As changes are proposed to the food system, the risks and responsibilities tied to protecting public health also change. Increasingly, the questions we face are not purely microbiological, nor purely nutritional—they are both, and more. From processed foods to sodium reduction to controlled environment agriculture, today's most pressing food issues demand a level of cross-disciplinary collaboration. However, this remains the exception rather than the rule, and it is time we changed that.

Food safety, nutrition, and public health professionals have traditionally operated in parallel but distinct domains. Food safety focuses on preventing foodborne illness, microbial contamination, and chemical hazards. Nutrition science zeroes in on nutrients, foods, dietary patterns, and chronic disease prevention. Public health, meanwhile, aims to understand and protect population-level health, drawing from both disciplines while also contributing expertise in behavioral science, risk communication, and policy evaluation. Yet too often these fields remain siloed with respect to research, regulation, and practice.

This fragmentation limits our ability to develop integrated solutions, communicate with clarity, and implement meaningful change. In a food system where safety, health, and perception are deeply intertwined, siloed science underdelivers for the people it aims to protect.

When Nutritional Goals and Food Safety Realities Collide

Sodium reduction provides one example. Lowering sodium intake is a cornerstone of dietary guidance and public health strategies to reduce hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Yet sodium also plays a critical role in ensuring the microbial safety and shelf stability of many foods, especially meats and cheeses. Reformulating products without fully accounting for this tradeoff can lead to spoilage risks, safety concerns, or reduced consumer acceptance.

The challenge is not just technical, it is interdisciplinary. Solutions require food scientists to identify viable alternatives, nutrition experts to support health benefits, and public health professionals to evaluate population-level impacts and communicate findings in culturally and contextually relevant ways. No single group can do this alone.

Reframing Processed Food 

The conversation around processed foods is another area primed for cross-disciplinary insight. Nutrition scientists are leading efforts to understand relationships between diet and chronic diseases, including how processing impacts nutrient delivery. Food safety experts point out that many additives and processing methods targeted in this debate serve critical functions, from stabilizing emulsions to preventing microbial growth. Public health professionals look to bridge these perspectives, monitoring and identifying how processed foods affect vulnerable communities, examining access and equity issues, and evaluating the real-world consequences of reformulation policies or labeling changes.

Rather than framing food processing as inherently "good" or "bad," an integrated approach would ask more precise and practical questions: What does "minimally processed" mean from a scientific standpoint? In the quest for "minimally processed," what are the consequences of removing or skipping processing steps that serve as critical preventive controls? How do we create products that appeal to consumer demands for a "clean label" without creating a microbial food safety issue? Reformulating products by swapping out ingredients like dyes, emulsifiers, and preservatives for so-called "cleaner" or more "natural" alternatives must be supported by science—and should not compromise safety. 

Without this kind of integration, we risk sending mixed signals regarding the safety of foods. The public deserves better than siloed science. They need coordinated, clear, and evidence-based information that accounts for safety, nutrition, and health outcomes.

Emerging Technologies, Uncharted Risks

Innovations such as hydroponic farming, vertical agriculture, and alternative proteins are transforming the food production landscape. While these technologies may offer promising benefits—like improved sustainability and increased access to fresh produce, particularly in urban areas, they also introduce new and not yet fully understood food safety risks.

Hydroponic and vertical farming systems, for example, highlight the need for an integrated scientific response. Vertical farming utilizes closed-loop systems that reuse and recycle materials and products throughout food production to minimize waste and maximize resource optimization. In an effort to increase sustainability, these systems could inadvertently increase the risk of pathogen spread, including E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria monocytogenes, as well as biofilm formation if any of the products in the system become contaminated and reused. At the same time, nutrition scientists are investigating the nutrient composition and quality of produce grown in these environments, while public health professionals are evaluating questions of affordability, environmental impact, and equitable adoption at the community level. 

Addressing these intersecting concerns requires a co-developed research framework that brings together food safety, nutrition, and public health expertise. Without such collaboration, we risk overlooking critical hazards or overstating the benefits of these innovations.

Why This Matters for Food Safety Professionals 

At its core, food safety is about protecting public health. That mission does not stop at microbial limits. It extends to how we design food systems, how we respond to emerging risks, and how we communicate with the public. Food safety professionals are often asked to serve as the voice of scientific authority during recalls, outbreaks, and policy debates. To do that well, we need a full view of the landscape.

Collaborating with public health and nutrition colleagues strengthens that perspective. It helps us anticipate consequences that do not show up in the lab—like how a well-intentioned reformulation might fail due to consumer mistrust, or how a seemingly safe product might worsen health disparities when it reaches the market. It also helps us contribute more effectively to cross-cutting conversations on issues like labeling, ingredient use, and food system sustainability.

Building Effective Bridges Across Disciplines 

So, how do we improve this kind of collaboration? Some ideas are outlined below: 

1. Collaborate from the start. Cross-disciplinary collaboration should be embedded from the outset, not added as an afterthought. This includes jointly developing research questions that reflect multiple perspectives and engaging stakeholders—not just from other sectors but also from different disciplines including food safety, nutrition, and public health throughout the research process. This could also involve intentional collaboration between food safety professionals and nutrition experts during product development to ensure that emerging products meet consumer demands while remaining both safe and nutritious.
2. Build shared professional spaces. Conferences, professional development groups, and scientific societies play a critical role in fostering integration across disciplines. These venues can create intentional spaces for dialogue. This includes organizing panels that feature cross-disciplinary expertise. It also means hosting sessions that examine how food system challenges are being addressed from multiple scientific and policy perspectives. Finally, providing networking opportunities that lay the groundwork for future collaborations advances this goal.
3. Fund and prioritize transdisciplinary work. Funders should prioritize transdisciplinary research by establishing mechanisms and review criteria that recognize the value of team science and cross-disciplinary relevance. This includes rewarding proposals that bring together experts from food safety, nutrition, and public health to address complex, real-world challenges. Additionally, investing in collaborative research centers can further accelerate integration. These centers often have the infrastructure, networks, and institutional support necessary to facilitate sustained partnerships, coordinate multi-sector efforts, and translate findings into practical solutions for public health and the food system.

The threats to food safety are evolving, and so must our approaches. The traditional boundaries between safety, nutrition, and public health are increasingly artificial—and increasingly counterproductive. To protect public health in today's food system, we need food safety science that engages the full spectrum of hazards, risks, and benefits.

That means working with nutrition experts to understand the impact of diet on health. It means partnering with public health professionals to design equitable, community-informed strategies. It also means recognizing that protecting consumers is not only about preventing illness, but also about supporting long-term health, informed choice, and trust.

The challenges are shared. The solutions should be too.