With the latest (significant) recall of a food product (peanut butter this time) when will either the USDA/FDA or a major retailer or manufacturer realize that the QC inspections are ineffective?

When will they see that a management systems approach, based on something like ISO 22000, is what's needed?

The wonders of deregulation and lack of corporate responsibility. :thedeal:

With the latest (significant) recall of a food product (peanut butter this time) when will either the USDA/FDA or a major retailer or manufacturer realize that the QC inspections manufacturing processes are ineffective?


I fixed that for you. :tg:

Unfortunately, in the world that created this mess too many times the "upper management" would make a "business decision" to overturn a decision made by an underling resulting in these issues.

I have had the same thing happen to me - ended up costing the company over $10 million in recalls and rework. But, it was decided that they HAD to hit the market window (like a bird I might add) for the product launch. Fortunately, not a product that would kill anyone; however, it was the start of the downturn of the company resulting in the eventual sale and moving of production to China.

Hopefully, the happenings of today will result in a future business model that is less likely to do this just to launch a product "on-time".

Jumping off my sandbox,

John

I fixed that for you. :tg:

:applause:

With the latest (significant) recall of a food product (peanut butter this time) when will either the USDA/FDA or a major retailer or manufacturer realize that the manufacturing processes are ineffective?

When will they see that a management systems approach, based on something like ISO 22000, is what's needed?

Great question Andy!

As you know, I have only been in the food industry since June 2008 and was hired to install a ISO 22000 system. I was surprised to find out how few companies in the US have a system in place but I also have found that there are a lot of systems to choose from and it can be frustrating.

I not only have to put something in to meet ISO Standards but I need to maintain compliance with AIB, BRC, SQF and the many other systems that are around for the Food Industry. It is tough enough to manage to one set of guidelines but when you need to be up on all of them because each of the major retailers support a different one, it gets more complicated.:biglaugh:

Hopefully everyone settles in on one soon and for my sake and the sake of my company I hope it is ISO 22000 :yes:

As for the peanut butter, it has been an interesting case to observe and see the reactions of other companies as well as my own company. I have watched it unfold over the last month and hopefully can use it as a learning tool.

Great question Andy! I agree. Regulatory agencies, strapped for resources, should really start using solutions offered by the industry, to enhance controls over the suppliers subjected to their oversight. That is the reason I started the Should Regulatory Agencies require Accredited Certification in their Respective Areas (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=26346&highlight=regulatory) poll. I not only have to put something in to meet ISO Standards but I need to maintain compliance with AIB, BRC, SQF and the many other systems that are around for the Food Industry. It is tough enough to manage to one set of guidelines but when you need to be up on all of them because each of the major retailers support a different one, it gets more complicated.Indeed, the multiplicity of standards and schemes in the food sector are an additional challenge for the suppliers. Some of the ones that we are involved with include:

Animal feed & ingredients – GMP+/PDV and FAMI-QS (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/animal_feed_and_ingredients/index.asp)
GLOBALG.A.P. IFA - Aquaculture (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/globalgap_ifa_aquaculture.asp)
GLOBALG.A.P. IFA – Fruit and Vegetables (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/globalgap_ifa_fresh_fruits_and_vegetables.asp)
ISO 22000 (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/iso_22000.asp)
HACCP (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/haccp.asp)
BRC Global Standard for Food Safety (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/brc_global_standard_for_food_safety.asp)
IFS – International Food Standard (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/ifs_international_food_standard.asp)
SQF 1000/2000 – Safety Quality Food Program (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/sqf_1000_2000_safety_quality_food_program.asp)
GMA-SAFE (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/primary_production/gma_safe.asp)
BRC Global Standard for Packaging and GMP FEFCO (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/packaging/index.asp)
BRC Global Storage & Distribution and IFS Logistics (http://www.dnv.com/industry/food_bev/services_solutions/food_safety/logistics/index.asp)

Wow - that's like alphabet soup!:lol:

To think - the creation of the ISO set of standards was to eliminate this "alphabet soup" of standards. Instead, it seems to have created multi-lingual alphabet soup instead....

:nope:

No wonder so many food companies seem to be looking for good "quality" people - the previous ones are inhabitants of the nearest mental health facility in their area!

I would be willing to bet that there are cases where meeting the requirements of one standard conflict with the other standard! My favourity being when one standard is "silo" based and another is "process" based. Two very different paradigms that a company has to maintain to stay in business.....:magic:

No wonder so many food companies seem to be looking for good "quality" people - the previous ones are inhabitants of the nearest mental health facility in their area!


Thanks for the glimpse into my future. :(

We had a semi annual spot audit from AIB for one customer last month which focused only on their processes along with a food defence audit which was unannounced and we were not aware of the customers expectations (they just wanted to see where there suppliers ranked).

This month we have another AIB audit focused on all processes. Same auditor from last month but for a different customer. :confused:

I am also working with a registrar to start Stage 1 audit for ISO 22000 but during the process of finding a registrar one of our customers contacted a registrar that we were noegiating with for ISO because they work with them on BRC audits and wanted a BRC compliance audit conducted which now looks like it will happen in February. :bonk:

In the end we will go through at least four audits between Dec 2008 and April 2009. All looking for "Food Safety" and all working from a different scope and/or standard.

The good thing is, we have improved and will continue to improve after each audit until we get to the point that we have everything covered (or I end up in that institute somerqc mentioned!!!) :biglaugh:

By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-01-19-fake-foods_N.htm)
Some of your favorite foods may be fakes.

Foods masquerading as something else — a more nutritious something else — have been big news in the past two years. Chinese food companies in particular have been blamed for making deadly alterations to dairy, baby and pet foods by adding melamine. The chemical makes it appear that the food or beverage has the required level of protein.

But what about food producers in this country? What fraudulent foods do U.S. consumers have to fear from American companies? Experts say dangerous U.S.-produced foods are comparatively few, but producers have been known to practice "economic adulteration" — adding a little to their bottom line by padding, thinning or substituting something cheap for something expensive. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration regulate the food industry, but with safety issues to deal with, economic adulteration has "really been back-burnered," says Bruce Silverglade of the non-profit Center for Science in the Public Interest. So in a caveat emptor world, what should consumers look out for?

Read more.... (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-01-19-fake-foods_N.htm)

:topic:

Interesting article, we had similar things in my past industry of wood working. Not to burst the bubble of anyone that may think they have a nice solid piece of furniture but there a rules that allow for substitutions with veneered particle board (or similar) and even different species of wood.

We produced doors for a "Solid Cherry" product in which no solid cherry was actually used. It was a veneer particle board panel surrounded by Soft Maple or Poplar framing.

Rule of thumb, the darker the stain, the more suspicious you should become!;)

Your example, Tim, reminds me of a little expose that the BBC tv did, some years ago, about the amount of chocolate in chocolate products, particularly enrobed products found in the UK.

They showed that there are 'chocolate flavored' coatings, some of which had almost no chocolate butter or related constituents and were mainly wax! There are, of course good reasons for doing such things in some cases - 'good' chocolate often gets a white 'bloom' which is aesthetically unattractive, it melts at body heat which parents hate if they give their kids chocky covered snacks! It's all in the wording of the product descriptors:mg:

However, the nearly all wax products make you wonder what you're getting.....

I think the article that Marc posted exemplifies that, when it comes to food, there are two issues at hand: food safety and food quality. Most of the standards and schemes out there deal with product safety.

It is possible that a producer of food products mislead consumers about the content and grade of the product. However, gambling with food safety is a more perilous game, imo.

This makes it sound like there is at least some talk of requiring third party certifications, http://ptnpa.org/news_pdf/fda_issues_guidance_01-28-09.pdf, but of course it does not name a standard.

Unfortunately they seem more focused on imports than domestic US issues. The current salmonella issue should help to redirect things back to the states.

Also see: Peanut Product Recall Took Company Approval (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=32206).

Marc,
It would be interesting to know how much money the FDA receives from the food industry....

Sandra

I haven't researched it, but I assume it's more of an issue of how much is given to the various politicians. As I stated earlier, in my opinion we are so far into a culture of deregulation that we have the companies telling the government what to do. It's not always this public and obvious, but we have come to the state where we allow the foxes to run the hen house. Ah, nothing like lobbyists... :lmao:

Marc,
It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Sandra

The FDA recall list is now over 1300 products related to peanuts, peanut paste and peanut butter.

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/peanutbutterrecall/index.cfm

In an already weak economy, this is going to have a huge impact on the peanut industry. On top of it all, there was already a peanut surplus.

http://www.thepostsearchlight.com/news/2009/feb/03/recall-adds-peanut-stockpile/

It's like this: if you like packaged crackers, cheese is the new peanut butter...:lmao:

I'd like to know how the FDA could allow a company to release product when their last inspection revealed some pretty disturbing findings....It almost seems like the FDA should bear some of the responsibility for the recent outbreak. Read an excerpt from the Los Angeles Times today regarding the FDA citings at the peanut butter facility in question.

Sandra

This was in the Los Angeles Times newspaper today:
A recent FDA inspection report did not note specific signs of rodents. But it did cite large openings along the sides and tops of the trailers that contained containers of raw or roasted peanuts. It also noted roaches; mold on the walls and ceiling and in the storage cooler; dirty utensils and equipment used in food preparation; and gaps in the roof, allowing for wet conditions that could cause salmonella contamination.

"There were open gaps observed as large as 1/2 inches x 21/2 feet at the air conditioner intakes located in the roof of the firm. Water stains were also observed on the ceiling around the air conditioner intakes," the report stated.

The report also noted rainwater had leaked along the edges of skylights: "Totes of finished, roasted product and a roasted nut packaging line are located directly underneath these areas."

Here's the link if you would like to read the entire article http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-peanut5-2009feb05,0,7925421.story

Ah, nothing like lobbyists... :lmao:

Congress would starve without them....:notme: Would even have to turn DC Beltway cocktail parties into punch and cookies without them....:lmao:

Some recent fallout. (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=308180&postcount=6)

I'm not sure why people are surprised at any of this considering all the food recalls going back a number of years, especially several hamburger recalls. It is not a new problem, it's just a problem that is 'solved' by reducing or eliminating regulations, or ignoring (not enforcing) existing regulations.

Congress would starve without them....:notme: Would even have to turn DC Beltway cocktail parties into punch and cookies without them....:lmao: I have a novel idea. Outlaw lobbying and only allow political donations from individuals with a cap on the donation amount set at about US$2000 per person.

Government representatives elected by the people of the US instead of big business and special interest group lobbyists. Can you imagine?

Naw - That would make too much sense. It might become a government *of* the people, *by* the people, *for* the people.