S
Sid9
Guest
sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-flafda0718nbjul18,0,7425419.story
South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Plan to cut FDA labs sparks criticism
Employees fear food inspections would suffer
By Claudia Lauer
Los Angeles Times
July 18, 2007
Washington The Food and Drug Administration would be unable to ensure the
nation's food safety if a plan to close half its testing laboratories goes
through as suggested, a House panel was told Tuesday.
The agency has come under increased scrutiny in recent months because of a
succession of well-publicized problems with food, including peanut butter
contaminated with salmonella, spinach contaminated with E. coli and fish
imported from China and found to have traces of illegal antibiotics.
In testimony Tuesday before a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee,
congressional investigators criticized the reorganization plan and said they
doubted the FDA's ability to police food imports.
"The FDA lacks sufficient resources and authority to be effective," said
David Nelson, chief investigator for the Energy and Commerce Committee.
In his opening statement, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the
subcommittee on oversight and investigations, said the FDA inspects fewer
than 1 percent of the food imports that come through the nation's ports and
takes samples from only a fraction of those.
Investigators said much of the problem stems from the laboratories being
understaffed or lacking the authority to scrutinize shipments of products
unless they are on a watch list from the FDA head office.
They argued that closing seven of 13 laboratories, as FDA Commissioner
Andrew von Eschenbach is suggesting, would only weaken the agency's ability
to police imports.
Investigators said they feared that closing the laboratories could have a
negative effect on food security at ports of entry by depleting their
already understaffed operations.
They said many foreign food importers have learned how to get around FDA
testing by shipping their products directly to cities where there are no
agency laboratories.
For example, they said, because the FDA laboratory in San Francisco has
expertise in examining seafood, companies have started shipping more fish to
Las Vegas.
"Stop the reorganization. They have given us no justification for the
closures," Nelson said. "There is a lot of indication that it will cost more
than it will save."
Directors from five of the targeted laboratories also testified, arguing
that each of their facilities had special programs that weren't available
elsewhere, including the only food irradiation testing site in Winchester,
Mass.
Von Eschenbach said the plan was getting an early bad rap.
"I want to make it very clear, the closures are for one purpose and one
purpose only: to bring the FDA laboratory infrastructure into the 21st
century," he said.
"It's going to be very painful, but we are not closing labs with the idea of
eliminating functionality."
Von Eschenbach said new consolidated district offices would have
state-of-the-art robotics equipment that would make testing easier and in
some cases more portable, allowing for more agents to go out to sites to
test products on the spot.
The current system requires most samples to be transported to a laboratory
for testing.
South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Plan to cut FDA labs sparks criticism
Employees fear food inspections would suffer
By Claudia Lauer
Los Angeles Times
July 18, 2007
Washington The Food and Drug Administration would be unable to ensure the
nation's food safety if a plan to close half its testing laboratories goes
through as suggested, a House panel was told Tuesday.
The agency has come under increased scrutiny in recent months because of a
succession of well-publicized problems with food, including peanut butter
contaminated with salmonella, spinach contaminated with E. coli and fish
imported from China and found to have traces of illegal antibiotics.
In testimony Tuesday before a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee,
congressional investigators criticized the reorganization plan and said they
doubted the FDA's ability to police food imports.
"The FDA lacks sufficient resources and authority to be effective," said
David Nelson, chief investigator for the Energy and Commerce Committee.
In his opening statement, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the
subcommittee on oversight and investigations, said the FDA inspects fewer
than 1 percent of the food imports that come through the nation's ports and
takes samples from only a fraction of those.
Investigators said much of the problem stems from the laboratories being
understaffed or lacking the authority to scrutinize shipments of products
unless they are on a watch list from the FDA head office.
They argued that closing seven of 13 laboratories, as FDA Commissioner
Andrew von Eschenbach is suggesting, would only weaken the agency's ability
to police imports.
Investigators said they feared that closing the laboratories could have a
negative effect on food security at ports of entry by depleting their
already understaffed operations.
They said many foreign food importers have learned how to get around FDA
testing by shipping their products directly to cities where there are no
agency laboratories.
For example, they said, because the FDA laboratory in San Francisco has
expertise in examining seafood, companies have started shipping more fish to
Las Vegas.
"Stop the reorganization. They have given us no justification for the
closures," Nelson said. "There is a lot of indication that it will cost more
than it will save."
Directors from five of the targeted laboratories also testified, arguing
that each of their facilities had special programs that weren't available
elsewhere, including the only food irradiation testing site in Winchester,
Mass.
Von Eschenbach said the plan was getting an early bad rap.
"I want to make it very clear, the closures are for one purpose and one
purpose only: to bring the FDA laboratory infrastructure into the 21st
century," he said.
"It's going to be very painful, but we are not closing labs with the idea of
eliminating functionality."
Von Eschenbach said new consolidated district offices would have
state-of-the-art robotics equipment that would make testing easier and in
some cases more portable, allowing for more agents to go out to sites to
test products on the spot.
The current system requires most samples to be transported to a laboratory
for testing.