by Bryan Salvage
People fear what they don't understand, particularly when it comes to new and emerging technologies designed to improve food safety. If people don't understand a technology, they won't support it.
Two months ago, USDA hosted an excellent conference in Chicago entitled "New Technology to Improve Food Safety." It was too bad the meeting wasn't held in a huge stadium or televised because it could have resulted in a boost regarding consumer acceptance for utilizing new technology.
Attendees consisted of industry stakeholders-packers, processors, academia, suppliers, consultants and consumer group representatives. Twenty people (mostly suppliers and university researchers) made brief presentations on new and emerging technologies designed to improve food safety.
The talks focused on a range of technologies, such as steam pasteurization (see page 34), electron pasteurization of meat and poultry products, and intense pulsed light multi-hurdle pathogen reduction, just to mention a few.
The conference was unusual for several reasons:
-- There was a lot of interaction between attendees, presenters and a five-person panel of experts. The panelists asked questions of the speakers and answered questions attendees had on new technologies or USDA's inspection reform proposal, which includes a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point program and microbiological testing.
-- The panel. It consisted of FSIS Associate Administrator Thomas Billy; Patricia Stolfa, FSIS associate deputy administrator for science and technology; Gene Lyon, research leader, Richard Russell Research Center, Agrigcultural Research Service, USDA; and Bo Reagan, director of product technology research for the National Live Stock and Meat Board. The panel also included consumer activist Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of Food Safety Projects for Center for Science in the Public Interest.
"This conference represents as well as anything a kind of culture change going on at USDA," DeWaal says. "It represents a new partnership with the department."
Reaching consumers
It was great to see many packers and processors in attendance. But I kept asking myself how will consumers perceive these new technologies? What can be done so industry has a fair chance of winning consumer acceptance for new, effective and safe emerging technologies?
When I asked this last question to the panel, DeWaal answered: "I don't think consumers are looking for good marketing of [new] technologies; they're looking for good science."
I think consumers need both. Every time a discussion arises about gaining consumer acceptance for new technologies, the issue of convincing people that pasteurized milk was safe and wholesome emerges as one example of a major challenge the milk industry faced.
Consumers were initially frightened of microwave ovens. And look at the consumer and industry confusion that still surrounds the issue of irradiation.
Thomas Hoban, of North Carolina State University's Department of Sociology and Anthropology, addressed the issue of consumer acceptance of new technology.
He pointed out that food is an emotional and personal issue, and that most people do not understand food production. The media shapes public understanding and acceptance (especially concerns) and education helps to build acceptance.
"Perception is reality for most folks," Hoban stressed. "By understanding perceptions, you can influence acceptance."
Although DeWaal and I disagree on the issue of marketing new technologies to consumers, I do agree with her that the ability to exchange information on new technologies is something USDA needs to do again.
Now, how can industry, government, suppliers and academia do a more effective job in educating consumers about new and emerging technologies to improve food safety?