Our Food Integrity Campaign (FIC) is officially under way. We hope you’ll visit our new FIC website and join our campaign to safeguard food integrity by facilitating truth-telling. In addition to providing litigation services for employees who speak out against safety or health violations, GAP’s Campaign brings their stifled concerns to the public eye as well as provides education outreach and advocacy efforts. The website profiles some of GAP’s prominent food integrity whistleblowers, serves as a hub of information for would-be whistleblowers and those interested in food integrity and whistleblower issues in general. It also provides useful information on what you can do to support food industry whistleblowers.

Along the journey that food takes from field to fork, problems arise every step of the way and we mean to expose them by fueling the voice of the voiceless. FIC believes that food industry whistleblowers are the first line of defense against foodborne illness and outbreaks—the employees that actually work at the food processing facilities, either for the company or as an inspector assigned by the government. Yet they go unheard. If they get up the courage to blow the whistle at a plant they work at, these workers often face retaliation or their complaints are simply ignored. If whistleblowers feel protected (hopefully under the law as well as among the community), it will be more difficult for agribusinesses to maintain their questionable practices as more people step up to push food transparency.

FIC's website spotlights whistleblowers who have spoken out against violations of food integrity acts. Some that have lost their jobs for speaking up were able to publicize their concerns with the help of GAP. Others were protected from termination because of strong evidence GAP helped release to the media.

In addition to exploring food.whistleblower.org to learn more about problems in today's food system and our work with whistleblowers, you can also be part of the cause by following our campaign on Twitter @foodinteg and joining us on Facebook. We need your energy and support to keep this movement moving forward and solidify committed solutions that will enable confident providers and consumers of our nation's food.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

It's becoming a real chore to be a food consumer in America. When outbreaks and recalls are daily news, it’s hard to ignore the source of the problems -- our nation’s giant food producers, and a lack of adequate government regulation. We are left to fend for ourselves in determining what should safely make it to our dinner plate. It's no wonder people are turning to local food retailers, sourceable farmers’ markets, or even becoming vegetarians to institute their own personal ban on industrial agriculture.

Wright County Egg owner Austin DeCoster testified at a House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing on the egg recall yesterday. This was prefaced by a blockbuster New York Times article recapping DeCoster's infamous history with salmonella outbreaks – going back three decades. The point of the article is that a DeCoster-salmonella connection is nothing new. When a problem evolved in one of his facilities, DeCoster simply moved efforts elsewhere. With no federal oversight or guidance, each state had to take its own initiative to protect consumers, but their actions – like the FDA visiting DeCoster’s Iowa farms after the August recall – were reactive rather than proactive. In 1988, New York banned DeCoster from selling eggs in the state after three salmonella outbreaks tied to his operations occurred. Maryland quarantined his eggs in 1991. Food embargoes appear to be the only answer.

At the international level, countries are concerned about accepting U.S. food products. Some of these actions may be related to protectionism—but concerns over the safety of American food have been repeatedly raised. After this year’s egg recall, the Obama administration had to reassure Russian officials that their U.S. chicken imports were safe and unaffected by the outbreak, emphasizing that poultry meat and eggs are produced in separate facilities. These concerns came in the wake of Russia lifting a seven-month ban on U.S. poultry imports that had been in effect over concern about the use of chlorine in processing chicken meat. Coincidentally, as that ban ended, Russian officials announced a new ban on imports from two Smithfield pork plants due to finding excessive amounts of antibiotics. If it’s not one problem, it’s another. American livestock producers put antibiotics in their animals’ daily feed to speed up growth and prevent disease – often helped by large numbers of animals in small, crowded spaces. A NYT editorial highlights new recommendations to delay the use of antibiotics until cases of illness and emergency, but it’s doubtful that agribusiness will listen. It’s easier for them to care about profits over public health.

The idea of having genetically modified (GM) fish on the consumer market – the first would-be “transgenic” animal sold in the country – was explored from all sides at the FDA’s public hearing Monday. AquaBounty, the company seeking FDA permission to sell the ”frankenfish,” asserted that its product is identical to Atlantic salmon, except for the speed of its growth. The fish would be raised in physically contained tanks and would be sterile females, reducing the likelihood that they could, respectively, escape and reproduce. Critics countered that the company has not proved that the fish is safe for human consumption, or the environment – and need to consider the impact of possible escape.

The most recent episode of GAP TV – Whistle Where You Work – explored concerns regarding the impact of GM salmon. Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food & Water Watch discussed the problems with conventional salmon farming, and the added complications GM fish might cause. She also pointed out that inland farming is very difficult, and those who have tried in the past have used fish much smaller than salmon, which need a lot of room. Eric Hoffman, the genetic technology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth, mapped out how the GM fish are produced and the fact that FDA is using AquaBounty’s own research. That’s right - no one is actually able to look at its process because it is propriety information.

Whistle Where You Work airs nationally on the Free Speech TV channel on the Dish Satellite Network, on over 70 community access stations around the country, and in parts of Europe. The show features panel discussions with nonprofit/media experts on topics related to whistleblowing, civil liberties, or general public interest issues. Click here to visit the show’s webpage.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

Saying that American food safety would improve if federal employees serving the food system had strong whistleblower protections – allowing them to reveal agency violations – seems like common sense if you ask me. Thanks to GAP coalition partner Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a new survey of USDA and FDA employees confirms this belief.

Over 1,700 scientists and inspectors responded to the UCS 44-question survey about what helps and hinders our food system. An overwhelming majority (70 percent!) said establishing stronger whistleblower protections for inspectors, regulators and food industry workers would improve food safety. Only two percent disagreed with this. In addition to that, more than 300 federal employee respondents affirmed that corporate interests forced their agency "to withdraw or significantly modify a policy or action designed to protect consumers in the past year." Many even said agency managers asked them to provide incomplete, inaccurate or misleading information.

If, in fact, USDA and FDA employees did feel protected under the law to speak out when their agencies failed to uphold food safety regulations, then a burning question must be asked – How many of the 85 recalls reported in the last year could have been prevented? Whistleblowers risk heavy consequences when trying to go up against the seemingly unbreakable corporate-government love affair that is the current U.S. food system. With more accountability power, perhaps government inspectors would have listened to GAP client Kenneth Kendrick – who tried to blow the whistle on Peanut Corp.'s health violations prior to the massive Salmonella outbreak last year. Or maybe USDA veterinarian Dean Wyatt would not have been penalized for exposing inhumane handling of animals at various plants in 2007. The list goes on.

The UCS report reinforces the need for new food safety legislation. It's no question that more regulation needs to take effect to ensure safe food for consumers. But making sure those who play a role in the food system have rights that help maintain such regulation is also essential. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act that is currently stuck in the Senate includes a provision that establishes whistleblower protections for employees of entities "engaged in the manufacture, processing, packing, transporting, distribution, reception, holding, or importation of food" who provide information relating to any violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Until a bill is passed that protects these employees, our food system continues to hang in the balance. Send a letter now urging your representative to support stronger whistleblower protections.

To learn more about other food safety recommendations concluded in the survey, go to the UCS website.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

The first genetically modified animal could be on American plates within two to three years, according to a UK Telegraph article. FDA scientists have dubbed AquaAdvantage salmon, claimed by its developer –AquaBounty Technologies – capable of growing at twice the normal rate, as safe to eat and no threat to the environment. A coalition of 31 U.S. organizations disagrees, and is urging the FDA to deny approval of the controversial fish, which remains undecided until after a three-day adviser meeting that starts September 19.

GAP’s TV show Whistle Where You Work recently discussed the unknown consequences of genetically engineered food – and this salmon specifically. Check out the video below.

Aside from incomplete data on the consumer health impact, a major concern shared by consumer and environmental groups is the effect of escaped GM salmon on wild populations, which are already endangered. GAP coalition partner Food & Water Watch asserts that, despite AquaBounty’s claim that it will raise the fish in land-based facilities, the move will set a precedent for corporations racing to produce GM fish in their open ocean pens where “millions of salmon currently escape from every year.” In addition, AquaBounty is taking advantage of the lack of labeling requirements currently in place to let consumers know they are eating something that has been altered genetically. Consumers’ right to know is in jeopardy.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

As of last Wednesday, NYC restaurant patrons are now able to choose dinner based not only on reviews of cuisine and service, but also on information about restaurant cleanliness. Each restaurant will receive a health department letter grade, ranging from a coveted A to an unwanted C, which will be displayed in prominent locations of entrances to dining establishments.

One of the most interesting features of the rating system is a new website, where patrons can view information about each restaurant’s latest inspection, including its egregious violations (think rodents, roaches). The system’s advanced search options allow users to compare eateries’ ratings using parameters such as cuisine or zip code, thus helping diners gain greater control over the food they consume, as well as the businesses they choose to support. The website uses the same rating system for 5-star restaurants to burger joints, and has the potential to dispel myths about the perceived cleanliness of establishments.

A similar system piloted in Los Angeles in 1998, as well as the NYC Health Department’s own six-month research process, reflects a growing public concern about holding restaurants accountable to the clientele they serve. Not surprisingly, many restaurants themselves oppose the new system, claiming that it will harm B- and C-rated restaurants and that it allows for too much government intrusion. Others agree – TIME calls New York and Los Angeles “downright draconian in their urge to oversee the inner workings of small businesses like restaurants.”

This is a red herring. Hand-wringing over big versus little government gets a bit off-topic, largely ignoring the fact that even those who oppose government oversight may still care about what they put into their bodies. Given the fact that restaurant inspection records have always been public (albeit more difficult to find), the new system is more about increased visibility, and is a clear victory regarding consumer rights.

Furthermore, a 2003 study found that there was a 20 percent decline in hospital admissions for food-borne illness after the letter grade system in Los Angeles was introduced. Considering that 11,000 people in New York City go to hospitals each year for food-borne illnesses related to eating out, the new rating system provides a promising and necessary step towards pushing dirty kitchens to clean up, or close doors.

The Vermont Attorney General announced today that arrest warrants have been issued for former Bushway Packing, Inc. owner Frank Peretta and former Bushway worker Christopher Gaudette on charges of animal cruelty in the Bushway case. The case attracted national attention last fall, when the Humane Society of the United States released shocking video footage of operations at Bushway showing animals being repeatedly stunned with electrical prods, too weak to stand on their own, and stabbed for bloodletting while still conscious.

However, while the Humane Society footage spurred action, GAP client and USDA Public Health Veterinarian Dr. Dean Wyatt had been warning of problems at Bushway for months before. As detailed in Dr. Wyatt’s testimony earlier this year in front of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, Dr. Wyatt had attempted to stop inhumane handling practices not only at Bushway, but also at his previous assignment at the Seaboard pork plant in Guymon, Oklahoma. How did Dr. Wyatt’s supervisors at the USDA Food Safety Inspection Service react? They overturned his reports of animal cruelty based solely on the word of plant ownership, they forced him out of his job in Oklahoma, and the Director of the Office of Field Operations for FSIS even wrote a letter to Congress calling Dr. Wyatt “incompetent” for his charges of animal cruelty.

Fortunately for Dr. Wyatt, the Humane Society video tape vindicated his charge that there was something very wrong in the way Bushway was treating its animals. To the credit of USDA leadership, once the video evidence became clear, the agency was very aggressive in taking action on Bushway in conjunction with state and federal law enforcement.

GAP is happy to see real consequences for the people who engaged in animal abuse at Bushway. However, not every whistleblower is lucky enough to have an independent secret videotape investigation to surface and support his or her claims. How many others like Dean Wyatt are out there, being ignored and marginalized for speaking out against industry interests?

-------------------

Jonathan Cantú is Food and Public Health Counsel at the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.