Recommended Improvement for FDA, StonyField Farm Product Recall

Dear President Obama,

You're a technophile I have heard. So, I have an improvement to suggest for the FDA, particularly how it deals with food-safety issues.

Here's what the FDA does now.

In the age of web technology, the FDA's methodology is just plain laughable.

I propose a webpage with a database that would enable citizens to submit food-safety alerts.

This should be damn simple. The post office has a list of all addresses in the country. Why can't the FDA create a list of all foods sold in the U.S. plus a list of all food sellers (grocery stores, restaurants, etc.).

Consumers who suspect they have some bad food could go online and within a few clicks select their product and where they bought it from. They could describe the issue, etc.

In the background, the system would monitor products for unusual activities (larger than normal number of alerts) and create an alerting response when something looks wrong.

If the FDA doesn't have the wherewithal to design and create such a system. I would be glad to take this on with my strategic partner Centrax Corporation (they build high-premium e-learning and web programs and could whip this up no problem).

Seriously, the FDA could save lives very simply and at a relatively low cost. Let's just do it.

Thank you Mr. President for considering this.

Please let me know what I'm supposed to do with the yogurt in my refrigerator that tastes bad. If you think I'm going to call one of those numbers, you just don't get it.

--A worried citizen/consumer

Update Thursday April 16th

Yesterday I decided I should make those calls. I called the yogurt manufacturer and went to their website and I called my regional FDA hotline person (who called me back today, a day later). Stoneyfield Farm has posted the following recall information (their phone complaint line was horribly implemented with long wait times and no one has gotten back to me from their online complaint system):

Londonderry, NH - April 3, 2009 Stonyfield Farm is conducting a voluntary recall of Fat Free Plain Quarts in Stonyfield Farm branded containers limited to specific dates. The products are being recalled because they may contain a presence of food grade sanitizer.

Affected products are limited to Stonyfield Farm 32 ounce Fat Free Plain yogurt UPC # 52159 00006 carrying one of the following product codes printed along the cup bottom that start with the following date codes:
· May 06 09 Time stamped 22:17 thru 23:59 (limited to these specific time stamps only)
· May 07 09 All time stamps

Approximately 44,000 quarts were distributed to retail accounts nationally.

We have received several reports of people noticing an off-taste when eating the product. We have received no reports of illness of any kind after consuming the product.

The issue was a result of human error in not following our Company's standard operating procedures. Stonyfield has taken all the necessary corrective action to prevent this from occurring again.

Consumers are advised not to consume the product and to return opened and unopened containers to the store where it was purchased. Anyone returning these products will be reimbursed for the full value of their purchase.

Customers with questions should contact Stonyfield Farm Consumer Relations at 1-800-Pro-Cows (776-2697) or visit our website at www.stonyfield.com.

This is listed on their website when I checked today. I didn't notice it yesterday (they have a very busy home page), but it probably was there.

Note to Stonyfield Farm: 

I am not satisfied with your announcement stating, "We have received several reports of people noticing an off-taste when eating the product. We have received no reports of illness of any kind after consuming the product."

THAT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH!! You should (1) tell us what we ingested, (2) get health experts to provide us with some expert guidance on what symptoms or dangers we might be subject to.

More:

I just called Stonyfield Farm Consumer Hotline again (and actually got through to them today) and the guy said it was a Food-Grade Sanitizer, FDA approved, organic, etc. He told me ingesting it wouldn't hurt me, but I'm not convinced. I told him I wanted to know what it was I ingested. He wouldn't or couldn't tell me. I asked him if I ate a whole container whether it would hurt me...He said no.

Hey Stonyfield. You can do better...

Comments

[Stephen Downes]

It's like this proposal doesn't take into account any of web history.

Such a system would quickly fill with spam and misleading (and blatantly false) reports as people tried to game the system.

[Will Thalheimer]

Dear Stephen Downes of Stephen's Web and OLDaily fame:

Thanks for commenting so inauspiciously on my blog.

As a skeptic of web information myself, I really really really want to resonate with your comment, flippant as it may be, but I find it hard to take its unsubstantiated arguments seriously.

What web history are you talking about? Certainly Wikipedia has its problems, but much of the information is good. Certainly Google searches can find nonsense, but can also find valuable information as well. Even Amazon.com ratings are imperfect, but I've found them very useful to me in buying all sorts of things.

You submit no evidence that such a system as I had suggested would quickly fill up with spam. Certainly people have reasons for gaming any system. But are we so limited in our capabilities that we couldn't design a system that would provide better information than the information the FDA gathers now? Sure there will be difficulties and flaws, but even if we only create a system that is 10% better, wouldn't that create a benefit? Yes, maybe there will be some false negatives, but wouldn't we still save lives with the true positives? And Stephen, I thought you of all people would be more concerned with the big citizenry than with big agribusiness.

In one of the posts you highlight on your blog (http://www.downes.ca/post/4) you offer "Principles for Evaluating Websites." Did you consider using this to examine the current FDA website? Your overall recommendation is that TRUST is the prime criterion. Pssssst. Not many here currently trust the FDA (have you heard about the Peanut Corporation of America?). Surely, you don't think the current FDA website is sufficient to protect the health of my fellow citizens (I'm assuming as a Canadian you're not attempting to wish pestilence on your southern brethren).

Or perhaps your aforementioned post (which conveys a watch-out-everyone-else-is-just-trying-to-pull-one-over-on-you point-of-view) ignores not web history, but human history, in surrendering the idea that good will might exist in human form--maybe the system-gamers will be outshined by good honest citizens.

Finally, it is all very well to distrust the mass of humanity and just be critical, but if you have true wisdom to offer at least one suggestion for an improved alternative would have been helpful. Just one.

[cycling clothing]

do with the yogurt in my refrigerator that tastes bad. If you think I'm going to call one of those

[DuranBernadine33]

The credit loans seem to be important for people, which would like to organize their career. As a fact, that is not really hard to receive a bank loan.

[eBridge advertising]

Nice post!! Stonyfield has taken all the necessary corrective action to prevent this from occurring again.

[Total Protect Home Warranty]

The post office has a list of all addresses in the country. Why can't the FDA create a list of all foods sold in the U.S. plus a list of all food sellers.

[red bottom shoes]

something mysteriously sexy....................i like!!

[thomas sabo charm club]

the FDA could save lives very simply and at a relatively low cost. Let's just do it.

[Marc by Marc Jacobs Handbag]

for his many years in leading the workplace learning