Thursday, July 15, 2010

Chasing the Ambulance Away: Reshaping the Role of the Personal Injury Lawyer in Society and the Law

Denis Stearns, Founding Partner, Marler Clark LLP, PS, was the featured speaker at The Robert Leader Endowed Lecture, Thursday, June 17 at Michigan State University. The lecture entitled, Chasing the Ambulance Away: Reshaping the Role of the Personal Injury Lawyer in Society and the Law is available  online; click here.Stearns began his involvement in food-related litigation in 1993 as one of the lead defense attorneys handling the cases arising from the historic Jack in the Box E. coli O157:H7 outbreak. Since helping to found Marler Clark twelve years ago, he has worked on hundreds of food outbreak cases, including recent ones involving E. coli O157:H7-contaminated Dole spinach, Salmonella in Peter Pan peanut butter and Banquet pot pies, and a spate of outbreaks involving E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef, NestlĂ© cookie dough, and raw milk.

Wednesday, July 07, 2010

Jim Prevor: Aggrandizing the FDA

Jim Prevor, the Perishable Pundit, has written a provocative piece, “How to Improve Food Safety: Aggrandizing the FDA Only Distracts from Real Solutions,” for The New Atlantis. Jim Prevor’s lead point—that attention on improving the FDA distracts from real solutions for nagging food safety concerns with raw produce—is well taken. Ironically, the article’s leading points—a cursory dismissal of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act and a flawed discussion of product liability standards—are distractions from other solutions proposed that deserved far more attention. Indeed, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act will not solve our food safety concerns with raw produce.  Nor will the law eliminate all problems with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  Nevertheless, these points do not add up to a reason to withhold support for the bill.

But read on. Jim Prevor is a  voice crying out in the wilderness about the need to invest in food safety research, state health laboratories, food safety education, and agricultural extension. These crying needs are why discussion of strict liability versus  negligence are a distraction. No system of liability will generate the level of private investment in research and extension that are desired. Private interests should not be expected to invest in the commons. That is why there is a need for public investments in food safety research, state health laboratories, food safety education, and agricultural extension for the greater common good.

For my Francophone readership, Jim Prevor’s article was translated into French and is available here.

Summer Academy in Global Food Law & Policy, Como Lake, Italy

The 2nd EFFL Summer Academy in Global Food law & Policy will be held on July 26-30, 2010, at the beautiful Villa La Collina on the shores of the Como Lake, Italy. Building on the successful previous edition, the academy will offer scientific reflection and discourse on key legal and policy issues in European and World food law as well as information and updates on the latest developments. This will be achieved through a dynamic, informal and highly interactive five-day programme, which includes lectures, presentations, discussion groups and social activities. The faculty of the academy consists of food experts coming from relevant authorities, European and US institutions, academia, legal practice and the industry.

Speakers

Alberto ALEMANNO Associate Professor of Law HEC, Paris

David BYRNE S.C. Former EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection

Dirk DETKEN Head of the Units Legal & Policy, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Marsha A. ECHOLS, Director of the World Food Law Institute, Washington D.C.

André EVERS, Food and Veterinary Office, European Commission

Andreas KADI, Chief Science Officer, Red Bull GmbH

Susanne KETTLER, Scientific and Regulatory Affairs Director, Coca-Cola Company

Vittorio SILANO, Chair of the Scientific Committee, European Food Safety Authority

 

Topics

 The summer academy will cover main aspects of the law and policy of food regulation. Thereby, it will give a broad overview on the subject from a legal as well as a public policy point of view. In particular, it will discuss on the following:

- The global and international food regulation (WTO, SPS/Codex Alimentarius, WHO/FAO)

- The State of Play of WTO trade disputes (Hormones II, COOL, Australia Apples, EC-Poultry) and EU Food regulation (Food Supplements, enriched foodstuffs, novel food and Food Improvement Agents Package)

- The emergence of private standards
- Food quality and labelling issues

- The new challenges facing EFSA (Health Claims; Animal Cloning; Safety and claims of botanical) and its relationships with US FDA/USDA

- The risk analysis framework as applied in the food regulation sector

- The system of official controls
- Data sharing, protection and compensation in pre-market approval regimes

 

Please apply no later than May 30, 2010.
Further information, please visit: http://www.lexxion.de/2nd-effl-academy/ 

Thursday, May 06, 2010

Food Inc. and Commentary

Check out Susan Schneider's posting over at the Agricultural Law blog: Food Inc. and Commentary

GAO Reports about FDA Strengthening Oversight of Imported Food

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released the following testimony, "Food Safety: FDA Could Strengthen Oversight of Imported Food by Improving Enforcement and Seeking Additional Authorities.” GAO-10-699T, May 6 available at: http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-10-699T

Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d10699thigh.pdf

Wednesday, May 05, 2010

Salk Cures Disease, Salt Cures Ham

Stephen Colbert takes on salt with guests from the Salt Institute and Center for Science in the Public Interest:
The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
FDA Salt Regulation - Lori Roman & Michael Jacobson
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorFox News

Spend on science not marketing for a positive health claim

Companies should put more money into studies to substantiate the science of health claims, even if that means spending less on marketing, said a member of EFSA’s evaluating panel.

“Obviously science costs money. Marketing costs money, too, and there are quite a few companies where the marketing budget is larger than the scientific budget. And perhaps that is not always such a good idea,” said Henk van Loveren, professor of immunotoxicology at the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) and a member of European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA).

“If you want to do science and if you want to have a scientific basis for a claim, then you need to have the data, and it costs money if you want to do the studies,” he added.
Read the rest of the story here.

US GMO Labeling Position at Codex Could Pose Problem

“More than 80 food processing, farming and consumer organizations have called on officials to revise the US position on draft Codex food labeling guidance, saying it could cause problems for labeling food as GM-free,” notes Caroline Scott-Thomas in FoodNavigator.com.

The Codex Committee on Food Labeling (CCFL) is due to meet in Quebec City from May 3-7.  In a draft document, Codex proposes to allow countries to adopt different positions for labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods. But the United States’ position, drafted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), opposes this, stating that Codex should not “suggest or imply that GM/GE foods are in any way different from other foods” by allowing countries the option of mandatory labeling. The position is due to be presented at the CCFL meeting next month.

The Codex Alimentarius Committee is a United Nations organization that sets food safety and labeling standards, which are those used in settling World Trade Organization disputes.

The letter is available here.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Food Labeling Workshop at MSU July 28-29


Institute for Food Laws & Regulations





» Hurry, registration is limited
Food Labeling Workshop
 

July 28-29, 2010   ·   Lansing, Michigan
This workshop presents the FDA requirements for US food labeling.  The workshop format and materials are designed to provide a user-friendly approach for those new to food labeling and also provide a thorough system and reference for those experienced with food label design and review.  The workshop format allows time for questions. The focus is practical, and students are encouraged to bring problem labels for hands-on review.    
For more information, click here.

Early bird discount (by May 14, 2008):  $895
Free Bonus
Workshop participants will receive the Guide to U.S. Food Labeling Law (Vol. I) by Peter Barton Hutt, Esq. The Guide provides practical guidance and expert advice on FDA, FTC, and USDA labeling requirements in plain English. The Guide is an invaluable resource for regulatory officials, industry personnel, and anyone reviewing food labels. 
The Instructors
Neal Fortin, is Professor and Director of the Institute for Food Laws & Regulations, Michigan State University.  His law practice experience concentrated on food law, labeling, ingredient evaluation, advertising, legislation, and administrative law. Professor Fortin also has 20 years experience in food regulatory work with the state of Michigan, including being the primary drafter of Michigan Food Law of 2000.  He has trained more than 1,500 people on the labeling law. 

Constance Henry
, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 

James E. Hoadley 
is a senior consultant with EAS Consultant Group. In Dr. Hoadley's 20-year FDA career he served ten years a Senior Regulatory Scientist in the Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling and Dietary Supplements (ONPLDS) with primary responsibilities in food label claim regulations. Dr. Hoadley has been directly involved in the scientific review and drafting of authorizing regulation, or denials, of nearly all health claim petitions received by CFSAN over the last decade. Dr. Hoadley has received the CFSAN Distinguished Career Service Award. 

John Spink 
is the Director of the Packaging for Food and Product Protection Initiative at Michigan State University (MSU) and a faculty at the MSU School of Packaging. John developed and teaches the graduate classes “Packaging for Food Safety” and “Food Protection & Defense – Packaging Module”, and the “Future of Sustainability.”
IFLR Internet Courses
 Learn more about IFLR at:
www.IFLR.msu.edu or call (517) 355-8295
      Email: IFLR@msu.edu                       Telephone: (517) 355-8295
Fax: (517) 432-1492                        web:
www.IFLR.msu.edu   
Institute for Food Laws and Regulation
Michigan State University, 140 G.M. Trout Building, East Lansing, MI 48824


 If you would like to be sure of receiving future IFLR announcements:
Subscribe to the IFLR mailing list

Saturday, April 24, 2010

More Frooty Claims

A class action lawsuit was refilled against Kellogg USA alleging that “Froot Loops”—here’s the shock—contain no actual fruit!  The plaintiff said he was duped by the “brightly colored cereal made to resemble fruit” depicted on the package, the use of the word “Froot,” and depictions of real fruit on the label.“ He finds these practices likely to mislead and deceive a ‘reasonable consumer’ such as himself . . .”  The plaintiff, Roy Werbel, claims he was deceived over a four year period when he bought the cereal.

I sympathized with Mr. Werbel’s plight. I really do. Really. Assuming he honestly ate Froot Loops for four years believing they were made from real fruit. Nonetheless, I am finding it hard to believe enough similarly situated consumers are out there for a class action.  Can there really be a whole class of reasonable consumers that eat neon-colored, candy flavored loops of froot for the real fruit content?

You can read more here: Froot Loops’  complaint. I wrote about an earlier complaint here: “I Was Duped by the Loops of Fruit.” The case, Roy Werbel v. Kellogg USA, Case. No. CV 10-1660 EMC, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on April 19, 2010.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

If you had any doubts about globalization of food

With Flights Grounded, Kenya's Produce Wilts by Jeffrey Gettleman of the New York Times discusses how the volcanic eruption in Iceland has devastated the horticulture businesses in Kenya. Horticulture is Kenya's top foreign exchange producer and a critical piece of the national economy.

Consumer Representatives Needed for FDA Advisory Committees

Do you want to make a difference in FDA’s decision-making? Do you have ties to consumer groups or community-based organizations? Can you analyze scientific data? If so, plan to attend FDA’s public meeting on April 30, 2010, in Rockville, Md., to learn what it takes to become a consumer representative on FDA’s advisory committees and panels. More information is available here.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Proposed Free Speech About Science A...

Peter M. Jaensch, in his blog post Proposed Food Labeling Changes May be Hard for Pharmaceuticals to Swallow, provides a snapshot introduced H.R. 4913–-the Free Speech About Science Act of 2010, which would amend the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) to expand disease and health-related claims in the labeling of some foods and dietary supplements. The bill would also add a new subsection to FD&C Act to permit certain claims "to diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure, or prevent a specific disease or class of diseases" in labeling for dietary supplements. These changes, Jaensch notes, "would permit food and dietary supplement manufacturers to make claims similar to those typically made for drug products, without subjecting them to the same degree of oversight or requiring the same depth of scientific analysis."

More efficient methods of food-recall notices needed

MSU professor Ewen Todd discussed food recalls at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting. "As our food supply becomes increasingly global and interconnected, food recalls that were largely regional in the past have the potential of injuring vast numbers of consumers across the United States in relatively short periods of time," Todd said. "For this reason, time is of the essence in delivering targeted recall messages to consumers through various means to reduce the risk of illness. Direct phone calls, e-mail messages and even Facebook are now being explored for a more targeted approach, as opposed to the more traditional media and word of mouth."

Menu Nutrition Labeling and Consumer Choices

Information is beginning to come in on the effect of providing nutrition information on menus in chain restaurants. The result is consumers make lower calorie selections.  Here are some of the studies and commentaries:
The Stanford Graduate School of Business study, Calorie Posting in Chain Restaurants, looked at the effect of mandatory calorie posting on Starbucks stores in New York City. Customers averaged six percent less calories per transaction.
An Atlantic article, Calorie Labeling Works, II, which also references New York City health department's Preliminary  Data from New York City , and a Yale study, Evaluating the Impact of Menu Labeling on Food Choices.
Nutrition Menu Labeling May Lead to Lower-Calorie Restaurant Meal Choices for Children in Pediatrics, which found that when nutritional information is available on menus, on average pick lower-calorie foods for their children. In BusinessWeek, Listing Calories on Fast-Food Menus Cuts Kids' Intake, quotes Dr. Pooja Tandon: "When parents are provided with calorie information they chose about 100 calories less [per meal] for their 3- to 6-year-old child compared to parents who didn't have that information."
The Wall Street Journal, Restaurants Begin to Count Calories, notes, "Restaurants from Applebee's to Starbucks are pushing new low-calorie menu items in an effort to attract customers who say they want healthier options.  Chain restaurants, traditionally known for peddling fatty food and sugary drinks, hope that offering healthier fare will give them a competitive advantage, especially with the prospect of a federal nutrition labeling law looming."

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

How Great is the Burden of Foodborne Illness?

Susan Jones, “Counting the global burden of foodborne disease,” Speaking of Medicine (Nov. 2, 2009):
[Y]ou may be surprised to find that the global burden of disease attributable to foodborne illness, which is perhaps the most basic information needed to push forward research and action on foodborne illness, is not known. Why is there such an apparent lack of interest in documenting the scope of illnesses that affect people from all countries? One reason may be a common misconception that foodborne diseases are mild and self-limiting. A second and very important reason is that it’s often incredibly difficult to attribute foodborne illnesses and deaths to a specific foodstuff. And a third reason is that there is no well-heeled funder providing the impetus and cash to tackle foodborne illness, unlike other global problems such as HIV, malaria and TB.
In 2007, the WHO launched an international initiative to tackle foodborne disease. The WHO Initiative to Estimate the Global Burden of Foodborne Diseases aims to quantify how many people die from, or are affected by, all major foodborne causes each year. The FERG (Foodborne Disease Burden Epidemiology Reference Group) initiative, led by Claudia Stein and Jorgen Schlundt from the WHO, aims to set the problem of foodborne illness incontext. . .
FERG has commissioned research seeking to quantify burdens of different foodborne diseases. Early reports were presented at the meeting and revealed the shocking level of the problem. A systematic review by Christa Fischer-Walker and Robert Black from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in the US revealed that there are a whopping 5 billion episodes of diarrhea in children aged >5 annually, with 3.2 billion cases in South-East Asia. Specific inspection of papers reporting deaths revealed that there were more than 1.15 million estimated deaths from diarrhea in South East Asia and Africa each year in children >5; this is almost a million more deaths than was previously estimated. The paucity of data was laid bare by these preliminary results, with no data for China, Latin America, the Middle East. Pathogens in the spotlight in these systematic reviews were the usual suspects, including E. coli, Shigella, Vibrio cholerae, Campylobacter and Salmonella. This is not a burden solely borne by those living in poverty—455 million episodes of diarrhea each year in the Americas and 419 million episodes each year in Europe. The data are so limited that these global estimates are virtually bound to underreport the problem. . . .

Food in Bloom: Cross Pollination and Cultivation of Food Systems, Cultures and Methods

The Twelfth Annual Joint Annual Meeting of the
Association for the Study of Food and Society (ASFS)
Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society (AFHVS)
with the Society for the Anthropology of Food and Nutrition (SAFN) June 2 to June 6, 2010.
Hosted by Indiana University, Bloomington, IN

For more information click here.

Saturday, November 21, 2009

Time to Put Aside Biotech Biases

The World Summit on Food Security in Rome just finished a few days ago. A few words of Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the chairman of NestlĂ©, talking about how hostility to new food technologies exacerbated the global food crisis by holding back agricultural productivity, “It is disheartening to see how easily a group of well-intentioned and well-fed activists can decide about new technologies at the expense of those who are starving.”

Some have dismissed these remarks. Harder to dismiss are the thoughts of Paul Collier, a professor of economics at Oxford University and author of “The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It,” in the New York Times,
The debate over genetically modified crops and food has been contaminated by political and aesthetic prejudices: hostility to U.S. corporations, fear of big science and romanticism about local, organic production.
Food supply is too important to be the plaything of these prejudices. If there is not enough food we know who will go hungry.
Genetic modification is analogous to nuclear power: nobody loves it, but climate change has made its adoption imperative. As Africa’s climate deteriorates, it will need to accelerate crop adaptation. As population grows it will need to raise yields. Genetic modification offers both faster crop adaptation and a biological, rather than chemical, approach to yield increases.
Opponents talk darkly of risks but provide no scientific basis for their amorphous expressions of concern. Meanwhile the true risks are mounting. Over the past decade global food demand has risen more rapidly than expected. Supply may not keep pace with demand, inducing rising prices and periodic spikes. If this happens there is a risk that the children of the urban poor will suffer prolonged bouts of malnutrition.
African governments are now recognizing that by imitating the European ban on genetic modification they have not reduced the risks facing their societies but increased them. Thirteen years, during which there could have been research on African crops, have been wasted. Africa has been in thrall to Europe, and Europe has been in thrall to populism.
Genetic modification alone will not solve the food problem: like climate change, there is no single solution. But continuing refusal to use it is making a difficult problem yet more daunting.
I have written on a related aspect of this issue, In Lean Times, Biotech Grains Are Less Taboo. When there is no direct burden to people, they tend to take “better safe than sorry” as their overarching risk-management principle. Sometimes this approach works, but it also can magnify risk grossly out of proportion to reality.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Google legal research is free!


Google launched a free online case law search system available through Google Scholar (select scholar as search option, then legal cases). Of course, it's not LEXIS or Westlaw, but it is surprisingly comprehensive and robust. Every citation is hyperlinked to the full text of the opinion cited. It looks like a great tool for preliminary research. One announcement is here.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Ensuring Global Food Safety


Ensuring Global Food Safety: Exploring Global Harmonization, edited by Christine E. Boisrobert et al., is now published. I wrote a very small part of this large book. You can find out more here.