- Email: [email protected]
The UK Food Safety Advisory Centre
Comment
References
24.6.1988, p. 28); 88/388/EEC on flavouring agents (OJ L 184 15.7.1988, p. 61); 89/107IEEC on food additives (OJ L 40 11.2.1989, p. 27); 89/109iEEC on materials and articles in contact with foodstuffs (OJ L 40 11.2.1989, p. 38); 89/398/EEC on foods for particular nutritional use (OJ L 186 30.6.1989, p. 27) Office of Publications of the European Community. Luxembourg
Canadian government (1988) Consolidated Strategy for the Assessment of Chemical and Biological Hazards in Agri-Food Agri-Food 1989-1993. Commodities, Safety Division, Food Inspection Directorate, Food Production and Inspection Branch. Agriculture Canada, Ottawa. CEC (1985) Completion of the Internal Market: Community Legislation on Foodstuffs COM(S5) 603, Commission of the European Community, Brussels. CEC (1988) Research on the ‘Cost of Nonof Europe’ Vol. 12, part A, Commission the European Community, Brussels, p. 18. CEC (1989a) A Global Approach for Certification and Testing, Quality Measures for Industrial Products. COM(89) 209, 24 July 1989, Commission of the European Community, Brussels CEC (1989b) Communication on the Free within the Movemeni of Foodsruffs of the EuroCommunity. Commission pean Community, Brussels, OJ C 271 24.10.1989, p. 3. CWS (1990) Food Safety - who cares? A survey carried out by the Oxford Research Agency for the Cooperative Wholesale Society in February 1990, CWS. Manchester EC (1988-l 989) Council Directives: 88/344/ EEC on extraction solvents (OJ L 187
EC (1989) Council directive on the official inspection of foodstuffs, OJ L 186 30.6. 1989, p. 23 Office of Publications of the European Community, Luxembourg Fidler, D.G. (1990) Due diligence and quality assurance in the UK. Food Control 1, 117-121 Gray, O.W. (1990) Pressure groups and their influence on agricultural policy and its reform in the EC. PhD Thesis Bath University, 1990 Gray, P.S. (1990) Food law and the internal market: taking stock. Food Policy, 15, 11 l-121. Mollenhauer, H. (1990) Control additives. Food Control 1, 69
of food
Newsweek (1989) Gallup survey of 756 respondents carried out in March 1989. Newsweek USA. 27 March 1989, p. 22 Richmond, M. et a/. (1990) The Report of the Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food, part I. HMSO, London
The UK Food Safety Advisory Centre Michael Young explains its interface with the consumer The Food Safety Advisory Centre (FSAC) was established in the UK in February 1989 in response to the crisis in consumer confidence which had been generated by a series of food scares. A public debate followed in which questionable research findings were sensationalized by certain sections of the media and a proposition was advanced that most food was dangerous for consumption. Such was the lack of balance in the public debate with the consumer becoming the prime victim, that a group of scientists, food specialists, doctors and retailers decided to set UDand fund the FSAC.
Six of Britain’s largest retailing groups wanted to fund a truly independent body whose function was to provide detached, dispassionate information for the consumer. The centre is thus governed not by the retailers but by a team of well respected individuals with an interest and expertise in food and
Michael Young is Executive Director of the Food Safety Advisory Centre, 14 Soho Square, London WlV 5FB, UK
0956-7135/91102007542
0
food safety. The views expressed by the centre emanate from this group who form the centre’s scientific advisory panel. The panel is chaired by Professor Will Waites (Professor of Food Microbiology, University of Nottingham) and comprises Professor Geoffrey Campbell-Platt (Professor of Food Technology, University of Reading); Ann Foster (Food Policy Adviser, National Consumer Council); Dr Dorothy Jones (Senior Research Fellow in Food Microbiology, University of
1991 Butterworth-Heinemann
Ltd
Leicester); Dr Gillian Rice (General Practitioner and broadcaster); Dr Mike Smith (Medical Practitioner and broadcaster); Mr Bob Tanner (Environmental Health Consultant); Professor Ron Walker (Professor of Food Science, University of Surrey). The base of expertise is therefore very wide and substantial.
Foodline The first initiative of the centre was to establish its free Foodline telephone service (0800 280407) which is staffed by the centre’s food scientist. Foodline provides accurate data on all aspects of food safety. The calls are free of charge and thus the centre receives calls from individuals throughout the UK and across the socioeconomic range. The volume of calls depends, to some extent, upon the nature of the debate prevailing at any one time. For instance at the height of the issue ‘on BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy or ‘mad cow’ disease), the centre received some 60 calls per day. This level reduces to about 25 per day during times when no one single issue is dominating the public agenda. Calls range from the preparation of royal icing at Christmas time through to questions concerning pregnancy and Listeria monocytogenes. The worries of expectant mothers, the elderly and the young suggest that listeriosis is of great concern. From the many calls made and the answers given, a wide range of data is now available to the centre. This has recently been made available in book form.
Research The second initiative concerns the funding of public interest research work and stemmed, in part, from concern that as a society we approach many issues without knowing the answers to vital questions. This knowledge gap is particularly worrying since the incidence of food poisoning is rising and public expenditure on research and development is diminishing, particularly research and development spending by the UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Food Control - April 199 1
75
Comment
(MAFF). The centre takes the view that public interest research work relating to food safety should be a function of the state and is therefore critical of the government’s reluctance to support it more fully. Because of the absence of adequate funding the centre made available 20.5 million for the calendar year 1990, from which eight research projects have been financed. Five of the projects are of one year duration, e.g. a project being conducted by the Agriculture and Food Research Council (AFRC) Institute of Food Research looking at the growth and survival of Listeria monocytogenes in soft cheese. The project of two years duration conducted by the University of Nottingham is tracking small outbreaks of Salmonella-induced food-borne disease back to the food item responsible. There are two threeyear projects, one being conducted by the Moredun Institute in Edinburgh looking at sources of L. monocytogenes in agriculture, and the other by the University of Leicester examining L. monocytogenes and the development of virulence-directed DNA probes. All these projects will be published in full and will add to our collective knowledge in these important areas. In selecting the projects, the scientific advisory panel consulted with government and others to ensure that such work was not being conducted elsewhere. The projects were identified by the advisory panel, and public tenders were invited through the New Scientist and Nature magazines. An independent group of scientists adjudicated the applications and the contracts were awarded on the basis of this adjudication. The centre will be spending a further f0.25 million for 1991 and is currently seeking ways of attracting further research funds in order to expand the research programme.
Leaflets The third initiative undertaken by the centre relates to the provision
76
of information leaflets which the centre distributes directly and via the six supporting supermarkets. The first leaflet, ‘The Good Food Safety Guide’ written by Professor W. Waites, gives consumers some important tips on safe food. The second leaflet, written by Dr Mike Smith, covers food safety more fully and includes ways consumers can help themselves. A third leaflet explains the highly emotive subject of irradiation and gives information on strengths and weaknesses and what it can and cannot do. This leaflet, written by Professor G. Campbell-Platt, contributes towards producing a more balanced debate on the subject. A fourth leaflet deals with what the consumer should look for in judging how safely a retail outlet handles food. The leaflet covers chill temperatures, freezer cabinets and use by dates. A further leaflet covers refrigerator and freezer safety and includes a free refrigerator thermometer. The leaflet advises how to avoid cross-contamination and food poisoning, particularly during warm weather. To date, 50000 of these leaflets have been distributed throughout the UK. In response to demand for factual information on BSE, the centre produced an information leaflet in November 1990 explaining what is known and unknown about BSE and indicating what steps are currently being taken to minimize the risk to the consumer, and outlining further areas of research.
Future role All of these initiatives have provided the consumer with factual and balanced data from which to make rational choices. A year or so ago the debate on food safety was influenced by alarmist and simplistic statements. These are still being made but the media are now more cautious. The consumer, but also the UK government, suffered from this irrational debate. Today, MAFF has lost some credibility with consumers although they still
expect government to be the ultimate arbiter on food safety issues. If government cannot be impartial, the consumer is left wondering who to look to for detached judgement. The problem is partly historical, in that MAFF was established as a ministry responsible to the producer, and it will be extremely difficult to transform MAFF from a ‘farming’ ministry into a genuine food ministry or agency. In the UK, we clearly need such a ministry or agency and, in the view of the centre, such an agency ought to be beyond treasury control and patronage. Ideally, an agency should be formed along the lines of the US Food and Drugs Agency, albeit less bureaucratic in form. The agency would represent the widest cross-section of interests and report to Parliament for its financial resource and remit. Only by establishing an agency beyond the control of government will that agency accrue the necessary credibility to discharge the role of neutral and detached decision maker. The government is perceived to have abandoned such a role in the UK and there is a need for an ‘honest broker’ between producer and consumer. The consumer feels he has been shortchanged by the government in relation to inadequate research and development spending. Research facilities have been closed and essential staff discharged. The proper provision of resources to police extraregulatory requirements such as a full and well trained Environmental Health Officer cadre which can properly check those matters which the law determines, is avoided. The Food Safety Act goes some way to addressing consumer fears but does not establish the independent authority which so clearly is in demand. Ministers appear to have failed to anticipate problems and at times have seemed arrogant and remote. Until the role of MAFF is reappraised, consumer confidence will continue to be undermined and the centre will need to continue to provide its service in the interest of balance and choice.
Food Control-April
1991
References
24.6.1988, p. 28); 88/388/EEC on flavouring agents (OJ L 184 15.7.1988, p. 61); 89/107IEEC on food additives (OJ L 40 11.2.1989, p. 27); 89/109iEEC on materials and articles in contact with foodstuffs (OJ L 40 11.2.1989, p. 38); 89/398/EEC on foods for particular nutritional use (OJ L 186 30.6.1989, p. 27) Office of Publications of the European Community. Luxembourg
Canadian government (1988) Consolidated Strategy for the Assessment of Chemical and Biological Hazards in Agri-Food Agri-Food 1989-1993. Commodities, Safety Division, Food Inspection Directorate, Food Production and Inspection Branch. Agriculture Canada, Ottawa. CEC (1985) Completion of the Internal Market: Community Legislation on Foodstuffs COM(S5) 603, Commission of the European Community, Brussels. CEC (1988) Research on the ‘Cost of Nonof Europe’ Vol. 12, part A, Commission the European Community, Brussels, p. 18. CEC (1989a) A Global Approach for Certification and Testing, Quality Measures for Industrial Products. COM(89) 209, 24 July 1989, Commission of the European Community, Brussels CEC (1989b) Communication on the Free within the Movemeni of Foodsruffs of the EuroCommunity. Commission pean Community, Brussels, OJ C 271 24.10.1989, p. 3. CWS (1990) Food Safety - who cares? A survey carried out by the Oxford Research Agency for the Cooperative Wholesale Society in February 1990, CWS. Manchester EC (1988-l 989) Council Directives: 88/344/ EEC on extraction solvents (OJ L 187
EC (1989) Council directive on the official inspection of foodstuffs, OJ L 186 30.6. 1989, p. 23 Office of Publications of the European Community, Luxembourg Fidler, D.G. (1990) Due diligence and quality assurance in the UK. Food Control 1, 117-121 Gray, O.W. (1990) Pressure groups and their influence on agricultural policy and its reform in the EC. PhD Thesis Bath University, 1990 Gray, P.S. (1990) Food law and the internal market: taking stock. Food Policy, 15, 11 l-121. Mollenhauer, H. (1990) Control additives. Food Control 1, 69
of food
Newsweek (1989) Gallup survey of 756 respondents carried out in March 1989. Newsweek USA. 27 March 1989, p. 22 Richmond, M. et a/. (1990) The Report of the Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food, part I. HMSO, London
The UK Food Safety Advisory Centre Michael Young explains its interface with the consumer The Food Safety Advisory Centre (FSAC) was established in the UK in February 1989 in response to the crisis in consumer confidence which had been generated by a series of food scares. A public debate followed in which questionable research findings were sensationalized by certain sections of the media and a proposition was advanced that most food was dangerous for consumption. Such was the lack of balance in the public debate with the consumer becoming the prime victim, that a group of scientists, food specialists, doctors and retailers decided to set UDand fund the FSAC.
Six of Britain’s largest retailing groups wanted to fund a truly independent body whose function was to provide detached, dispassionate information for the consumer. The centre is thus governed not by the retailers but by a team of well respected individuals with an interest and expertise in food and
Michael Young is Executive Director of the Food Safety Advisory Centre, 14 Soho Square, London WlV 5FB, UK
0956-7135/91102007542
0
food safety. The views expressed by the centre emanate from this group who form the centre’s scientific advisory panel. The panel is chaired by Professor Will Waites (Professor of Food Microbiology, University of Nottingham) and comprises Professor Geoffrey Campbell-Platt (Professor of Food Technology, University of Reading); Ann Foster (Food Policy Adviser, National Consumer Council); Dr Dorothy Jones (Senior Research Fellow in Food Microbiology, University of
1991 Butterworth-Heinemann
Ltd
Leicester); Dr Gillian Rice (General Practitioner and broadcaster); Dr Mike Smith (Medical Practitioner and broadcaster); Mr Bob Tanner (Environmental Health Consultant); Professor Ron Walker (Professor of Food Science, University of Surrey). The base of expertise is therefore very wide and substantial.
Foodline The first initiative of the centre was to establish its free Foodline telephone service (0800 280407) which is staffed by the centre’s food scientist. Foodline provides accurate data on all aspects of food safety. The calls are free of charge and thus the centre receives calls from individuals throughout the UK and across the socioeconomic range. The volume of calls depends, to some extent, upon the nature of the debate prevailing at any one time. For instance at the height of the issue ‘on BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy or ‘mad cow’ disease), the centre received some 60 calls per day. This level reduces to about 25 per day during times when no one single issue is dominating the public agenda. Calls range from the preparation of royal icing at Christmas time through to questions concerning pregnancy and Listeria monocytogenes. The worries of expectant mothers, the elderly and the young suggest that listeriosis is of great concern. From the many calls made and the answers given, a wide range of data is now available to the centre. This has recently been made available in book form.
Research The second initiative concerns the funding of public interest research work and stemmed, in part, from concern that as a society we approach many issues without knowing the answers to vital questions. This knowledge gap is particularly worrying since the incidence of food poisoning is rising and public expenditure on research and development is diminishing, particularly research and development spending by the UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Food Control - April 199 1
75
Comment
(MAFF). The centre takes the view that public interest research work relating to food safety should be a function of the state and is therefore critical of the government’s reluctance to support it more fully. Because of the absence of adequate funding the centre made available 20.5 million for the calendar year 1990, from which eight research projects have been financed. Five of the projects are of one year duration, e.g. a project being conducted by the Agriculture and Food Research Council (AFRC) Institute of Food Research looking at the growth and survival of Listeria monocytogenes in soft cheese. The project of two years duration conducted by the University of Nottingham is tracking small outbreaks of Salmonella-induced food-borne disease back to the food item responsible. There are two threeyear projects, one being conducted by the Moredun Institute in Edinburgh looking at sources of L. monocytogenes in agriculture, and the other by the University of Leicester examining L. monocytogenes and the development of virulence-directed DNA probes. All these projects will be published in full and will add to our collective knowledge in these important areas. In selecting the projects, the scientific advisory panel consulted with government and others to ensure that such work was not being conducted elsewhere. The projects were identified by the advisory panel, and public tenders were invited through the New Scientist and Nature magazines. An independent group of scientists adjudicated the applications and the contracts were awarded on the basis of this adjudication. The centre will be spending a further f0.25 million for 1991 and is currently seeking ways of attracting further research funds in order to expand the research programme.
Leaflets The third initiative undertaken by the centre relates to the provision
76
of information leaflets which the centre distributes directly and via the six supporting supermarkets. The first leaflet, ‘The Good Food Safety Guide’ written by Professor W. Waites, gives consumers some important tips on safe food. The second leaflet, written by Dr Mike Smith, covers food safety more fully and includes ways consumers can help themselves. A third leaflet explains the highly emotive subject of irradiation and gives information on strengths and weaknesses and what it can and cannot do. This leaflet, written by Professor G. Campbell-Platt, contributes towards producing a more balanced debate on the subject. A fourth leaflet deals with what the consumer should look for in judging how safely a retail outlet handles food. The leaflet covers chill temperatures, freezer cabinets and use by dates. A further leaflet covers refrigerator and freezer safety and includes a free refrigerator thermometer. The leaflet advises how to avoid cross-contamination and food poisoning, particularly during warm weather. To date, 50000 of these leaflets have been distributed throughout the UK. In response to demand for factual information on BSE, the centre produced an information leaflet in November 1990 explaining what is known and unknown about BSE and indicating what steps are currently being taken to minimize the risk to the consumer, and outlining further areas of research.
Future role All of these initiatives have provided the consumer with factual and balanced data from which to make rational choices. A year or so ago the debate on food safety was influenced by alarmist and simplistic statements. These are still being made but the media are now more cautious. The consumer, but also the UK government, suffered from this irrational debate. Today, MAFF has lost some credibility with consumers although they still
expect government to be the ultimate arbiter on food safety issues. If government cannot be impartial, the consumer is left wondering who to look to for detached judgement. The problem is partly historical, in that MAFF was established as a ministry responsible to the producer, and it will be extremely difficult to transform MAFF from a ‘farming’ ministry into a genuine food ministry or agency. In the UK, we clearly need such a ministry or agency and, in the view of the centre, such an agency ought to be beyond treasury control and patronage. Ideally, an agency should be formed along the lines of the US Food and Drugs Agency, albeit less bureaucratic in form. The agency would represent the widest cross-section of interests and report to Parliament for its financial resource and remit. Only by establishing an agency beyond the control of government will that agency accrue the necessary credibility to discharge the role of neutral and detached decision maker. The government is perceived to have abandoned such a role in the UK and there is a need for an ‘honest broker’ between producer and consumer. The consumer feels he has been shortchanged by the government in relation to inadequate research and development spending. Research facilities have been closed and essential staff discharged. The proper provision of resources to police extraregulatory requirements such as a full and well trained Environmental Health Officer cadre which can properly check those matters which the law determines, is avoided. The Food Safety Act goes some way to addressing consumer fears but does not establish the independent authority which so clearly is in demand. Ministers appear to have failed to anticipate problems and at times have seemed arrogant and remote. Until the role of MAFF is reappraised, consumer confidence will continue to be undermined and the centre will need to continue to provide its service in the interest of balance and choice.
Food Control-April
1991