Search results for: Darin+Detwiler

— OPINION —

When you are sitting comfortable at home feeding your kids or going out to dinner, remember that there are a lot of people that have your back. I will be profiling them over the coming days as ‘Poisoned’ begins streaming on Netflix. Darin Detwiler has always been one of my heroes – even before he became a Netflix star.

Dr. Detwiler is a well-respected food safety academic, advisor, advocate, and author.  For nearly 30 years, he has played a unique role in controlling foodborne illness.  After losing his son, Riley, to E.coli in 1993, the Secretary of Agriculture invited Detwiler’s collaboration on consumer education.  He was twice appointed to the USDA’s National Advisory Board on Meat and Poultry Inspection, represented consumers as the Senior Policy Coordinator for STOP Foodborne Illness, served on Conference for Food Protection councils, and supported the FDA’s implementation of FSMA. 

Today, Detwiler is a Professor of food policy and corporate social responsibility at Northeastern University, where his students have gone on to leadership positions in industry and in state and federal agencies.  Detwiler’s research and insights have appeared on television and in print, including his column and articles in Quality Assurance and Food Safety Magazine and his books Food Safety: Past, Present, and Predictions and Building the Future of Food Safety Technology: Blockchain and Beyond.  In addition to his current role as the Chair of the National Environmental Health Association’s Food Safety Program, his leadership capacities include numerous advisory and editorial boards as well as having long consulted on food safety issues with industry in the U.S. and abroad. 

A U.S. Navy Nuclear Submarine Veteran, and a former high school teacher, Detwiler earned his doctorate in Law and Policy, focusing on states’ ability to implement federal food policies.  He is the recipient of the International Association for Food Protection’s 2022 Ewen C.D. Todd Control of Foodborne Illness Award as well as their 2018 Distinguished Service Award for dedicated and exceptional contributions to the reduction of risks of foodborne illness.

Key Media Links (Selected):

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Darin Detwiler, adjunct faculty at Northeastern University and Senior Policy Coordinator at STOP Foodborne Illness, sat down with Food Safety News at the 2015 Food Safety Summit in Baltimore, MD, last month to discuss food safety from a consumer perspective.

Detwiler’s son, Riley, was one of four children who died in the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak. Since that outbreak, Detwiler has pushed for a safer food system through various roles.

Watch the interview below:

— OPINION —

The Department of Government Efficiency has cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, including employees in food safety roles.

Following the cuts, Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods Jim Jones resigned his post citing the cuts as being indiscriminate and endangering the lives of the American public.

Before the layoffs, the FDA had 18,000 employees across all 50 states. That number includes staff responsible for reporting on food recalls and the investigation of foodborne illness outbreaks. 

Today we hear from food safety thought leaders about the impact of the FDA layoffs.

MIKE TAYLOR — is board member emeritus of STOP Foodborne Illness, which supports and represents victims of foodborne illness and their families.  He served from 2010 to 2016 as FDA’s Deputy Commissioner for Foods and Veterinary Medicine, where he led the implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011 (FSMA).  He previously served at the FDA as Deputy Commissioner for Policy (1991-94) and at the USDA as Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service and Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety (1994-96).

“FDA is already struggling to implement FSMA’s mandated shift from reaction to prevention of foodborne illnesses, having received less than half of the new funding the Congressional Budget Office said FDA would need. Any staff cuts in inspection or scientific staff only futher delays the protection consumers rightfully expect. More people will get sick.

“FDA has been unable to invest in the true, efficiency-enhancing food safety partnership with the states FSMA envisioned. Further weakening FDA, whether on microbiological or chemical safety, further fractures the food safety system among 50 states and harms both consumers and the food industry.

“The US imports 90 percent of its seafood, 60 percent of its fresh fruit, and 35 percent of its vegetables, yet conducts maybe 10 percent of the foreign food inspections FSMA mandates. Cutting FDA staff only undermines consumer confidence in these crucial parts of the American diet.”

FRANK YIANNAS — was the deputy commissioner for food policy and response at the Food and Drug Administration, a position he assumed in December of 2018 and held through early 2022. There he was the principal advisor to the FDA commissioner in the development and execution of policies related to food safety, including implementation of the landmark FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA).

“Like others, I’ve been watching the cut-backs at several federal agencies including the US FDA.  Having spent much of my career in the private sector, unfortunately, the occasional cutback in workforce is something many in industry have had to deal with and experience. 

“While my heart and thoughts go out to the dedicated men and women at FDA and I have compassion for anyone losing their job, let’s hope the cut-backs are being done judiciously and with insights into where the cuts make sense and where they do not. I also hope the cutbacks don’t serve as a hindrance in our ability to recruit future talent at the agency.

“But let me offer a bit of a contrarian view.  With every challenge comes opportunities.  And while cutbacks are always distressing and they should be taken seriously and executed with precision, they do also serve as an opportunity to work smarter and more efficient on behalf of the American people.  

“While I worked in federal service, I saw the tendency for the government to want to hire people for every issue that came their way.  In contrast, based on my private sector experience, not all work was viewed as a need to hire more full-time-equivalents.  Sometimes, it was about implementing more efficient processes or arming the staff with new tools and smarter ways of working.

“For example, during my tenure at the US FDA, lines of imported seafood were increasing exponentially.  Rather than try to address it the old-fashioned way, by just hiring more people, we launched a seafood AI pilot (under our Smarter Food Safety initiative) that ultimately showed we could increase our predictive capability of which seafood shipments contained violative products by a whopping 300%.  The initiative was never meant to eliminate jobs, but rather to ensure the work was more data-driven, predictive, and efficient.  It did, however, help change the paradigm from one of simply adding more people to screen lines of imported food shipments at ports to one of leveraging better tools, data, and technology to make the jobs of inspectors more effective and efficient.

“The work of the FDA is critical to the nation.  Therefore, I hope we strike the right balance, but default to one where I believe arming the dedicated men and women at FDA with data, new tools and, more modern ways of working is the goal – Smarter Food Safety – than simply trimming jobs.”  

THOMAS GREMILLION — since 2015, Gremillion has overseen the research, analysis and advocacy for the Consumer Federation of America’s food policy activities. He also monitors food safety activities at USDA, FDA and in Congress, where he advocates for strong food safety protections for consumers.

“Staffing on the food side at FDA has been flat since 1978, while the U.S. population has grown by over 100 million people. The infant formula debacle catalyzed a much-needed reorganization of the FDA foods program, which also sought to address growing, widespread skepticism about the chemicals FDA has allowed in food. With the “Make American Healthy Again” campaign, this skepticism and calls for more aggressive regulation of chemicals like Red Dye No. 3 in food became bipartisan. FDA responded by hiring new staff to evaluate food additives on the market, and ensure the safety of products like infant formula. But now Elon Musk’s DOGE has fired those new ‘probationary’ employees, only to rehire an undisclosed number of them a few days later, while telegraphing massive staffing cuts to come. In the meantime, the Administration is still muzzling agency employees with a communications ‘pause.’

“You don’t need an advanced degree in organizational psychology to understand the likely impact of this chaotic attack on FDA’s highly skilled, expert workforce. The agency has struggled to attract many of its best employees with comparatively lower salaries than they could earn in the private sector. These employees typically viewed FDA employment as a financial sacrifice in exchange for serving the greater good.

They may soon be running for the doors, if they are not already, and the safety and quality of our food supply will likely suffer as a result.”

DARIN DETWILER — is founder and president of Detwiler Consulting Group, LLC, is the director of the MS in Regulatory Affairs of Food and Food Industry and Professor of Food Policy at Northeastern University in Boston.  In addition to serving as the executive vice president for public health at the International Food Authenticity Assurance Organization.

“Since the tragic loss of four children, including my son Riley, in 1993 due to an E. coli outbreak, approximately 3,000 Americans have died each year from foodborne illnesses. This equates to nearly 100,000 lives lost over the past 32 years. Each of these deaths represents a family forever changed, holding onto hope that our federal response would strengthen to ensure safer food for future generations — not put us in greater risk.

“The recent staff reductions at the FDA threaten to undermine progress in food safety. The resignation of Jim Jones, head of the FDA’s Human Foods Program, in protest of these “indiscriminate” staff cuts, further exacerbates these concerns.

“Such reductions not only hinder the FDA’s ability to prevent foodborne illnesses but also disproportionately endanger our most vulnerable populations — children, the elderly, pregnant individuals, and those with compromised immune systems. Historically, robust food safety measures have been upheld as a non-negotiable priority, reflecting a commitment to safeguarding public health. Budget cuts in this area risk treating these populations as expendable, undermining public trust and well-being.

“Investing in food safety is not merely a regulatory obligation; it is an essential commitment to the health and security of our nation. The lessons from past tragedies compel us to advocate for sustained support and resources for the FDA.

“Only through unwavering dedication to stringent food safety protocols can we ensure that everyone has access to safe and nutritious food, thereby honoring the memory of those we’ve lost and protecting future generations from similar heartbreak.”

DON SCHAFFNER — is the Department Chair, a Distinguished Professor at Rutgers University, and Extension Specialist in Food Science. Schaffner has served on a variety of expert committees, including service to U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Food Technologists, and U.S. National Advisory Committee on Microbial Criteria for Foods.

“I think that Jim Jones said it well in his resignation letter when he called these layoffs ‘indiscriminate.’ I also appreciated the comment from James Shehan, a lawyer who works on FDA issues. Shehan compared these cuts to trying to trim the fat off a steak using a sledgehammer. 

“Laying off the most junior individuals from the agency does at least two things. First, it creates a gap in the pipeline so that we may not have the expertise we need to deal with unexpected food safety problems in the future. Second, it sends a discouraging message to talented young scientists who had hoped to make a career in government service. 

“These layoffs may not have an immediate effect on food safety but the long-term effect certainly will not be good. I’m especially concerned that this action along with other similar cuts at CDC and USDA as well as terminating the National Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Criteria for Foods, will begin to create perfect storm scenarios where we will miss outbreaks, not have the adequate resources to fully investigate outbreaks, and not have the tools and resources to prevent similar outbreaks in the future.”

BRIAN RONHOLM — is the Director of Food Policy for Consumer Reports.  He leads CR’s advocacy efforts to advance a safe and healthy food system. Ronholm is the former deputy under secretary of food safety at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. During his time at USDA, Ronholm developed strategic frameworks and engaged in outreach activities to advance Food Safety and Inspection Service policies and initiatives impacting the meat, poultry, and processed egg industries.

“The recent article in Consumer Reports by my colleague Laura Kirchner was alarming to read. Current FDA staff people indicated to CR anonymously that many critical food safety functions at the agency had ceased or dramatically slowed because of a spending freeze in effect. 

“These FDA employees explained that they feel dangerously unprepared for any new, urgent food outbreaks, and further warned that all food testing could stop if the situation continues and their ability to protect consumers from unsafe food would be diminished. Between the loss of staff and the lack of supplies and research, “we can’t protect the American public well,” one current FDA scientist declared. 

“It’s widely acknowledged among food policy stakeholders that the food side of the FDA has been chronically underfunded for decades. As such, any additional cuts would be destructive and exacerbate an already bad situation, resulting in even fewer inspections and reduced testing capabilities.

“The alarm has to be sounded because we’re facing a deeply troubling situation. A coalition of industry, consumer, and public health stakeholder groups is trying, having recently written a letter to HHS Secretary Kennedy urging him to resist additional cuts to resources and staff that are critical to the FDA foods program. Otherwise, as former FDA deputy commissioner for food Mike Taylor warned, “It’s like another dagger to the capacity of the agency, and it will have lasting consequences.”

CARTIER ESHAM— Alliance for a Stronger FDA, Executive Director.

“Our members have expressed concerns about the collective impact of recent activities from the Administration may have on FDA’s workforce.  We represent a broad community of patient and consumer advocates, food and animal companies and medical product companies. We know how difficult it can be to recruit and retain top scientific and medical talent that are necessary for the agency to review innovative products, ensure food safety  and improve the health of our citizens.

“We share the goal of having a federal government that is effective, efficient, can protect the public and advance innovation. We are committed to working with the Administration and Congress to ensure the FDA maintains the level of resources needed and is provided the flexibility necessary to achieve those goals.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

In response to a reduction in workforce at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, a coalition of consumer, industry and public health stakeholder groups issued the following statement: 

“Ensuring the safety of our nation’s food supply is a shared responsibility,” the coalition stated. “Food companies are committed to producing safe products. Maintaining safe, accessible, and affordable food is a fundamental public health priority and a key component of the Make America Healthy Again platform. An under-resourced food safety agency could jeopardize Secretary Kennedy’s stated objectives to improve nutrition and ingredient safety for children and adults. Adequate resources are critical not only for outbreak response but also for developing and updating food safety standards, providing science-based industry guidance, and ensuring a well-trained federal-state inspection force to protect the integrity of our food system.“

Members of the coalition are:

  • American Frozen Food Institute
  • Association of Food and Drug Officials
  • Association of Public Health Laboratories
  • Center for Science in the Public Interest
  • Consumer Brands Association
  • Consumer Federation of America
  • Consumer Reports
  • Council for Responsible Nutrition 
  • Global Cold Chain Alliance
  • Institute for Food Safety and Nutrition Security, George Washington University
  • International Dairy Foods Association
  • STOP Foodborne Illness
  • Darin Detwiler
  • Bill Marler
  • Jennifer McEntire

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

The alarm certainly sounded long and loud in 2022 when Abbott recalled Similac, Alimentum, and EleCare powdered infant formulas after an FDA investigation found Cronobacter sakazakii in the powdered infant formulas. 

Do not use recalled product produced at Abbott Nutrition’s Sturgis, MI, facility the FDA urged.

The largest supplier of infant formula in America withdrew its products from supermarket shelves nationwide. A suddenly very limited supply coupled with concern about the safety of what few products could still be found on supermarket shelves created consumer panic.

Consumer concern was compounded late last year when dozens of products were recalled after hundreds of confirmed cases of lead poisoning by children who ate certain brands of apple purée containing contaminated cinnamon, according to the FDA. The lead detected in those products was more than 2,000 times higher than the FDA’s maximum allowed limit.

In 2018, Consumer Reports tested 50 packaged baby and toddler foods for cadmium, mercury, arsenic, and lead and found all the products contained measurable amounts of at least one heavy metal, about two-thirds had “worrisome” levels and 15 posed a potential health risk if eaten only once a day. The magazine conducted follow-up tests five years later and found the overall risk hadn’t changed much. In 2024 their research team still found shocking levels of arsenic, cadmium, and lead in baby food made with rice, sweet potatoes, and carrots. 

Healthy Babies Bright Futures, a non-profit “alliance of scientists, nonprofit organizations and donors working to create and support initiatives that measurably reduce exposures to neurotoxic chemicals” checked 168 baby foods in 2019 and found toxic metals in 95 percent of them. In 2022, the group tested homemade baby food. Sadly, the group discovered that 94 percent was contaminated with one or more of the four toxic heavy metals. Levels of heavy metals varied significantly by the type of food, not by how it was made. 

Cronobacter? Arsenic? Lead? Cadmium? What’s Going On?

As far back as February 2021, the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy released a 59-page report stating that some packaged baby foods contained “dangerous levels” of heavy metals. Yet, it took the Food and Drug Administration nearly four years to set maximum levels for lead in baby foods.

No level of lead is safe for infants and toddlers, according to the Centers for Disease and Prevention, the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Under the new FDA guidelines, baby food manufacturers should have no more than 10 parts per billion of lead in yogurts, custards, puddings, single-ingredient meats, processed fruits and vegetables, and mixtures of fruits, vegetables, grains and meat sold in jars, pouches, tubs or boxes. 

“The guidance does not cover infant formula, beverages, or snack foods like puffs and teething biscuits,” the federal agency said.

Root vegetables such as carrots and sweet potatoes, which typically contain the highest levels of lead, and dry infant cereals are permitted to contain twice the level of those foods. 

Are the FDA’s actions too little, too late?

The FDA’s final guidance estimated their suggested steps could reduce lead exposure from processed baby foods by about 20 percent to 30 percent.

Agreeing with the findings of Healthy Babies Bright Futures, Mindy Brashears, Director for the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Texas Tech University, put her finger on an often overlooked “solution” that some parents think they’ve developed – “They think that If they make their own baby food, it will be safer,” she said. “The lead generally comes from the source product itself. Consumers blame the processing so assume if they make their own it will be better, but that simply isn’t true.”

We wanted to know what other experts say about the FDA’s long overdue attempt at making baby foods safer. Here is what they said:

Thomas Galligan, Center for Science in the Public Interest Principal Scientist for Additives and Supplements: The FDA’s final guidance is very timid. Hopefully it will influence a few firms to take more precautions and invest in better controls to prevent harmful levels of contamination, but it’s a very baby step on baby food, whose meagerness is exacerbated by its lack of enforceability, and extensive loopholes exempting products like infant formula. FDA can do better, and we will continue to advocate with our coalition partners for standards that better reflect the science.

Darin Detwiler, food safety academic, advisor, advocate, author, and Professor of Food Policy and Corporate Social Responsibility at Northeastern University: The toxic baby food crisis is not just a failure in public health; it is a defining moral challenge for an industry entrusted with the most sacred responsibility: nourishing our children. For years, warnings about heavy metals like lead, arsenic, and cadmium, coupled with pathogens such as Cronobacter sakazakii, have sounded loudly, only to be met with insufficient action. The public’s trust has been steadily undermined by corporate inertia and regulatory gaps that prioritize short-term profits over long-term safety.

Keith Warriner, Professor of Food Science, University of Guelph: The presence of lead, cadmium and lead in foods are primarily environmental pollutants or from old infrastructure in processing plants. There is the rare occurrence of deliberate contamination for financial gain which is easier to control by having an effective supplier verification program and taking lessons from the melamine incident in petfood treats. 

However, environmental pollution is more challenging given the scale of industrialization occurring across the globe. All logic would say there are no safe levels of these toxic compounds in foods, especially in those commodities destined for infants. One assumes the FDA guidelines were delayed and limits provided due to the difficulty in imposing zero tolerance. 

As with many food safety regulations, it is easy to propose zero tolerance but it’s another on how this could be achieved. It may be possible to source ingredients from regions with low or no levels of pollutants but if those sources could provide sufficient product to support the food sector is questionable. What is needed is the classic One Health approach where methods to prevent or reduce the impact of pollutants within the environment are used. In this regard, there is active research in bioremediation to sequester heavy metals, but other approaches can also be taken. Embracing new technologies would be the most effective approach than relying on testing.”

Marion Nestle, Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, Emerita, New York University: It looks to me as though we need a thorough investigation of the amounts of heavy metals in foods in general and baby foods in particular. No safe level of lead and other heavy metals has ever been established, meaning that the safest level is zero. But if baby food makers are sourcing foods that contain them, the metals will get concentrated in their products, are intrinsic, and cannot be removed. 

Testing is essential to make sure the levels are as low as possible. Regulations should be rigorous to encourage baby food companies to source carefully and test at every step. Protecting babies from lead exposure should be high on the priority list.”

Jane Houlihan, National Director of Science and Health for Healthy Babies Bright Futures: We called out the FDA for its misleading claim that the new lead guidance would meaningfully reduce babies’ exposure to lead. The reductions they cite apply to only a narrow subset of foods and a limited portion of U.S. babies. Specifically, the agency’s calculations focus on the 90th percentile of exposure — only for the foods they’ve chosen to regulate.

The biggest flaw in the new guidance is that it ignores the foods responsible for most of the lead in babies’ diets: infant formula, homemade foods, and items purchased outside the baby food aisle. These sources account for more than three-fourths of babies’ lead exposure. By failing to address them and instead focusing solely on commercial baby food, the FDA’s action will reduce overall exposure by less than 4 percent — a woefully inadequate step.

The FDA must do better. We’ve urged the agency to lower lead levels in infant formula and tackle lead contamination in foods beyond the baby food aisle. That’s the only way to achieve real progress. There is no safe level of lead exposure — these changes can’t come soon enough.

Important links

Abbott Recall | Powder Infant Formulas & 2 fl oz Ready-to-Feed Liquid Products – (Abbott press release)

Heavy Metals in Baby Food: What You Need to Know – (Consumer Reports)

What To Know About Heavy Metals in Baby Food – (Cleveland Clinic)

FDA Issues New Compliance Measures for Infant Formula Testing-and Reporting – (Food Safety News)

4 Key Environmental Monitoring Solutions to ensure your end product isn’t ‘Poisoned’ – (Nemis Technologies)

Digging into the Dollars: The True Cost of Foodborne Outbreaks – (Nemis Technologies)

What’s in My Baby’s Food? – (Healthy Babies Bright Futures)

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

By Darin Detwiler and Hal King

The past year has been defined by a troubling series of foodborne outbreaks and recalls, underscoring systemic weaknesses in the U.S. food safety system. From Listeria-contaminated deli products to E. coli-tainted produce, these incidents aren’t just unfortunate—they’re symptomatic of a larger issue: America’s predominantly reactive approach to food safety.

As food safety experts with decades of experience in industry, academia, and policy, we’ve seen how these crises unfold time and again. Outbreaks make headlines, recalls are announced, and regulators investigate. Companies issue promises to invest in food safety measures, yet once public attention fades, many fall back into old habits. This familiar cycle is frustratingly persistent.

“I often describe this as the seemingly endless cycle of crisis and reform,” Darin explains. Hal echoes this sentiment: “When outbreaks occur, companies scramble to fix the immediate issue, but without systemic changes, the industry returns to the same practices. The cycle continues.”

It’s time to break this cycle. In this editorial, we reflect on the patterns we observed in 2024, discuss the urgent need for corporate accountability, and propose solutions for creating a more proactive, effective food safety system.

Observing the patterns of 2024
The breadth of recalls and outbreaks in 2024 has been described in the news as “staggering.” Incidents spanned nearly every sector of the food industry, including multi-state outbreaks tied to carrots, walnuts, cantaloupes, cucumbers, onions, and ready-to-eat meals. Massive recalls of meat and poultry products involved millions of pounds. Troublingly, recalls for products containing heavy metals—like lead in cinnamon—also emerged as a recurring issue.

Listeria was particularly relentless, appearing in a wide range of foods, including deli items, nuts, frozen waffles, meats, and even guacamole. Despite advancements in detection technology, the sheer number of Listeria-related recalls suggests deep-rooted issues, including poor sanitation, inadequate preventive measures, and a lack of accountability.

Reflecting on the past year, two key lessons stand out. 

First, no company is immune to food safety failures, regardless of size or reputation. Even a century-old company like Boar’s Head (founded in 1905) and a restaurant chain as global as McDonald’s faced deadly outbreaks this year. 

Second, if we think our food safety system is “working,” it’s only because we’ve resigned ourselves to a reactive model. The idea that our system is “working” rings hollow when you consider how often these needless outbreaks and recalls occur. We have the tools to prevent them — we just aren’t using them effectively.

The accountability gap
One of the most glaring issues is the lack of meaningful accountability for food companies and their executives. The landmark 2015 sentencing of Peanut Corporation of America executives — tied to the deadly 2008-2009 Salmonella outbreak — showed that criminal charges could be a powerful deterrent. Yet, in recent years, such accountability has been rare. Instead, companies often pay substantial fines but avoid making fundamental changes to their practices.

Boar’s Head provides a striking example. In 2024, the company faced more than 65 USDA critical violations and a deadly outbreak linked to its deli meats, which caused 61 illnesses, 60 hospitalizations, and 10 deaths across 19 states. Despite an ongoing investigation, history suggests the outcome will likely be a hefty fine, not criminal charges.

If Boar’s Head’s executives get away with paying a huge fine but no criminal charges, it sends the wrong message to the industry. Executives know they can pay a fine and go back to business as usual. Until there’s personal accountability — real consequences for leaders — nothing will change.

Moving toward proactive solutions
To address food safety failures, we need to fundamentally shift from reacting to crises to preventing them. Here are five critical steps we believe the food industry must take:

  1. Hold leadership accountable
    Corporate leaders set the tone for food safety culture. When executives prioritize profits over safety, the system suffers. Holding them personally accountable — through criminal charges, fines, or other penalties — is essential to driving change. Until executives know they’ll face consequences for neglecting food safety, they have little reason to change their behavior.
  2. Enforce proactive management systems
    Companies should be required to demonstrate compliance with FDA food safety plans before operations are allowed to begin. A permitting system where food manufacturers must provide FSMA FDA- based food safety plans as the license to prepare and sell food is needed. This would address risks upfront, rather than waiting for inspections to discover noncompliance or outbreaks to reveal them. Too many companies rely on corporate programs but not facility-based food safety plans and practices and many don’t have a proper food safety plan that declares and controls all hazards. A permitting system tied to risk-based inspections would make compliance non-negotiable.
  3. Leverage economic incentives
    Insurance companies could play a role by charging higher premiums to businesses lacking robust safety systems, creating a market-driven incentive for compliance. When safety systems are tied to financial rewards or penalties, companies have a clear reason to invest in doing the right thing.
  4. Incorporate corporate accountability
    Food safety must become a financial imperative at the corporate level. Involving the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in food safety oversight as is currently used to ensure corporate governance and financial integrity would be a start. Tying food safety performance to SEC oversight and the resultant stock valuation would create a powerful economic incentive for compliance. Imagine a company knowing their compliance to the SEC that enables them to sell stock could be effected  because of poor food safety practices. Investors would also demand better governance of food safety integrity, and food safety would become as critical to executives as quarterly profits.
  5. Invest in technology and processes
    The technology to reduce foodborne risks exists but is often underutilized. From rapid pathogen detection to advanced sanitization techniques, adopting these tools could significantly reduce contamination risks. The potential of produce sanitization systems capable of achieving a 5-log reduction in pathogens is needed. Innovation isn’t just about developing new tools. It’s about standardizing and implementing the best existing ones.

Looking forward
The well-worn claim that “we have the safest food supply in the world” feels increasingly difficult to defend in light of 2024’s alarming food safety record. Lives have been lost, public trust has been eroded, and the financial cost of recalls has reached staggering levels. Yet, these outcomes are preventable.

We believe the U.S. food industry has the people, systems, and science to do better. If we move from solely reacting to crises to proactively preventing them, we can build a food safety system that works for everyone.

At the same time, industry leaders must recognize their role in driving change. Food safety isn’t just a cultural issue or a compliance checkbox — it’s a core business responsibility. Companies that invest in robust safety systems will not only protect their customers but also demonstrate brand equity and business value to the public and their investors because of reduced financial risk. 

We also call on regulators and policymakers to step up. The tools and frameworks already exist, but they need to be enforced consistently and effectively. Whether through stronger permitting systems, SEC oversight, or innovative technology, the solutions are within reach.

Our vision for 2025 and beyond is clear: Enforce stronger accountability measures, integrate food safety governance into corporate leadership, and invest in proactive systems to prevent outbreaks before they occur. This isn’t just about protecting consumers — it’s about creating a food safety system that fosters trust, saves lives, and supports sustainable business growth.

About the Authors

Darin Detwiler, LP.D., is the CEO of Detwiler Consulting Group with more than 30 years of experience in food safety policy and regulation and the recipient of IAFP’s 2022 Ewen C.D. Todd Control of Foodborne Illness Award as well as their 2018 Distinguished Service Award for dedicated and exceptional contributions to the reduction of risks of foodborne illness. He is an author of several books, keynote speaker, and an Associate Professor of food policy, corporate social responsibility, and global economics of food and agriculture.

Hal King, Ph.D., is the Managing Partner at Active Food Safety, an Advisory Services partnership for the food industry.  Hal is an Adjunct Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases at the University of Georgia College of Veterinary Medicine and the College of Public Health, and is the author of several books on the corporate governance of food safety management in the foodservice industry, and the author of numerous food industry publications that help the industry identify risk and prevent foodborne disease outbreaks.  Hal is the recipient of the 2018 NSF International Food Safety Leadership and Innovation Award, and is formally the Director of Food and Product Safety at Chick-fil-A Inc. where he led the Food Safety Management Program under Tom Childers for over 10 years.

Recently Food Safety News reported the CDC declared a late summer outbreak of Listeria infections traced to Boar’s Head deli meats to be over. 

We reported “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began investigating the Boar’s Head outbreak on July 19. Ultimately the outbreak sickened 59 people across 19 states, killing 10. The company closed its production plant in Jarratt, VA, and permanently stopped liverwurst production nationwide. Boar’s Head recalled more than 7 million pounds of deli meats because of the outbreak.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-CT led a group of federal lawmakers calling for an investigation into the outbreak and Boar’s Head manufacturing practices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has said the company is under criminal investigation. 

Boar’s Head was just the most visible incident, though. A list of food businesses affected by Listeria-related recalls so far in the fourth quarter of 2024 includes Fresh Express, Rao’s, Boston Market, Great Value, Atkins, Dole, Taylor Farms, Home Chef, BrucePak, McDonald’s, and Signature Select. Most supermarkets carried the affected products including Aldi, Amazon Fresh, Giant Eagle, H-E-B, Kroger, Meijer, Publix, Target, Trader Joe’s, Walmart, Wegmans, and C-store chain 7-Eleven. Tens of millions of pounds of products have been recalled.

We asked some of the most prominent voices in food safety what happened and what steps we can take to help reduce this threat to public health.  

Steven Mandernach, Executive Director of the Association of Food and Drug Officials, suggested a lack of a comprehensive program at Boar’s Head led to the problem. 

“Boar’s Head is different from the others. Boar’s Head seems to be a lack of a comprehensive and implemented Listeria monocytogenes prevention program, which clearly was needed by the nature of the products produced, some clear gaps and long-term correction challenges, and a lack of coordination and communication between the state and federal agencies.

“Second, some of this increase likely relates to improved detection and a better ability to relate cases to specific foods. Some probably relate to the appearance of a reduction in Listeria-related outbreaks and a reduced emphasis on Listeria monocytogenes by operations.”

Mandernach suggested, “Now, all food operations should be evaluating, updating, and ensuring the implementation of their Listeria monocytogenes prevention program. Further, it might also be a sign that our knowledge of Listeria monocytogenes prevention isn’t quite as good as we thought.  Also, if I were a retailer with recalled Boar’s Head products that were cut and handled within their meat department or deli, I would implement a heightened program with periodic environmental testing to ensure that Listeria monocytogenes didn’t become resident in their operation.”

Beth Koenig, President, Koenig Food Safety LLC, said “It’s time to get back to basics. Food processing facilities must put into place robust sanitation and environmental monitoring programs, and management must act on the results. Spending time daily on the production floor having genuine conversations between management and operators will develop strong communication lines and those hidden problem areas will come to light.

“Resources must be allocated to seek and destroy pathogens, develop hygiene zoning to protect critical areas, repair infrastructure, and control traffic. There is a cost to doing things right, but it pales in comparison to the cost to families who have lost loved ones and facilities that have closed due to food pathogen contamination.”

Phyllis Entis, MSc., an author and food safety microbiologist, blamed complacency on the Boar’s Head outbreak. “The FSIS, which was ‘inspecting’ the Boar’s Head plant daily, did nothing to require compliance on the part of the company with ordinary cleaning, sanitation, and Listeria testing protocols until the Boar’s Head products were identified as the source of the outbreak.

“Since that time, we have had yet another deadly Listeria monocytogenes outbreak linked to an FSIS-regulated plant, Yu Shang Food Inc. It is time for a top-to-bottom overhaul of the FSIS’s policies and strategies for preventing microbiological risks in the industry sectors over which it controls.”

Marion Nestle, Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, at New York University, pointed out the inherent problems of containing Listeria saying “The bacteria are nasty to control because they proliferate at refrigerator temperatures that would discourage other pathogens.

“I once visited a meat packing plant that experienced a Listeria recall; the company thought it was easier to move elsewhere than to try to clean up where they were. Testing for pathogens would help but the incentives are not too (test); if they find Listeria, they can’t sell their products. They would rather do a Hail Mary and take their chances. 

“The key to Listeria prevention is to establish a corporate culture of food safety where everyone cares and is rewarded for doing the right thing.”

Darin Detwiler is a well-respected food safety academic, advisor, advocate and author, and is a Professor of Food Policy and Corporate Social Responsibility at Northeastern University. 

His main concern? “This year’s resurgence of Listeria highlights troubling trends in food safety leadership. Perhaps pandemic-era inspection delays and resource reallocations allowed sanitation failures to fester, while some companies grew complacent, even reducing investments in critical hygiene practices.

“Outbreaks linked to uncooked produce like onions and carrots emphasize the need for stronger preventive controls earlier in the supply chain. Multi-state recalls, driven by premature shipment before pathogen test results, amplify risks and costs – the most significant costs being human lives.

“Boar’s Head’s century-old reputation and McDonald’s global prominence are stark reminders: no brand is immune to pathogens—or public scrutiny.”

Keith Warriner, who is doing research on enhancing food safety within meat processing and the fresh-cut sectors at the University of Guelph, is well-positioned to comment on the Boar’s Head recall.

“Listeria monocytogenes is making a comeback. The pathogen never really disappeared despite North America being considered the safest food system in the world. The key challenge is how to translate HACCP, food safety plans, knowledge, and training into practice. The reality is that to be applied, any actions require belief, which in turn is derived from memory anchors. 

“Companies believe in productivity, profit, and quality. Food safety is less visible and less likely to be adopted compared to a process that makes a job easier or quicker. To date, the focus has been traceability and testing, neither of which are effective.” 

Jeff Chilton, Vice President of Consulting at Intertek Alchemy said, “Listeria control has been an ongoing challenge for the food industry for decades. This ubiquitous pathogen is a concern due to its ability to grow at refrigerated temperatures and high fatality rates. 2024 has been a particularly bad year due to the foodborne illness outbreaks and major product recalls caused by Listeria monocytogenes contamination.

“This highlights the need for a fresh look at Listeria prevention and control methods. We must look beyond the traditional methods to see how we can build additional safety for our people, product and process controls. Robust foundations must remain in place for sanitation procedures, environmental monitoring programs, product, and GMP controls. Any breakdown in these fundamental systems can lead to Listeria contamination. 

“There are new technologies available to help reduce this public health threat. Companies can now employ shoe sanitizing stations for footwear control, new antimicrobial ingredients such as peptides, equipment sterilization methods, and post-lethality treatments such as high-pressure processing of packaged products. 

“This multiple-hurdle approach promotes greater prevention and control for Listeria. Food safety is part of doing business. Positive investments in these areas yield good dividends for enhanced safety and prevent catastrophic loss of life and finances while avoiding outbreaks and recalls. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Every year an estimated 48 million people get sick from a foodborne illness, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC coordinates as many as 36 investigations in multiple states each week.

Important links:

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

The documentary “Poisoned: The Dirty Truth About Your Food” has won an Emmy in the Outstanding Current Affairs Documentary category. This recognition highlights the impact of the film, which made its debut on Netflix on Aug. 2, 2023, and sheds light on critical issues surrounding food safety in the United States.

Based on the bestselling book “Poisoned: The True Story of the Deadly E. Coli Outbreak That Changed the Way Americans Eat” by Jeff Benedict, the documentary offers a gripping exposé that resonates with consumers, the food industry, regulators, and politicians. The film’s nomination underscores its relevance and the urgency of its message about the dangers posed by foodborne illnesses.

Directed by Stephanie Soechtig, known for her impactful works such as “Under the Gun” and “Fed Up,” “Poisoned” delves into the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak, which was a pivotal moment in American food safety history. The outbreak, which resulted in numerous illnesses and deaths, spurred significant changes in food safety regulations and practices.

The film also spotlights outbreaks traced to leafy greens and includes interviews with victims of those outbreaks.

The documentary features prominent figures in food safety, including former government officials, industry spokespeople and Bill Marler, a food safety lawyer and publisher of Food Safety News. Marler played a crucial role in advocating for food safety reforms following the Jack in the Box incident. The film also includes testimonies from individuals personally affected by foodborne illnesses, such as Darin Detwiler, who lost his 16-month-old son Riley to E. coli during the outbreak.

“Poisoned” premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in June 2023, where it garnered significant attention and acclaim.

Other notable works in the Outstanding Current Affairs Documentary category, included:

“Loudmouth” (BET)

“Love in the Time of Fentanyl” (PBS)

“Mourning In Lod” (Showtime)

“No Accident” (HBO | Max)

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

By Darin Detwiler, Gillian Kelleher and Roger Hancock

The goal of a food recall is simple: to remove compromised food in order to prevent people from eating contaminated food that could kill or sicken them. But if people don’t know about the recall, that goal cannot be achieved. If they hear about the recall after eating the food, the goal cannot be achieved. If they don’t trust, understand, or recognize the importance of the recall information, again, the goal cannot be achieved. 

To save lives and minimize health risks, we need clear, credible, and compelling recall information that is disseminated quickly and widely, not just to businesses across the supply chain, but also to consumers.  

The good news is that we know what to do and how to do it. We have the tools, the templates, and the technology to succeed. What we need is a shared and vigorous commitment on the part of the FDA, the USDA, the states, and the industry to modernize recalls today.

3 Steps the government should take

Both the FDA and the USDA have expressed interest in modernizing recalls.  Here’s how they can move from rhetoric to action:

  1. Both the FDA and the USDA should write and post all Class 1 food recalls. Today, this is standard practice for the USDA: it writes the recall announcement, gives the recalling firm a short period to review it, and then disseminates the announcement. The USDA uses templates to standardize and expedite the process. The messaging is concise to prevent confusion and promote action. The FDA needs to adopt this same practice. 
  2. The FDA needs to modernize its IT systems to facilitate and streamline industry reporting of recalls. For example, it could finalize seamless connectivity with the Reportable Food Registry (RFR) database for faster reporting. 
  3. Government agencies need to reach a consensus on the specific information that should be part of recall communications and eliminate extraneous information that does not help consumers recognize the products involved and motivate them to take action. 

 3 Steps the industry should take

  1. Companies need to disseminate recall information through channels commonly used to promote their products. While loyalty programs, social media, and websites are effective in reaching consumers, we see little evidence that these same tools are used to distribute recall information.
  2. With the goal of ensuring consistency and clarity in the provision and dissemination of recall information, the industry must agree upon a unified set of data elements and protocols. This will make information exchange faster and more reliable, providing all stakeholders with accurate and uniform data. 
  3. The industry needs to promote the use of modernized recall simulations that replicate real-world scenarios, going beyond traditional “mock recalls” that serve primarily as trace-back exercises. This allows stakeholders to practice and refine their response strategies in the context of their supply chains. 

What’s already being done in this space

In addition to the work being done by regulators and individual companies, other organizations are leading the charge to standardize and optimize the recall process, including consumer communication. 

  1. STOP Foodborne Illness, through its workgroup on recall modernization, is conducting crucial research to identify needed improvements in consumer messaging. Led by Dr. William Hallman, Distinguished Professor at Rutgers University and former chair of FDA’s Risk Communication Advisory Committee, STOP is developing and testing new food recall templates to determine those that will best inform and motivate consumers. In addition, STOP is emphasizing the need for the FDA to create a transparent set of recall classification decision criteria and to classify recalls in real time, something USDA already does.
  2. The Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO) has issued a white paper, Recall Modernization: Accelerated Partnering for Effective Recalls, urging the FDA to develop a concise recall handbook, standardize a process for classifying recalls, and work more closely with industry for effective recalls.
  3. The Alliance for Recall Ready Communities (ARRC), is a newly formed alliance that the three of us co-chair. We are bringing together organizations such as the International Fresh Produce Association, the American Frozen Food Institute, the Consumer Brands Association, the National Restaurant Association, and more, to establish and enable companies to use agreed-upon data standards, collaborative processes, powerful tech solutions, and recall simulations to quickly and effectively practice and manage food recalls. 

The steps outlined above are concrete and actionable. We encourage the FDA, the USDA, and industry to build on the work that’s begun. Together we can achieve the goal of reducing death and illness connected to contaminated food.  

About the authors:

Darin Detwiler, founder and president of Detwiler Consulting Group, LLC, is the director of the MS in Regulatory Affairs of Food and Food Industry and Professor of Food Policy at Northeastern University in Boston. In addition to serving as the chair of the National Environmental Health Association’s Food Safety Program Committee, Detwiler serves on numerous editorial and advisory panels related to food safety, sustainable development, leadership, and policy. He is a sought-after speaker on key issues in food policy at corporate and regulatory training events, as well as national and international events. Detwiler holds a doctorate of Law and Policy.

Gillian Kelleher is a food safety and quality leader with a four-decade career in the food industry, spanning multiple countries and sectors. She has worked with leading companies such as Häagen Dazs, Burger King, Express Foods, Pillsbury, and spent over twenty years at Wegmans Food Markets. As CEO and President of Kelleher Consultants LLC, Gillian helps companies build sustainable food safety and quality programs with a focus on prevention. She is a member of IAFP, IFT, and ASQ, and has served in various leadership roles, including vice chair of the Global Food Safety Initiative Board. Gillian is board co-chair of Stop Foodborne Illness. She also chairs the Educational Advisory Board for the Food Safety Summit and leads the Leafy Greens Safety Coalition.

Roger Hancock, CEO of Recall InfoLink is one of the world’s foremost experts on recalls, with experience that spans retail, tech, data, regulatory, and the entire supply chain. Prior to founding Recall InfoLink, he spent 15 years at Albertsons where he oversaw 250+ recalls every year, experiencing first-hand the pain points and need for better recall practices. 

The documentary “Poisoned: The Dirty Truth About Your Food” has been nominated for an Emmy in the Outstanding Current Affairs Documentary category. This recognition highlights the impact of the film, which made its debut on Netflix on Aug. 2, 2023, and sheds light on critical issues surrounding food safety in the United States.

Based on the bestselling book “Poisoned: The True Story of the Deadly E. Coli Outbreak That Changed the Way Americans Eat” by Jeff Benedict, the documentary offers a gripping exposé that resonates with consumers, the food industry, regulators, and politicians. The film’s nomination underscores its relevance and the urgency of its message about the dangers posed by foodborne illnesses.

Directed by Stephanie Soechtig, known for her impactful works such as “Under the Gun” and “Fed Up,” “Poisoned” delves into the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak, which was a pivotal moment in American food safety history. The outbreak, which resulted in numerous illnesses and deaths, spurred significant changes in food safety regulations and practices.

The film also spotlights outbreaks traced to leafy greens and includes interviews with victims of those outbreaks.

The documentary features prominent figures in food safety, including former government officials, industry spokespeople and Bill Marler, a food safety lawyer and publisher of Food Safety News. Marler played a crucial role in advocating for food safety reforms following the Jack in the Box incident. The film also includes testimonies from individuals personally affected by foodborne illnesses, such as Darin Detwiler, who lost his 16-month-old son Riley to E. coli during the outbreak.

“Poisoned” premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in June 2023, where it garnered significant attention and acclaim.

The documentary’s Emmy nomination places it alongside other notable works in the Outstanding Current Affairs Documentary category, including:

  • “Loudmouth” (BET)
  • “Love in the Time of Fentanyl” (PBS)
  • “Mourning In Lod” (Showtime)
  • “No Accident” (HBO | Max)

A full list of Emmy nominations can be viewed here.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)