Is the U.S. food safety system overwhelmed?

Food industries and federal regulators are increasingly advocating the same solution following a rash of food-borne illnesses: have companies police themselves and take action to prevent outbreaks. But this system of " preventive controls" has worked in the past only with adequate regulatory enforcement and industry support--neither of which is guaranteed.

In recent years, the number of illnesses caused by foods regulated by FDA--including fresh produce and peanut butter--has risen sharply, according to an analysis of government and medical-journal data by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer group in Washington.

Traditionally, FDA has reacted to outbreaks after they occur. By focusing on preventive, rather than reactive measures, the industry would be required to do more self-policing, so regulators could focus their limited resources on riskier products.

A White House cabinet-level group set up to address import safety problems has recently touted preventive controls as a solution, and FDA is likely to advocate preventive controls as part of a new food-safety plan set for release as early as this month.

Meanwhile, several USDA inspectors said in interviews that their workloads are doubling or tripling as they take on the duties of inspectors who have left the department, not to be replaced. "We've been short the whole time I've been in," said one veteran inspector who asked not to be named. "We don't have enough inspectors, but we have too much management. The inspectors are short all the time and getting spread thinner and thinner.

The Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS), which regulates meat, poultry and egg production, says it had 7,200 inspectors in 1992 and 7,450 now. "FSIS ended [fiscal year '07] with the highest number of in-plant employees since 2003," Eamich stated. During the year, FSIS was approved " for more in-plant inspectors than at any time since 2003. The agency has numerous hiring initiatives targeted at recruiting inspectors for these vacancies."

Stan Painter, an inspector and union representative for the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents the inspectors, said the actual number of inspectors is closer to 6,500. The difference, he said, are unfilled vacancies that FSIS permanently carries.

The legal requirements for inspections, combined with a reduced force, mean that the inspection goals have not been met for years, according to inspectors. They say the workload is unrealistic, reducing their duties to cursory checks of company records, not the physical examination of meat, poultry and eggs.

"Inspectors are not ... in the vast majority of processing plants full time," said Felicia Nestor, a senior policy analyst for Food & Water Watch, a Washington-based food safety group. "For the most part, inspectors at processing plants are on patrols, meaning they cover a number of plants."

Thus, she said, the patrols are counted as an inspection because of the possibility that inspectors could show up. Questions about the size of the inspection force have come amid a sharp increase in E. coli-related ground beef recalls