Bernie Madoff was sentenced yesterday to 150 years in prison. That is one hefty sentence, but of course, Madoff’s crime was hefty. I know this is a food blog and one might ask what Bernie Madoff’s sentencing has in common with foodborne illness. To me, both are, in part, about government regulation failing at many levels.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were created to solve problems in each of their respective domains, the SEC to monitor investment and trading and the FDA to monitor food and drug safety. Recently, both of these organizations have been unsuccessful in protecting the American people.
It’s always a shame when a crime or illness is caught long after the fact. Madoff lied to investors and the SEC, but as long as it seemed like everyone was making money, his crime continued with little suspicion. Perhaps if the SEC looked more carefully into the accounting practices of Madoff, they would have discovered the Ponzi scheme long before it defrauded investors of billions, but instead Madoff was essentially left to monitor himself …and we see how well that works. The same troubling dynamic seems to be prevalent in the food industry.
Most food recalls are voluntary at the suggestion of the FDA. Our own food protection agency cannot pull poison food off the shelves without the OK of the offending company. So, we have to rely on the companies that caused the problem in the first place to be responsible enough to take the food back when it proves to be dangerous. It often takes consumers becoming sick, many very seriously, before the company makes the choice to recall.
When contaminated foods are distributed and subsequently recalled, the offending company is usually responsible to provide a list of products to be recalled and isn’t always obliged to inform the public of where those products were sold. We, as consumers, have to wait until we see clusters of outbreaks before we can pinpoint where potential contamination sources exist.
The FDA is very limited in what it can demand from the companies they are inspecting. According to a Wall Street Journal article by Jane Zheng, Nestle refused to share records, safety protocols and client complaints with federal inspectors in their past inspections. In light of recent events, one has to question how sound a policy it is to allow big food corporations to monitor themselves.
Secret and closed door food safety protocols didn’t protect Nestle or their consumers from E. coli O157:H7 contamination. At least nine people associated with the recent recall of Nestle’s raw cookie dough have experienced hemolytic uremic syndrome or HUS as a complication from E. coli O157:H7 infection. HUS is a blood disease that can cause kidney damage and even kidney failure. Many of the victims of HUS experience long term problems and require all sorts of medical treatments for life; everything from daily medicines to kidney transplants.
This passivity policy didn’t work for the SEC in the Madoff scandal and it’s obviously not working for the FDA in our food system. We consumers deserves better.
Richard J. Arsenault, 2010
