Some hunger for food labels

After recalls, shoppers want to know the origins of globalized groceries

Take a look at the meal you put on the table tonight, and you'll likely be looking at an international effort. The steak may have come from a cow raised in Colorado, while the carrots were grown in Canada and the apple juice imported from China.

Many consumers consider the globalization of the food chain a good thing; you can get any food you want any time of the year. But several recent recalls of tainted food have some shoppers questioning exactly where their food comes from and how safe it is. On Thursday, there was another one: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned consumers to toss certain cans of hot dog chili sauce linked to botulism.

This week, President Bush created a panel to investigate food imports and Congress held hearings asking some of the same questions consumers are asking.

As local shoppers have found, the answers are far from adequate.

"You just buy it and hope for the best," said Marsha Owen, who was shopping this week at Whole Foods in Raleigh. "I won't be buying as many things from China, I can say that."

Figuring out where the food on grocery store shelves comes from isn't always easy.

Country-of-origin labels -- telling shoppers the country in which a product was grown, caught or raised -- would do that but right now they're required only on seafood. Labels for meat, produce and peanuts won't start until September 2008.

Opponents of the labeling say knowing where food originates doesn't make it safe. Advocates say such labels will make it easier to trace food to its source if there is a problem.

America's food safety problem is complicated but starts with this: We are importing more food and the government agencies charged with keeping food safe don't have enough funding or resources, said Chris Waldrop, director of the food policy institute for the Consumer Federation of America.

U.S. agricultural imports increased from $45.7 billion in 2003 to $64 billion in 2006, according to the Department of Commerce. We're on track for an even bigger 2007, with imports projected to top $70 billion.

Despite the dramatic increase, the FDA has allocated only $10.6 million of its $2.1 billion 2008 budget for strengthening food safety. According to the agency's Web site, there are more than 7,500 food inspectors nationwide.

Chasing events

"They don't have the tools that they need in a modern-day society to deal with these problems and prevent them from happening," Waldrop said.

"It needs the ability to go into other countries and inspect," he said. "Otherwise, they're just chasing after these events after the outbreak has occurred."

Country-of-origin labeling for meat and produce was supposed to take effect three years ago. But lobbyists, primarily for the beef industry, enlisted the help of congressional Republicans to delay the change. Trade associations are still fighting it.

In a statement released in March, Food Marketing Institute president and CEO Tim Hammonds called the mandatory labeling law "flawed."

The Food Marketing Institute, which represents 1,500 food retailers and wholesalers, argued that the costs are prohibitive. They point to seafood labeling, as an example.

According to the institute, the cost per store to retailers to implement the labeling was between $9,000 and $16,000 -- not the $1,530 the USDA projected.

Those numbers are hard to validate, said Steven Wilson, chief quality officer for the Commerce Department's seafood inspection program and national director for the American Society for Quality.

"Yes, sometimes it does cost money because it means a change in what you usually do," he said. "Will it cost money to the consumer? Probably no more than a penny a pound. Usually the people who say that are manufacturers or brokers or importers who don't want to comply."