The local food movement is a good thing for farmers and consumers alike, with more people becoming aware of the products available in their own area and choosing to support their neighbors. When that movement is stretched to the point of sidestepping safety regulations for food products, however, it’s gone too far.
That’s precisely what’s happening in several Maine towns, and in other states, too. Eight Maine towns have voted in ordinances that attempt to get around state and federal regulations that govern food safety, giving locals the final say on the issue instead. The ordinances are invalid, of course, trumped by higher laws of the land, but these folks are trying to make a statement with their votes: Stay out of our food.
We’d like to urge them to reconsider. While it’s no secret that some government regulation is too invasive in people’s lives, it’s hard to argue against laws and rules that guarantee the safety of our food supply. Why would anyone want to purchase food from an unlicensed producer?
It’s one thing to produce unlicensed food for yourself, but once you start selling it, potential consumers should be assured of its safety. Freedom is great in many, many arenas, but oversight of food safety is one of those arenas where government regulation has literally saved lives without really impeding on individual rights ”“ unless you consider yourself as having the right to consume unsafe food.
The license applications for food production, which can be viewed on the Maine Department of Agriculture website, denote basic health and safety requirements, like a clean workspace, screens on any windows, sanitation of utensils and other common sense concerns. Regular inspections help to ensure a clean environment, preventing the spread of diseases like E. coli and salmonella. While supporters of the local food regulation movement feel that these problems are more likely to occur at large-scale farming operations, it’s a simple fact that they can occur anywhere that food safety specifications are not closely followed. These bacteria don’t know or care about the size of a farming operation ”“ and they can be deadly.
Yes, the equipment to pasteurize and ensure food safety is a costly investment, but it’s the price of doing business. Those farms that are too small to afford such safety equipment or the appropriate licenses simply shouldn’t be selling the products, as they cannot guarantee that they are safe for consumption. And it’s not out of the question to say that they’re setting themselves up for lawsuits if they continue to sell foods as an unlicensed producer. All it takes is for one person to get sick ”“ and the likelihood of that is high.
Raw milk, for example, is one of the items at the heart of this debate. Enthusiasts insist that pasteurization ruins the milk by taking out the nutrients, but scientists argue that it’s a worthy trade-off to get rid of the bacteria, and that those nutrients are easily found in other foods.
Just this past February, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a study, published in “Emerging Infectious Diseases,” showing that most disease outbreaks linked to dairy products are caused by raw milk, according to an NPR report.
The study looked at 121 disease outbreaks caused by dairy products between 1993 and 2006, and found that raw milk products caused 60 percent of the outbreaks, 84 percent of the hospitalizations and two out of three deaths. The rest came from pasteurized milk, NPR reported. The outbreaks were all caused by bacteria, such as E. coli O157, which can lead to severe illnesses, according to the study.
Why, in 2012, are we taking a step backwards with regard to food safety? Modern pasteurization began in Europe in the late 1700s and became popular in America for milk in the mid-1800s due to its ability to preserve the product and kill bacteria. It’s worked this long, but the extreme libertarian movement is now taking us way, way back in time as they are going too far with their hands-off approach to government regulation.
We hope Maine legislators will keep food safety as their top priority if this issue is brought to the Legislature in the future, as these towns attempt to have their ordinances made legal. We Mainers have plenty of individual freedoms to take risks with our own health, from riding a motorcycle without a helmet to not taking preventative health care measures, but those are actions that only impact the individual. Having unsafe products on the market that look similar to the safe ones is dangerous for all consumers. If it is someday made legal in the interest of personal freedom, we hope the government will still hold on to one regulation: Warning labels, such as those on tobacco and alcoholic products.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
