reaction when we hear the word? What actions if any do we take? Does it become too overwhelming? Are we becoming immune from the word? We are required to eat for survival sake and we don’t know if there is a problem with the food we are eating until after it has been recalled. At Stop Foodborne Illness, we send out recall notices every time there is a recall announced, which is typically a few times a week. Recently, a friend asked, “So, do I just quit eating to avoid contamination?”

I wonder if we can start a conversation about the term, how we use it and how to use the word and related action effectively. What does it mean for consumers? Is it only meaningful after the fact? The word and action of the word “prevention” is so much more powerful. Just “food” for thought.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part I

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much do we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Good luck!

Create your own user feedback survey