Remarks prepared for delivery by Dr. Richard Raymond, USDA Under Secretary for Food Safety, to the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, December 4, 2006, Houston, Texas.

Introduction

Good morning. Thank you for that introduction Dr. Hulebak. Your service as chairperson of this committee in addition to your work as Vice Chairperson of the Codex Alimentarius Commission is very much appreciated by everyone at USDA.

I believe that you have a unique perspective on Codex's efforts to work more effectively and efficiently. A view made possible by being involved with the Commission as it works from above to implement the recommendations of the Codex evaluation, while at the same time taking an active role in this committee's efforts to implement a work management plan from the bottom up.

On behalf of the United States Government, I want to welcome the delegates and thank Texas A&M for hosting with us the 38th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene.

I also want to thank the delegates to the Committee on Food Hygiene in addition to their chairperson. I commend you for your contributions that have helped make the Codex a more productive — and in the process a more relevant — organization.

You have made great progress-which is a lot less easy then it sounds — in preparing draft principles and guidelines for microbiological risk management, revision of the egg code, and the control of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods.

Since its creation, this committee has helped to further food safety worldwide through the development of internationally recognized science-based standards and guidance for countries on how to meet those standards.

In recent years, thanks to the work just mentioned, this committee has also led the world food safety community in the development and application of effective risk management, risk assessment and HACCP systems.

The recommendations made by this committee serve as important touchstones for governments as they address food safety issues, and are more important than ever in this global environment.

These are issues that I'm involved in everyday as the United States' senior food safety official and it's a large part of why I appreciate all of your work so much. Don't worry though; I'm not going to go into my usual speech about the importance of more robust risk-based inspection systems today.

However, I will say that I believe that these important systems are the future and will help to greatly improve the state of food safety around the globe. If you're interested in hearing the whole pitch, then please find me at the reception.

USDA's Food Safety Program

As the Under Secretary for Food Safety, I oversee the Food Safety and Inspection Service, which carries out USDA's food safety regulatory program, as well as public health outreach and education activities focused on enhancing the safety of the U.S. food supply.

Our mission is to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry and egg products. It doesn't matter if those products are imported to, or exported from, the United States.

FSIS has more than 10,000 employees, approximately 7,700 of whom are inspection and veterinary personnel present daily in nearly 6,000 meat, poultry and egg product processing plants throughout the United States.

In addition, we're also dedicated to fostering safer food handling habits among all types of food handlers, and developing science-based policies to improve our food safety and defense systems.

I also oversee the work of the U.S. Codex Office. This is a role that I take very seriously because I can see the difference that Codex can make when it comes to the health and well-being of every person on this planet.

The Importance of this Committee's Mission

In fact, the work of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene plays an integral part in the overall efforts of all of the other Codex committees to protect the health of consumers worldwide by providing access to safe food of all types.

As a medical doctor, I can tell you that the importance of a safe, plentiful, nutritious food supply cannot be overstated. There are plenty of examples, unfortunately, of the harm and suffering that hunger, malnutrition and foodborne disease can cause.

It's my firm belief that the abundance, wholesomeness and safety of food are all characteristics that ideally should be present simultaneously. I think we can all agree that a plentiful food supply is of little value if it's unsafe, or doesn't provide our citizens with the nutrition that they require for a healthy life.

Increasing international trade has meant that a greater variety of foods are available to the world's population, which has in turn resulted in improved nutrition. However, this expanded reach also means that unsafe food poses a risk to a larger population over a greater geographical area than ever before.

Our Success Hinges on Three Key Factors

This meeting is critical to reducing that risk from unsafe food, while continuing to ensure that our nation's citizens reap the benefits of growing international trade in food products. But success will be dependent on three key factors: inclusiveness, collaboration and science.

Inclusiveness
Inclusiveness — ensuring that all voices are heard — is essential to making the improvements we all want in food safety on a global scale. I bring to my position the belief that everyone deserves a seat at the table because we can certainly do more together then we could ever think of doing alone.

Not only do we need to make certain that all governments understand the importance of cooperation in assuring food safety, but we need to work to make it possible that all countries are able to fully participate in international policy making.

The standards set in food hygiene are recognized by all member countries, and this is critical because it pushes everyone toward improved food safety. But the burden to some countries is often not considered. Establishing realistic standards, and the methods and technical assistance to achieve them, should always be part of the discussion.

We shouldn't just strive to be inclusive at this conference. It's something that should be practiced when we return home, as well. Stakeholders, both industry and consumer groups, need to understand the importance and ramifications of the work that's done at these meetings. An open and honest exchange of ideas with all of your stakeholders is the best way to accomplish that important goal.

Including your stakeholders in the process doesn't mean that they're going to agree with every one of your policy decisions-trust me on that. But they can be certain that their voice was heard, and their views were considered once the final decision is made.

Collaboration
Success this week will also depend on building a collaborative relationship between the delegates of various member nations. Even with all of the advantages of modern telecommunications, and the cost in time and money of traveling to such meetings, I still feel there's no substitute for personal interaction when you're developing the foundation for a professional relationship. We have a lot that we can learn from each other. The relationships that are formed this week will encourage the future collaborations that will be vital to improving food safety in all of our countries.

As delegates, your work is critically important, not only for your own respective agencies or countries, but for consumers everywhere. Because of Codex's important role, you need to make certain to use its full power to unite yourselves so that a real consensus on shared goals can be achieved.

Science
We can't just be inclusive and collaborative this week, if Codex and this committee are to improve public health. We must also make sure that our decisions are based on sound science and objective data if this committee's decisions are going to have a positive impact.

There's no question in my mind that a science-based approach pays off greater returns than any other option available to us. I believe that USDA's own positive results — or I should say, practical results — such as dramatic measurable declines in foodborne illnesses or the incidence of pathogens in products, speak for themselves.

Let me give you an example. Thanks to USDA's focus on creating collaborative, science-based policies with all of our food safety partners on issues directly relating to public health, we've seen dramatic improvements in the safety of meat, poultry and egg products in the United States. I believe that the best indicators of this progress are those that directly relate to pathogen reduction and public health outcomes. This is where the need for the objective data I just mentioned comes into play.

Since 2000, the percentage of regulatory samples of meat and poultry products that tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes has fallen by 56 percent so that in 2005, only 0.64 percent of regulatory samples were positive for this dangerous pathogen. This is in part because FSIS has focused its efforts on the products that present the greatest risk of being contaminated.

The results are even more dramatic for product sampling for E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef. Since 2000, positive samples have declined by nearly 80 percent. Only 0.17 percent of FSIS' samples were positive in 2005.

We're also seeing dramatic declines in the rate of human illness in the United States. Comparing human foodborne illness data from 2005 with 1998 data, E. coli O157:H7 human illness rates are down 29 percent and illnesses from Listeria monocytogenes are down 32 percent.

Objective science-based measures of performance are not only useful for bragging purposes. They also serve a critical function in letting you know when your policies need to be adjusted before a major public health threat emerges.

For example, when it comes to Salmonella we haven't seen quite the reductions that we wanted to see. Thanks to our data, we were able to quickly discover places in our regime that could be strengthened and improved upon.

Taking this information, we formulated an 11-step risk-based initiative to reduce Salmonella in meat and poultry products, which included increased sampling in plants where it's most needed and quarterly publication of Salmonella testing data by product class.

This plan, which is already seeing positive results would, not have been possible without first having objective data that could act as a solid foundation for our science-based policies.

Closing

All three of the factors that I mentioned are connected. Inclusiveness by all member countries provides the necessary elements for thorough scientific discussion to occur in an atmosphere of understanding and collaboration.

The state of public health is constantly evolving and we must evolve with it. We can't afford to let ourselves, our partners or our nations' food safety systems stagnate.

Once again, I want to reiterate how much I value the work you put into this committee. The decisions you make help to improve the health and well-being of millions of consumers around the world.

Thank you again for your time and I hope everyone here has a productive meeting this week.