When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Coordinated Outbreak Response and Evaluation Network began operating in August 2011, it was structured to respond to foodborne illness outbreaks in three interdependent phases.
Why is traceability suddenly so important? It depends on who you talk to—public health, business, supply chain, consumers—all are key stakeholders in food traceability.
Think the threat of Ebola is over? Think again. The effects on the food industry is far reaching.
No word strikes more fear in the hearts of individuals in the food industry than “recall.” Advance planning for recalls can save lives and can make the difference in the survival of your company.
The food product industry faces an escalating barrage of lawsuits—both for alleged mislabeling and for safety violations.
Tracebacks are painstaking efforts that require investigators to be both detectives and scientists.
Traceability is designed to help food companies manage relationships, safeguard their food supply chains and protect their brands. But any supply relationship is fraught with risk. The answer? Transparency.
What is broken in the chain that allows a suspected foodborne illness event to be neglected and become an epidemic? Restaurant patrons should be encouraged to report suspected cases of foodborne illness in a timely fashion.
What precisely should be reported in order to make the Reportable Food Registry effective in protecting consumers? The U.S. Food and Drug Administration wants your input. To that end, it has extended until August 18, 2014, the period for submitting comments on the proposed rulemaking.
In the food industry, as in the automotive industry, internal vigilance for product safety is imperative: The lives and health of customers depend on it. What else can we learn?
In the case of a food recall, a company’s food safety manager and its crisis communicator make up the most unlikely of duos. But don’t underestimate the importance of this team to your company’s ability to survive.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to submit to Congress an annual report on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s exercise of its new mandatory recall authority.
Processors that have been producing pasteurized products and are considering introducing raw products to their product portfolios should weigh gains in profits with the much higher risks to the safety of their customers and the potential financial liability to their business.
Although Foster Farms avoided the harshest of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s enforcement measures by making immediate changes to its manufacturing practices, it did not recall its products. Find out why.
With food scandals exposed in fast food chains, supermarkets and local businesses, concerns about the safety and hygiene of food is increasing.
In general, food producers usually think of risk as the potential for undesirable consequences. But an optimistic attitude towards risk can be beneficial in terms of developing new products or starting new enterprises. What is your risk tolerance?
Most players in the food supply chain believe that the safety of their product is a central concern. Regardless of this gradual shift in attitudes, the outcome is positive for the industry as food manufacturers are integrateing corporate risk management into their processes.
The widespread move from global food supply chains to food supply networks presents considerable challenges.
Summary: Canada’s historic meat recall provides lessons on the importance of a food safety culture for all those along the food supply chain.
Whether large- or small-scale, food product recalls tend to leave their mark on the industry and often alter practices for the better. In order to react quickly and responsibly to a voluntary or involuntary recall, all companies must be adequately prepared.