Bob Ferguson

Ongoing debates about the use of rapid microbiological test methods in food safety have led to the rise of many questions about the future of this type of testing. This column will explore which methods are being used, food processors' views on what attributes of the tests are most important, how fast is fast enough, and what even faster tests would enable them to accomplish. It also explores where the growth may continue and whether rapid methods used in commercial labs will continue to drive growth, or if a plateau is likely. Growth in regions outside of the U.S. and Europe will also be examined, along with whether rapid testing technology is evolving to the point where it may be acceptable to bring back the analysis to an in-plant lab.

Ongoing debates about the use of rapid test methods in food safety have led to the rise of the question: Has the vast increase in outsourcing testing to contract labs made rapid methods less useful, or is the ease of use and speed of the methods still important (if not essential) for better management and decision-making in food safety? Food Safety Insights asks food safety professionals their opinions on this question.

In this Food Safety Insights column, we continue to explore processors' near-term priorities for food safety programs, as well as the regulations and issues they are watching that will have the most impact on their programs in the future. Food safety culture, microbiological control (including environmental monitoring), and sanitation and hygiene are three of processors' indicated top priorities for the near term.

The August/September Food Safety Insights column continues with our survey asking food processors about their top issues and priorities. In this issue, we explore processors' "to-do" lists of projects for the next 1–2 years and the regulations or requirements that will have the biggest impacts on their programs in the near future.

In food safety, multiple issues always need to be addressed. To get things done, however, food safety professionals need to prioritize certain projects over others. What are those priorities now? The Food Safety Magazine audience shares their views on a number of topical issues to give an idea of where their focus will be in the coming months and years.

In November 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its Final Food Traceability Rule—a new rule that will have wide-reaching impact on food companies. This issue features Part 2 of the results of our survey of food processors' thoughts on this new rule and their plans for compliance.

In November, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its new Food Traceability Rule. The rule will apply to companies that manufacture, process, pack, or hold food on FDA's Food Traceability List (FTL), but the rule will have a wide-reaching impact on processors and suppliers that work with other foods, too. We surveyed and interviewed food processors in the U.S./Canada and around the world to get their thoughts on this new rule and how it will impact their businesses.

Advances in information technology, rapid advances in diagnostic sensitivity, and shifting regulatory requirements are changing the nature of food safety, while macroeconomic trends like globalization, competitive consolidation, and maturation of the industry are altering the structure of the markets. These trends are colliding with shorter-term disruptions like the economic recovery from COVID-19, inflation, and the war in Ukraine, making the near-term future difficult to see.

We have been monitoring the relationships between food processors and regulators for a number of years. Our attention to this topic started with the implementation of FSMA to watch the evolution of the FDA's enforcement posture, as well as inspection and sampling procedures related to the new requirements. Now that the FDA has resumed its regular in-person inspections, we asked processors: (1) whether they have had an inspection so far in 2022 and, if so, did FDA collect any samples; (2) now that processors are seeing inspectors again, do they still agree that FDA "educates before it regulates"; and (3) with their experiences from recent and previous inspections, what do processors wish that regulators understood better? This column presents answers from more than 300 food processors in every category on these and related regulatory questions. 

With the COVID-19 pandemic (hopefully) solidly in the rearview mirror, we wanted to find out what projects and initiatives food companies are focusing on for the rest of this year and into 2023. We heard from more than 200 food processors in every major category. They reported a wide-ranging wish list of projects and priorities, with improving their food safety culture, more training, improving their supply chain management (especially with their foreign suppliers), and improving their sanitation and environmental monitoring programs at the top of the list.