Copyright © Global Coalition for Sustained Excellence in Food & Health Protection, 2011 and ALL subsequent years: Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s authors and/or owners is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Global Coalition for Sustained Excellence in Food & Health Protection with appropriate and specific reference and/or link to the original content.

Friday, 25 March 2016

Further to the blog post - The Merits and Pitfalls of Engineered Focus in Product Safety Assurance

Many people in the food and health products industry (professionals and non-professionals) have been conditioned to think narrowly about product safety. Only a few are able to escape from the narrowly engineered focus and think freely? An example of the engineered focus is the usual understanding about what constitutes a safe food product. Some people may be able to think beyond the definition of a safe food product as that which is free of contaminants (biological, chemical, physical and other agents that cause unhealthy reactions such as allergens, and sensitizing agents). The majority of people do not think of food safety beyond this scope.

This could very well be an unproven hypothesis. So, let’s put it to the test. Responses to this post will prove or disprove the hypothesis. Here is the challenge: Do you know of anything that is left out in the definition of a “safe food product” as provided above?

You may read the comments posted in response to this question on LinkedIn: 

No comments:

Post a Comment