As predicted, consumer fright about E. coli meat contamination, which flared because of the Hudson Foods frozen beef patty fiasco, faded quickly and not much of a sales decline persists.
Consumer memory of such events tends to be ephemeral even in situations far more severe. For instance, an executive from Marks & Spencer, London, told an industry audience that despite the mad-cow alarm in the United Kingdom, that retailer's sales of beef have rebounded.
But, here's a cautionary note: The same speaker said sales of the most susceptible form of meat, ground beef, remain depressed. (See Page 23.) And that's the real point: Consumers seem to be willing to forget about some negative developments, but at some point the jig will be up; repeated bad news, or the inept handling of a minor situation, eventually will alter buying patterns.
The fact is, the side of the business that deals with organic product has never been more vulnerable than it is at the moment. No doubt that message has been received and efforts are being implemented across the distribution chain to make sure sanitation is maintained.
But let's face it: Organic product, especially ground meat, is vulnerable to contamination and no matter how much care is taken in the fabrication, distribution and in-store display of such product something will happen -- sooner or later a mistake will be made, pathogens will gain entrance and consumers will be sickened.
That situation is as unacceptable as it is inevitable. What to do? There is only one sure answer and it is the irradiation of ground meat, or, if you admire great euphemisms, "electronic pasteurization." It's too bad the process is now forbidden by federal regulation as it applies to ground meat.
But as a direct result of the recent contamination incident, cudgels have been taken up in the U.S. Congress in a bid to obtain authorization for irradiation.
The war is being waged on two fronts: Rep. Greg Ganske, R-Iowa, has added to a Food and Drug Administration reform bill the requirement that the agency act quickly on a long-pending request to consider irradiation; should that fail, he has introduced into the House a bill that would declare low-dose irradiation of meat to be approved. (See Page 29.)
How likely is it that either of these provisions will succeed? Capitol Hill watchers told me last week that Ganske, who is a physician, is confident the House version of the FDA provision will be passed, that a similar provision will be attached to the Senate version passed last week and that the resulting measure will be enacted.
So, if this prediction is correct, it means that as soon as the bill is authorized (probably this year), the FDA would have 60 days in which to rule on irradiation. Note that the FDA need not rule favorably. Should it be necessary to go the other route, that of seeking authorization by means of a separate bill, that probably wouldn't happen until next year, at the earliest, if at all.
In any event, should authorization to irradiate ground meat be achieved, the real work would begin -- that of convincing consumers the process isn't some sinister plot. That's another story.
