E-mail surfaces about safety of meat treatment
WASHINGTON - The Agriculture Department in 2004 gave a green light to the use of carbon monoxide to keep older cuts of meat looking red and fresh, even though scientists at the two companies promoting the technology had questioned the validity of their own safety tests, congressional investigators revealed Tuesday.
The tests, by Cargill and Hormel Foods, both of Minnesota, were part of a joint effort to persuade federal regulators to allow use of the gas without going through a public-approval process. Inexplicably, however, the tests found that microbial counts on meat that had been left under-refrigerated went down over time instead of up as expected, even as other indicators of spoilage increased, suggesting the possibility of an error.
“Believe me, we are also puzzled by the data,” a Hormel employee wrote in a May 2004 e-mail, marked CONFIDENTIAL, to a colleague at Cargill. “Please let me know if you see any other funny data,” he wrote later. “Quite honestly, this test seemed to raise more questions than what it answered.”
Agriculture Department scientists did not question the data and relied upon them to reverse the agency’s earlier decision to oppose the technology, said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on oversight and investigations.
In July 2004, acting on the USDA’s recommendation, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave the technology a final OK.
Asked if the e-mails raise concerns about the approval, the Agriculture Department’s lead reviewer, Robert Post, said: “Based on this information, I think this leads to some questions, yes.”
In another surprise at Tuesday’s hearing, the chief executives of Cargill and Hormel said for the first time that their companies were willing to put labels on the treated meats that would say, “Color is not an accurate indicator of freshness.”
That concession was the latest in a string of victories for those who oppose use of the gas on meat, claiming consumers are being deceived into thinking meat is fresher than it is. Packages of ground beef more than two years old were on display at the hearing, looking red and fresh.
Giant Food, Stop & Shop and Safeway stores recently said they would no longer sell the gassed meats. Tyson Foods, the nation’s largest processor of meat and poultry, has said it will stop using the technology. On Friday, Target stores asked the Agriculture Department for permission to use labels indicating that the gas was used on the meat.
Industry officials, who said they lose $1 billion in sales each year from having to toss out or discount meat that is edible but does not look red and appetizing, defended the gas, which locks in the red indefinitely.
“We’re very comfortable with the science surrounding this packaging,” said Gregory Page, Cargill’s chief executive, noting the company has received just 48 complaints of “off” meat of 23 million packages sold, every one of which has the company’s toll-free number.
Stupak responded by asking Hormel’s chief executive, Jeffrey Ettinger, to read the 800 number on a package, something Ettinger could not do because, he said, the type was too small.
FDA officials at the hearing stood by their decision to categorize the gas as “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS, for use on red meat and tuna, a category that allows companies to bypass a public regulatory review.
“This particular issue is not a safety concern that is even a remote concern on our radar,” said David Acheson, FDA’s assistant commissioner for food protection.