Food Safety - History & Economic Impact

Food SafetyHistory

Definition

Economy

by Alois Fellinger

FoodSAFE’14

May 7,2014

Lets look back into

History

… not quite that far back!

but almost …

God gave man a commandement, saying „Youmay definitively eat from every tree in thegarden. But from the Tree of Knowledge ofgood and evil, do not eat, for on the day youeat from it, you will definitely die.“

Genesis 2:16-17

Whatever parts the hoof and is cloven-footed and chews the cud, among the animals, you may eat. Nevertheless, among those that chew the cud or part the hoof, you shall not eat these: The camel, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you. And the rock badger, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you. And the hare, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you. And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. You shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall not touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.

Leviticus 11:3-8

Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Qurʼan, Surah 5 (al-Maʼidah ), ayah 3

Hippocrates (460 377 BC)

Hippocrates recognized The essential Relationship between Food and health, pointing out that differences of diseases depend on nutriment

Pliny the Elder

(23 – 79)

“So many poisons

are employed to

force wine to suit

our taste – and we

are surprised that it

is not wholesome!”

Natural History

”What is food to one,

is to others bitter

poison.”

(“quod aliis cibus est aliis

fuat acre venenum”

Book IV, line 637)

Titus Lucretius Carus

(99-55 B.C.)

STELLIONATUS

"And, where anyone has

substituted some article

for another; or has put

aside goods which he was

obliged to deliver, or has

spoiled them, he is also

liable for this offense"

Roman Civil Law

A second, but much inferior, species of offence against public health is the selling of unwholesome provisions.

Magna Cartaxiii. No. III.: PROCEEDINGS ON AN ACTION OF DEBT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS; REMOVED INTO THE KING’S BENCH BY WRIT OF ERROR. - Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books, vol. 2 [1753]

And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and theybit the people; and much people of Israel died.

Numbers 21:6

The Romans used Lead-lined Vessels for

cooking and leaden pipes for water.

„SAPA“ was a syrup like grape concentrate,

boiled in lead-lined vessels to enhance

color, flavor and shelf life of wine.

• First Speculated in 1694 by

Dr. Eberhard Gockel published

• Connection to lead in 1767 by

SIR George BAKER

USING litharge to sweeten wine

Hüttenkatz

Colic of Devonshire

Colic of Poitou

St. Anthonys Fire

An intensely painful burning sensation in the limbs and extremities caused by ergotamines from the fungus Claviceps purpurea that can contaminate rye and wheat.

MoldsMold poisoning played a criticalrole in repressing populationgrowth in Europe between the16th and 19th century

ParasitesMold poisoning played a criticalrole in repressing populationgrowth in Europe between the16th and 19th century

Ascaris eggs

Friedrich Accum, 1820

Mercury

Methylmercury in fish, locally

caught, was causing „Minamata

disease“ – destroying nerve cells

and causing neurological problems

DDTDDT bioaccumulates in fatty tissue of animals and eventually

is taken up by humans. An FDA survey in 2005 still found

DDT in all human bolod samples tested, although DDT was

practically banned in the 1970‘s

Dioxin

Melamine

Antibiotics

Pesticides

Horsemeat

BSE

Hormones

Listeria

Acrylamide

PCB‘s

Public

Opinion

Special Eurobarometer 354 – Food-related risks. 2010

Biannual Public Attitudes Tracker, Wave 7, November 2013 Food Standards Agency, Social Science Research Unit

Center for Food Integrity, Consumer Trust in the Food System, 2010


“I am confident in the safety of the food I eat.”


“I am as confident in the safety of the food

I eat as I was a year ago.”


“Today’s food supply is safer than it was

when I was growing up.”

Consumer Attitudes Survey 2007 - A benchmark survey of consumers’ attitudes to food issues. Food Standards Australia New Zealand. 2008.

Consumer Attitudes Survey 2007 - A benchmark survey of consumers’ attitudes to food issues. Food Standards Australia New Zealand. 2008.

About 1/3 of the

people are very

concerned about

the safety of food!

very

concerned

somewhat

concerned

Definitions

FoodSafety

Food safety is a scientific

discipline describing handling,

preparation, and storage

of food in ways that

prevent foodborne illness.

The five keys to safer food

• Keep clean

• Separate raw and cooked

• Cook thoroughly

• Keep food at safe temperatures

• Use safe water and raw materials

Food security is reached

when all people at all times

have access to sufficient, safe,

nutritious food to maintain

a healthy and active life.

FoodSecurity

Food security is build on three pillars

• Food availability - sufficient

quantities of food available on a

consistent basis.

• Food access - having sufficient

resources to obtain appropriate foods

for a nutritious diet.

• Food use - appropriate use based on

knowledge of basic nutrition and care,

as well as adequate water and

sanitation.

Economy

• Handling, preparation, and storage

• Legislation and control

• Healthcare costs

• Trade impact

• …

What to consider?

John M. Mantle: Benefits and costs of food safety regulation. Food Policy, 24, 605-623. 1999

Benefit calculation

B = e · p · n(c · s · fs + v · d · fd)

B Benefit (measured in US$)

e effectivness of regulations for preventing incidents

p percentage of food-borne illness associated with food

n size of the population

c cost of illness (in US$)

v value of a statistical life

s, d observed frequencies of illness and death in population

fs, f

dexpansion factors for illness and death translating observed data into

estimated rates for the population

Production costs withquality control

c(y,q,w,k,a,b,g) = vc(y,q,w,k,a) + qc(q,w,k,b) + fc(k, g)

c total costs

vc variable costs, joint in conventional production inputs and some quality

control inputs)

qc variable costs, non-joint in conventional inputs and certain quality

control inputs,

fc conventional fixed cost component independent of both output and

quality.

a,b,g parameters of the respective components of the cost function

John M. Mantle: Benefits and costs of food safety regulation. Food Policy, 24, 605-623. 1999

C. Botulinum $18,333,349

Campylobacter jejuni $169,918,469

Ciguatera $9,513,321

Cryptosporidium $95,464,676

Cyclospora $20,889,089

E. coli non-0157 STEC $65,515,401

E. Coli O157:H7 $153,367,257

E. coli, Enterotoxigenic $132,011

Hepatitis A $54,128,295

Listeria monocytogenes $1,622,899,591

Mycobacterium bovis $26,244,795

Norovirus $6,656,158

Other chemical $13,657

Other fungal $1,329

Other parasitic $772

Plant toxin $343

Salmonella $1,973,633,824

Scombroid $4,414,540

Seafood poison $24,982

Shigella sonnei $22,770,087

Vibrio cholerae $23,172

Vibrio parahaemolyticus $18,939,883

Unidentified $1,081,016,934

TOTAL $5,343,901,935

Estimated Dollar Burden Attributable

to All FDA-regulated Foods Agent

U.S. Food and Drug Administration: Analysis of Economic Impacts – Standards for the

Growing, Harvesting, Packing and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption, 2013

„Let me give one example: the European regulation

on aflatoxins. A World Bank study has calculated that

this regulation costs Africa 670 million dollars each

year in exports of cereals, dried fruit and nuts. And

what does it achieve? It may possibly save the life of

one citizen of the European Union every two years.“

Kofi Annan - Statement on the Challenge of Eradicating Poverty

for Sustainable Development; Third United Nations Conference

on the Least Developed Countries, May 14, 2001

Relative to Codex*

Relative to the

pre-EU harmonization

(1998 trade)**

Loss in the value of

African Food exportsUS$ 670 000 000 US$ 340 000 000

Number of cancer

death saved2.3 persons 0.9 persons

The value of African food exports and human health

risk under the new EU harmonized standard relative to

those under the alternative regulatory scenarios

* 9ppb aflatoxin B1, calculated from Codex 15ppb aflatoxin total standard

** 4.8ppb aflatoxin B1

(average of 1998 individual EU countries aflatoxin regulations)

Otsuki T., Wilson J.S. and Sewadeh M.

“Saving two in a billion: quantifying the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports”

Food Policy 26, 495-514. 2001

Otsuki T., Wilson J.S. and Sewadeh M.

“Saving two in a billion: quantifying the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports”

Food Policy 26, 495-514. 2001

Trade flow of cereals and nuts2 groups of countries

15 importing countries

Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Spain, UK, USA

31 exporting countries

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy,

Kazakhstan, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Romania, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Sri

Lanka, Tanzania, Thailand, Uruguay, USA, Vietnam, Zimbabwe

One possible Scenario

All importers follow a 2ppb afaltoxin limit vs. only EU at 2ppb, other importers at status-quo

Loss of 46,1% in trade (US$ 10,9 billion)

biggest loss: Argentina (US$ 2,6 billion, -67,4%), no country gains

Sector Impact of aflatoxin considered Parameter used in social cost estimation Maize

only

Grain sector Product spoilage effects Change in wastage rates and postharvest costs 70.9

Households Human health effects The cost of premature death due to aflatoxin-related primary

liver cancer

112.7

The cost of disability due to aflatoxin-related primary liver

cancer

63.8

Poultry Increased mortality rates and

reduced feed to weight

conversion

Reduction in the unit cost of production when the aflatoxin

content of feed is reduced

28.9

Hen eggs Increased mortality rates and


conversion



6.6

Pig meat Increased mortality rates and


conversion



36.2

Total 319.1

Estimate of the 1991 Annual Social Costs of Aflatoxins

in Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand (million $A; 1$A @ 1.5 EUR)

)

For peanuts the costs were a total of 158 million $A. The estimate does not include the costs from loss of foreign markets

Godfrey Lubulwa and Jeff Davis;

Inclusion of environmental and human health impacts in agricultural research evaluations:

Review and recent evaluations.

In: ICRISAT Workshop, Hyderabad, India, 1994

Conclusion

• Food Safety is a scientific discipline and does not cost,

per se, anything

• Food Safety consequences (e.g. legal limits) can result

in enormous investment or losses

• Economic impact goes way beyond direct costs

Enjoy your

Safe Food!