FDA-Has-Egg-On-Its-Face Update
Did you know that salmonella poisoning from eggs has been virtually wiped out in Britain? So what are they doing that we aren’t?
Answer below the fold.
British producers are encouraged to vaccinate their hens. It’s not required and is completely voluntary. But those who do so can advertize that fact — signaling to consumers that their product is safer. In the U.S., any such advertising campaign must have FDA approval and the FDA isn’t convinced that vaccination works.
Great post. The FDA keeps acting like it wants to be the protector. The more we learn, the more apparent it is that the FDA is the cause of the problem.
This is fascinating. And it makes sense from an economic point of view.
The chart says it all.
You mean regulation can make us worse off? I’m shocked. Shocked.
The two firms whose eggs are being recalled both estimate that about 80% of their hens have been already been vaccinated. But eggs are comingled and it might take 18 months for all the unvaccinated hens to be cycled out.
“In the U.S., any such advertising campaign must have FDA approval and the FDA isn’t convinced that vaccination works.”
Can you expand on what the actual requirement here is? How specifically did the FDA restrict US farmers from implementing a scheme along the lines of what the British farmers did? Is vaccinating illegal, saying you’ve vaccinated illegal, or claiming the vaccination provides health benefits illegal, or something else? Is the “red lion” stamp in Britain making a health claim?
rif, the FDA doesn’t restrict the vaccination of hens for salmonella. In fact, over half the US farms currently vaccinate their hens. The rest of the farms are those free market worshipers who don’t think its worth the additional cost of a penny a dozen.
It’s my understanding that anyone selling a food or drug who makes a health claim falls under the FDA’s jursdiction. (Although maybe the USDA gets involved too.) Anyway, you can’t claim your chickens are healthier unless the FDA agrees with your claim.
Tom: Sure, but it’s not clear the British farmers are saying their chickens *are* healthier. Instead, an independent trade group is saying “You must vaccinate if you want to be in compliance with our independent standard.” To the extent that I understand it, there is nothing that makes this illegal in the US. I’m wondering to what extent this situation is really an example of FDA failure rather than market failure.
I’m not sue about the fine points of the regulations, but I believe that any claim of greater safety or even an implied claim comes under FDA rules.
This is David Friedman, writing at his blog:
“Britain’s success in drastically reducing the number of salmonella case is due not to regulation but to voluntary private action driven by market pressure.”
More here: http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
The graph shows about 17,000 reported cases at its peak in Britain. Assuming a population of 60 million for a rough calculation, this is slightly more than 28 cases per 100,000.
A 2003 MMWR article gives the incidence of Samonella Enteritidis in the US as 3.8 per 100,000 population in 1995 and 2.2 per 100,000 in 1996-98. The floor was 1.9 per 100,000 in 1999. To equal a 1.9 rate the number of British cases would have to drop to about 1,140 per year. http://bit.ly/cgIsMx
A graph in a paper by Cogan and Humphrey at http://bit.ly/bTJLkt suggests that there were 10,000 cases in Britain in 2001.
One wonders why the Times didn’t give an equivalent graph for the US.
Perhaps the difference is a result of reporting and surveillance differences. Perhaps US factory farms do a much better job. Maybe I’m interpreting the data incorrectly. However, if this rough analysis is accurate then the US is doing a much better job than the UK with or without hen vaccinations. We don’t need more regulations and the FDA shouldn’t be based for this.
Is this another case of not wasting a crisis?
Yes, I saw the David Friedman article. But digging into the article and the question, it’s not at all clear *why* this happened in Britain and not here. I can’t see anything the FDA did that would have *stopped* what happened in Britain from happening here.
I don’t know what the big mystery is about why only half of the egg producers vaccinate in the US. The made a business calculation that the reduction in the health risk to the US population wasn’t worth the additional penny a dozen vaccination adds to their cost.
artk, read the above. British producers made the same calculation, and there is nothing wrong with such calculations (we don’t want to spend the entire GDP avoiding risks). But in Britain, the producers could get tangible rewards from being able to advertize their expense to achieve more safety. That is why 90% vaccinate in Britain, even though it is voluntary.
BTW, the other side of the producer’s calculation is the consumer’s calculation. Apparently, you can buy chickens labeled as vaccinated in Britain for a somewhat higher price than unvaccinated ones. So both producers and consumers can trade off money against safety.
For some unexplained reason, you seem to think all this is evil.