Do Imported Foods Comply?

Instead of each country having its own standard for inspection/quality WHO should come forward,lay down standards,specifications,quality checks and check quality standards world wide and remove their UN membership if not adhered to.

Whose Standards would the WHO use. Obviously Americans won't go for food quality at the level India allows, and Indians would have a problem with food being disposed of they feel they could eat. So the poorer countries could not afford the higher standards, and the wealthier countries would not allow the lower standards.

The WHO could set some minimum expectations, but nothing the WHO does is truly enforceable. The WHO is not a sovereign governemnt agency. Secondly, what if it is China, India, Russia, the US or Japan tht isn't complying? If you removed Japan or the US the UN might collapse due to lack of funding and resources. China and Russia hold huge amounts of the rst of the worlds debt, so I would not expect the major countries to push against removing them. So you would just end up letting some countries slide. So your idea would only be enforceable against some countries. For most influential countries would simply be exempt because the UN would not have the authority or capaility of enforcement. (There is actually a substantial number of americans who believe the US should leave the UN anyways, I am sure there is a similar political impetus in many other major countries).

When I designed new or replacement equipment for a food processing plants, I would take the old equipment out.

And the old equipment, the USDA inspectors would not allow it to be returned into plant unless it was brought up to sanitary code laid out by the government, (of which each agency's code conflicted with each other such as USDA, 3A, FDA.....just have to pick the right one.) And bringing it to code, it was more times than not cheaper to build one from scratch with new material and components.

Frankly, I often wondered if the US is more susceptible or have less tolerance to pathogens because our quality of our intake environment is high that our resistance/immune system is lower to cope when there are issues.

As far as sliding, quality goes farther that just fresh fruit. types chemical usage such as insecticide, pesticides for one. Take any imported fruit, there are chemical traces. I am sure there may be traces on domestic as well, but alot of these are supposeable checked at the recieving station, or have the farmer sign a statement that they are free, or he hasn't use any chemicals a certain time frame prior to harvest..

how convenient that this was released about pesticides

http://shine.yahoo.com/event/green/the-new-quot-dirty-dozen-quot-list-of-produce-2496191/

Domestic food in the US, isn't normally checked for pesticides or herbicides. The farmer or a PCA will document the application history if requested by the brokers, but these aren't usually requested by the broker as they depend on the word of the farmers as to the dates of application and timing prior to picking. (It is different though when you have to export the crops, some countries outside US require certifications.)

Most crops go from the field to a cooler, are boxed and shiped nearly immediately and go strait to the local stored warehousing. The foods that get tested are those that get highly processed for long term storage. As long as the food is not highly processed there are essentially no inspection or testing conducted. Cold crops and fresh fruits are pretty much just washed, boxed and chilled right from the field, for shipping. Imported crops do get randomly inspected at the border, this is why Mexico is one of the worst violators (worse than china). Mexico exports a lot of fresh fruits and vegetables to the US.

True, to a certain degree, I believe drop spray is added for cherries, and a time period or a rain has to occur before harvest.

On the delicate fruits is true also, the storageable ones such as potato's ^potatoes , nuts, or the fruits that are storage for later in the year for better prices such as cherries and apples, quite a science for storage here, I posted a link about the pesticides, an embargo or a better word restrictions occur when importing foods stuffs when a known chemical is used that is banned in this country. And the restrictions happen only occurs when pressure from the US consumer groups are applied.

As far as link I posted, it does reinforce my earlier post and shows pesticide contamination is on the foods stuffs.

Our own farmers and processors comply with the regulations set down to insure the food we put on our tables is safe do they not? Then why should we not expect the imports to comply! The regulations are there for public safety.

Our own farmers and processor handle the burden.

What this tells me that food stuffs production worldwide have approached some what equal cost. Shipping cost have to do a lot with that. The only way to reduce cost is skimp on following regulations for food safety at the source.

If the importers can't the burden to insure those regulations are followed. Then get out of the business.

FYI, most of the E. Coli poisonings in the US are related to American grown food products, vegetables as of late, so I would not assume that our farmers meet the standards. Also, most food inspection safety is done through consultants retained by farmers who also happen to sell the products they inspect food for safety againts, pesticides, herbicides, etc.. Farmers in the US are in essences self inspected by the salesment who support their production. Only things like Meat and Milk get federal inspections. (This is likely why there has been a severe decline in E Coli poisonings from meat in the last decade, but a increase in poisonings from vegetables.)

I'm aware of the issues you are talking about. The spinach out break a farmer leased land from a cattle rancher. The land being contaminated with E coli from cattle droppings. Animals are the source of E coli. Don't know whether there are or were regulations in place to prevent planting crops on fields that have had long term use with cattle. As you have said the Dairy and Meat industry get the blunt of those regulations. Spent some of my youth working grandma's dairy farm. Some I understood the reasoning behind others I question. The big practice I question is the use of manure as fertilizer. If it has the potential pass on a harmful strain of E coli to the crops. This is practiced on most farms to get rid of animal waste and improve crop yield.

Do we expand though the possible problems by letting those regulation be ignored in the production of import food stuffs?

Long term use by cattle? use of farm land for agriculture where cattle manuer is employed is a standard of the industry. The regulations are by each State, and the stricter states do have standards for the period of time period before harvest that wastewater or solids may not be applied to land growing crops for human consumption. Actually most farms, not Dairies (which dont grow plant based food for human consumption), buy the solids (manure), it is just usually a bit cheaper than processed fertilizers. Part of the reason for use is the soil amendment, moisture retention and slow release benefits you can not get from comparable priced chemical fertilizers ( plus people perceive it as natural so it is the only form of fertilizer that organic farms can use).

They have had a few other problems beside spinach, though the spinach problem in California did get the CEO of Dole and a few other major ag corporations removed (or retired i should say). There was the organic apple juice about 10 years ago, and a few other scares in past few years ( i get to hear about such things from my friends who are maangers, growers and/or brokers for some of the larger corporations).

Yes long term use. There are many different strains of E coli bacteria. Good many beneficial to the animal whom digestive system they in habit. Most will not survive long outside the animals digestive tract. But you never know when one may mutate and survive longer in the soil.

Anything meat or meat related is regulated by USDA

farmers are no longer self regulated, the link just talked about the provisions for importers, there have also been much needed domestic regulatory changes as well

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA_Food_Safety_Modernization_Act

and alot of the outbreaks were cause by poor management practices.......for the most part....factory farms.

It's a big world. I don't think it would be reasonable to expect everyone to follow health standards or enforcement of standards. Look at the problem we had with China and the melamine in food products. Standards used by the developed countries are probably safe. I wouldn't include third world countries or China until they can prove their products are safe.

a quote from the linked article:

The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, signed by President Obama January 4, 2011, amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to establish a prevention-based food safety regulatory framework. There is a significant focus on imports, given that 15-20 percent of this country's food supply is imported, from over 300,000 foreign facilities in more than 150 countries. The new import provisions increase importers' responsibility for food safety.

mostly these requirements are to document the conditions the food is produced under, which would include things like the purity of the water, the chemicals used & basic conditions in the field & processing facility

enforce it.

realize this, other country's specifically south of the border, buy our used equipment because it does not meet the sanitary standards and can't even continue to be used under thr grandfather clause.

what we're seeing is a tiny effort to level the playing field

to sell in the USA should require importers to meet the same standards our companies do