Food Safety

Strategic Alliance Between TraceGains and iFoodDS Extended

Fri, 20 Feb 2026 01:40:33 GMT

TraceGains and iFoodDS have extended the companies’ strategic alliance, which the organizations say strengthens integration between TraceGains Supplier Management and iFoodDS Trace Exchange.

The companies say this expanded alliance delivers seamless data integration that simplifies how suppliers share traceability data and how fresh produce companies identify, monitor and work with FSMA 204-ready trading partners.

“This alliance offers a differentiated alternative to legacy approaches to traceability and supplier management,” says Gary Iles, chief marketing officer of Esko and TraceGains. “Food and beverage companies can find proven, traceability-ready suppliers, monitor FSMA 204 compliance and manage supplier data and documents in one place, while suppliers gain a clear way to stand out in a competitive marketplace.”

TraceGains’ global network spans more than 100,000 supplier locations. iFoodDS’ Trace Exchange platform provides a flexible, scalable traceability solution that is purpose-built to support FSMA 204 requirements across complex supplier networks. The companies say that by integrating these platforms, the alliance makes traceability data sharing and compliance management a natural extension of existing supplier workflows.

TraceGains and iFoodDS say a cornerstone of the partnership is the ability for suppliers to earn the TraceApproved FSMA 204 traceability readiness badge through iFoodDS and showcase that credential directly on their supplier profiles within Gather, the TraceGains supplier marketplace. Fresh produce companies can then search for and engage suppliers that have demonstrated their readiness to comply with FSMA 204.

The integration also enables seamless data sharing between the platforms, including master product and location data as well as critical tracking event data. This eliminates duplicate effort for suppliers, reduces errors and supports integrated reporting within TraceGains Supplier Management.

“Many suppliers are already taking proactive steps toward FSMA 204 compliance by adopting iFoodDS’ flexible, cost-effective traceability software and completing our TraceApproved readiness program,” iFoodDS CEO Scott Mathews says. “Our expanded alliance with TraceGains streamlines supplier workflows and gives suppliers a powerful way to showcase their traceability capabilities to current and prospective customers.”

Counting Down the Top 6 Food Safety Concerns for 2026

Sun, 04 Jan 2026 19:55:23 GMT

When looking back at the past few years, former FDA Deputy Commissioner Frank Yiannas says the fresh produce industry still has a lot of work to do when it comes to food safety.

“[2025] was a tough year,” he says. “I said this same thing last year at the end of ‘24. I said, ‘It’s been a tough year for food safety.’”

He notes, however, that the industry seeks continuous improvement.

There have been successes, Yiannas says, highlighting romaine lettuce, but there are still constant recalls and foodborne illnesses, though not all related to fresh produce.

“Just last week, recalls this year are up,” he says. “But more importantly, just the total number of recalls by FDA-regulated products, the number of units is dramatically up; the number of units that are being recalled, almost twice as many.”

So, he says it’s time for the industry to do more.

“There’s certainly a lot that we could say about what’s transpired in ‘25,” he says. “Philosophically and for the organizations I’ve worked with, it’s even more important to look back, but let’s look forward. What should we be doing and planning for ahead?”

Yiannas sat down with The Packer to share his top six food safety concerns for 2026.

1. Know the Risks

Yiannas says that while many growers might think more about the regulations, he says it’s more important to focus on the real risks.

“The first thing you have to do is just rereview your hazard analysis and risk assessments,” he says. “Rereview it, and challenge the assumptions, because what I see is that companies continue to have problems.”

Yiannas says some produce industry businesses have not identified hazards or risks in production or growing. Companies can’t measure what hasn’t been evaluated, he says, adding that this evaluation should be continuous; any existing hazard and risk analysis should continually be challenged to make sure it’s good enough.

“I always say, even if it’s a low probability, high-severity event, I want to think about it,” he says.

It’s also important to remember the relationship between hazard and risk, Yiannas adds. The hazard might be E. coli, but the risk is: How does the produce get exposed to E. coli? Is it adjacent land? Is it irrigation water?

“It seems fairly basic, but I promise you that if companies did a better job with hazard analysis and risk assessments, we’d have less outbreaks,” he says.

2. Rethink Controls

“We have literally what I call a gazillion controls in food safety, but most of the controls are not very good,” Yiannas says. “I don’t believe we bend that curve until we start, what I would say, adopting or utilizing more design or engineering controls.”

He says these controls are designed to manage or reduce hazards, but if those measures rely on administrative controls, that is not a recipe for success.

Yiannas says an example of an administrative control is having an employee check available chlorine in the water four times a day. This relies on the employee performing this control consistently at the same time and conducting the test properly. Whereas, if a produce business automates a control, it reduces the potential for error.

“Clearly, in the 20^th century, there was the industrial revolution in the way we grow and farm. They adopted technology and they did things so much differently,” he says. “I think it’s time right now to say, ‘How do we continue to modernize how we produce and harvest products so that it’s more dependent on engineering controls as opposed to administrative or human controls?’

“I would look around those points of harvesting, whether it’s done by people or equipment, and make sure that we have the right food safety considerations there, and certainly water applications, which has been very much traditional and manual,” Yiannas adds. “And in some cases, we haven’t even had controls, right?

3. Have a Laser Focus on Water and Adjacent Land Use

“Water is one of the best conduits to spread contamination, whether it’s indoors or outdoors,” says Yiannas, who notes that, while he was with the FDA, salmonella was found in a nutrient pond of a controlled environment agriculture facility.

What also complicates food safety efforts in modern agriculture production is that there are often many types of farming operations within a location, Yiannas says.

“We have these complex agricultural ecosystems all across the U.S.” he says. “They differ depending on whether you’re in Salinas or Yuma or other states. We need them all to coexist together and safely.”

However, if a grower’s farm is across the field from a neighbor raising livestock, it’s important to consider the risk and the hazards that come with those neighboring farms, Yiannas says.

“The solutions sometimes aren’t easy, especially if they’re upstream, but there are things you can do, whether it’s planting a hedge, a tree or barriers to try to direct the flow of water, but you should think about that,” he says.

4. Continue to Digitize Food Safety

Food safety records on paper should be obsolete, Yiannas says.

“You have it on a piece of paper; it’s a dead end. You can’t automate anything. You can’t trend and compare. You can’t evaluate it in totality with other data, but food safety data in digital form is the beginning of what I call meaningful action,” he says. “You can trend and compare long-term. You can trend and compare with other data sources that might be relevant.”

Yiannas says technology helps an operation bridge the gap between data and powerful information. While the fresh produce industry may have a wealth of data, it lacks actionable information, he says — and for food safety, it offers immense potential for data analysis.

“I think [in] the year 2026, every food producer, regardless of the type of food you’re producing, you should be challenging your teams and yourself to say, ‘Maybe we don’t digitize everything overnight. It might be a multiyear journey, but we’ve got to start making the transition,’” he says.

5. Be Ready for Compliance

While the FDA’s Food Traceability Rule does not go into effect until 2028, Yiannas says that is way too long to wait to become compliant. Whether it’s a potential issue with onions or beef, or spinach or other leafy greens, traceability will help prevent food waste and minimize the harm caused to the commodities involved, he says.

“Let’s minimize the damage as opposed to destroying the livelihood of all romaine growers, of all onion growers, of all spinach growers,” Yiannas says. “It pays to have food traceability now.”

He strongly encourages all produce industry businesses to take traceability seriously and work toward FSMA 204.

6. Cultivate a Culture of Food Safety

While Yiannas says he’s known for touting the importance of a top-down culture of food safety, he couldn’t offer a list of food safety concerns without mentioning it.

Food safety culture trumps strategy and planning because, at the heart, it’s about the values and beliefs of the company, he explains.

“I’ve seen enough outbreaks over the course of my career to know that those companies that have strong cultures — they’re doing this just because they really genuinely care about the safety of people,” he says. “And they’re not just trying to protect their brand reputation.”

Yiannas says it’s important for fresh produce businesses to embrace food safety throughout the entire company, in which it’s important to conduct food safety properly every day.

“I am always struck by companies thinking that food safety is a regulatory requirement,” he says. “They have the wrong mindset. Really, food safety is just the right thing to do because we care about consumers.

Your Fresh Market Broccoli Florets Recalled in Canada

Tue, 02 Dec 2025 15:32:00 GMT

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency says broccoli florets from Fresh Taste Produce Ltd. that were sold under the Your Fresh Market label have been recalled due to a potential contamination with salmonella. The florets were distributed in the provinces of New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Quebec.

The recall includes the 907-gram Your Fresh Market broccoli florets with a 627735270548 UPC and lot code of 25318.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency says the recall was triggered by its inspection activities. The agency says it has begun a food safety investigation, which may lead to the recall of other products.

There have been no reported illnesses associated with the consumption of this product, the agency says.

RedLine Solutions Adds FastPack for MyProduce

Wed, 15 Oct 2025 11:31:44 GMT

RedLine Solutions has released MyProduce version 5.0, which includes a major new feature called FastPack.

RedLine Solutions says FastPack handles receiving, packing and moving finished goods into inventory. FastPack offers the ability to print on-demand or preprint batches of both case and pallet labels, which optimizes both field-packed and direct-packed workflows with full FSMA Section 204 data collection and reporting compliance built in.

“FastPack is the result of our field-packed and pack-on-receipt workflow analysis,” says Ross Lambert, director of software development at RedLine. “Packing in the field or pack-on-receipt have significantly different workflows than receiving and packing from bulk storage and potentially separate locations. This configuration is optimized for these unique packing environments.”

RedLine says label printing for FastPack drives efficiency in field-packed and packed-on-receipt workflow. The company says when the packed produce is scanned at receiving, the pallet label data is matched to its harvest plan and added to inventory along with the associated traceability data. And, the company says, matching the scanned label to its harvest plan radically reduces the amount of data entry required and significantly reduces the opportunity for error.

FastPack offers label reprints as needed and without fear of duplicate IDs; the software will not put the same pallet ID into inventory more than once.

FastPack also provides the status of all pallets it has created.

“The new Pallet Details tracking screen tells you in real-time which pallet IDs have been printed as well as which pallets have been received and scanned into inventory,” says Todd Baggett, president of RedLine. “The MyProduce Zebra device client supports mobile scanning and can even capture pallet weights, which are stored for use in the shipping process.”

Environmental Monitoring is Key for CEA Leafy Green Safety

Thu, 09 Oct 2025 17:02:52 GMT

As the phrase goes — you can’t manage what you don’t measure. But in that same vein, how you measure something matters. When it comes to pathogen contamination in leafy greens, it really matters.

That was a key take away at the most recent Center for Produce Safety webinar, held Oct. 6. During the webinar, researchers presented the findings of a study into the food safety of leafy greens grown in different controlled environment agricultural systems. The study was partially funded by CPS.

“We were trying to identify if CEA systems are safer than open fields, and we can conclude that they are not inherently safe,” says Ana Allende, from the University of Spain’s Center for Soil Science and Applied Biology and the study’s principal investigator.

“What we can do to make it safer is not magic,” she continues. “We recommend implementation of an environmental monitoring program. It will be essential for early detection and prevention of any microbiological contamination.”

About the study

According to Allende, there is a perception among consumers that CEA-grown produce is inherently safer. However, illness as a result of CEA-grown leafy greens contaminated with salmonella has happened, and listeria is a pressing food safety concern for field-grown leafy greens. Allende says there was a knowledge gap in the CEA industry regarding risk for listeria that this study, in part, tried to address.

The research was conducted at commercial CEA growing facilities in Spain, though the facilities selected mirrored U.S. and Canadian growing practices. The study looked at three different types of CEA growing conditions — soil-based, hydroponic and substrate-based systems — growing a variety of leafy greens for listeria and salmonella contamination.

Researchers also looked at persistence of pathogens in the environment and on common surfaces such as harvesting crates after intentional inoculation. They also looked at the efficacy of crate washing systems for removing contamination.

The study’s main findings included:

Water is a primary contamination vector: Salmonella was found in the substrate-based system’s irrigation water and nutrient solutions, and listeria was found in the hydroponic system’s drainage water.
Soil or growth media can serve as pathogen reservoirs: Listeria was found in the soil-based and hydroponic systems, especially on workers’ boots.
Normal work in CEA systems can spread pathogens: Workers’ boots and cart wheels inoculated with listeria could spread the pathogen to other parts of the CEA facility, though persistence after 24 hours was low, particularly for cart wheels.
Dirty harvest crates can harbor pathogens: Insufficient cleaning of harvest crates that allows organic matter to remain can protect pathogens.

One of the most surprising findings according to Allende came from the portion of the study that looked at the cleaning of the harvesting crates.

The study collected swabbed samples from harvesting crates before and after being run through a commercial tunnel washing system. While the researchers didn’t find listeria on either the dirty or clean crates, they did find other bacteria. A lot of them. The study reported that “the total bacterial levels were very high” and washing did almost nothing to change the total bacterial load on the crates.

“I must say that the experiment dealing with the crates was really surprising because the growers were using these automatic systems, which seemed to be very advanced, but they are failing in the most basic task,” Allende says.

Key takeaways for growers

The researchers had a few key recommendations to CEA leafy green growers that came out of the study. The primary one was to have a rigorous environmental monitoring program that focuses on key contamination vectors, or hotspots as Allende calls them.

“We identified soil and floor surfaces as a hotspot, as well as the reusable plastic crates. Also, the water is a key risk factor for contamination, and of course the recirculating nutrient solution that is used in the hydroponic and the substrate-based systems.”

When it came to monitoring water, which the study identified as the primary contamination vector, Allende stresses you cannot do initial tests and then assume the water will stay safe.

“You have to check as the days go on,” she says.

Mabel Gil, a co-principal investigator on the study and also from the University of Spain, adds that the volume of water sampling sizes is important. The bigger the better.

“For irrigation water, our growers were surprised about the results because the labs normally have a very small sample size like 100 milliliters or something similar,” she says. “In our case it was 10 liters. When you increase the sample size, you have more possibility of finding positives.”

When it came to the apparent failure of the automatic washing systems for reducing bacterial load on the harvesting crates, Allende says there are a lot of potential advantages to automation. However, she says growers must both implement the systems properly and validate their efficacy.

Ultimately, however, both researchers stress the need to monitor for contamination and to monitor properly based on the risk factors of growers’ specific facilities and growing systems.

“If you don’t want to find, you will not find, so you really have to look,” Allende says. “If you don’t use the more sensitive sampling methods, you probably will think that you don’t have any positives in your system. But you have to look carefully to really detect the contamination points.”

Commercial Food Sanitation to Open Food Safety Training Facility in New Orleans

Thu, 02 Oct 2025 11:14:17 GMT

Commercial Food Sanitation is set to open its first stand-alone training facility, CFS Institute North America, at the Intralox global headquarters in New Orleans on Oct. 3. The facility will be a place for CFS technical experts to help food processors worldwide implement preventive programs that mitigate and prevent critical food safety challenges, according to a release.

The 13,700-square-foot facility will be home for CFS trainings and certifications, including its Sanitation Essentials Training, Hygienic Design Training, and Advancing Sanitation Impact Training.

The facility also features three laboratories, providing real-life plant environments for training participants. Additional collaboration spaces in the facility enable learning and cross-functional collaboration among food manufacturing professionals in engineering, quality assurance, sanitation, and operations roles as they are educated on risk reduction, operational efficiency, and long-term food safety performance, the release said.  

“Our new facility will be a hub for food industry collaboration, learning and innovation,” says Darin Zehr, CFS general manager. “This facility is purpose-built to support the food manufacturing industry and its professionals with cutting-edge resources and a collaborative environment.”  

CFS Institute North America is a part of a global network with training offered in Amsterdam; São Paulo; Shanghai; Monterrey, Mexico; and Melbourne, Australia. CFS says it has trained over 5,300 participants at its global training centers to date. 

“This new facility is more than just a space; it’s a place where we can instill a true passion for food safety and empower teams through hands-on education,” says CFS Global Training Manager Nicole Cammarata. “By combining training with real-world application, we’re not only helping provide safer food to the world but also shaping a culture where food safety is the top-priority.” 

CFS, an Intralox company, is committed to building a safer global food supply by helping food processors worldwide to implement preventive programs that mitigate and prevent critical food safety challenges, the release says. Using robust education programs and customer-centric consulting, CFS says it helps food manufacturers instill a companywide passion for food safety and sustained improvement to efficiency and productivity. 

Fresh-Cut, Processed Cantaloupe Recalled

Wed, 01 Oct 2025 17:58:50 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration says Wholesale Produce Supply of Minneapolis, Minn., has recalled its fresh-cut and processed cantaloupe due to a potential contamination with Listeria monocytogenes.

Wholesale Produce Supply sold its fresh-cut cantaloupe to distributors in Nebraska, North Dakota and Wisconsin, who may have distributed into other states under the “Harvest Cuts” and “Fresh & Finest” brand at traditional grocery locations, according to the FDA. The company packaged the fresh-cut cantaloupe in traditional plastic clamshell containers under the “Harvest Cuts” and “Fresh & Finest” label in both cantaloupe-only products, as well as mixed containers that include other fresh cut-fruits.

The FDA says no illnesses have been reported to date.

The company recalled its products following a routine sampling program, which revealed that the finished products potentially contained bacteria, according to the agency. The FDA says Wholesale Produce Supply has suspended production and distribution of the affected lots as the company continues its investigation into the cause of the contamination.

Visit the FDA’s recall notice for lot codes and UPCs of the recalled products.

How Water Sanitizers Help Reduce E. Coli on Leafy Greens

Wed, 01 Oct 2025 11:30:08 GMT

Remember the aphorism, “Perfect is the enemy of good”? It applies to water sanitizers for keeping leafy greens safe.

The Center for Produce Safety (CPS) hosted a Sept. 30 webinar presenting the findings of a study on food safety in leafy greens. The study , partially funded by CPS, looked at how effective common irrigation water sanitizers are at reducing or eliminating E. coli already present in the soil or on leafy greens. It also looked at which E. coli infection scenarios posed the biggest risk.

Generally, the researchers found both common water sanitizers used by industry reduced microbial loads on plants and in soils. They also found that the “animal intrusion” scenario — for example, deer entering fields and leaving droppings — posed the highest and most persistent contamination risk.

“Hopefully, the results of this study are helpful to industry, not only growers but also regulators, because it really helps us understand … additional positive impacts of water treatment to ultimately reduce risks for consumers,” said the study’s principal investigator, Channah Rock of the University of Arizona.

Background on the Study

The research was spawned in part because food safety attention surrounding illness-causing E. coli in leafy greens has shifted to agricultural water. Researchers found a problem, however.

“While significant progress has been made in understanding pathogen reduction within water, a critical knowledge gap remains regarding the impact of treated water on pathogens already present on plant surfaces or in soil,” the report’s abstract reads.

In an attempt to fill that gap, researchers inoculated romaine and the soil the greens grew in with different strains of E. coli. These strains included the 2006 spinach outbreak strain, the 2018 romaine outbreak strain and a generic strain. Plants were inoculated at differing concentrations of E. coli — one intended to mimic atmospheric deposition, one mimicking animal intrusion and the last replicating a treatment failure.

The plants were then treated with irrigation water containing common sanitizers — either peracetic acid (PAA) or calcium hypochlorite (chlorine) — at low and high concentrations. Researchers then looked for the level and persistence of illness-causing E. coli on the plants and in the soil.

Study’s Findings

Overall, both of the trial sanitizers reduced — but did not eliminate — illness-causing microbial loads both on plants and in the soil, regardless of contamination level.

“No sanitizer was completely effective, nor at differing concentrations,” said Kerry Cooper of the University of Arizona, one of the co-principal investigators (PI) on the study. “We see a lot of variation within the different concentrations as well as between the different strains when it comes to the efficacy of the different sanitizers and the different concentrations.”

For example, PAA was more effective at reducing pathogens on the plant in the short term, but chlorine was more effective in the long term. The different strains also showed different reactions to the sanitizers, both on the plant and in the soil.

Efficacy also differed depending upon the contamination scenario. Of the three contamination scenarios tested, the animal intrusion mimicking fecal contamination posed the most risk. It had the greatest microbial load and persisted longer on both plants and in soil.

“Essentially what we’re seeing is bacteria is able to hold on for extended periods of time when we’re comparing it to the other two contamination type scenarios,” Rock said. She also reported that the animal intrusion contamination scenario had the least response to the two sanitation treatment methods.

Still, water sanitizing treatment did reduce microbial loads. And that reduces risks to consumers; an important takeaway.

“Ultimately, what we see is that applying the chemical sanitizer decreased the relative risk in all cases,” said Hunter Quon of Arizona State University. Kerry Hamilton, also of ASU and one of the study’s co-PIs, added that while there is no way to remove all risk, water sanitizer does help reduce the risks to consumers.

Advice to Growers

From the findings, researchers had some recommendations for growers. The first is to optimize their approach to using sanitizers for leafy greens.

“That ultimately is going to help maximize microbial reduction and limit some of that treatment variability,” Rock said.

Regarding the high-risk contamination potential of animal incursion, the report recommends growers “develop enhanced mitigation strategies” to deal with the potential.

“The last recommendation or take home is monitoring of your systems can really help to support confidence that they are operating as intended,” Rock said. She cited the changing requirements of the Food and Drug Administration’s Produce Safety Rule , specifically in Subpart E , backing the importance of water systems data.

“We believe that FDA and other state inspectors are going to be looking for is confidence in your water treatment system,” she added. “The only way that you can do that is to have monitoring information and data that you can present to show their efficacy and to show that they are operating as intended.”

RedLine Solutions, iFoodDS Talk Traceability Partnership

Fri, 26 Sep 2025 04:29:14 GMT

Recently, RedLine Solutions, a produce traceability and inventory management system company, and iFoodDS, a food traceability, quality and food safety software company, announced the companies have integrated RedLine’s MyProduce and iFoodDS Trace Exchange.

The companies say this partnership helps produce suppliers collect, manage and share critical tracking events (CTEs) and key data elements (KDEs) across the supply chain. KDEs and CTEs are an essential part of the FDA’s Final Food Traceability Rule, also known as FSMA 204.

“What our partnership with RedLine does is it alleviates that operational expense, that operational burden, because there are many suppliers, especially produce suppliers, that are already using RedLine Solutions for case and palette labeling or even for their own individual traceability, but they need a broader ability to share that data out with all of their downstream customers,” says Alyson Sharron, vice president of marketing with iFoodDS,

Sharron says this integrated solution helps produce companies better share the information gathered without having to input the data into two different systems.

Todd Baggett, CEO and founder of RedLine Solutions, says the partnership is relatively straightforward. RedLine is the data collection and gathering mechanism, and iFoodDS is the storage mechanism.

RedLine labels cases, identifies what’s on a pallet and where it went.

“They don’t do what we do,” Baggett says. “We don’t do what they do, but we’re meeting in the middle. [iFoodDS’s] place in the market is to really assist the retailers and the large food service companies in retaining that traceability data for the FDA … What we’ve specialized in for the last 25 plus years is data collection, and we’ve had software that manages the data collection and passes it on to ERP or other systems, grower, accounting, etc.”

Baggett says RedLine has tracked its customers’ productivity after integrating its solutions, and in the 20-plus years of business, RedLine saves grower-shippers around 25% in the labor required for storage, picking and shipping processes.

Sharron says the goal of this partnership is to help RedLine and iFoodDS customers share data as easily as possible. And Andy Kennedy, chief traceability officer with iFoodDS, says the value of the data collected by RedLine is so important.

“They understand all the different ways a product can be harvested and come from the field and how that gets tracked inbound,” he says. “So, it looks like a really simple piece of data.”

This simple piece of data is inbound field binds, field harvested products and keeping track of the raw product as it is converted to pack product.

“You need a specialist who really understands the industry, understands the language and can handle all the complexity, and then track that through production, into storage and then outbound,” he says. “[RedLine] does all that work, packages up that shipment record and then sends it to us. So then we have the confidence knowing that the initial packing record has the correct information. It’s got the right field, it’s got the right commodity, variety, etc., and the labeling is good.”

Kennedy says a real risk is that if a label doesn’t scan properly, it defeats the purpose of tracking the produce up to that point.

“The key piece of information that a specialist like RedLine captures, which is so important, is the first critical tracking event,” he says. “It’s really one of the most critical pieces of information in the whole supply chain, because what happens during initial packing? That’s where the harvest information, the fields, where that harvested product actually came from and where it’s being packed gets linked to the case label with the GTEN lot.”

Study Finds Promising Pear Food Safety Situation

Fri, 12 Sep 2025 11:49:59 GMT

It seems the pear industry is doing well when it comes to food safety on pear harvest, packing and storage. This is according to a study partially funded by the Center for Produce Safety (CPS).

During a Sept. 10 CPS webinar, Laura Strawn — professor and extension specialist at Virginia Tech — presented findings from a recently completed study into food safety risk mitigation in pears. The study used a metagenomic approach to catalog microbiological communities present on pears at harvest, during various stages and conditions of storage, and at retail.

Among other things, the study found that the packing line reduced microbial load — including of foodborne illness-causing microbes — on pear surfaces, and that method and length of storage changed the volume and makeup of microbial communities on pears.

“We were able to find that Listeria monocytogenes and generic E coli did not grow on intact pears throughout the entirety of storage,” says Strawn, the study’s principal investigator, adding that “wrapping of the pears significantly reduced Listeria monocytogenes levels.”

Objectives, Purpose and Findings

The study had three main objectives:

Identify what kinds of microbial communities are present on whole, intact pears prior to storage. D’Anjou pears were used in the study.
Identify and quantify what microbial communities are present on marketable (whole, intact) and unmarketable (mechanically damaged) pears in bulk bins and individually wrapped in storage for three, six and nine months under industry-standard environments, and track the changes over those storage times.
Track what happens to listeria colonies across storage conditions and lengths when applied to pears individually and in combination with other microbes that could be found on pears

“We really wanted to characterize the microbiota of these pears under different storage practices and provide evidence-based recommendations for both food safety and then also a little bit of quality management if possible,” Strawn says of the motivation behind the study. She adds that other tree fruit, especially apples, have benefited from similar investigations.

“But we really didn’t have those strong science-backed recommendations for our pear industry, and this was a really wonderful opportunity to do it,” she says.

On the first objective, the study found that the types of microbes on pears — the microbial communities — at harvest and after running through the packing line didn’t change much. But the number of microbes decreased significantly after passing through the packing line, “confirming the value of postharvest handling,” the report reads.

Strawn also notes that listeria was not found natively on pears in the study. Though another part of the study involved inoculating pears with listeria to see what happened under different conditions, they did not find the microbe on uninoculated pears.

On the second objective, the study made the surprising finding that the microbial communities were very similar between intact marketable pears and mechanically damaged unmarketable pears. However, wrapping pears in antimicrobial wrapping had a noticeable impact, both reducing the number of microbes present and decreasing the variety of microbes.

Finally, on objective three, the study found that listeria just didn’t grow on pears across storage. Large volumes of listeria and other co-inoculate microbes were applied to the study’s pears, and while listeria was still observable on the pears by seven months of storage, there was never any growth. Instead, volumes declined from inoculation levels under all tested conditions.

Impact for Industry

While all the findings were valuable to the pear industry, Strawn characterizes the finding that listeria didn’t grow on pears through storage as especially important.

She says it means the pear industry needs to “stay focused and vigilant on our food safety programs to prevent that initial contamination because we were able to show that if you have no contamination, it’s not going to be a supportive environment.”

She points to the large-scale outbreaks of listeria from produce, noting that such outbreaks stem from high levels of initial contamination followed by microbial growth, or “amplification.”

“So, being able to show that your commodity, under your operation and whatnot, doesn’t grow or ever show that amplification — it’s really important,” she says. “Because then you can say, ‘OK, good, we’re not getting any amplification. Now let’s really focus in on our good agricultural practice programs or good manufacturing practices. All the things we do around sanitation and worker health and hygiene, all that stuff and make sure that we’re not getting any kind of potential contamination.’”

Strawn also points to the findings that wrapped pears in storage showed less varied and reduced microbial loads compared to bulk-stored pears as useful to industry. She acknowledges that wrapping pears is labor-intensive and comes with a big cost, so moving the industry to wrapping is not desirable. But she adds that it could be a quality-preserving strategy “if you did have a lot come in that you were particularly concerned about or you thought might be more prone to disease.”

How Changes in Foodborne Illness Tracking Could Impact Fresh Produce

Mon, 08 Sep 2025 23:13:57 GMT

Earlier this year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reduced the required surveillance in its Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet). The CDC works with the Food and Drug Administration and USDA, as well as select state health departments, to track foodborne illnesses.

Frank Yiannas, former FDA deputy commissioner, says that these cuts, which reduce the number of illnesses tracked from campylobacter, cyclospora, listeria, salmonella, Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), shigella, vibrio and yersinia to only STEC and salmonella, could have lasting effects on the fresh produce industry.

With FoodNet, the CDC checks in with laboratories in select areas weekly. These laboratories in Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Tennessee and select counties in California and New York equate to about 16% of the population. From there, FoodNet tracks the incidents of foodborne illness per 100,000 people, which Yiannas says helps stabilize the data, because FoodNet tracks the rates of incidents as they happen.

This active surveillance is different than passive reporting, where health departments and the CDC report foodborne illnesses, Yiannas explains. Oftentimes, passive reporting can lead to underreporting of foodborne illnesses due to delays in processing.

“Without this kind of work, we really don’t know what the incidence of foodborne disease is,” he says. “You don’t want to just count cases of foodborne disease. You don’t want to count outbreaks of foodborne disease. You want an incidence per 100,000 population, because then you have a rate that you can compare to year after year.”

But with the cuts, the CDC will now only track salmonella and STEC.

“That means, going forward, the only thing we’ll have good data on in terms of what the true incidence of these pathogens in our country will be salmonella and STEC,” Yiannas says. “The industry won’t really know long-term trends on whether these pathogens are increasing or the illnesses are decreasing. No. 1, it’ll be hard for us to know whether we’re making progress. It’s the ultimate measuring stick, if you will. We won’t know whether we’re making progress. We won’t know whether our food system is getting safer or less safe because of climate change, because of imports or because of rules. We won’t be able to rate whether our interventions or rules are working or not, because we just won’t have confidence in the numbers.”

He says these cuts directly conflict with both the interest in the “gold standard” of science as well as a desire for radical transparency.

“I can’t imagine you’d find an epidemiologist who would say passive surveillance is the gold standard,” he says.

And Yiannas says this is a shame, because he thinks the U.S. has built one of the best foodborne surveillance systems thanks to the use of whole genome sequencing.

“I’ve worked with other nations, and our ability to do surveillance and detect cases of foodborne illness is really, really good, and that was largely because of the CDC and the states in programs such as FoodNet and technologies just such as whole genome sequencing,” he says. “The thing that has advanced food safety the most into the 21st century is foodborne disease surveillance; the fact that we can detect foodborne illnesses sometimes makes the invisible visible.”

And this also comes at a time when he says the food industry has not bent the curve of foodborne illness in two decades. Some of that, he says, can be attributed to the challenges of those last-mile issues of tracing the foodborne illness all the way back to the producer.

“When you start fighting these battles, it’s kind of like you pick the low-hanging fruit off the tree, and now the fruit is a little bit higher up, and it’s harder to reach,” he says. “So, these last-mile problems that we’re battling, these are harder.”

It’s likely that there will be less reporting of smaller foodborne illness cases, only outbreaks, Yiannas says. With these cuts, it will set up a system only able to detect larger outbreaks.

“You want to find out the spread in low-number cases too, to see what you can learn about them and to prevent a big outbreak,” he says. “I use the analogy of the airplane industry of near misses. You want everything to be investigated. You don’t want to wait until there’s a catastrophic failure in a big airplane.”

And from here, he says he hopes that the private sector will step in and help fill the place of FoodNet’s reduced reporting. But, he adds, the important thing to remember is this is not a partisan issue; this is an issue that impacts all Americans.

“The reality is this is a public sector function, because the industry can’t do this,” he says of FoodNet. “We do expect our government to do basic things that keep the American people safe. Maintaining the safety of the American consumer is a government responsibility and clearly a private sector responsibility, but foodborne illness surveillance is a public sector responsibility.”

And for those concerned about the impacts of these cuts, Yiannas encourages the industry to contact their representatives and legislators, as well as the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Advocate with political leaders ... about the concern that what we’ll know about foodborne illnesses — other than the two that they’re tracking aggressively — will be less than what we’ve known for decades past, and we won’t really know whether our food system is getting safer,” he says.

Your next read: Former FDA Deputy Commissioner Talks FSMA Delay and Compliance Challenges

Former FDA Deputy Commissioner Talks FSMA Delay and Compliance Challenges

Fri, 05 Sep 2025 10:28:22 GMT

Earlier this summer, the Food and Drug Administration announced it would delay the compliance date for the Food Traceability Rule, colloquially known as FSMA 204, by 30 months .

Frank Yiannas, former deputy commissioner of the FDA, joined The Packer podcast to share his insights into why traceability is a critical step for the fresh produce industry and why it’s needed for the entire supply chain.

“It’s necessary, because in every big outbreak that happens, oftentimes we see that a lack of traceability is what I call an Achilles heel,” he says.

While the industry had been working to prepare for FSMA 204, which he says is a big undertaking, Yiannas expressed some disappointment that the FDA decided to delay compliance outright instead of moving forward with the Jan. 20, 2026, compliance date but with delayed enforcement, taking an educate before enforce approach.

“Had I been there, I would have been advocating strongly, for ‘Let’s provide the industry more time with something that we call enforcement discretion,’” he says. “The compliance date goes into effect, but you stay true to that FSMA mandate of educating before and while we regulate and give the industry certainty, maybe even in written form, that we would grant enforcement discretion for a period of time afterwards, and so you could have given them more time.”

Yiannis says the risk in delaying outright is that some companies within the fresh produce industry may stop progress toward compliance. There may be a thought that the FDA could delay enforcement again or even change the rule, but the FDA has said repeatedly that the agency has no intention of changing the rule.

“The good news is that industry has a little bit more time, and I strongly advocate that they use that time and don’t stop what they’re doing and work on it, because July of 2028 will be here before you know it,” he says.

Yiannis says he did an exercise a few weeks ago, looking at the outbreaks the FDA investigated and closed for this year. He says he discovered that 60% of those outbreaks were closed without identifying the food responsible for the outbreak.

“We live in a day and age where we have whole genome sequence, and the analogy I use is we can find needles-in-the-haystack cases of foodborne illness across the country; we know they’re linked because they have the same genetic match, which is a good thing, and I hope we continue to invest and make advancements in public health surveillance so we can find the needles in the haystack,” he says. “But we can’t find the haystacks — the foods from which these pathogens came from. We can’t delay this any longer than July of 2028, and if you say that you’re for radical transparency, as we hear a lot of leaders say these days, you can’t be for radical transparency and against food traceability. That’s an oxymoron.”

He says while FSMA 204 is a signficiant change, one of the biggest barriers to compliance is that many produce industry businesses don’t understand the true value of better traceability.

“We did a cost-benefit analysis, and on balance, we believe the rule will save the nation, the food system, our society at large, dollars, because we’ll be able to solve outbreaks quicker, prevent outbreaks, prevent these overly broad recalls that we’ve all seen over the course of the past decade,” he says. “We’ve seen repeatedly in these outbreaks. When you trace them back, it’s a source, yet everybody who grew the commodity got damaged.”

Yiannis says a challenge to implementing FSMA 204 across the entire fresh produce supply chain is what he calls the “last mile” at the distribution center and then shipping to a point of service such as a retailer or restaurant.

“I can tell you that in so many outbreaks, it was that last mile,” he says. “We couldn’t get good data on what was actually received at a restaurant or at a grocery store. There were always these estimates. And that’s why I say to those people who say that you don’t require capturing a traceability lot code at point of service, just don’t know. I hate to be so blunt, but they just don’t know, because they really haven’t tried to do this work.”

Born Farms Earns BRCGS AA Certification

Thu, 21 Aug 2025 19:08:03 GMT

Guatemala-based Born Farms says it has earned a BRCGS Global Food Safety Standard AA Certification for its food safety, quality and operational protocols.

The company says it earned the rating after a comprehensive third-party audit, in which Born Farms was evaluated across nine core sections and 265 compliance points. Sections audited include food safety plans, site standards, product and process controls, and personnel hygiene and training.

“Food safety isn’t just something we do during audits — it’s part of our DNA,” Christopher Safieh, vice president of Born, said in a news release. “This certification confirms our commitment to delivering clean, legal and consistently high-quality produce to our partners across the supply chain.”

Born Farms says it has maintained BRGCS certification for 19 consecutive years and that this latest certification reinforces its position as a trusted supplier to retail and foodservice sectors in North America and the world.

The company has also launched “Todos Somos BRC” (“We Are All BRC”) — an internal training movement that engages more than 50 production and operations staff in proactive food safety education. Born Farms says its initiative promotes awareness of preventive measures, reinforces compliance with standards and empowers staff to take ownership of quality and safety protocols.

Born Farms says that while BRCGS was originally designed for United Kingdom retailers, the standard is now widely accepted by buyers in the U.S., Canada, and global markets, which provides a transparent, letter-based grading system (AA, A, B, etc.) that offers immediate clarity for buyers evaluating supplier risk.

“Achieving an AA rating gives our partners confidence that we’re not only meeting the minimum — but going beyond,” Safieh says.

What You Need to Know About the FSMA 204 Delay

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 20:06:56 GMT

Last week the Food and Drug Administration announced an official extension to the enforcement date to the Food Traceability Rule of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). This follows a March notice about its intent to delay.

Angela Fernandez, senior vice president of market development at GS1 US, sat down with The Packer to discuss what was new in this latest announcement and what the produce industry needs to understand about this 30-month delay.

First, the FDA set a new compliance date for enforcement of July 20, 2028. Secondly, Fernandez says this announcement was as much about formality as it was an update to the industry.

Fernandez says any changes, including the extension of the compliance date, needed to go through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); once the office signed off on the change, a 30-day comment period opened.

“Any changes to the rule require OMB approval as well as public comment periods,” she says.

While the FSMA 204 rule is open for comments, Fernandez says the FDA has signaled that it does not intend to change any of the requirements.

“Organizations have the opportunity over the next 30 days to comment on the rule,” she says. “As much as the FDA is trying to focus on the additional time needed, is 30 months the right time? Are we looking at this the right way, taking into account the implementation challenges that they have heard from industry and from associations? That’s where they’re looking for comments.”

The FDA made available several resources with this announcement. Fernandez says these include examples for specific items to help an organization understand its responsibility with the Food Traceability Rule. The FDA also updated its FAQs around traceability lot code source.

“The FAQs did call out that the global location number, which is a part of our standard that identifies entities or locations, as being acceptable to be able to support this requirement of the rule,” she says. “They noted that the challenges industry is looking at overcoming with this role is around, of course, the data that has to be shared and the extent of that data and recognizing that everybody runs on different systems and different technologies. There was a call out that common data standards are probably going to have to be embraced.”

Fernandez says, in the FAQs, the agency acknowledged the need for some new standards or agreed upon standards for the industry to be able to use as part of the requirements of FSMA 204.

Fernandez says it’s important that organizations understand the data-sharing components of FSMA 204.

“When they’re calling for digital record-keeping and organizations that have certain requirements depending on their role in the supply chain, it could be a lot of data that they have to store and share, and being able to understand that is absolutely critical,” she says. “So, the fact that they’re recognizing that common data standards are going to have to be used, I think it’s just one step towards helping the food supply chain understand how they might be able to achieve those requirements that are laid out.”

And, as always, Fernandez encourages businesses and organizations impacted by FSMA 204 to not delay the process of preparing for enforcement. While 2028 might seem like a long time, she says it’s important that organizations work toward compliance during these 30 so months.

“This additional time just gives them an opportunity to not de-prioritize items and to sit back and wait,” she says. “I think it is a real mistake, because there’s a lot of changes, that happen with people process technology, irrespective of where you fall today in the food supply chain, and the faster you’re able to identify the enhancements you need to make and test that with your trading partners, then you really have assurance that the extension has served your firm well and making sure that you can meet those requirements.”

And she says many trading partners have expectations of traceability information being shared sooner.

“When you look at the largest retailers that really service our food supply chain, and the guidance they put out to their suppliers, their dates are still there,” she says. “They’re testing or going from pilots into implementation with their trading partners. And would encourage folks to just lean into that and be a part of that. Start those conversations with your trading partners if you haven’t yet.”

Having those conversations within an operation’s own supply chain is also a good use of these 30 months, Fernandez says.

“Now is the time to talk to transform your supply chains and lean into the requirements that are coming of extending and sharing that data that a lot of firms are doing internally today,” she says. “But how do we make that acceptable and translatable to the next trading partner, which is also going to give them visibility into where their product is going and how it’s being how it’s being sold or ingested into food items? If we’re truly sharing information back up the supply chain, this unlocks a potential amount of business benefits for organizations.”

IFPA Reorganizes to Amplify Food Safety

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:51:25 GMT

The International Fresh Produce Association (IFPA) says it has reorganized to enhance and amplify its goals in the areas of produce safety and food safety regulations.

Under the new structure, IFPA’s regulatory and compliance expert, Paul Lewis, will join the government relations team and report to Alexis Taylor, chief global policy officer. Other members of the food safety team, including Angie Fraser, vice president of food safety and quality; Jorge Quintanilla, food safety manager; and Alison Saltzmann, food safety support coordinator, will join the science and technology (SciTech) team under Max Teplitski.

“Food safety is foundational to our industry’s success,” Teplitski says. “Aligning our experts across our advocacy and science teams will help us deliver on the strategic imperatives to future-proof our industry, garner worldwide influence and create more valuable and personalized touchpoints and resources for our members. Food safety is a shared responsibility across every role and every step of the supply chain; and it’s a central part to all of the work the SciTech team does including the on-going work in packaging, FSMA 204 readiness, regenerative ag, and the Supply Chain of the Future initiative.”

IFPA says its science and technology team also includes the portfolios for the supply chain, ag technology, sustainability and the global intelligence team, which delivers on its proprietary research and analysis. This team also serves as critical advisers to IFPA’s government relations team, the association adds.

“While we’ve always worked across our teams effectively, this alignment allows us to more meaningfully commit government advocacy resources to food safety on the industry’s behalf in D.C. and in priority global regions,” Taylor says. “There are growing pressures on how, where, how much and when we grow and deliver fruits and vegetables across the world. This reorganization will help us to discover and advocate for the most powerful solutions and strategies to ensuring our industry is positioned to not only address these growing challenges but find the opportunities in them as well.”

IFPA says this reorganization is effective immediately and won’t result in any changes to work planned this year or volunteer leadership activities.

IFPA welcomes release of Reagan-Udall Foundation’s Food Safety Roadmap

Tue, 29 Jul 2025 05:33:49 GMT

The International Fresh Produce Association says the release of the Reagan-Udall Foundation’s report, “Roadmap to Produce Safety: A Conceptual Framework,” is a collaborative effort, and reiterated its call for adequate funding and future engagement with stakeholders.

“IFPA recognized the opportunity to represent our members in many of the working groups,” said IFPA Chief Science Officer Max Teplitski. “We believe that such [a] collaborative approach is fundamental in not only setting the direction, but also committing to the shared responsibility to follow the roadmap to enhance produce safety from farm to fork.”

IFPA also recognizes the FDA’s support and investment in the Produce Safety Dialogue process that informed the report, according to a release. The process included over 170 people who contributed to eight different working groups. This investment reflects the sentiment from both the participants and the FDA that ongoing collaboration and engagement across industry and regulatory groups will be critical to achieve measurable industry-wide impacts, the release said.

IFPA Chief Science Officer Max Teplitski says the Reagan-Udall Foundation’s Food Safety Roadmap was created in a spirit of collaboration.

(Photo courtesy of IFPA)

“While we stand ready to partner with our colleagues in industry and the FDA,” said Teplitski, “we also continue to advocate for the need to focus on risk-based and risk-appropriate approaches to food safety, investment into the development of detection tools and protocols that are robust and reproducible, using meaningful datasets to drive action plans, and for adequate allocation of federal and state resources to ensure the success of this collaboration.”

In addition to this advocacy work, IFPA says it will continue to inform industry members on opportunities to contribute to these collective efforts to improve produce safety and increase consumer confidence.

GlobalG.A.P. North America Offers New Guidelines

Thu, 10 Jul 2025 10:59:05 GMT

GlobalG.A.P. North America says in a news release that its U.S. national interpretation guideline for Integrated Farm Assurance (IFA) v6 GFS for fruit and vegetables has been published.

Integrated Farm Assurance promotes responsible farming practices and takes a holistic approach, addressing the key topics of good agricultural practices including food safety, environment, production processes, traceability and workers’ health, safety and welfare in one audit.

GlobalG.A.P. says its IFA v6 GFS edition achieved GFSI recognition and it supports this adoption of v6. The guideline details the specific requirements, clarifications and best practices for IFA v6 implementation, and provides examples, direction and resources to support verification and compliance.

Highlights of the guideline include:

For the principles and criteria on continuous improvement, relating to self-defined targets and progress, the guideline points to free tools such as the Cool Farm Tool or Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops (SISC) calculator, etc,. to establish baseline metrics and track improvement indicators of sustainability over time. These tools can help the producer “measure to manage” on topics such as water, energy, habitat and biodiversity, nitrogen and phosphorus use, soil organic matter and food loss. It also lists low-cost and no-cost examples of worker training, integrated pest management, recycling and more.
For biodiversity, the guideline points to existing Natural Resource Conservation Service or Farm Service Agency programs as evidence of compliance.
References national or local licensing as evidence of competencies, such as pesticide applicators’ licensing.
Explains the difference between subcontractors and service providers in the context of the U.S.
Considering common industry practice in the U.S., it clarifies the use of GlobalG.A.P. identification numbers, logos and mass balance to maintain producer confidentiality.
Provides direct references to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) throughout.
Elaborates on water testing laboratories and acceptable accreditations.
Contains an explanation of spill containment, which applies to most farms that store fuel on site.

GlobalG.A.P. says its U.S. National Technical Working Group (NTWG), which consists of GlobalG.A.P. Community Members, certified producers and producer groups, experts, buyers, certification body representatives and other supply chain actors, helped develop this guideline.

The organization says Walter Ram of Giumarra and U.S. NTWG Chair, led extensive conversations with the working group and addressed challenges to present the guideline updates for peer review and final approval by the GlobalG.A.P. Fruit and Vegetables Technical Committee.

“The guideline provides U.S. producers support and clarification, especially on topics that might be new to some producers like biodiversity and environmental metrics,” Ram says. “This is a resource that can help them make the connection between what regulations already require them to do, and what needs extra attention for GlobalG.A.P. certification.”

The Golden State Sets the Gold Standard for Food Safety

Thu, 03 Jul 2025 11:46:52 GMT

When food safety makes headlines it’s often for outbreaks, illness or worse, but recently California’s fresh produce industry, and particularly the lettuce and leafy greens sector, has attracted national media attention for its positive and highly proactive approach to a safer food supply.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration cut thousands of positions from the Food and Drug Administration, including hundreds that worked in food safety. The firings prompted a Forbes interview with California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement CEO Tim York on how the mass federal departures might impact the food safety of California lettuce and leafy greens.

“What we got across in that [May 5] article, was that despite the changes, turmoil, chaos — if you will — with FDA, we’re forging ahead with our food safety programs, and we don’t rely upon them for anything more than the occasional counsel or advice,” York says. “We don’t rely on them for funding or to conduct research or anything else. We’re completely independent of them, and their changes don’t impact the LGMA whatsoever.”

One month earlier, CBS Sunday Morning aired a segment on California leafy greens that shined a light on the stringent standards adhered to by LGMA member growers.

“It was an opportunity to talk about the good things going on with food safety,” York says.

The California Leafy Green Products Handler Marketing Agreement was formed in 2007 following a tragic outbreak of E. coli in 2006 that sickened over 200 people. Today, LGMA members, companies that ship and sell California-grown lettuce, spinach and other leafy greens products, represent approximately 99% of the state’s commercial volume.

Working with Western Growers, university and industry scientists, food safety experts, government officials, farmers, shippers and processors, the LGMA has created a rigorous science-based food safety system that it says protects public health by reducing potential sources of contamination and establishing a culture of food safety on the farm.

While its food safety bar is high, LGMA isn’t stopping there in its quest to prevent 100% of outbreaks. In collaboration with Western Growers, each year it asks its members what’s important to them and what they need most in terms of support. They then use that feedback to hone and evolve their standards.

Water Deep Dive

This year, water topped grower-packer-shippers’ wish lists, and while water standards have been a key metric from LGMA’s inception, improvements are ongoing.

“We made changes to water in 2011, 2018, 2020 and 2022, but there’s additional things we can and should be doing around water, and so we’re working on evolving that water standard, the metric around water, to address what we think are some vulnerabilities and opportunities for improvement in the way in which our standards are set today,” York says. “Water is complicated. It’s why the FDA took how many years to write a water rule, got it wrong, and then took another four or five years to redo it.”

Metrics development is led by Western Growers, who is the standard bearer for LGMA’s food safety metrics, York says. The organizations work with auditors to set the standards and ensure that the auditors know how to audit against that new standard.

“We have to make sure that our industry knows how to farm against that new standard and that means putting together training programs, both in person and on video, to equip them to be successful with a new metric,” he says.

“With water, we’re testing for indicator organisms — for potential pathogens of concern,” says Greg Komar, LGMA technical director. “We’re really focused on acute concerns with pathogenic microorganisms, so things that can cause people to get injured or become sick really quickly.”

As products get closer to harvest, and especially if that water is going to touch the edible portion of the crop, the standard requirements become stricter, he explains.

California’s grower-packer-shippers of leafy greens manage the testing of their own water sources and state inspectors audit the farms to ensure compliance.

“Metrics are continuously reviewed to see if something’s changed or if new research or evidence suggests growers should do something different,” Komar says. “We also look at our compliance information to see where we need to make changes or where we need to make more resources for the industry, so they better understand what they’re supposed to do.”

LGMA’s focus on water this year also involves a streamlining and simplification of the standards and best practices.

“It’s more complicated to get closer to zero — to prevent all outbreaks from occurring,” Komar says. “We’re making sure it’s super clear what’s expected, but also looking at where we can reduce redundancies so it’s just easier for our members to understand what they have to do to be compliant.”

Industrywide Standards

While LGMA’s focus is lettuce and leafy greens, York says the organization’s food safety standards are applicable to the entire fresh produce industry.

“It would be illogical to tell your food safety crew that this is how you have to treat the water if you’re planting lettuce, but if you’re planting broccoli, don’t worry about it,” he says. “Quite frankly, you need to train people to one standard.”

York says once LGMA has a standard that’s applicable to lettuce and leafy greens, he sees other commodities following suit.

“We don’t cook most of the produce items grown in California,” he says. “From a logical standpoint, if it’s good enough for the lettuce, it’s got to be good enough for the broccoli and the cauliflower and the rest of the crops. LGMA standards for lettuce and leafy greens help dictate what happens across the rest of a grower’s operations.”

The GreenLink Platform

Launched in 2022, Western Growers’ GreenLink platform, which hosts the LGMA Romaine Test and Learn program, has become another critical food safety tool for growers of lettuce, leafy greens and other fresh produce.

“GreenLink is a first-of-its-kind data sharing platform that was developed by Western Growers and its members to better understand produce food safety risks and questions and help inform strategic and risk-based decision making,” says Joelle Mosso, associate vice president of science programs for Western Growers.

The data-sharing program invites growers, packers and shippers to anonymously share their data to gain food safety insights.

“GreenLink is more than just a platform, it is a collaborative approach to food safety by connecting participants with actionable data and helping intentionally cultivate a culture of data sharing, positive food safety culture and preventative food safety culture,” Mosso says.

GreenLink also drives smarter decision-making, improves safety standards and encourages regulatory compliance, continuous learning and innovation, she adds.

Western Growers works with Crème Global, its data curator and its data participants to streamline data submissions and build more detailed metadata on their datasets, Mosso explains.

“Over the past year we have also had wonderful participation from many of the third-party laboratories who provide testing that have developed automatic programming interfaces (APIs) to streamline participants getting their data and more testing information into the data programs,” she says. “This collaboration between service providers and participants has very much improved participation by making the process easier, and it has also improved data quality since it comes straight from the laboratories and has established very routine submissions. By minimizing the time spent on getting data, it has offered more time for participants to learn from what the data is telling them.”

Mosso says Western Growers’ GreenLink program continues to welcome more participants, growers and users and to date, has over 6.5 million data points and hundreds of grower users, including many lettuce and leafy green growers.

“Western Growers did a tremendous job of getting the GreenLink program right and making it user friendly, so there’s no excuses for not doing it,” says York, noting that some 40,000 tests representing 75,000 acres of romaine have already been conducted through the Romaine Test and Learn program.

The confidentiality piece of the GreenLink platform is also designed to encourage participation.

“The systems built for confidentiality give confidence to the members to feel comfortable contributing without fear that there will be any adverse or negative fallout from participation,” says Mosso, who adds that over time, the program aims to provide a better understanding of “predictive conditions and elements that will allow participants and the industry to make improved data-driven decision-making and risk-based management.”

And now, the platform is poised to be award winning. The International Association for Food Protection (IAFP) plans to present Western Growers with the 2025 Food Safety Innovation Award for GreenLink during IAFP 2025 in Cleveland, Ohio, July 27-30.

“The IAFP award is an honor and a testament to the commitment of our industry to find more efficient ways to continue to improve food safety outcomes for the industry,” Mosso says. “The significance of this project is a commitment to build a data-driven and proactive risk-based approach to food safety. It also signifies the power that a collective industry can create — building a more collaborative food safety culture committed to driving long term value and improvements to food safety.”

Alma Pak International Recalls Organic Blueberries

Thu, 03 Jul 2025 17:53:44 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration says Alma Pak International has voluntarily recalled 400 of its 30-pound boxes of organic blueberries due to a positive test result for Listeria monocytogenes during routine testing.

The FDA has classified this recall as a Class 1; there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.

The product was shipped to one customer in North Carolina, and the lot codes involved include 13325 G1060 and 13325 G 1096, according to the FDA.

CFS 2024 Gold Star Award Goes to Bonduelle and Fresh Express

Fri, 27 Jun 2025 20:56:49 GMT

Commercial Food Sanitation says it was proud to announce four honorees as Gold Star Award winners for 2024. The annual award recognizes production facilities that have demonstrated self-managed excellence in the areas of sanitation, hygienic design and environmental pathogen control in the prior year.

Winners for 2024 were:

Bonduelle–Irwindale,
Bonduelle–Swedesboro
Fresh Express–Grand Prairie
Fresh Express–Streamwood

This is the third consecutive year a Bonduelle facility has received the award, according to CFS.

“At Bonduelle Americas, food safety isn’t just a priority — it’s a shared responsibility and a daily commitment to excellence across all our sites,” says Bobby Chacko, Bonduelle Americas CEO, in a news release.

“We are incredibly proud that both our Irwindale and Swedesboro teams earned the CFS Gold Star Award for 2024" Chacko says. “This recognition reflects not only the rigor of our standards, but also our signature Bonduelle quality approach, which is anchored in proactive risk management, team ownership, and a culture of continuous improvement. We’re grateful to Commercial Food Sanitation for their continued partnership and recognition as we advance our mission to deliver safe, high-quality, plant-rich foods to our consumers.”

At Fresh Express, President John P. Olivo says the team believes in comprehensive, system-wide prevention combined with diligent, well-trained teams to drive the food safety excellence needed to protect public health. He also says the company has emphasized strengthening their company-wide food safety culture, which highlights the essential links between team engagement, continuous learning and achieving exceptional sanitation performance.

“We’re especially proud to announce that our Grand Prairie and Streamwood facilities have been named recipients of the 2024 CFS Gold Star Award, a prestigious honor recognizing exemplary commitment to sanitation best practices and continuous improvement,” Olivo says. “The award highlights the importance of always striving to exceed existing food safety standards. Being selected for this recognition is a reflection of the dedication and hard work of our entire Fresh Express family.”

Facilities receiving the award implemented programs and achieved expectations that demonstrated sustainable characteristics, CFS says.

“It’s a privilege to recognize these four Bonduelle Americas and Fresh Express facilities with our 2024 CFS Gold Star Award,” says Cari Rasmussen, food safety director at CFS North America. “Food safety excellence requires an ongoing commitment from everyone across the organization, and all of our award winners exemplify that commitment to deliver safe food to all of us.”

IFPA Brings Food Safety Agenda to Capitol Hill

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 23:24:54 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 provides $6.8 billion for the Food and Drug Administration, including $234.6 million to support Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiatives “to address the nation’s chronic disease epidemic, restore trust in our food system and strengthen America’s nutritional and food safety,” according to the FDA. But the budget also reflects an overall decrease of $271 million, or 3.9%, compared to fiscal year 2025.

To learn more about how these proposed budget cuts may impact food safety specifically, The Packer connected with International Fresh Produce Association Chief Science Officer Max Teplitski on the heels of IFPA’s recent Washington Conference and adjacent Supply Chain of the Future Symposium, held June 9-11 in Washington, D.C.

“It was clear that the FDA leadership is committed to programs that support produce safety,” said Teplitski, who added that several workstreams at the symposium addressed food safety, including a session titled “Innovations in Food Safety” that featured Samir Assar, director for the division of fresh produce safety from the FDA’s Office of Produce Safety Human Foods Program.

The sessions focused on aspects of ensuring and documenting food quality along the entire supply chain, shelf-life extension and data sharing, and “while these do not aim directly at food safety, they will have a measurable impact on improving produce safety,” Teplitski said.

International Fresh Produce Association Chief Science Officer Max Teplitski talks food safety.

(Photo courtesy of the International Fresh Produce Association)

The MAHA Human Foods Program includes $97.8 million for food safety, and the FDA said the net increase to the Human Foods Program is $65.5 million for fiscal year 2026. “This investment will ensure the safety of the U.S. food supply, invest in nutrition, prevent food safety failures, prevent infant formula contamination and shortages, and restore laboratory operations to conduct gold standard science,” according to the agency.

As recent headlines have included produce-related food safety issues such as a salmonella outbreak in cucumbers , Teplitski said IFPA used the Washington Conference as an opportunity to take its stance on advancing food safety to the Hill.

“We had multiple conversations with both the regulators as well as on the Hill, and our priorities were clear that the industry stands firm in advancing food safety,” he said. “Certainly, fully funding the state inspections was top of mind, but also working on a collaborative relationship with FDA and more openly sharing data — now fully leveraging AI for building trust and data exchanges between the industry and FDA to identify root cause analysis to identify the issues that were highlighted by some of the recent events.”

Teplitski said the conference also provided a forum for several IFPA members to showcase their food safety programs and demonstrate their commitment to food safety in tangible ways, “like designing sanitation for cleaning [and] ensuring that food safety culture penetrates through the entire organization and not just for compliance.

“It was a consensus within the industry presenters that compliance is the price of entry into the industry and going above and beyond the compliance and propagating food safety culture is not only the desired goal, but something that the industry is actively working on,” he added.

What can the fresh produce industry do to ensure it continues to bring the freshest and safest food supply to market?

“I would argue that we already do bring the freshest and safest food to the market,” said Teplitski. “Considering the billions of servings of fresh produce that our industry serves each week, the industry’s food safety record is likely unmatched compared to other industries, whether in the food space or beyond.

“If we look at the investment that the fresh produce industry has made into various food safety programs, it’s also unmatched in the entire industry,” he continued. “It is important to continue to propagate the food safety culture through the organization building equipment for sanitation, ensuring that the labor force is fully trained and everyone in any organization is empowered to identify any food safety issues.”

Products added to field cucumber recall

Mon, 02 Jun 2025 18:37:32 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration has added more companies to a list of recalls due to a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Montevideo linked to field cucumbers grown by Bedner Growers.

Bedner Growers recalled its cucumbers sold directly to consumers at Bedner’s Farm Fresh Market between April 29 and May 14, as well as cucumbers also distributed by Fresh Start Produce Sales.

In an update, the FDA said it had detected other types of Salmonella in the cucumber sample collected at a distribution center in Pennsylvania that originated from Beldner Growers. The agency said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is working to determine if any human illnesses match these additional strains, and further analysis of the sample is pending.

According to a news release, companies that further processed the cucumbers are:

Kings, Isabelle’s Kitchen Inc. and Maple Avenue Foods — Salads containing fresh cucumbers.
Supreme Produce — Fresh cucumbers and salad and vegetable trays containing fresh cucumbers.
Snowfruit & Snowfox — Fresh-cut cucumber items and sushi products.
East Coast Fresh, TOPS, Wellsley Farms, WEIS, AHOLD, Jack and Olive, Created Fresh, Spring and Sprout — Salads, salsas and other products containing salsa containing fresh cucumbers.
PennRose Farms — Whole cucumbers.
Walmart’s Marketside — Fresh-cut cucumber slices.
The Albertsons Cos. — Ready to Eat and Star Market Greek Salad.
Ukrop’s Homestyle Foods — Marinated cucumber salad.
Big Y Foods — Made-to-order subs, wraps and paninis.

The FDA said Target has also issued a recall of products grown by Bender Growers .

Other companies had also announced recalls related to the multistate outbreak .

Global vision, local action: Amy Parks on leading food safety for Dole

Tue, 27 May 2025 19:55:51 GMT

As director of global food safety, quality assurance, governance and regulatory compliance for Dole, Amy Parks’ lengthy title encompasses the breadth and complexity of her role overseeing food safety strategies across operations in about 30 countries.

Her work centers on building globally harmonized, risk-based systems that are flexible enough to adapt to challenges in the dynamic fresh produce industry. With a passion for process and cross-functional collaboration, Parks helps guide Dole’s efforts to not only ensure food safety but also to advance industrywide standards through research, innovation and leadership.

Editor’s note: The following has been edited for clarity and length.

The Packer: What is your primary responsibility as director of global food safety, quality assurance, governance and regulatory compliance?

Parks: My main responsibility is to develop and implement our global food safety programs. We operate in about 30 countries, so I’m focused on setting the overall food safety strategy. I work closely with each division and region to harmonize programs and policies, helping standardize our approach across the board. I also identify food safety risks for both our business and consumers and collaborate with internal teams to manage and mitigate those risks effectively.

Could you give an example of how you assess or manage risk?

Sure. We handle a wide range of commodities, including higher-risk items like leafy greens, which have been linked to foodborne illness outbreaks in the past. When assessing a commodity, we look at several factors such as whether growers have food safety programs in place, if they meet regulatory requirements and whether they comply with internal or dual standards. We also ask if additional testing or oversight is necessary based on the commodity’s risk profile. The goal is to understand where the risks lie and determine what’s needed beyond our baseline requirements to ensure food safety.

You’ve mentioned a fascination with processes. Can you elaborate on that?

I love learning how things work. Understanding the process behind operations gives food safety professionals a better grasp of business needs and helps us avoid being seen as a barrier. The more we understand the daily realities of the field, the packinghouse or the plant, the more effectively we can collaborate.

For instance, in my last role, an R&D leader told me food safety always delays product launches. When I asked why, he explained that we needed to conduct an eight-week validation study, but marketing and R&D were only informing us three weeks before launch. Once we understood the disconnect [in the] process, they started involving us earlier, and the problem disappeared. That’s the kind of alignment I strive for.

How is food safety in fresh produce different — or more challenging — than in other sectors?

Fresh produce is unique. I’ve worked in multiple sectors — processed cheese, frozen foods, even in a research lab — and most products there have a kill step. In fresh produce, we deal with food that’s grown outdoors and typically eaten raw. It’s also incredibly diverse — everything from root vegetables to leafy greens to fruits. Each commodity has its own risks, which can vary by geography, climate or farming practice. It’s complex, challenging, and honestly, fascinating.

What are some of the biggest challenges you’re facing right now, and how are you addressing them?

One of the biggest challenges is building a risk-based food safety system that’s also flexible. We have to meet internal standards, regulatory requirements and customer expectations. And we work with a mix of suppliers: Dole-owned farms, contract growers and open-market purchases.

If there’s a disruption like a natural disaster, we need a system that can adapt while still delivering safe products. That means understanding how to manage risk across different supply chain models and decision-making structures without compromising safety.

What’s something you’re most proud of in your work?

I’m most proud of the cross-functional collaborations that lead to real solutions. For example, we’ve been working globally to update definitions in our food safety programs. A simple question like “What is a grower?” turned out to be more complex than expected. We have Dole-owned farms, individual growers, co-ops and contract farms. Clarifying these definitions helped us set clear expectations across the company.

Another moment I’m proud of came during the 2021 romaine lettuce outbreak. Because we control the full supply chain — farm to fork — we were able to do a deep root-cause analysis. While the facility showed no contamination, our ag operations team identified the issue was linked to specific harvest crews and equipment. That breakthrough was only possible because of strong collaboration across departments.

How is Dole advancing food safety across the broader fresh produce industry?

We’re a campaign contributor to the Center for Produce Safety, which funds research specifically for the produce sector. I sit on their technical committee, helping draft research proposals based on what we’re seeing in the field. We also collaborate closely with other industry leaders. After the 2021 outbreak, our former vegetable division president brought together peers across the industry and launched the Harvest Forward initiative, focused on improving harvest equipment design and sanitation. We want to be at the forefront of meaningful change, not just for Dole, but for the industry as a whole.

Lastly, how do you use data and research to drive business decisions?

I’m a total data nerd — and proud of it. Data helps remove emotion from tough decisions. Say two teams argue over whether a production line runs better at 60 or 70 bags per minute. Data can tell us whether faster speeds are causing more product rework or quality issues.

One example: We noticed seasonal upticks in environmental pathogen hits at one facility. After tracking and trending the data, we found a study from CPS and Cornell that showed increased Listeria prevalence in regional soils during certain times of year. That research helped validate what we were seeing and gave us a better understanding of how to manage risk. It’s all about pairing observation with evidence to make smart, informed decisions.

Retailers recall cucumbers traced to salmonella outbreak

Fri, 23 May 2025 14:07:45 GMT

Following an announcement earlier this week, the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said retailers have made additional recalls of cucumbers grown by Bedner Growers in Boynton Beach, Fla., and distributed by Fresh Start Produce Sales of Delray, Fla.

These recalls are part of a larger investigation by the agencies into a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Montevideo.

Additional recalls are being conducted by companies that used or repackaged recalled cucumbers grown by Bedner Growers:

Harris Teeter Disclaimer — fresh cucumbers and vegetable trays
Kroger — Yummi Sushi-branded products
PennRose Farms — 5-pound mesh bags of whole cucumbers
Ukrop’s Homestyle Foods — Marinated Cucumber salads

With FSMA 204 delay, companies have more time for digital transformation

Thu, 17 Apr 2025 18:25:36 GMT

On March 20 the Food and Drug Administration moved the compliance deadline for the Food Traceability Rule, also known as FSMA 204, from January 20, 2026, to July 20, 2028.

This reprieve was greeted as good news by companies struggling to determine how they were going to collect, track and report the required information, according to a news release from Inteligistics. However, the actual requirements of FSMA 204 remain unchanged.

FSMA 204 requires reporting within 24 hours of certain critical tracking events and key data elements — CTEs and KDEs. This requirement not only applies to each company notified by the FDA of a foodborne illness outbreak or food recall, but also for the companies from which they received the product or ingredients and the companies to which they shipped the product.

CTEs are triggered any time a food product moves (including from one location to another at the same company), is transformed (e.g., cooled or processed) or is handled significantly.

“Looking at their existing record-keeping and data collection, many companies got a reality check on how much there is to do, not only within their own four walls, but with their supply chain partners as well,” said Inteligistics CEO Gary Fleming. “At the same time, companies were beginning to see how the data could be used to improve operations, so they are continuing to move forward.”

Much of the product tracking and record-keeping of perishable products as they move from field to consumer has historically been manually recorded, captured in unconnected applications, or not been captured at all, according to Inteligistics. This limits the ability to spot bottlenecks and problems that could be costing companies significantly.

Assigning a GTIN and traceability lot codes and applying Produce Traceability Initiative labels to each case is the first step in creating a tracking mechanism, the company said. Collecting all the data into a system that can track, report and analyze all the end-to-end data is the ultimate goal.

This digital transformation automates data collection and tracking across data platforms to enhance visibility, efficiency, agility and decision-making — transforming traditional processes into intelligent, data-driven operations. For companies producing and selling perishable products, this reduces costs, labor and waste, according to Inteligistics.

“FSMA 204 was created because the FDA was not able to quickly perform trace-back and trace-forward investigations,” Fleming said. “This meant that tainted products remained in the supply chain for a longer period than was necessary, resulting in more people getting sick and additional people dying.

While delayed, FSMA 204 will solve problems by speeding up FDA investigations, resulting in quicker, more precise conclusions, which will help save lives, prevent unnecessary hospitalizations and minimize exposure to companies and the broader market affected by recall notices, he said.

“Beyond the food safety elements, the data capture and sharing now available from Inteligistics gives the industry visibility we have not had before, which enables us to be more efficient and strategic, reduce supply chain management costs and address problems that affect all our bottom lines today, while we prepare for FSMA implementation,” Fleming added.

Duda Farm Fresh Foods recalls celery sticks

Thu, 17 Apr 2025 12:53:11 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration says Duda Farm Fresh Foods Inc. issued a voluntary precautionary advisory of a single production lot of washed and ready-to-eat Marketside celery sticks.

The company issued the advisory for 1,587 cases of the product due to the possibility of contamination with Listeria monocytogenes. Georgia Department of Agriculture testing yielded a positive test result at a Georgia store location, according to the announcement.

The FDA said the product is no longer in stores, but consumers may have frozen the item for later use. To date, no illnesses have been reported in connection with this product, the FDA reported.

Specific products involved are four-count 4-inch/1.6-ounce bundle packs of Marketside celery sticks sold at Walmart stores and are identified by having a UPC code 681131161510 on back of bag, with best-if-used-by date March 3, 2025 and lot code P047650 on the front of the bag.

This FDA said this voluntary advisory does not apply to any other Marketside or Duda Farm Fresh Foods-produced products.

CBS News segment examines how leafy greens growers are prioritizing food safety

Tue, 08 Apr 2025 16:21:42 GMT

In the wake of cuts to federal food safety programs, California leafy greens farmers want to assure consumers that their farms continue to follow mandatory, government-enforced food safety practices every day.

During a segment on “CBS Sunday Morning,” the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement sought to show how leafy greens growers in the state are being proactive about product safety, according to a news release.

Reporter David Pogue visited the cabbage farm of Jack Vessey in Holtville, Calif., and spoke with LGMA CEO Tim York about the mandatory food safety program that leafy greens farmers implemented in 2007 to ensure science-based food safety practices are being followed on leafy greens farms.

Pogue describes the LGMA as a “coalition of farmers overseen by the California Department of Food and Agriculture who’ve agreed to adopt food safety protocols sooner and more stringent than the government’s. Ninety-four percent of the nation’s leafy greens are covered by this agreement.” He also mentions how government auditors verify required food safety practices are being followed by farmers like Vessey.

“This ‘CBS Sunday Morning’ show offers a quick look at what leafy greens farmers are doing to prevent outbreaks,” York said in the release. “We want to emphasize that the LGMA program is unaffected by changes at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Lettuce farmers are following required practices and we continue to update and improve our food safety program independently.California Department of Food and Agriculture auditors are regularly in our fields to verify farmers are in compliance with our stringent practices.”

“California produces the majority of our nation’s fresh fruits and vegetables. We take food safety very seriously here,” said California Food and Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross. “For decades, California has implemented and enforced some of the most stringent regulations in the world when it comes to agricultural pesticide use, environmental and worker protections and ensuring the overall safety of the healthy foods our farmers produce. We want to assure consumers that California state safety auditors are continuing to inspect leafy greens farms like those depicted in the ‘CBS Sunday Morning’ piece.”

York says the LGMA program was enacted by leafy greens farmers themselves to address past food safety outbreaks associated with their products.

“For leafy greens farmers, food safety is a top priority,” York said. “Most of the time leafy greens are eaten raw and they are grown outside. Every precaution possible is taken to prevent contamination. That is exactly why California lettuce farmers took steps to create and fund our own program. We are supportive of federal food safety laws, but we are not relying solely on the federal government. It is our responsibility to ensure our products are safe.”

York went on to say that, in addition to the LGMA food safety program, most retail and foodservice operations in today’s environment insist that their suppliers have food safety programs. This means leafy greens farms are not only audited by the CDFA, but retail operations have their own food safety inspectors who regularly visit farms to verify food safety practices are being followed.

In addition, York says the LGMA requires its members to have in place a traceback program so that, in the event of a foodborne illness outbreak, the products potentially involved can be quickly recalled.

In the “CBS Sunday Morning” segment, Vessey explains that his company performs mock product recalls two times per year to ensure the traceback program is working. As part of the drill, his food safety director will identify a box of cabbage or lettuce that has been shipped, the release said.

“Within 30 minutes, I can tell you who was in the field, what fertilizer was used, what seed company provided the seed and what harvest crew worked that day,” Vessey said. “Because the ability to stop a truck and bring product back is very important.”

“No one wants to experience foodborne illness, least of all the leafy greens community,” York said. “We will continue to work to ensure our products are safe with or without the government’s assistance. We urge everyone in the produce industry to share this ‘CBS Sunday Morning’ piece and to communicate with consumers all you are doing to produce safe food.”