Food Labeling Toward National Uniformity (1992) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Contextual Factors Affecting the Regulation of Misbranded Food
3 Contextual Factors Affecting the Regulation of Misbranded Food
Pages 35-62
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 35... ...
The nation's system of food regulation has, in effect, resulted as a response from State and Federal regulators to changes in food manufacturing and marketing and concerns about public health and consumer protection over time. This chapter examines the major developments surrounding food labeling and provides the background for understanding the current food labeling regulatory environment and reform efforts, and their relation to the 35
|
From page 36... ...
DEVELOPMENTS BEFORE 1900 Food Production and Marketing Early in the nineteenth century, the development of shelf-stable food products in hermetically sealed containers was a major landmark in the history of food packaging. The use of tin cans to actually seal and cook a food began in England in the early 1800s (Sim, 1951~.
|
From page 37... ...
State Departments of Agnculture were also established with authority to regulate the manufacture of food products. In 1888, Congress enacted the first broad food and drug legislation for the D~stnct of Columbia, which was subsequently strengthened in 1893 (Huts and Brown, 1985~.
|
From page 38... ...
Ordinarily, it has not chosen this option, leaving States considerable freedom tO regulate foods sold within their borders, including foods shipped out of State, so long as their requirements do not unreasonably burden interstate commerce. (Lee Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 [NLEA]
|
From page 39... ...
Even in those early years of food marketing, health officials, regulators, and the food industry quickly recognized the value of national uniformity in the regulation of food labeling. As early as 1879, E.R.
|
From page 40... ...
At that time marketers of food had little to use beyond graphics to differentiate their products. By the 1930s food products were being marketed in branded packaging, including Armour meat products and A&P coffee in bags (Walsh, 1986~.
|
From page 41... ...
The States, for their part, continued to be responsible for food within their respective borders. Dunng Congressional action on the legislation that subsequently became the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act, a witness representing a large food distributing company, who appeared before the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce to oppose passage of the pending food bill, declared that the food industry of the country rested on fraud and deception.
|
From page 42... ...
222~. Food Regulation In the early 1900s, the food industry strongly supported national food legislation in order to obtain national uniformity in regulatory requirements to build credibility for the food supply.
|
From page 43... ...
The 1907 Meat Inspection Act required postmortem inspection of all animals and meat prepared for human consumption and transported in interstate commerce (Olsson and Johnson, 1984~. The legislation also gave USDA the authority to supervise both processing and labeling of all meat products, and preempted State requirements for those products when moved in interstate commerce.
|
From page 44... ...
Increased prosperity led lo targeted markets and allowed the food industry to introduce a large number of new products. One such product was instant milk powder, which led to dried milk powders, whey products, cocoa- and strawbeny-milk beverages, and spray-dried coffee and tea (Goldblith, 1989~.
|
From page 45... ...
A major advance for the food industry came with the more widespread use of aseptic processing. Originally developed in the 1940s, it is defined as separate high-temperature, short-time sterilization (HTSI)
|
From page 46... ...
Several other advances have occurred that have affected food packaging. During the 1950s and 1960s, improved efficiencies in production, light weight packaging, and downsizing led to a decrease in the cost of packaging relative to the cost of food expenditures.
|
From page 47... ...
85-172) provided USDA with statutory authority for mandatory post-mortem inspection of every carcass and ante-mortem inspection of poultry in interstate commerce, with the Federal government required to pay the cost of the inspection program.
|
From page 48... ...
These two laws gave USDA explicit statutory authority to preempt State regulation of meat and poultry products with regard to inspection and labeling for products in intrastate as well as interstate commerce. The States were allowed to maintain their own meat and poultry inspection programs, provided that within 2 years, each State program was certified as at least meeting Federal standards.
|
From page 49... ...
Thus, the shelf-life of these products in a well~ontrolled distribution system can be extended for a number of days or even weeks. Increasing use of products in this category, however, will require rethinking of the current national food distribution system of centralized, high-volume production facilities, because these products require controlled storage and transportation conditions.
|
From page 50... ...
Although considerable knowledge has yet to be ascertained about certain dietary constituents and their relationship to chronic disease, labeling concerns have intensified as more has been learned regarding the long-term public health significance of certain nutrients. Also in the 1980s, criticism of the information on food labels escalated, spurred by two developments (IOM, 1990~.
|
From page 51... ...
The scientific evidence in these two documents convinced many poligymakers and health professionals that existing food labeling regulations needed to be reexamined to assess whether their provisions afforded consumers adequate information in light of the current scientific consensus on dietary constituents and their relationship to the risk of certain chronic diseases. Food Regulation Beyond its recommendations concerning food availability to those In need, the 1969 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health made a number of recommendations about the provision of information on food packages (WHC, 1970~.
|
From page 52... ...
These changes in food labels that were begun in the 1970s represented a fundamental shift in regulatory philosophy and a major advance in consumer information. From the perspective of the l990s, however, the adequacy of nutrition information on food labels was questionable, and indeed, during this period, some consumer and professional organizations began to press their concerns regarding nutrition labeling.
|
From page 53... ...
Improved food label information was more universally viewed as a way to assist consumers in making food choices that would be more healthful. In the spring of 1989, major new legislation was introduced in Congress to mandate nutrition labeling for food products under FDA jurisdiction (Porter, 1991~.
|
From page 54... ...
s proposed revision of its regulations, as well as other issues such as expansion of coverage of mandatory nutrition labeling to most food products regulated by FDA and USDA, presentation of label information, and legal authority for implementing label changes (IOM, lg90~. The Committee explored a number of issues: the extent to which foods should be covered by nutrition labeling, specific nutrient information that should be provided on packages, presentation aspects of nutrition information, and the appropriate legal and regulatory configurations by which labeling reform might be implemented.
|
From page 55... ...
. Unfortunately, the adoption of uniform laws, codes, and some implementing regulations, and their interpretation have not resulted in uniform enforcement procedures by all State agencies with jurisdiction over food products.
|
From page 56... ...
Federal and State regulators have worked together in a number of ways to promote uniform enforcement procedures. The FDA publication State Programs and Service us Food and Drug Control noted the following initiatives: joint FDA/State inspection of specific establishments or industries to effect both interstate and intrastate correction of violative practices, and for training purposes; FDA field office conferences with State counterpart officials to promote mutual understanding and agreement on current consumer protection priorities and planning compliance activities; formal training courses for State and local regulatory officials, held annually across the country in up to 50 locations, which cover food and drug issues to promote state-of-the-art knowledge and uniform inspection/analytic procedures patterned after FDA practices;
|
From page 57... ...
of Total Frequencya Food senrice 31.20 28.32 38 Grade A milk 21.43 19.45 38 Retail establishments 16.10 14.61 42 Shellfish 7.50 6.81 25 Manufactured milk 6.95 6.31 32 Cannenes 5.36 4.86 25 Warehouses 3.58 3.25 40 Aquatic products 3.03 2.75 29 Bakeries 2.92 2.65 40 Bottling plants 1.35 1.23 38 Candy 0.80 0.73 36 Grain 0.69 0.63 17 Miscellaneous 9.27 8.41 33 TOTAL 110.18 NOTE: Because some States do not report their expenditures by program category, there is a discrepancy between the total food expenditures noted in Table 3-1 and the total in the text. a Frequengy refem to the number of States with inspectional activities in a given program category.
|
From page 58... ...
For decades, obsolete State provisions have not been repealed, despite enactment of the AFDO Uniform Bill. In addition, individual States have frequently modified the Uniform Bill prior to enactment or instituted their own interpretation of similar language, thus creating local exemptions to the general rule of uniformity.
|
From page 59... ...
For those holding this view, NLEA is seen as an opportunity to accelerate me process of achieving national uniformity in food labeling while continuing to provide for joint FederaVState initiatives and a meaningful role for States in food labeling polio,r development and implementation.
|
From page 60... ...
1973. Regulations for the Enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act; Nutrition Labeling.
|
From page 61... ...
1990c. Food Labeling; Reference Daily Intakes and Daily Reference Values; Mandatory Status of Nutrition Labeling and Nutrient Content Revision; Senring Size; Proposed Rules.
|
From page 62... ...
Food Drug Cosmetic Law J
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.