Playing Chicken with Food Fears, Food Safety

While there are legitimate concerns over food safety and public health (Look at the latest E. coli outbreak,  for example.), groups that take the “sky is falling approach” only muddy the waters and further confuse the already shell-shocked consumer. I give you some recent examples:

The “Cancer Project” ―brought to you by what is essentially an pro-vegetarian animal-rights organization, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM)―is sponsoring a class-action lawsuit against McDonald’s, Burger King, and Friendly’s because they found traces of PhIP (2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine), a heterocyclic amine (HCA) that that occurs naturally in grilled meat.  According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer,  “There is inadequate evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of PhIP.” And, according to the Center for Consumer Freedom  (which in the interest of fairness is a pro-food-industry nonprofit “lobbying group.“) In 2008, the California Attorney General’s office filed a formal objection to a similar case brought by PCRM, writing that warning labels on grilled chicken “would not be in the public interest.” This is because, even though traces of some chemicals may be created in the process of cooking chicken, that same process also kills harmful bacteria, having “the net effect of making the food safer to eat.” In addition, will discouraging people from eating grilled chicken result in swearing off of chicken or lead them to a return to fried chicken, a food that when eaten to excess can provide its own set of health problems?

Then there’s the CSPI’s (Center for Science in the Public Interest) list of the “The Ten Riskiest Foods Regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration." The group says that lettuce, eggs, tuna, oysters, potatoes, cheese, ice cream, tomatoes, sprouts and berries account for nearly 40% percent of all foodborne outbreaks linked to FDA-regulated food. The group claims the list is a wake-up call to Congress and that “the presence of so many healthy foods on such a list is exactly why the United States Senate should follow the House and pass legislation that reforms our fossilized food safety laws.” But, as a result of CSPI’s  publicity and negative headlines, are consumers going to rush en masse to Washington, DC, to protest federal food policy, or are they going to switch to other, less healthy foods, because they only remember that foods like lettuce and berries are “risky”? (In an interesting twist, half of CSPI’s most risky foods were also on its list of "10 Super Foods for Better Health.")

Everyone has an agenda, and manipulation of public opinion is nothing new, but it’s a shame if it leads to putting consumers’ health at risk.

   -Lynn A. Kuntz