The history of food safety in America over the past 100 years is a long, complicated tale of social, economic and ethical entanglements. While food safety laws have come a long way and clearly serve the public interest, many might wonder if the significant reforms that finally emerged were motivated by moral concerns or economic incentives. In other words, was food safety reform driven by morality or money?
As it turns out, the answer is “yes.” Food safety reform is a result of both morality and money. Let’s explore both sides of the proverbial coin in order to provide a more balanced and informed perspective.
Protecting Public Health and Welfare Through Comprehensive Food Safety Reform
The public interest is a strong motivator. After all, executives in every industry understand both the strengths and vulnerabilities of “the few” leading “the many.” While the few are able to generate great profit from the many, the many can, in turn, exact considerable damages through litigation if their interests are not protected.
For a good while, the “public interest” was not a big concern in the industries of food manufacturing and food distribution. Even the public was not aware that there could or should be anything like an “interest.” Consumers simply grew accustomed to accepting whatever was put before them as being both safe and edible. Without any regulation, the consumption of food was a daily risk that few thought to question or care about. Food illnesses simply happened. To one's thinking, it was a way of life. In the minds of most consumers food was food was food. What else could it be?
According to Deborah Blum, author of “The Poison Squad: One Chemist’s Single-Minded Crusade for Food Safety at the Turn of the Twentieth Century” the chemical-laced “embalmed beef” fed to soldiers during the Spanish-American War proved more lethal than actual combat which is stunning when one considers how brutal and fatal combat was in those days.
A little more research shows that milk manufacturers even tainted their product with formaldehyde. This was done to keep milk from souring while waiting in the marketplace. The embalming fluid even added a sweetness to the flavor of milk which some preferred. This eventually led to regular outbreaks. However, the media barely gave it any mind and so the practice quietly continued.
Upton Sinclair’s shocking novel The Jungle, which was published in 1906, finally brought it all to a boiling point. Was food safety reform driven by morality or money? In this instance, morality took center stage in the food safety reform movement.
The widespread disgust and fear by consumers from coast to coast led to the government finally intervening. Lawmakers quickly argued that it was their duty to take the reins and protect citizens from these remarkably dangerous practices. The Pure Food and Drug Act as well as the Meat Inspection Act were both established as a moral response to the dangers of unethical food preparation.
This is clearly an example of reform driven by morality and a sudden and effective public response. Sinclair’s The Jungle was a lightning rod that generated a fast interest in doing what’s right for the sake of the people and not necessarily for the sake of money or profit.
Economic Interests and Industry Influence in Food Safety Reform
Most everyone understands that money is a driving factor in every industry. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that money also plays a big role when it comes to food safety reform. The expansion of national and international markets over the last 100 years meant that standardized regulations were needed in order to facilitate trade and sustain consumer confidence. In other words, manufacturers quickly realized that public trust was entirely essential for growth and profitability. Unsafe products were, and continue to be, a threat to that platform.
So, yes, it’s easy to see why industry leaders would submit to and even support food safety reforms. This is not simply done out of a moral concern. It’s also done to protect the bottom line. This presents the industry with what many might call a win-win.
By actually calling for and supporting food safety regulations food manufacturers are preserving their own economic interests and looking good while doing it. As a result, food executives are often able to avoid scandals and litigation while also stabilizing the market and reducing uncertainty for consumers. However, you may be sure that some reforms were crafted to favor larger corporations that were able to comply with those new regulations. This allowed for a competitive edge over smaller rivals.
These days, food manufacturers truly suffer when a massive food recall is announced. In fact, there are considerable, long-lasting consequences to a nationwide recall. This is why the industry is much more attentive to food safety laws and why it works hard to maintain compliance.
In fact, modern day recalls are almost entirely the result of an obvious accident and almost never issued because of intentional negligence or malfeasance. The people’s morality in league with the almighty dollar is a big part of what drives food safety regulations today. Was food safety reform driven by morality or money? Once again, the answer is “yes.”
If you’re looking to work in the food service industry you are likely aware of laws that mandate food handler training. Here at American Course Academy, you can achieve your certification in as little as a single day for qualifying states you can see here. Our course materials are both affordable and accessible from any Wi-fi-enabled device. This means you can complete your training remotely and entirely at your convenience.
