May 22, 2002 - FSIS plans major assault against bioterrorism

by Bryan Salvage, Meat Marketing & Technology

In recent months, concerns about biosecurity have been building. Protection of the food supply against intentional harm -- essentially biosecurity -- is one major goal of the Food Safety and Inspection Service, according to a recent Food Safety Consortium report.

"We're taking a multifaceted approach to biosecurity, which includes both short-and long term strategies," said Paul Resweber, acting district manager of the FSIS field office in Springdale, Ark. During a speech to the Ozark Food Processors Association convention in March in Springdale, Resweber explained five goals that Elsa Murano, Agriculture Department undersecretary for food safety, has set for FSIS.

Funds will strengthen biosecurity-related programs

Resweber said the Bush administration is proposing an allocation of $328 million in emergency funding to USDA to strengthen biosecurity-related programs, with FSIS receiving $15 million of that allocation for security upgrades and protection against bioterrorism.

These FSIS funds will be allocated to education, specialized training for inspection personnel, expanding the agency's capabilities to test meat and poultry products for suspected chemical agents and strengthening biosecurity and physical security at FSIS facilities, the report added.

Application of science to all FSIS policy decisions is another of Murano's goals, which Resweber described as essential in protecting public health.

"One way to accomplish this is to use risk assessment as a way to identify hazards and provide a basis for making risk management decisions," Resweber said. "We are gaining more experience in this area and are better able to use the data gathered by FSIS through its regulatory decisions to make policy decisions."

Resweber said that FSIS has established a risk assessments section at its Washington headquarters.

"Risk assessment studies must be designed not only to discover what the risk is but also how our behaviors, our practices and industry's behaviors and practices will affect that risk," he said. "And then we must be able to communicate that risk to consumers."

Murano also wants to improve coordination of food safety activities inside and outside of USDA, Resweber said.

"This has been going on for some time with active participation of FSIS and joint efforts with out sister agencies," he said. He cited the Food Net surveillance program that looks for signs of outbreaks of food-borne illness in certain population areas.

Another goal set by Murano -- to enhance the agency's outreach and public education efforts -- comprises efforts to make FSIS the entity that consumers consult for food safety education. Murano "is seeing an aggressive education and risk communication campaign to insure that our efforts reach consumers," Resweber said.

The full potential of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system has yet to be realized, Resweber said. Improvements can be made in regulating HACCP systems.

Can more be done?

"Is industry identifying the correct critical control points and can their choices be justified scientifically?" he asked. "This is necessary for all hazards associated with these foods to be appropriately addressed and controlled."

This article reprinted with permission from Meat Marketing & Technology.

Return to 2002 News Archives