Fishy

There are so many people out there who think inspections by the U.S. Department of Agriculture are a waste of money – they always use the words “job killers” when they really mean “unwarranted and often dishonest profit-killer” – that we do not need environmental controls and that our financial sector can regulate itself (I forgot to send a thank you note to the unregulated financial industry for triggering a “job-killing” global recession from which only they seem to have recovered.) Today, I will focus on one small segment of consumer regulation, honesty in food labeling… and targeted at one example – how restaurants and grocery stores mislabel fish, meat and poultry all the time.

When you go into a restaurant, what do you think the risks are if the proprietor tells you the beef was Kobe or the poultry was raised in natural “free range” conditions or when a food is supposed to be organic… and it’s not? Here’s what the USDA says (ams.usda.gov) is a rough definition of “organic” under their fairly strict National Organic Program certification process: “Organic is a labeling term that indicates that the food or other agricultural product has been produced through approved methods that integrate cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering may not be used.” With budget cuts and pressure to reduce regulation, the odds of that restaurant owner’s getting caught by a USDA inspector hover around zero.

So in New York City, Oceana, an international organization dedicated to ocean conservation, released a scathing report in early December noting widespread fraud in labeling seafood. Their reports jibe fairly consistently with the almost immutable principle that companies that are left to self-regulate or even comply with legal requirements where compliance inspection is almost non-existent just don’t. Doesn’t hurt jobs or job retention; it’s just more profitable to cheat, abuse the public trust we call the environment and cut corners, even if fraud or suffering are the inevitable result. Oceana has been at this a while. They also released a report in the Spring of 2011 (finding that seafood may be mislabeled as often as 25% to 70% of the time), but their methodology remains the same.

“Oceana’s researchers took the CSI route to identify the problem, DNA testing more 1,000 fish fillet samples from more than 50 cities. The result: Fish species were mislabeled an average of 50% of the time. Commonly mislabeled seafood includes yellowtail (labeled as mahi mahi), mako shark (labeled as swordfish), and sea bass (labeled as halibut).

“There are economic incentives for producers to mislabel seafood--they may want to avoid a tariff on a particular species, for example, or simply imitate a more expensive variety. And there is no incentive for producers to stop fraudulent practices, either: 84% of the seafood eaten in the U.S. is imported, but only 2% is inspected and less than 0.001% is inspected specifically for fraud. So who cares as long as the fish tastes good? You should, especially if you have seafood allergies. Oceana explains:

‘Allergens may be the most life-threatening risk of seafood fraud. Fish and shellfish are among the most common food allergies in the U.S., along with peanuts and tree nuts (HHS 2011). Failure to declare potential allergens involving shellfish, shrimp, and other species is considered an emerging problem for public health... The World Health Organization has identified crustaceans, including lobster, crabs, and shrimp, as key allergens that must be identified on packaged foods based on how common severe allergic reactions can be.’

“Fraudulent fish labeling also creates a market for illegal fishing by making it simpler to launder illegally caught seafood. Illegally caught species may be overfished--or fishermen may be involved in other destructive practices (i.e. fishing in protected areas or without the proper permit). “ FastCompany.com, May 26, 2011, addressing the 2011 report.

Seafood? Mislabeling? How pervasive is the practice today? Accord to the December 2012 report from Oceana, it’s still massive. “Every one of 16 sushi bars investigated sold the researchers mislabeled fish. In all, 39 percent of the seafood from 81 grocery stores and restaurants was not what the establishment claimed it was.” New York Times, December 15^th.

And it’s not just New York. “During the Florida grouper scandal of 2006, the state attorney general’s economic crimes division prosecuted 17 restaurants in the Tampa area and a large food-service company for selling Cambodian ponga instead of the more expensive Florida grouper… The Boston Globe conducted a similar investigation last year and discovered that Massachusetts consumers routinely paid for more expensive fish and got cheaper substitutes… In some cases, as many as three-quarters of the samples tested were different fish than what the stores or restaurants said they were. Although state and federal lawmakers said they would improve oversight, a follow-up investigation published this month found that the problem was still widespread.” NY Times.

The practice continues in almost every segment of the food services business where the product is an expensive centerpiece of the menu. “At [celebrity chef Tom] Colicchio’s New York restaurants, all but about 5 percent of the meat he serves is from animals raised without antibiotics, he said. It costs him about 30 percent more, so he charges more. ‘Yet I have a restaurant down the street that says they have organic chicken when they don’t, and they charge less money for it,’ he said. ‘It’s all part of mislabeling and duping the public.’

“Consumers are misled most frequently when they buy fish, investigators say, because there are so many fish in the sea and such limited knowledge among diners. The Food and Drug Administration lists 519 acceptable market names for fish, but more than 1,700 species are sold, said Morgan Liscinsky, a spokesman with the agency…  Marketing thousands of species in the ocean to a dining public who often has to be coaxed to move beyond the top five — shrimp, tuna, salmon, pollock and tilapia — is not an exact science… Robert DeMasco, who owns Pierless Fish, a wholesaler in New York, used a profanity to describe someone who buys farm-raised fish and sells it as wild.” NY Times.

I am more inclined to want my government to protect me from fraudulent/destructive financial practices, mislabeled/dangerous meds and foods I actually ingest or impact the air I breathe and the water I drink/bathe in than in maintaining a “defense” budget with a strike force capacity based on spending 41% of the planet’s aggregate military budget. Come to think of it, I would also like a government that might even attempt to regulate giving maniacs’ access to assault weapons and oversized magazines whose only purpose is to kill human beings efficiently! Want to cut the budget, House idiots? After you vote to cut your pay (you aren’t doing the job anyway!), relegate your retirement solely to Social Security and buy your own health insurance in the open market, how about not cutting the government programs that so completely impact the daily existence of everyone in this country?!

I’m Peter Dekom, and when I hear a high powered CEO complain about over-regulation, I am thinking maybe his or her company would be a really good place to send an inspector.