Food Safety Inspection Service Ethics

As food moves through several steps from production to consumption, its risk of becoming unsafe is very high. Thus, the creation and implementation of laws are indispensable to minimize the risk of unsafe food. However, food laws are not intended to oversee the quality of the food.

Then Tom continues education with a little education on the variety of antibiotics and how “crucial for treating serious human infections” (Philpott). Using a hotlink to a well-known credible organization like the “Food and Drug Administration” back up some of his statistics regarding over use of antibiotics in livestock operations. Tom continually notes

The Meat Inspection Act of 1906 was an attempt to regulate the meatpacking industry and to assure consumers that the meat they were eating was safe. In brief, this act made compulsory the careful inspection of meat before its consummation, established sanitary standards for slaughterhouses and processing plants, and required continuous U.S. Department of Agriculture inspection of meat processing and packaging. Yet, the most important objectives set by the law are the prevention of adulterated or misbranded livestock and products from being commercialized and sold as food, and the making sure that meat and all its products are processed and prepared in the adequate sanitary and hygienic conditions (Reeves 35). Imported meat and its various

A couple times a year local and national mass media put the spotlight on problems connected to antibiotic overuse. Some people consider those problems to be real and serious, and others think that the discussed topics are nothing more than new “fashionable” subjects to talk about, distracting people from “real” problems, such as climbing gas prices or war expenses. Meanwhile, antibiotic overuse continues as a common practice among US doctors and agribusinesses for the last 20 years. The practice of antibiotic overuse has put patient’s health at risk, contributed to antibiotic resistance and increased bacterial mutation to a new, stronger level; as well as it hitting the economy with new costly expenses in health care. It is time to stop

"This is no fairy story and no joke; the meat will be shoveled into carts and the man who did the shoveling will not trouble to lift out a rat even when he saw one." (Sinclair “The Jungle”). When it comes to having safe and approved food, our esteemed nation does not have the greatest reputation. Ever since the use of slaughter houses and meat packing plants began, people have been getting severely ill and even dying

In recent years, Americans have been blaming antibiotics used in animals to be processed for food for many of the growing number of health problems in developed countries. Fast food restaurants are making movements to remove antibiotic treated meats from their menus. This movement is causing quite the stir in consumers and livestock producers alike. Do the antibiotics used in beef really contribute to antibiotic resistant diseases? Should antibiotics be outlawed in the use of farm animals? The eradication of antibiotic use in America’s beef industry is not feasible due to its usage in the treatment and control of deadly or discomforting diseases.

By weight, eighty percent of antibiotics are used in agriculture to “fatten animals” and “protect them from the conditions in which they are raised” (McKenna). Animals are given micro-doses of antibiotics, that is, a small amount of antibiotics to prevent diseases from occurring. This micro-dosage amount allows for mutation that Fleming described. The routine use of antibiotics in agriculture has led to “[sixty-five] percent of chicken breasts” and “[forty-four] percent of ground beef” to house bacteria “resistant to tetracycline”. Additionally, “[eleven] percent of pork chops carried bacteria resistant to five classes of drugs” (McKenna). These bacteria then spread from animals to the humans who eat them, causing humans to get infections which cannot be treated. The issue isn’t as simple as ceasing to give antibiotics to animals. Most animals raised for consumption live in an environment ripe for infections and diseases to spread. Instead of giving the animals more room to live, the majority of farmers opt to give the animals antibiotics. For cattle, This prevents diseases and death to the immature weaned calves and cattle which saves the rancher both time and money—passing on the savings to the consumers. In a free market society higher prices tend to not go well. However, if antibiotics became useless farmers would have to “[enlarge] barns, [cut] down on crowding, and [delay] weaning”, which ultimately would increase the costs of raising livestock

coli and Salmonella” (Veldman). This statement allows the reader to see the negative impact of antibiotics used in livestock. Gay Miller elaborates on the subject when speaking with Veldman, saying, “Of course, it raises concerns about resistance issues… but from my perspective the most important thing to reflect on with regard to antibiotic resistance is from a benefit/cost perspective.” Veldman continues to explain that the National Cattleman’s Beef Association Website also says, “…science has not found a link between the use of antibiotics in food animals and development of resistant bacteria that might compromise the efficacy of related antibiotics in human medicine.” These two statements by Veldman and Miller tell the reader that even though there is a chance that certain antibiotics used in livestock could be harmful to consumers, there is no scientific evidence to support

The main threat for the overuse of antibiotics are the creation of antibiotic resistant microbes, or more commonly called superbugs. Antibiotics are used to kill mass amounts of bacteria, but they cannot kill all of them. Some bacteria still survive, so they will reproduce and pass their genes down to their offspring. The offspring will now have their parents genes, which includes being resistant to a certain type of antibiotic. Tom Philpott, an award winning writer about food politics, explained, “And the worst part is that antibiotics use in factory farms is not mostly matter of keeping animals healthy.” Philpott is saying farmers mostly use antibiotics to promote faster growth and not to treat sickness. American Cyanamid, a pharmaceutical company, tested animals with vitamin B12 to see if they grew faster. The animals saw significant weight gain, and more experiments were tested. What American Cyanamid found was the antibiotic in vitamin B12 was actually causing the weight gain. This discovery led to mass amounts of antibiotics being used in animals. In 1950, before the discovery, there were 1.6 million chicken farms raising a total of about 560 million chickens. 28 years later, 3 billion chickens were being hatched in about 31,000 large farms (Philpott). The discovery led to mass expansion of farms, because animals were able to grow faster and bigger, so farms took advantage. Factory farms have been overusing

FSIS examines and screens all meat, poultry and egg items sold to guarantee consistence with obligatory U.S. sustenance wellbeing measures and investigation enactment. There is required review of domesticated animals and poultry before butcher, keeping ailing creatures from entering the nourishment supply. There is likewise an obligatory after death examination of each cadaver for unmistakable deformities that can influence wellbeing and quality. USDA sets up sterile gauges for slaughterhouses and meat handling offices with USDA enrolled offices on-going checking and assessment of operations. A system executed to decrease the rate of sustenance borne sickness inferable from meat, poultry and egg

The food system in the U.S. has changed a lot over these decades. In the past, people grew crops in their land and vegetables in their gardens. Today, the food system is dominated by the industrial farms and food companies. The industrial food system prevents us from knowing the food. We do not know where the food comes from, how it is produced, and what the conditions that animals live in are. Animals, such as cattle and chickens, are raised in concentrated feedlots where the conditions are terrible and the space is narrow. When it comes to the meatpacking, we do not know how the animals are slaughtered, gutted, and skinned. The operations are invisible and conducted behind walls. The industrial food system aims to produce more food faster and more cheaply. However, it hides lots of truths, such as its effect on consumers’ health, the environment, and the society. If there were more transparency in the food system, the inhumane practice of meatpacking would be reduced; the living conditions of animals would be improved; fewer fertilizers and pesticides would be used in agriculture; consumers would have the chance to see how the food is produced and make a wiser choice of what to eat; and the current industrial food system might be replaced.

Food is considered a basic necessity in order to live. Each year, foodborne illnesses strike 48 million Americans, hospitalizing approximately 128,000 people and killing 3,000 (“Estimating Foodborne Illness”). Over time, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has implemented various legislations in order to prevent illnesses and reduce risks. In 2011, the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) was signed by the President which was considered to be a “historical legislation” (Hamburg). Along the course of its development, the Executive and Legislative branches of the United States government played a significant role in approving and modifying the food regulation law. Since its approval as a legislation, the policies have been implemented in order to prevent problems that can make people sick however it is still a work in progress (Taylor).

Believe it or not, there was a time when the food industry was 100% natural and free of man-made inventions. But, as population grew, so did the efforts to try and produce more food for a cheaper price. Caring for livestock during the 1900’s was not an easy task because, as everyone might know by now, animals are fragile and susceptible to many diseases which led to costly deaths that companies were not fond of. It wasn’t until the 1950’s that a group of scientists from the US, discovered that adding antibiotics in animal feed increased the growth rate of the livestock. By 2001, The Union of Concerned Scientists reported that nearly 90% of the antibiotics used in livestock were being used for non-therapeutic purposes, in other words, it was

The documentary Resistance explains how using antibiotics on livestock enables farmers to house animals in deplorable conditions and maintain their health efficiently. Although high heat kills them, the superbugs spread from animals to people through raw or undercooked meat. This constant treatment of antibiotics allows for the bacteria to develop a way around the antibiotics, making it more difficult for hospitals to treat

People today believe that the government is supposed to eliminate any possible danger from the food they consume, but that is not the case. In the book Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of The All-American Meal written by Eric Schlosser, he discusses numerous problems with food production. Some of these issues are discussed in the “Epilogue”, “What’s In Meat”, and “Most Dangerous Job” chapters where Schlosser elaborates on the government’s role and how workers are mistreated. In the article, “U.S. Meatpacking Under Fire: Human Rights Group Calls for Line Speed Reduction, ERGO Standards,” it explains how the working conditions in the meat packaging industry are hazardous and are violations of basic human rights. Although workers are affected by the government’s role in the food industry, consumers are affected as well. The consequences of the lack of governmental oversight, like food contamination and others, are discussed in the film Food Inc. “Escaping the Regulatory Net: Why Regulatory Reform Can Fail Consumers”, an academic journal written by Henry Rothstein, explains how “putting consumers first” is difficult for the Food Standards Agency (FSA) to accomplish because with consumer’s interests that means regulatory reforms are most likely going to fail.