There has for a long time been valid criticism of food recalls, both with regard to how agencies like the FDA implement them, and whether recalls really work to prevent foodborne illness.  In my view, most recalls are best described as closing the barn-doors after the horses have escaped.  But that said, when a food product is determined to be contaminated, there is no avoiding the need to try to remove the product from the market.  That means recalls are necessary.  It also means that recalls need to be effective as possible at limiting the spread of foodborne disease. According to a great and interesting new study out of Rutgers’ Food Policy Institute, it appears that recalls are anything but effective in prompting necessary public action.  For example, in a survey of over 1,100, the study found that only about 60 percent of the studied sample reported ever having looked for recalled food in their homes, and only 10 percent said they had ever found a recalled food product.

This is a disturbing finding, because, unless we can reliably count on the public to take the actions necessary to prevent the spread of foodborne disease, we may be assuming that recalls work when, in fact, they do not.  This study thus deserves to be read carefully by public health officials, and additional research definitely seems to be needed.

The full study can be found here: www.foodpolicyinstitute.org/docs/news/RR-0109-018.pdf

To read the full press release announcing the study, please hit the Continued Reading link.

Continue Reading Recalls Found to be Even Less Effective Than Expected