Tag Archives: food fraud

Microscope, pepper
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Authentic Food, Safer Shelves: How Testing Prevents Fraud

By Baidini Ghosh
No Comments
Microscope, pepper

Food adulteration can be either intentional or incidental, such as heavy metal contamination, pesticide residue, or packaging-related issues. When this adulteration is deliberately carried out by addition, omission, or substitution for economic gain, it is known as economically motivated adulteration (EMA), a subset of food fraud. The motivation for both EMA and food fraud is primarily financial gain. However, food fraud extends beyond EMA to other deceptive practices such as misbranding, counterfeiting, and diversion.

In late 2023, cinnamon apple puree and apple sauce products sourced from Ecuador were recalled after testing positive for elevated levels of lead and chromium1. The FDA’s leading hypothesis was that the incident was likely due to EMA, and the contamination went undetected until it escalated into a serious public health issue. This highlights the importance of implementing robust traceability systems and conducting food authentication tests to ensure that only genuine products reach the consumer market, in compliance with all relevant food safety and quality standards.

Spectroscopy Simplified

Spectroscopic techniques such as UV-Vis Spectroscopy, Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIR), Raman Spectroscopy, and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Spectroscopy, when combined with chemometrics, are among the most reliable methods in verifying food authenticity. UV-Vis Spectroscopy is widely utilized in most analytical laboratories for analyzing chromophore-containing compounds, such as pigments. In the food manufacturing sector, it can be used to detect dilution of alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, such as juices and wines. However, it provides limited structural information, an area where FTIR performs comparatively well.

FTIR, in contrast, is ideal for routine screening in food authentication. It can be used to detect adulteration in olive oils with cheaper oils such as sunflower, palm, or soybean oils, and the addition of sugar syrup to honey2. The portability of Raman and NIR is advantageous for non-destructive on-site testing. While they can provide rapid profiling, they are typically less sensitive than FTIR for trace analysis and are most beneficial when used complementarily in a laboratory setting. Since Raman relies on light scattering, it can overcome certain challenges FTIR faces in analyzing high-moisture foods, like milk. Such foods strongly absorb infrared, which can interfere with and weaken signals, impacting detection accuracy.

Large organizations with dedicated R&D laboratories may benefit from setting up an in-house FTIR. If small and mid-size organizations were to adopt product authenticity testing as a standard practice with high testing volumes, having an in-house FTIR could turn out to be an economical choice over time. For operations with low testing frequency, outsourcing could be more cost-efficient. Finally, while NMR delivers detailed information, it is time-consuming and requires expensive equipment as well as expert handling, making it better suited for confirmatory analyses. In such cases, it is practical to use specialized third-party labs, as operating costs can outweigh the benefits.

Chromatography in Action

Chromatographic separation techniques such as Gas Chromatography (GC) and High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) are often coupled with Mass Spectrometry (MS) for detecting trace levels of adulterants in intricate food matrices that cannot typically be detected by spectroscopic methods alone. Both GC-MS and LC-MS are powerful and selective techniques, but they come with significantly higher purchasing and operating costs than FTIR. Their preference can be driven by the need for advanced research or for regulatory compliance purposes, in addition to authentication testing.

GC-MS is ideal for volatile compounds that can withstand high temperatures and can be used for identifying synthetic flavor compounds in natural flavors and juices. Flavorings and non-alcoholic beverages are among the top 10 implicated categories of food fraud, and olive oils have been frequently associated with mislabeling incidents3. In contrast, LC-MS is better suited for non-volatile, thermally sensitive, and high-molecular weight compounds. Common applications of LC-MS include detecting melamine in milk and identifying Sudan dyes in chili powder.

To prevent fraud, testing is most effective when done at the ingredient level, and raw material suppliers should be encouraged to engage in such practices. This offers multi-ingredient food manufacturers a greater reliance on their suppliers for authenticity and, depending on the scope of their operation, may reduce the need for additional testing of incoming materials.

Decoding Mass Spectrometry

MS techniques such as Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (IRMS) and Inductively Coupled-Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) have distinct applications. IRMS measures stable isotope ratios, whose abundance varies with environmental and agricultural factors, serving as a strong indicator of growing conditions and geographical origin. With IRMS, it is possible to ascertain whether a conventional product is mislabeled as organic or if meat has been derived from a grass-fed or grain-fed cow4. While spectroscopic methods can cover a broader spectrum in provenance mapping, IRMS is more focused and definitive in such an approximation.

Likewise, ICP-MS analyzes the elemental composition of heavy metals and trace minerals. It is often used to detect heavy metal contamination, such as arsenic in rice or lead in water, and to estimate mineral content in supplements. Since both IRMS and ICP-MS are high-precision instruments that involve considerable capital investments, internal implementation is justified for regulatory agencies where accuracy is key. For private organizations, the choice ultimately depends on their requirements, infrastructure, and budget thresholds.

Cracking the Molecular Code

Molecular techniques such as Conventional PCR and Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) are popular choices for species identification due to their speed, precision, and reliance on genetic information, which is not influenced by farming conditions. Both methods detect and amplify DNA, but only qPCR can quantify genetic material in real-time by using fluorescent probes. This offers qPCR a functional advantage over conventional PCR.

Historically, meat and dairy products have been frequently implicated in food fraud incidents3. For example, conventional PCR can detect whether beef is adulterated with pork, whereas qPCR can determine the amount of pork meat present. An alarming case of fraud occurred in 2013 when horsemeat ended up in the supply chain across Europe, labeled as beef. Similarly, qPCR can distinguish whether goat milk has been diluted with cow milk, as well as the extent of dilution.

Another type of PCR, known as multiplex PCR, allows simultaneous detection of multiple species in a single assay, which can save time and expenses, but the overall process can be complex to implement. While PCR instruments are essential for biotechnological research in pharmaceutical companies and are often favored by regulatory agencies, their routine use in food manufacturing establishments might be limited unless the company participates in applied research, such as the development of bioengineered foods.

Relative cost analysis of standard analytical technologies, categorized from 1 (very low) to 6 (extremely high) based on approximate market pricing. The variations between entry-level equipment and advanced models have been accounted for in the design (Credit: B. Ghosh)

The Analytical Dilemma

The bar graph in Figure 1 demonstrates a clear trend between the equipment cost and the depth of the analysis achieved. In summary, the more comprehensive the analysis, the higher the cost of the equipment, and the greater the technical expertise required. Food manufacturers can use these observations to determine the approach best suited to their scope and budget. UV-Vis Spectroscopy requires basic operation skills and is relatively easy to handle. Given their low cost, they can be easily integrated into an existing internal lab infrastructure.

Now, the choice between FTIR and Raman can be challenging as both techniques have distinct strengths and complement each other.  FTIR excels at analyzing a broad range of food matrices, while Raman offers a convenient application for field use. Among the mid-range category, qPCR requires careful handling during sample preparation to prevent false positives, and companies can evaluate outsourcing testing to accredited labs, collaborate with research institutions, or appoint trained specialists.

GC-MS, LC-MS, and ICP-MS tend to have considerable costs, making them ideal for confirmatory analyses. Whether they are used regularly or customarily, operational needs and budget thresholds are ultimately the deciding factors for an in-house infrastructure development. IRMS and NMR are superior and highly advanced instruments that are employed for specialized research rather than routine food authentication testing. When required, they can be selectively utilized through third-party labs.

From Insight to Action

Food authentication technologies like spectroscopy, chromatography, mass spectrometry, and PCR play a key role in ensuring the integrity of food products. While each technique comes with a cost and capability trade-off, strategically leveraging them within the existing safety and quality framework offers an additional layer of protection from food fraud. Figure 2 summarizes essential practices organizations should adopt and avoid to strengthen food fraud prevention and mitigation efforts.

Recommended practices for food fraud prevention (Credit: B. Ghosh)

Raw material suppliers must actively engage in product authenticity testing. Multi-ingredient or finished product manufacturers can adopt the following best practices depending on the nature of their supplier relationships.

  • New suppliers – Request or conduct authenticity testing before initial bulk purchase.
  • Domestic and/or established relationship with suppliers – Perform random raw material sampling on a rotating basis for authenticity testing.
  • International suppliers and/or complex supply chains – Conduct authenticity testing at least annually.

Food fraud can quickly evolve into a food safety or a food quality issue. Investing in the right authentication tools today can prevent costly recalls tomorrow. In addition to testing, it is essential to stay informed and monitor emerging trends in the rapidly evolving supply chain landscape. Building a safer global food system requires prioritizing prevention over reaction by proactively detecting and eliminating food fraud risks before they occur.

References

  1. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). “Investigation of elevated Lead & Chromium Levels: Cinnamon Applesauce Pouches.” Current as of March 10, 2024. https://www.fda.gov/food/outbreaks-foodborne-illness/investigation-elevated-lead-chromium-levels-cinnamon-applesauce-pouches-november-2023
  2. Mendes, E., & Duarte, N. (2021). Mid-infrared spectroscopy as a valuable tool to tackle food analysis: A literature review on coffee, dairies, honey, olive oil and wine. Foods, 10(2), 477. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10020477
  3. Everstine, K. D., Chin, H. B., Lopes, F. A., & Moore, J. C. (2024). Database of food fraud records: Summary of data from 1980 to 2022. Journal of food protection, 87(3), 100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfp.2024.100227
  4. Hong, E., Lee, S. Y., Jeong, J. Y., Park, J. M., Kim, B. H., Kwon, K., & Chun, H. S. (2017). Modern analytical methods for the detection of food fraud and adulteration by food category. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 97(12), 3877-3896. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8364
  5. Vinothkanna, A., Dar, O. I., Liu, Z., & Jia, A. Q. (2024). Advanced detection tools in food fraud: A systematic review for holistic and rational detection method based on research and patents. Food Chemistry, 446, 138893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.138893
Fraud
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Sharp Rise in Fraud for Nuts, Dairy, and Cereals: Q1 2025

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Fraud

The Index—published quarterly—tracks verified food fraud cases reported by global food safety authorities. Findings from the first quarter of 2025 reveal volatile patterns in vulnerable commodities, impacting procurement, quality assurance, and supply chain integrity.

Key Q1 2025 Highlights:

  • Nuts, Seeds & Nut-Based Products: +358% rise in incidents, mostly due to species substitution, allergen risks, and origin fraud.
  • Dairy Products: Though incident numbers remain low, cases involving counterfeit butter and milk adulteration are rising, indicating early escalation.
  • Cereals & Bakery Products: 23% increase, driven by mislabeling, illegal additives, and pesticide-related compliance failures.
  • New Risks: Garlic and non-alcoholic beverages appeared as emerging fraud targets for the first time in the Index.

“It is extremely important for the food industry to identify the commodities most at risk from food fraud globally,” says Professor Chris Elliott, Founder of the Institute for Global Food Security at Queen’s University Belfast. “FOODAKAI’s Global Food Fraud Index has identified some new threats I was unaware of, while others were high on my radar.”

The report also confirms persistent threats in seafood, with a 74% year-on-year increase due to species substitution and antibiotic misuse in aquaculture.

Food Fraud Quick Bites

The Cascading Food Safety Risks from Tariffs on the Food Industry

By Benjamin Miller, Ph.D., MPH
No Comments

We’re now a month out from “Liberation Day,” the Trump administration’s launch to restructure global trade by increasing tariffs on imports into the US to levels not seen in over 100 years.  While “reciprocal tariffs” for most countries are currently on “pause” until July 9th, 10% across-the-board tariffs remain in place for many countries, with tariffs against Chinese products currently at or greater than 145%. These tariffs create interconnected challenges requiring systematic attention.

While it is inevitable that some buyers in tariffed countries will shift their purchases from U.S. suppliers to avoid the tariffs, it is just as expected that many U.S. food companies will shift their purchasing to domestic supply chains to save costs. And as those food companies move away from expensive imports, domestic growers and manufacturers may experience demand surges, creating a fundamental safety challenge where production pressures increase faster than the food safety infrastructure.

Increased Capacity Leads to Increase Risks

Processing facilities operating beyond designed capacity may compromise existing food safety management systems. Rapid workforce expansion typically outpaces adequate food safety training, increasing food safety handling risks, while quality assurance programs designed for standard production volumes become stretched if production volumes increase substantially. Companies expanding domestic production should conduct comprehensive risk assessments before increasing capacity, with particular attention to known or reasonably foreseeable hazards that may be compromised under accelerated production schedules.

Supply Chain, Traceability and Recording Keeping Concerns

The economics of high-value imported foods like avocados, mangoes, meat, and specialty cheeses will fundamentally change under the tariff structure. When legitimate import channels become prohibitively expensive, sophisticated black market operations emerge that specifically target food supply chains. These operations present unique food safety hazards, as products may be transported without temperature monitoring or verification; traceability documentation is often falsified, eliminating the ability to conduct recalls; and products may be “washed” through multiple intermediaries to obscure origin.

Food Fraud

Product substitution represents perhaps the most immediate economically motivated adulteration (EMA) risk in this environment. When high-value ingredients face substantial tariff increases, suppliers may substitute lower-value alternatives without disclosure. For example, we might see conventional produce falsely labeled as organic to command premium pricing that offsets tariff costs. Similarly, expensive oils like extra virgin olive oil might be diluted with cheaper oils while maintaining premium labeling and pricing. Food companies will need to enhance receiving processes specifically to identify potentially diverted products by implementing enhanced documentation verification, supplier approval processes, and potentially laboratory testing to verify product authenticity and safety.

Companies facing margin compression commonly target operational efficiency measures that inadvertently compromise food safety systems through extended production runs between sanitation cycles allowing biofilm formation and harborage point development, reduced preventive maintenance increasing equipment failure risks during production, and reformulation to extend shelf-life requiring additional validation.

Similarly, economic uncertainty may cause some international and domestic food companies to delay capital investments in food safety-related infrastructure, continuing to use equipment that may be past its useful lifespan or more difficult to clean and maintain, leading to increased microbiological or physical hazards during production.

While most food items from Mexico and Canada that meet the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement rules of origin remain tariff-free, the Canadian supply chain realignment (due to long-term uncertainty around US policies) may represent a more than temporary adaptation—it may reflect a fundamental restructuring of North American food trade that will have persistent effects even if tariffs are eventually removed. New supplier relationships will need to be established and a holistic assessment of food safety programs should be conducted as part of new supply identification and onboarding processes. Canadian companies may approach these changes as permanent structural adjustments requiring comprehensive revisions to supplier verification programs rather than as temporary workarounds. In preparing for these challenges, companies should implement a structured approach that includes:

  • Conducting systematic vulnerability assessments of supply chains to identify specific points where tariff pressures create food safety risks.
  • Developing enhanced verification processes for the specific risks of rapidly onboarded new suppliers.
  • Revalidating critical control points under new operating conditions.
  • Implementing targeted testing programs for high-risk imported products potentially subject to black market diversion.

In these uncertain times, navigating the complex intersection of international trade policy and food safety requires specialized expertise that combines regulatory knowledge, technical assessment capabilities, and strategic planning.

Editors Note: this article was originally published March 12, 2025 and was updated May 5, 2025

Food Fraud Quick Bites

Highlights and significant changes of USDA’s revised regulations on organic foods

By Jennifer Allen
No Comments

On March 19, 2024, the USDA implemented revised regulations on organic foods. The overall purpose of the revisions is to strengthen enforcement of the regulations, with a focus on greater accountability for organic food fraud. This article does not go into every detail of the changes. That would be a long and rather dull read, and you could just as well go read the new regulations for yourself. But it does highlight some of what this writer believes are the most significant changes, and to the extent your compliance with the organic regulations has been on autopilot, this is a reminder to take the wheel and make sure you know how the new regulations affect you.

Perhaps the most significant change is to the scope of what it means to “handle” organic products. Before the revisions, handling meant selling, processing, or packaging agricultural products. Now, handling includes trading, facilitating the sale or trade on behalf of a seller or yourself, importing and exporting, as well as a number of other activities including conditioning, containerizing, and labeling. Thus, the universe of individuals and entities that could be on the hook for organic fraud, and who may need to be certified by the USDA, just got significantly larger. What this means is that even if all you do is hit buttons on a computer keyboard, and you never lay your hands on a piece of produce, you can still be responsible if the product you are trading turns out to be falsely labeled or otherwise noncompliant. There are exemptions from certification, but you still need to be compliant with the rules.

There are some changes in exemptions under the revised rule. Restaurants and stores that cook or prepare food and then sell it to consumers at the same location are exempt. But online sellers are not. Companies that store packaged and sealed products are exempt, but those who store bulk and unpackaged products must be certified. Customs brokers and logistics brokers – those who merely connect operations with carriers and storage facilities – are exempt. Likewise, businesses whose only job is to transport products are exempt, but handlers must still use audit trails and traceability to ensure that their carrier does not compromise the organic integrity of the product.

With respect to fraud, the term “organic fraud” is now defined, as “deceptive representation, sale or labeling of nonorganic agricultural products or ingredients as . . . organic.” New regulations relating to traceability make it easier to follow a product from birth to sale. New language requires certified operations to keep records that “span the time of purchase or acquisition, through production, to sale or transport and be traceable back to the last certified operation.”  And certifying agents must conduct risk-based supply chain traceability audits to trace products across multiple links in a supply chain.

These are just some of the changes that USDA has made to ensure that consumers paying a premium for organic products are getting what they pay for. If you are part of the chain of organic products, then make sure you know how the changes affect your organization.

Food Traceability and Authentication in the AI Era

By Maria-Eleni Dimitrakopoulou
No Comments

Food traceability provides comprehensive information about a product’s history and origin, facilitating efficient recalls and supply chain management. However, distinct types of food fraud, such as concealment, counterfeit, and mislabelling, pose significant challenges. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and new regulatory measures, like the FDA’s traceability rule, enhance food safety and authenticity, fostering a more transparent and reliable food supply chain.

In the intricate web of the global food supply chain, ensuring the safety and authenticity of consumables stands as a paramount concern. Food traceability, defined as the ability to provide comprehensive information about the history and origin of a product throughout its journey, emerges as a cornerstone in this endeavour. This meticulous documentation not only facilitates supply chain management but also empowers swift actions such as recalls in the event of safety or quality breaches.

Beyond its logistical benefits, food traceability assumes a pivotal role in safeguarding consumer interests. By serving as a fundamental component of food safety and quality assurance, traceability ensures transparency and accountability at every stage of production and distribution. However, the efficacy of a traceability system is inherently tied to the credibility of its origins, paving the way for the convergence of food traceability and authentication.

Unveiling the Shadows: The Challenge of Food Adulteration

In an era plagued by instances of food adulteration and mislabelling, the imperative for robust authentication mechanisms becomes increasingly apparent. Reports from international and national research bodies shed light on a myriad of cases spanning various food categories, from wine and spirits to olive oil, fish, meat, and beyond. This pervasive challenge underscores the need for stringent standards and regulatory frameworks to combat fraudulence and uphold consumer trust.

Food fraud manifests in several forms, each presenting unique challenges for detection and prevention. For example:

  • Concealment involves hiding inferior or harmful ingredients within a product to avoid detection. An example of this is the addition of melamine in milk to falsely increase protein content readings, which led to a major scandal in China.
  • Counterfeit products replicate and sell a product under the guise of a well-known brand, often with substandard quality. These fake products can range from everyday items like bottled water to high-end goods like wines and spirits. Counterfeiting not only deceives consumers but also damages brand reputations and violates intellectual property rights.
  • Botanical Authentication ensures that plant-based products are derived from the claimed species and not substituted with cheaper alternatives. This is particularly important for products like herbal supplements, teas, and spices. For instance, saffron, one of the most expensive spices in the world, is often adulterated with less expensive substances such as dyed corn stigmas or safflower.
  • Geographical Origin fraud involves misrepresenting the region from which a product originates. Certain regions are known for producing specific high-quality foods and beverages, such as Champagne from France or Parmigiano Reggiano cheese from Italy. Mislabelling products to benefit from these reputations deceives consumers and undermines genuine producers.
  • Substitution entails replacing a high-value ingredient with a lower-cost one. This is common in products like olive oil, honey, and seafood. For example, extra virgin olive oil might be diluted with cheaper oils, or expensive fish species like tuna might be replaced with less costly ones like escolar. This not only cheats consumers but can also pose health risks.
  • Mislabelling involves incorrectly listing ingredients or nutritional information on labels. An example is claiming a product is organic when it is not.
  • Dilution involves adding water or other substances to increase the volume of a product. For instance, diluting fruit juices with water and not declaring it.
  • Unapproved Enhancements involve using unauthorized substances to enhance the appearance or quality of a product. An example is adding unauthorized dyes to make a product look fresher or more appealing.
  • Theft and Resale refers to stealing products and reintroducing them into the market through unauthorized channels. For example, reselling stolen goods without proper storage conditions.
  • Artificial Additives involves using artificial ingredients to mimic the qualities of a natural product. For example, adding synthetic vanilla flavor instead of natural vanilla extraction

The New Traceability Rule of FDA

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has introduced a new traceability rule aimed at enhancing the ability to trace the origin of foods throughout the supply chain more efficiently. This rule mandates that companies maintain more rigorous records of their supply chains, focusing on high-risk foods. The implementation of this rule is expected to significantly improve the speed and accuracy of traceability in the event of a foodborne illness outbreak or contamination incident, thus ensuring faster recalls and reducing the risk to public health.

The Dawn of a New Era: Advancements in Food Fraud

As the spectre of food fraud looms large, there arises an urgent demand for sophisticated analytical techniques to authenticate foodstuffs with precision and reliability. Here, the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) heralds a new era of innovation. AI-driven algorithms can sift through vast datasets, identifying patterns and anomalies that elude traditional methods. Machine learning models can analyse complex chemical compositions, flagging deviations indicative of adulteration or mislabelling. By harnessing the power of AI, authorities can fortify their efforts in safeguarding consumer interests and preserving the integrity of the global food market.

Charting the Course Ahead: Toward a Safer, More Authentic Future

In the pursuit of food safety and quality, the symbiotic relationship between traceability and fraud, bolstered by AI technologies, emerges as a beacon of hope. By fortifying supply chain transparency and deploying cutting-edge analytical methods, stakeholders can navigate the complexities of the modern food landscape with confidence and integrity. The integration of the FDA’s new traceability rule further strengthens this endeavour, ensuring a safer and more reliable food supply chain for all.

Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

6 Ways IoT Asset Tracking Ensures Safe Distribution and Better Traceability

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

Internet of Things (IoT) sensors are being used in industries across the spectrum, and their potential is far from being realized. The data provided via IoT asset tracking technologies, in particular, can enhance traceability and product integrity, leading to safer food and reducing costly losses. Following are six ways IoT tracking sensors support food safety, traceability and accountability.

Vendor Compliance

Adulteration occurs more often in the supply chain than any professional cares to admit. Some experts estimate it has a $50 billion annual impact on the food industry. Whether motivated by financial gain or product shortages, opportunistic intermediaries will take advantage of poor food traceability and make substitutions, dilutions or falsifications.

To prevent bringing adulterated products to market and keep consumers safe, manufacturers must hold their third-party vendors accountable at every stage of the distribution process, and IoT asset tracking sensors can help. They have the ability to record shipment movements in real time, so companies can ensure that their products and raw materials arrive and remain in the right places at each step in the chain.

Further, manufacturers can reduce the chances of product tampering by using IoT sensors that alert you when someone damages packaging. Bad actors are much less likely to commit food fraud when they know highly sophisticated technology is monitoring their actions and movements.

Damage Detection

Food products, especially those in the cold chain, can bruise, break and flatten relatively quickly, causing financial losses. For instance, grain loses significant value when damaged due to improper handling. Through a combination of IoT sensors and sensing nodes that can track the condition of products and provide relevant, real-time updates, companies can ensure their shipments stay intact throughout distribution and transportation.

Theft Reduction

Cargo theft is a significant problem that’s relatively new to the food industry. According to the FBI, it costs supply chain vendors and retailers up to $30 billion annually. While thieves have historically targeted electronics or high-cost imports, food inflation is making food products a top target as of 2023.

Industrial IoT sensors improve food traceability by tracking a shipment’s movement through the supply chain. They can provide real-time location data or update food-manufacturing professionals when the product reaches a particular destination. Companies can use this data to pinpoint sources of cargo theft, delays or mishandling, increasing product safety and reducing loss.

Spoilage Detection

Spoilage claims 33% of food products manufacturers produce, resulting in over $1 trillion in losses annually. This figure probably isn’t surprising for professionals working in the cold chain, as transportation condition management is incredibly complex and expensive.

Even if food appears fine for human consumption, undetected issues can be catastrophic down the line. A single recall costs a food company over $10 million on average, not accounting for lost sales or reputational damage.

With IoT asset tracking, industry professionals can monitor temperature, humidity and chemical compounds to improve the integrity of their products and ensure safe distribution. They can place sensors inside their vehicles or in packaging to monitor all changes.

Since these sensors provide a complete temperature and humidity account, professionals can even collect data for future use to forecast potential losses when conditions become abnormal. This allows companies to take action quickly to prevent spoilage, dramatically reducing the chances of a recall.

Enhanced Data Collection

An IoT sensor utilizing radio frequency identification (RFID) can collect a massive amount of data on distribution and transportation conditions that industry professionals can gather and store for future use. This information provides insights into route optimization and/or sources of contamination. With the addition of artificial intelligence, these sensors can maximize food traceability by validating everything passing through a gate.

If retailers wish to make some of this information available to end users, they can publish it or use specialized barcodes. Customers will get to review the origin of the raw materials and products, providing increased awareness of where their food comes from and the path it took to get to their store.

Faster Traceability

One in six people every year become sick due to a foodborne illness. It is up to manufacturers, distributors and retailers to ensure product quality and prevent these illnesses. When outbreaks do occur, it is up to manufacturers—both morally and legally—to trace that product and remove it before others are affected.

Luckily, IoT devices meet all the necessary regulatory criteria. RFID and other technologies can trace products in real time and alert the relevant parties of any significant changes. For example, they could track a perishable produce shipment and notify retailers and manufacturers of an extreme temperature spike.

Since these sensors can send out instantaneous alerts, nearby professionals can immediately respond before product becomes contaminated or spoils. Whether they are alerted to temperature fluctuations, suspected tampering or imminent spoilage, they can move quickly to address the concern.

IoT asset tracking is an innovative approach to common industry pain points. It addresses the food sector’s unique needs, taking perishables, food compliance and adulteration into account. With such significant food traceability improvements, manufacturers, distributors and retailers will have a much easier time coordinating their operations to increase safety, speed to market and the quality of their products.

Food Safety Consortium 2023
Food Safety Think Tank

The Rise of Unforeseen Hazards and New Regulatory Strategies

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Food Safety Consortium 2023

The food industry is facing new challenges in food safety due to the introduction of novel foods and extreme weather events. In recent years, flaws within the nation’s regulatory system have also come to light. On October 16-18, food safety and quality professionals will gather at the 2023 Food Safety Consortium in Parsippany, New Jersey, to share lessons learned, join discussions with regulatory bodies and gain knowledge on how to mitigate current and coming food safety challenges. Join your peers as we examine topics including: 

Modernizing the U.S. Food Safety System

Following the infant formula crisis, the food industry, the public and the U.S. legislature called for changes to how we regulate food in the U.S. In this session, we look at key concerns and shortcomings with our current regulatory framework and how the system can be modernized to better address—and reduce—the most likely foodborne illness risks facing today’s consumers.

Panelists: Stephen Ostroff, M.D. former Acting FDA Commissioner, Bill Marler, Food Safety Attorney; Barbara Kowalcyk, Executive Director, Center for Foodborne Illness and Panelist of the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA. Moderated by Inga Hansen, Managing Editor, Food Safety Tech.

View the full agenda.

The Rise of Previously Unforeseen Hazards

With the combined effects of the recent pandemic, globalization, climate change, digitalization, and decreased regulatory inspection oversight, it is inevitable that previously unforeseen food safety hazards have emerged from within the food sectors previously thought low risk. Arguably, the rise of previously unforeseen food hazards may be attributed to the following:

  • Food Fraud. The addition of food fraud adulterants such as non-food grade chemicals, unapproved colors and flavors, and non-compatible allergenic ingredients, pose health risks to consumers. These hazards are changing and becoming more sophisticated.
  • Fusion Foods. With the internationalization food, food ingredients are being used in new and unexpected ways. As a result, new and unexpected hazards may occur, which may not be accounted for in food safety plans.
  • Clean Labeling. Foods that are considered “natural”, “healthy”, and “sustainable”, are free of artificial ingredients, to include preservatives. As foods are reformulated, hazards that were previously not a concern may become more prevalent.
  • Protein Alternatives. Food safety hazard analysis of plant-based and cell-cultured proteins cannot be approached in the same manner as traditional meat and poultry processing.

In this session, Tim Lombardo, Senior Director for Food Consulting Services, EAS Consulting examines the challenges of identifying emerging hazards associated with Food Fraud, Food Fusion, Clean Labeling, and Protein Alternatives as well as mitigation strategies to minimize these risks.

Make Data Useful Again: Building an Analytics Strategy to Drive FSQA Performance

Are you tired of sifting through vast amounts of data that don’t provide the valuable insights you need for your business? We understand that not all data is created equal, and it can be overwhelming to determine which information truly matters for making critical decisions. In today’s digital, world where every solution promises data insights, finding the right analytics and meaningful insights is crucial for success. Join our panel discussion where three seasoned F&B industry experts will share their hard-earned lessons and best practices for navigating the data deluge. Learn how they have successfully identified and utilized the data that matters, enabling them to drive important decisions and uncover critical gaps in visibility to revolutionize FSQA and supply chain programs.

Panelists: Gary Smith, Vice President, Quality Systems, Food Brands, 1-800-Flowers and Paul Bradley, Senior Director Product Marketing, TraceGains

Registration options are available for in-person and hybrid team attendance.

 

Laura Dunn Nelson, Intertek Alchemy

Navigating Food Industry Challenges Requires a Comprehensive Crisis Management Plan

By Laura Dunn Nelson
No Comments
Laura Dunn Nelson, Intertek Alchemy

The food industry has faced numerous challenges in recent years that have disrupted its stability and normal operations. While it might feel like the industry is finally starting to stabilize, there is still a long way to go to achieve a steady new normal. The industry remains extremely vulnerable to inflation pressures, product shortages, cyberattacks and food fraud. Any one of these risks can send a manufacturer or restaurant scrambling to replace missing ingredients or supplies and resume operations.

In today’s unpredictable landscape, crisis management plans are essential for reducing downtime, safeguarding food quality and maintaining customer trust. These plans help establish backup suppliers in times of supply chain disruptions and bolster defenses against cyberattacks and food fraud. While there is no one-size-fits-all approach, developing a customized crisis management plan tailored to your specific production risks is crucial. Below are some insights into using a crisis management plan to tackle common threats faced by food manufacturers and restaurants.

Vendor Management: Ensuring Continuity

Vendors play a key role in the food industry, and their vulnerabilities can directly impact your food safety and quality. Ingredient shortages and price fluctuations create supply chain disruptions that must be managed through proactive measures.

Including a vendor replacement strategy in the crisis management plan enables quick adaptation to unforeseen circumstances. This strategy should encompass multiple sourcing options, rigorous vendor audits, effective communication channels, comprehensive product specifications and efficient change management processes.

Detecting and Preventing Food Fraud

When supply chains are disrupted, food fraud becomes a serious concern. Counterfeiting, dilution, substitution and mislabeling pose risks to both food quality and safety. To combat food fraud effectively, it’s important to vet suppliers to ensure they provide the correct ingredients and adhere to quality standards.

Integrating your supplier selection processes into the crisis management plan will help ensure consistency as you vet new suppliers. Additionally, frontline employees should receive training to detect food fraud. This includes training that enables them to identify abnormalities in raw materials, manufacturing processes and finished goods.

Risk management is not solely the responsibility of leadership. To effectively combat food fraud, it needs to be part of your frontline worker food safety training program.

Safeguarding Against Cyber Threats

With increasing reliance on technology, the food industry has become more vulnerable than ever to cyber threats. Last year, the U.S. cybersecurity company Dragos identified the food and beverage sector as the second largest victim of cyberattacks, making it imperative to prioritize cybersecurity measures.

While robust security platforms and backup systems are important, the most effective defense lies in having an informed workforce trained to identify and prevent potential attacks. It’s critical to ensure your crisis management plan includes preventative measures such as educating employees on recognizing suspicious emails, updating passwords regularly and avoiding risky online behavior.

Transparent Communication Builds Trust

When changes occur in suppliers, products or ingredients, transparent communication with your customers is vital. The crisis management plan should lay out clear guidelines for informing customers on important updates, including formulation and label changes when different ingredients or formulas are used. These guidelines should have the agreement and support of multiple internal departments, including management, marketing, production, safety and quality. Implementing thorough communication strategies can be time-consuming, but surprising customers with unexpected product changes can cause lasting damage to their trust and loyalty.

In today’s challenging food industry environment, proactive planning and risk mitigation are crucial for preserving business continuity, brand reputation and customer relationships. A comprehensive crisis management plan tailored to address specific threats is essential. By prioritizing cybersecurity, vendor management, fraud prevention and transparent communication, food businesses can navigate the challenges effectively and ensure their long-term success in this rapidly evolving landscape.

Conor Kearney

FoodChain ID Announces New CEO

No Comments
Conor Kearney

Conor Kearney has been appointed CEO of FoodChain ID. He succeeds Brad Riemenapp, who led FoodChain ID as CEO for more than five years before his death due to cancer in May. Kearney joined FoodChain ID in 2021 and most recently served as Interim CEO during Riemenapp’s medical leave of absence.

Kearney previously served as the company’s Senior Vice President of Strategy and Operations. Before joining FoodChain ID, he worked for 11 years at Staples, holding multiple leadership roles, and five years at McKinsey & Company. Kearney earned his MBA from Harvard Business School and a bachelor’s degree in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology from Dartmouth College.

“Conor has already had a significant impact on FoodChain ID. His collaborative leadership style and ability to rally the organization to achieve its goals make him the absolute right person to lead FoodChain ID in the next stage of its growth journey,” said Ted Rainaud, Managing Director at Berkshire Partners.

“Brad was a great mentor to me, and I’m committed to continue building on his vision and delivering on FoodChain ID’s mission to make the food supply chain safer and more transparent,” said Kearney.

 

Food Safety Consortium 2023
From the Editor’s Desk

Registration Open for the 2023 Food Safety Consortium

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Food Safety Consortium 2023

Registration for the 11th Annual Food Safety Consortium, which will take place October 16-18 at the Hilton Parsippany in New Jersey, is now open.

Presented by Food Safety Tech, the Food Safety Consortium is a business-to-business conference that brings together food safety and quality assurance professionals for education, networking and discussion geared toward solving the key challenges facing the food safety industry today.

In addition to two full days of high-level panel discussions, this year’s program will include a second Food Safety Hazards track. These “Boots on the Ground” sessions provide education on the detection, mitigation, control and regulation of key food hazards.

New this year is a strategic co-location with the Cannabis Quality Conference (CQC), a business-to-business conference and expo where cannabis industry leaders and stakeholders meet to build the future of the cannabis marketplace. Registered attendees get full access to both conferences.

Registration options are available for in-person and virtual attendance.

The Consortium will kick off with presentations from Erik Mettler, Assistant Commissioner for Partnerships and Policy in the FDA’s Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA), and Sandra Eskin, Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety at the USDA FSIS, followed by a Town Hall with the regulators.

Other agenda highlights include:

  • The Future of Food Safety Culture
  • The Rise of Previously Unforeseen Hazards,
  • FSMA 204: The Final Rule – Looking Ahead,
  • Anti-Food Fraud Tactics for the Entire Supply Chain
  • Bridging the gap between food safety and cybersecurity
    Protecting Allergic Consumers through Audited and Validated Allergen Control Plans
  • Succession Planning for Food Safety Inspectors
    Utilizing Food Quality Plans to Ignite Positive Food Safety Culture
  • Recalls Trends and Predictions

View the full agenda and register here.

Attendees will also have the opportunity to take part in pre-conference workshops on Monday, October 16, including:

  • Food Safety Auditor Training
  • CP-FS Credential Review Course
  • The Food Safety Culture Design Workshop
  • The Seed to Sale Safety Workshop

Event Hours

Monday, October 16: 8:30 am – 5:00 pm (Pre-conference Workshops)

Tuesday, October 17: 8 am – 6:30 pm

Wednesday, October 18: 8:30 am – 3:45 pm

Register now

Tabletop exhibits and custom sponsorship packages are available. Contact Sales Director RJ Palermo.

About Food Safety Tech

Food Safety Tech is a digital media community for food industry professionals interested in food safety and quality. We inform, educate and connect food manufacturers and processors, retail & food service, food laboratories, growers, suppliers and vendors, and regulatory agencies with original, in-depth features and reports, curated industry news and user-contributed content, and live and virtual events that offer knowledge, perspectives, strategies and resources to facilitate an environment that fosters safer food for consumers.

About the Food Safety Consortium

The Food Safety Consortium is an educational and networking event for Food Protection that has food safety, food integrity and food defense as the foundation of its educational content. With a unique focus on science, technology and compliance, the “Consortium” enables attendees to engage in conversations that are critical for advancing careers and organizations alike. Delegates visit with exhibitors to learn about cutting-edge solutions, explore high-level educational tracks, and network with industry executives to find solutions to improve quality, efficiency and cost effectiveness in the evolving food industry.