Working through California’s Environmental Protection Agency, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) will collaborate with stakeholders and the legislature to advance Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) reforms that would end frivolous “shake-down” lawsuits, improve warnings about dangerous chemicals and strengthen the science that supports warning levels. The governor will have to convince environmental and consumer groups that the reforms are needed; any changes will apparently require the approval of at least two-thirds of both legislative houses, and supporters believe that the current law works well to force businesses to cease making products with chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. Numerous lawsuits have been filed against food companies under the law since it was adopted in 1986 for various substances found in foods, including acrylamide, MEI-4 and lead. According to a May 7, 2013, press release, the governor will seek to (i) cap or limit attorney’s fees in Prop.…
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently announced its decision to delay its final opinion on the safety of aspartame until November 2013 “to allow sufficient time to consider and address feedback, including new information, resulting from the public consultation on its draft opinion.” According to the agency, the Scientific Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources Added to Food (ANS Panel) received more than 200 comments on its January 9, 2013, draft opinion “on issues such as how EFSA’s experts select studies for its risk assessments, the safety of the metabolites of aspartame and how best to express uncertainties highlighted in the draft opinion.” Based on this feedback, ANS Panel experts have purportedly “identified aspects of their draft opinion and key steps in their scientific approach that they would like to clarify further, including the expression of uncertainties, before finalizing their conclusions.” Finding that aspartame and its breakdown products “pose…
The European Commission (EC) has introduced a “landmark package to modernize, simplify and strengthen the agri-food chain in Europe” by reducing the number of food and feed regulations from 70 pieces to five. In addition to addressing regulatory enforcement and funding, the proposed package describes new procedures, preventative measures and risk-based controls related to plant and animal health, including plant reproductive materials. Among other things, the recommendations discuss (i) combining animal health regulations under a single piece of legislation focused on preventative efforts, livestock traceability and disease prioritization; (ii) upgrading the plant health regime to increase surveillance of both domestic and imported crops; and (iii) implementing “more simplified and flexible rules for the marketing of seeds and other plant reproductive material… to ensure productivity, adaptability and diversity of Europe’s crop production.” To finance these goals and improve accountability, the new rules would change the way member states fund official controls…
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently issued a report to explore whether U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed rules on labeling muscle cuts of meats will comply with World Trade Organization (WTO) findings that current country-of-origin labeling (COOL) requirements discriminate against livestock imports. Titled “Country-of-Origin Labeling for Foods and the WTO Trade Dispute on Meat Labeling,” the report reviews events that led to the WTO ruling which followed a challenge filed by Canada and Mexico to the 2008 farm bill amendments that adopted the disputed COOL provisions. A WTO arbitrator established May 23, 2013, as the deadline for the United States to comply. Various stakeholders have apparently presented a number of options to bring the United States into compliance, and USDA issued a proposed rule in March. Canada and Mexico have evidently argued that the proposed rule does not fulfill U.S. WTO obligations, and the CRS report notes that this…
U.S. Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), have written a letter to the Office of Management and Budget asking for the release of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) voluntary industry guidelines for levels of arsenic in fruit juices currently under review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Citing studies that have found “concerning” levels of arsenic in food and beverages, DeLauro and Pallone assert that FDA’s guidance document will be “instrumental” to industry members and consumers in their efforts to address “this public health issue.” It is “inexcusable that the guidelines are stalled while consumers continue to be exposed to potentially dangerous levels of arsenic,” the letter states. “Inorganic arsenic is a known carcinogen that can increase the risk of bladder, lung and skin cancers, [which is] particularly concerning because children consume large quantities of juice and may be at risk for more harmful…
Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) have introduced bipartisan legislation to combat antimicrobial drug resistance by requiring the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to report more information on the annual sales of antibiotics used among industrial farm animals. The “Antimicrobial Data Collection Act” would also reportedly give the agency a deadline to finalize policies proposed in 2012 that would eliminate the use of antibiotics for growth-promoting uses. “Antimicrobial resistance is a public health concern that needs to be adequately addressed,” Gillibrand said in a statement. “Increased data collection, transparency, and accountability are part of a comprehensive solution that will help protect American citizens from drug resistant microbes, saving lives and tax dollars.” “Our bill would not create any new reporting requirements for drug companies, feed mills, or farmers. It would only require the FDA to provide more transparency in reporting the antimicrobial data which is already being reported to it,”…
A recent report issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has allegedly found that “approximately 13% of adults’ total caloric intakes came from added sugars between 2005 and 2010” despite government recommendations that “no more than 5% to 15% of calories should come from solid fats and added sugars.” R. Bethene Ervin, et al., “Consumption of Added Sugars Among U.S. Adults, 2005-2010,” NCHS Data Brief, May 2013. Based on data from the Natonal Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2010, the report also suggested that (i) “men consumed a larger amount of calories from added sugars than women, but not when their added sugar intakes were expressed as a percentage of total calories,” and (ii) “the percentage of calories from added sugars increased with increasing age for children and adolescents, but there was no difference in added sugars consumption between income groups.” In addition, CDC researchers noted that…
According to a new Consumer Reports study that analyzed ground turkey purchased at retail store nationwide, more than one-half of the 257 samples tested were contaminated with fecal bacteria and “almost all” of the diseasecausing organisms “proved resistant to one or more of the antibiotics commonly used to fight them.” The magazine tested both conventional meat and meat from birds that were not fed antibiotics, and, although all were reportedly found to be equally likely to contain the bacteria the magazine considered in its study, bacteria on the antibiotic-free ground turkey “were much less likely to be antibiotic-resistant.” “Turkeys are given antibiotics to treat acute illness,” the report stated, “but healthy animals may also get drugs daily in their food and water to boost their rate of weight gain and to prevent disease.” This practice “is speeding the growth of drug-resistant superbugs, a serious health concern. People sickened by those…
University of Arkansas School of Law Professor Susan Schneider has authored a post on the Agricultural Law Blog agreeing with a Federation of Southern Cooperatives post refuting claims by a New York Times reporter of fraud linked to the recovery of settlement proceeds (the Pigford settlement) in litigation alleging U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) loan program discrimination against African-American, Hispanic, Native American, and women farmers. Schneider states that on reading the April 25, 2013, New York Times article, titled “U.S. Opens Spigot After Farmers Claim Discrimination,” “I was alarmed to see errors, omissions, and misleading references . . . [and] I am very disappointed that the author appeared more interested in producing a salacious story than in treating the issue with the respect and depth that it deserved.” She includes a number of details overlooked in the newspaper article and concludes, “casting the story in the cynical tone of political…
According to a news source, a California judge recently determined that the California Department of Food and Agriculture did not comply with statutory requirements when it created the state’s Raisin Marketing Board 15 years ago, agreeing with a challenge filed by dissident raisin growers and packers who have long complained about paying for marketing with which they did not agree. Superior Court Judge Raymond Cadei reportedly determined that the raisin industry did not prove that the industry was in crisis when the board was formed, stating, “[t]he record shows that there was no evidence of the kind of severe adverse economic conditions the Marketing Act was intended to address.” The court also ordered the board to repay the plaintiffs’ assessments, which could reach millions of dollars. Board officials have indicated they will explore all legal options to keep the board operating. See The Fresno Bee, April 27, 2013.
