Tag Archives: Health Canada

Blame the consumer – Health Canada style

Posted on by
1

I don’t know who writes these press releases, but stating, “Health Canada would like to remind Canadians of the importance of safe handling of fresh produce to reduce the risk of foodborne illness,” gives the organization, Health Canada, a level of creepiness that could be easily replaced by quoting individual humans, not bureaucratic organizations.

Health Canada (is that a she or a he?) then recites the messages of separate, clean and chill, which is fine, but says nothing about what is done in the fields and facilities before fresh produce reaches consumers.

There’s probably an outbreak going on that no one wants to talk about.
 

I’ve gotten divorced, remarried, had another kid and moved to the U.S. – CFIA updates bottled water consultations ongoing since 2002

Posted on by
1

Yesterday, I made fun of Campbell soup boss Doug Conant who said he wanted Canadian-style food safety regulation in the U.S.

Here’s an example of the lightening speed with which Canadian bureaucracy works:

In 2002, Health Canada and the CFIA began consulting on proposed regulatory changes for bottled water and prepackaged ice in a document called Making it Clear – Renewing the Federal Regulations on Bottled Water: A Discussion Paper.

During the consultation, several significant technical challenges with the proposal were identified including: how to identify the source of the bottled water and the specific microbiological, chemical and radiological requirements listed in the proposed amendments.

Since that time, Health Canada and the CFIA have been consulting further with stakeholders to identify how to address these specific issues. A summary of consultations and comments received on proposed revisions to food and drug regulations on prepackaged water and ice up until November 2008 has been posted as a next step in this process to develop regulations.

This was published today. That’s seven years. And they’re still years from finishing.
 

More Canadian listeria reports; more bureaucratic BS

Posted on by
Reply

The bureaucrats have been busy.

Three more Canadian government studies on the listeria outbreak of 2008 which killed 21 were quietly posted Friday afternoon while the House of Commons was adjourned – what the Canadian Press called a traditional dumping ground for news the government wants to bury.

The Public Health Agency of Canada, Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency each released their Lessons Learned Report today, following a thorough review of the steps taken during last year’s tragic listeriosis outbreak.

Despite the fact that Canada has one of the best food safety systems in the world, and that outbreaks like the one in the summer of 2008 are extremely rare, it was clear that further improvements were needed.

Who writes this shit?

I already read one government report today and wanted to gouge my eyes out. I’ll need to spread these out over the weekend with viewings of old movies which make me feel secure and happy, like Monty Python and the Holy Grail which is playing right now.

Some early highlights from media coverage:

Despite having an emergency response protocol, the CFIA never did activate an emergency operations centre as laid out it the plan. Still, the report concludes: "In general, the CFIA exercised its inspection and other statutory powers during the recall process."

The CFIA report first congratulates federal agencies on their "timely and appropriate exchange of information."

But under the heading "Areas for Improvement," the report states that timely determination of an outbreak and timely notification of the public require "additional clarity at provincial and federal levels … as to protocols and leadership roles."

Conservative Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz was the lead government spokesman during the crisis, and came under fire for making a tasteless joke about "death of a thousand cold cuts" during one internal conference call.

Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett said she can’t understand why Ritz was given the role of communicating to concerned Canadians.

"It seems that there was interference, political interference, in what was clearly a public health outbreak that should have been managed by public health officials and done in a clear communication with the people of Canada.”

Pesticides, risk and regulation – Health Canada gets this message right

Posted on by
Reply

When Amy and I were in Guelph, Ontario a few weeks ago, she aksed, “what’s with all the dandelions.”

I tried to explain how municipalities, and now the province of Ontario, were proposing bans on the so-called cosmetic use of pesticides, even if the use of such chemicals had been declared safe by scientists working for the federal government.

I have no intention of getting wound up in the pros, cons or otherwise of chemical use. But what has been absent in the public discussion of various risks is the voice of the government regulator, which can lead to the creation of an information vacuum, which can lead to all kinds of erroneous information amplified through various social media. It’s a well-documented phenomena, and I co-authored a 1997 book about it, Mad Cows and Mother’s Milk.

So it was an unexpected surprise when Richard Aucoin, acting executive director of Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency, penned a lucid, articulate, and well-thought out letter which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen.

“Health Canada’s priorities are the health and safety of Canadians and their food supply, and this primary mandate is applied when approving pesticides for use in Canada.

Under the Pest Control Products Act, if a pesticide (herbicide, insecticide, fungicide) meets our stringent health and environmental safety standards and proves value in its application, it must be approved for use. Only those products that meet Canada’s strict health and safety standards are registered for sale and use in Canada.

When determining if a pesticide can be used in Canada, Health Canada conducts extensive health and environmental scientific reviews.

Testing methods must have adhered to accepted international standards. The evaluation takes into account the available scientific information on potential health and environmental effects from publicly available studies including epidemiological and incident reports both nationally and internationally.

Health Canada employs over 300 qualified scientists dedicated to the evaluation of pesticides, many of whom have doctorates and masters credentials in the fields of human health sciences, environmental and agricultural sciences. This team carefully scrutinizes the scientific information available on all of the components of a product, including both the active and non-active ingredients.

In addition, before Health Canada makes a final decision on whether to allow the use of a pesticide, the Canadian public is invited to submit comments and questions.

All chemical substances have inherent risks, which is why Health Canada has a dedicated regulatory program in place to review pesticides.

Given the rigour of the evaluation process, we are confident that the pesticides approved for use in Canada, including lawn and garden products, can be used safely under the prescribed circumstances indicated on the label.

Canadians should use pesticides judiciously, carefully follow label directions, and take measures to become better informed about their safe and effective use.
Any questions about pesticides can be addressed to Health Canada’s Pesticide Information Services at 1-800-267-6315.”

Health Canada can’t help themselves — ruins tomato PR effort with BS

Posted on by
Reply

There’s been lots of silly statements in the latest Salmonella-in-tomato outbreak. For example, at right is the sign from The Pad in Topeka, Kansas (photo by Stephanie Maurer). I have no idea which Dept. of Ag. inspected the tomatoes, and I’m not sure what they thought they’d find by looking. I’ll be revisiting the risk communication highlights in the coming weeks.

One press release stood out yesterday. Health Canada decided to "remind Canadians of the importance of proper handling and preparation of fresh tomatoes in order to prevent foodborne illness."

Uh-oh. Sure washing can remove some amount of pathogens and dust, but not much. As Robert Tauxe, Deputy Director, Centers for Disease Control Division of Foodborne, Bacterial, and Mycotic Diseases, pointed out at a session sponsored by the New York Academy Of Sciences in April, "Washing might be logical, but it turns out that it removes very few pathogens."

Reminds me of past outbreaks when various groups have tried to advise consumers to control problems that were quite out of their control — like Salmonella in tomatoes (see, pathogens in produce; once inside they ain’t being washed off at all).

The Health Canada effort concludes by stating

"… there are as many as 13 million cases of food-related illnesses in Canada every year. Many of these illnesses could be prevented by following proper food handling and preparation techniques."

Why do the PR thingies feel it necessary to add on such a meaningless statement about proper handling and preparation in an outbreak that does not appear to involve food handling and preparation? Food safety for produce begins on the farm, and then all the way through the farm-to-fork system. But especially, for fresh produce, on the farm. Canadian taxpayers deserve better.