They’re both wrong.
"Canada’s public and private sectors are not doing enough to prevent foodborne illnesses," writes Dr. Paul Hébert, Editor-in-Chief with coauthors. "Among the major failings are inadequate active surveillance systems, an inability to trace foods from "farm to fork" and a lack of incentives to keep food safe along the "farm to fork" pathway."
Maybe. But citing self-published reports that haven’t been peer-reviewed doesn’t lend much credibility to the argument. And speaking on behalf of all Canadians, with statements like the following further disminish credibility.
“Canadians are usually good at regulation. Canada’ s pragmatic yet stringent regulation of financial institutions ensured that the economic downturn has been less severe here than in other countries. In health, our blood system’s surveillance programs and ability to trace products from ‘vein to vein’ is another fine model.”
The way Canada handled the emergence of HIV in the blood supply in the early 1980s was an international embarrassment. Good regulation does not equate to good enforcement. I don’t know what banking has to do with food safety other than it’s another myth Canadians like to comfort themselves with at night, content their world doesn’t contain the harsh nasties of other places.
Oops, that’s a generalization. I should stay away from that; so should editors of journals.
Ron Doering, an Ottawa lawyer and a former CFIA president, will give a speech on food safety at McGill University on Friday during the launch of the school’s new Chair in Food Safety, the first of its kind in Canada. Although he agrees the system could use some improvement, Mr. Doering said it is not in a ramshackle state.
“I’m not aware of any system anywhere in the world that’s better than ours on public health reporting for foodborne illness,” he said. “It doesn’t mean it’s perfect. There’s no zero risk. But I’m not aware of any study that demonstrates in any persuasive way that any country has a better food inspection system than Canada.”
Doering is right there is no published study that demonstrates one food safety system is better than another; such comprehensive studies are difficult, expensive and don’t mean much. But the listeria outbreak of 2008 in which 23 died was another international embarrassment, the Ontario salmonella-in-sprouts outbreak that sickened over 600 was another, and what is going on with E. coli O157:H7 in walnuts is another shameful addition.
There are lots of great epidemiologists and public health professionals in the Canadian system – but they are stifled by a system that rewards mediocrity.
The only way consumers will be able to exercise choice is to market food safety at retail, get beyond the platitudes, and show some data.