Large-Scale Attacks On Food Supply Unlikely To Succeed

Source(s):
Doug Archer dlar@mail.ifas.ufl.edu, (352) 392-1991, x-210
Adam Putnam ask.adam@mail.house.gov (202) 225-1252

View Photo
View Photo

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Terrorists who intend to kill or seriously harm large numbers of people by attacking the U.S. food supply are unlikely to be successful, say experts with the University of Florida’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

“News reports have raised fears about terrorists attacking the nation’s food supply, but when you examine the list of known biological and chemical agents, not many would be successful at harming people on a large scale,” said Doug Archer, UF food science professor and former deputy director for the federal Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

Archer said attacks are possible, but that agricultural plants or animals are a different matter than contaminating the end-point of the food supply.

“Viruses or bacteria that affect cattle, swine or plants are relatively easy to spread, but the important point is that those attacks are unlikely to seriously harm many humans,” Archer said. “The potential damaging effects of terrorist attacks on the food supply would mostly be financial and psychological.”

During his tenure with the FDA, Archer assessed and reviewed designs of numerous food facilities to ensure food safety.

He said it is important to differentiate between large-scale food terrorism and product tampering, such as the 1982 Tylenol scare when seven people died after taking cyanide-laced Extra-Strength Tylenol.

“Small-scale product tampering occurs on a regular basis around the world,” said Archer, who has served since 1990 on the World Health Organization’s Expert Advisory Panel on Food Safety. “Those incidents are hard to defend against, but the industry is reassessing issues such as food packaging in light of the Sept. 11 attacks.”

Archer said a key aspect of the U.S. food supply is that it’s derived from many sources, so even if terrorists penetrated a few industries, consumers would still have alternatives.

“Capitalism has its advantages,” Archer said. “Free-market competition is an effective protection against terrorism because it allows large numbers of manufacturers and distributors to compete in the same industry. That in itself provides built-in protection against large-scale attacks to the food supply.”

Archer said most American food products are manufactured in numbered lots, are tested often and are meticulously tracked, allowing for quick recall when contamination occurs. He said that although imported foods present a different risk, many are manufactured by American companies that have overseas plants or by companies required to meet American processing standards.

Ruth Welch, spokesperson for the FDA, said the agency expects to use part of its $61 million from President Bush’s anti-terrorism package to hire an additional 210 employees to inspect imports.

According to the FBI, the only successful large-scale act of “food terrorism” using a biological agent occurred in 1984 when a religious cult known as the Rajneeshees spread salmonella in restaurant food, causing mild food poisoning in 751 people. No one died or became seriously ill from the attack.

Archer said that in light of recent events, the food industry is seeking better tools to secure the food supply.

He said an important tool is already in place — and with some modifications to address agents such as anthrax, hepatitis or aflatoxin – should go a long way in protecting the food supply.

“Most food industry companies use the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP), system, which anticipates and prevents traditional food contamination before it occurs,” Archer said. “The system uses a series of critical control points to prevent or reduce food safety hazards to acceptable levels.”

Archer said the system addresses hazards both inside and outside processing plants.

“The idea is to monitor food from the farm to the fork,” Archer said. “Preventative measures include physical, chemical and other interventions.”

He said the best thing about HACCP being in place is that the food industry does not have to reinvent the wheel.

“Because the industry already has people who are trained to monitor, observe and take physical measurements of food and beverages at certain points in the process, it is in a good position to add control points that address terrorism,” Archer said.

He cited five main areas the industry should reevaluate: identity of personnel, suppliers of raw product, tamper-proof packaging, recall procedures and transportation.

“The first thing I tell business owners is you have to know who is working for you,” Archer said. “After that, owners need to know who is transporting their goods to market.”

Another issue Archer said needs to be addressed is cooperation between government agencies.

His viewpoint is echoed by Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla., who recently introduced a bill calling for cooperation in the government to better monitor the food supply.

“We should consider a radical re-balancing of power, and should create one single agency to oversee Homeland Security in regards to agriculture and food safety,” Putnam said.

Archer said the industry is being proactive, and said many trade organizations such as the National Food Processors Association and the United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association have formed security task forces to work with government agencies such as the FDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and their memberships.

“The industry is taking preventative measures, which is an acknowledgement that no system is 100 percent secure,” Archer said. “But we need to be careful not to make the psychological fear worse than the actual threat.”

-30-

0

Avatar photo
Posted: November 14, 2001


Category: UF/IFAS



Subscribe For More Great Content

IFAS Blogs Categories