Ezra Klein: Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) On The Pet Food Recall, The FDA And Food Safety

« The Netroots Get Another Close-up | Main | On Books »

May 01, 2007

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) On The Pet Food Recall, The FDA And Food Safety

[Posted by litbrit.]

"If you want to do business with the United States, you'll do it on our terms when it comes to health and safety."

At hearings today, Senator Durbin speaks out on behalf of all who eat. He goes through the timeline of this massive recall, pointing out many of the systemic vulnerabilities, including those of the FDA, that led to our food supply being tainted, and calls for reform. Great stuff.

(H/T Petulant)

Crossposted at litbrit; also Shakesville.

May 1, 2007 in Government | Permalink

Comments

Let me know when he comes out in favor of having all exported beef tested for BSE, the way that Japan insists.

Oh, wait, if you do business with us you do it on our terms.

Posted by: James Killus | May 1, 2007 7:24:09 PM

Is any of this relevant to the debate about importing prescription drugs? If we can't expect the Chinese to give us untainted pet food, can we trust their knock-off blood pressure meds?

Posted by: Grumpy | May 1, 2007 8:14:43 PM

Grumpy, it is relevant because the FDA regulates drugs, but also food ingredients (like vitamins, protein powder, gluten, etc.) and pet food.

For example, China is the largest--and perhaps the sole--producer of vitamin C in the world. And under current conditions, we really have no idea how pure any of it is.

This issue if about much more than pet food, if that's what you meant. I lost my two beloved dogs to aflatoxin poisoning this January, something that happened because currently, the FDA actually permits certain levels of the mold toxin in domestically-grown corn that's used for animal food. Of course, the mold has a way of growing, and samples taken from one part of a silo may have "accceptable" readings, whereas truly lethal levels exist in the overall container. When this recall began, I thought it might be the same thing, and I felt compelled to investigate and report on developments, hoping to prevent someone else from going through what I went through, namely, holding my comatose, seizure-wracked dogs in my arms while the vet administered their euthanasia.

If adulterated food harms any of my friends or family, I honestly don't know what I'll do.

Posted by: litbrit | May 1, 2007 8:31:35 PM

Grumpy, you sound exactly like a stooge for the pharmaceutical industry.

Let me remind you that the main debate over importing drugs was about importing them from CANADA.

I think I'm ready to take that risk.

Posted by: agum | May 1, 2007 8:39:23 PM

Let me know when he comes out in favor of having all exported beef tested for BSE, the way that Japan insists.

Oh, wait, if you do business with us you do it on our terms.

A diet of self-righteousness might be preferable to poisoned food, but you're not going to survive on either. This issue is not about BSE. Similarly, it is not about the conditions under which tennis shoes are made, or about what happened at Abu Ghraib. I would like to change both the way our clothing imports are made and the approved methods of interrogation that the CIA and military use.

However, I'm not going to criticize those who have a problem with the idea of eating poisoned food, or even feeding poisoned food to their pets just because they aren't simultaneously mentioning every single instance of American misconduct or even hypocrisy.

Posted by: Stephen | May 1, 2007 10:18:01 PM

Also, while I appreciate Durbin's remarks and the amendment he proposed, it doesn't go far enough.

We need a complete ban on all imported foodstuffs from China pending an investigation into the various distribution systems, coupled with tax breaks for every plant-based protein importer that will sign multiyear contracts with American suppliers. Or they would certainly be free to do business with Canadian suppliers or other countries which do not have a history of intentionally poisoning our food supply in order to make a couple of extra dollars.

Posted by: Stephen | May 1, 2007 10:22:45 PM

Okay, Stephen, I'll try to explain it in simpler terms. The food industry in the United States has a history of intentionally poisoning the food supply in order to make a couple of extra dollars. It is also current practice to switch off practically all regulatory oversight of practically every industry in the country, except when it is to the benefit of the industry itself.

In short, it would be nice if we had a trustworthy food supply, but we don't. And if this poisining incident had come from within the U.S. it would be being covered up and minimized.

Pop quiz: how many food borne illnesses occur in the U.S. each year? How many deaths? What is the ratio of those deaths to the current example?

Once you answer those questions, then you can give your little lecture about tennis shoes and Abu Ghraib.

Posted by: James Killus | May 2, 2007 1:29:09 AM

James Killus, the point of this post, and Senator Durbin's efforts, and everyone's outrage, is that this particular food adulteration issue is the result of profit motive and low-to-no regulations. It is no better or worse that the food comes from China, or anywhere else abroad.

Bringing up all the profit-driven malfeasance that has occurred domestically heretofore accomplishes little more than saying "Well, we do it too, so we should expect likewise from the world, tough noogies,".

And if this poisining (sic) incident had come from within the U.S. it would be being covered up and minimized.

It was covered up and minimized. Menu foods sat on the knowledge for weeks, allowing the adulterated food to remain on the shelves and the investigation to be delayed--critically so. The Chinese officials stalled and refused visas to our inspectors, relenting only when Senator Durbin got involved and wrote to their embassy personally. I know it might not be too clear to someone who's just discovered this crisis and watched this video clip alone, or read the post below (I've written extensively about the recall and adulteration; there's a lot to cover), but over the past few weeks--the past week, in particular--there have been numerous criticisms of US companies for their role in this, which is no less driven by profit motive and the ability to take advantage of the FDA's pathetically weak posture (inspectors are spread so thinly, only 1% of imported foods and ingredients even gets inspected!) than the Chinese.

So what is your point? And how is bringing up Stateside food-borne illnesses and deaths--the lion's share of which were caused by high-density factory farms and their runoff, cheap and improper feed, antibiotic use, feeding 3D-animals to their live brethren, and more--in order to minimize or somehow dismiss the adulteration scandal any different than mentioning all the other dreadful things that America has done, or sat by and watched as others did (Abu Ghraib, supporting companies that use child labor, etc.)?

I think the word strawman applies here.

Posted by: litbrit | May 2, 2007 6:43:37 AM

Gee, James, how many deaths occur on our highways each year? What is the ratio of those to food-borne illnesses? If more people die on the highways, are we to refrain from any attempts to safeguard our food supply?

If you'd bothered to pay attention to what Durbin was saying, you might have noticed how his amendment addresses the recent problems we've had with spinach and peanut butter. Beefing up the FDA's oversight capabilities will help to keep an eye on US-produced food as well as the stuff we import.

I don't suppose that it does anything to affect your personal bugaboo about BSE, but the presence of other problems is never a good reason to fail to address the problem that is before us here. Really, take a step back and try to see that what you're actually saying to us is that we should ignore melamine poisoning until we address BSE. Next time you go to the store, take a look at some labels on the food humans are supposed to consume. Once you see how many products contain plant-based protein sources such as wheat gluten, perhaps you'll understand that this needs to be addressed even before we solve all our problems with BSE.

And yes, we need to deal with BSE as well. Our entire food production system is broken. But I really don't feel like letting the magnitude of the problem paralyze me.

Posted by: Stephen | May 2, 2007 9:31:12 AM

Litbrit, I never knew that about your dogs. That is heartbreaking.
While I appreciate what Durbin is doing here, I agree with the above commentary that it really isn't nearly enough. Of all things that we ask our representatives to do, food and drug safety is in at least a three way tie for first place.

Posted by: sprocket | May 2, 2007 11:44:07 AM

Grumpy, you sound exactly like a stooge for the pharmaceutical industry.

I wish! I could use the pay increase.

My point is that the debate about imported meds is that they're presumtively safe, because the countries we would import from have their own safety inspections. But you'd think that countries would also regulate the safety of food ingredients. If they don't, how can we guarantee the safety of imported anything?

If I was a stooge, I'd find this persuasive. I don't -- for the simple fact that the US FDA couldn't get the job done, either, so I can't hold other countries to a higher standard.

Posted by: Grumpy | May 2, 2007 4:53:46 PM

Really, take a step back and try to see that what you're actually saying to us is that we should ignore melamine poisoning until we address BSE.

I think the word strawman applies here.

Jesus, this comment thread couldn't have derailed itself any faster if I'd been trying.

For the record, I was observing that issues like food safety in the U.S. don't seem to get any traction unless they are linked to xenophobia and racism. But the way you folks reacted, I'm wondering if you've been drinking the Republican stupid juice, maybe somehow thinking that it's the source of their mystical power. It isn't. Drinking that stuff only makes you stupid, like when you interject subjects like Abu Ghraib and automobile accidents into discussions about food.

Posted by: James Killus | May 2, 2007 5:02:26 PM

As for why I referenced BSE:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2004/2004-04-15-02.asp

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Content.asp?ContentID=81739

Posted by: James Killus | May 2, 2007 7:09:45 PM

Killus,

Why should I follow those links? Why should anyone care what you think after you've insulted us?

Yeah, BSE is a problem. Yeah, the US government isn't addressing it. We get it. We understand the issue quite well, thank you.

Try to read this next part really carefully: the whole point of bringing up car crashes and Abu Ghraib is because those subjects aren't relevant to the discussion.

Just like BSE.

As far as the level of importance we should give to melamine poisoning relative to BSE, look at it this way. If you're really worried about BSE and don't want to get it, don't eat beef. If you're really worried about melamine poisoning and don't want to get it, don't eat.

And don't accuse me of being a racist or a xenophobe. I can get called a lot of things without being upset, but I simply don't tolerate bullshit like that, so quit acting like an asshole.

Posted by: Stephen | May 2, 2007 8:58:34 PM

托盘
 托盘
 钢托盘
 钢制托盘
 塑料托盘
 木托盘
 木制托盘
 纸托盘
 木塑托盘