The Prince makes several good points and there are more to consider. Ensuring the safety of food consumers extends beyond the usual focus on contamination control. Although such controls are essential in the assurance of food safety, they constitute only a fraction of the necessary considerations with regards to consumer protection. What is viewed as food contamination can even be ambiguous in some instances. For example, while the presence of allergens could be fatal to susceptible individuals, this is not a bona fide contamination concern for individuals who are not susceptible.
An institutionalized and dangerously narrow view of consumer protection:
Ensuring the safety of food for consumers is the noble intention of food safety management programs. However, the scope of considerations is often narrowly focused on the control of contamination. Attention must certainly be given to food contamination control at the same time that other (collateral) considerations must be given equal attention.
Most people in affluent countries do not see these (sufficiency and equitable distribution of food) as significant issues. However, places abound where availability of nourishing food is of grave concern. Even affluent countries have such places, albeit, in small pockets.
How would this guy define food safety?
Control of Food Wastage:
Other Related Posts:
Evidence of a Shameful Social Responsibility Failure – Food Recalls
Further to the blog post - The Merits and Pitfalls of Engineered Focus in Product Safety Assurance
The “Live-to-Eat” or “Eat-to-Live” Question