FDA Inspection Finds 20% of Seafood Tainted

Preliminary results from the first complete inspection of American seafood processing facilities ever conducted by the federal government reveal that as many as 20% of the samples analyzed showed evidence of microbiological contamination, decomposition and filth, The Times has learned.

The as-yet unpublished findings, by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s newly created Office of Seafood in Washington, indicate that the seafood industry has yet to solve a host of product safety problems.

The inspections also found evidence of economic fraud. Forty product samples were considered economic violations for improper labeling, misbranding or short-weight problems.

Told of the report, a seafood trade group representative declined to comment. A Washington-based consumer advocate and leading seafood industry critic, however, called the findings “damaging” and cause for public concern.

The FDA review of 3,852 processing plants encompassed everything from large salmon canneries to mom-and-pop oyster shucking operations. Officials said that all commercial species of fin fish and shellfish are being analyzed for contaminants and other problems. The purpose of the survey, which may be finished by late April, is to identify the industry’s most severe problems and to suggest how FDA should allocate its resources.

First inspection results were compiled for two important seafood producing areas: the Pacific Coast and the Southeastern United States. In the FDA’s Pacific region, which includes California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska, the agency found that 711, or 20.8%, of the 3,415 samples analyzed in laboratories were in violation of federal health or marketing standards. In the Southeast, a total of 1,885 samples were analyzed and 284 violations, or 15%, were found.

The violation rates exceed those of any other food commodity regulated by the FDA. By comparison, the FDA’s extensive pesticide monitoring program has found only 1.1% of the domestic and imported foods analyzed in 1990 to be in violation of federal chemical residue standards. (The U.S. Department of Agriculture has jurisdiction over the meat and poultry supply while FDA is responsible for all other foods.)

Thomas Billy, director of FDA’s Office of Seafood, explained that the violation rate for seafood appears elevated because FDA investigators intentionally targeted those species and fishing grounds that “have historically had problems.” (Similar targeting is also done in the FDA’s pesticide monitoring program.) Billy said that the 15% violation rate is “pretty typical” of what to expect in other areas of the country.

“This demonstrates--all too sadly for the consumer--decades of gross negligence,” said Ellen Haas, executive director of Public Voice for Food & Health Policy, a Washington-based advocacy group. “Without a rigorous system of seafood safety . . . this will be the pattern of contamination that--all too easily--makes it to the consumer’s dinner table.”

Both the federal government and the seafood industry have been under fire from consumer advocacy groups for not doing enough to ensure a safe and wholesome seafood supply. In the last year Congress and the Bush Administration increased the FDA budget for seafood inspection by 60% to $40 million. The funding, however, is still a fraction of the $500 million spent by the Department of Agriculture on meat and poultry inspection.

Haas, of Public Voice, said that “the agency lacks the (financial) capability and the authority to respond to this public health problem.”

To date, the region with the most complete available data is the Southeastern United States, which includes all states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The area has been recently troubled by pollution and contamination problems.

While the laboratory analyses of seafood samples yielded elevated violation rates, the processing plants were more compliant with federal health standards. In the Pacific, 38 plants, or 5.1% of the 742 facilities inspected, were in violation. In the Southeast, only 23, or 1.5%, of the 1,508 seafood processors inspected, were in violation.

Unrelated to the current review, the FDA has announced plans to increase the number of domestic seafood samples analyzed for industrial chemicals and pesticides to 900 in 1992, a 50% increase over 1991. Another 800 samples of imported seafood will be similarly examined, up from 400 such tests in 1991.

“We want to provide assurances that there are in place mechanisms to safeguard the wholesomeness of seafood,” said Chris Lecos, an FDA spokesman in Washington.

Measuring Seafood Contamination

The FDA review of 3,852 processing plants encompassed everything from large salmon canneries to mom-and-pop oyster shucking operations. Here are some of the findings: Violations of Health or Marketing Standards

PACIFIC REGION * Food samples tested: 3,415 Violations: 711 % violations: 20.8% Processing plants inspected: 742 Number in violation: 38 % violations: 5.1%

SOUTHEASTERN U.S. Food samples tested: 1,885 Violations: 284 % violations: 15.0% Processing plants inspected: 1,508 Number in violation: 23 % violations: 1.5%

Signs of Poor Storage, Handling

The region with the most complete available data is the Southeastern United States, which includes all states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. Among the findings there:

The most common problem found in 121 samples including shrimp, mahi mahi and scallops was decomposition, an indicator that the product had been improperly stored and was on the verge of decay.

Filth, or avoidable contaminants such as rodent hairs, insects or mold that make food unsuitable for human consumption, was identified in 67 samples, including lobster tails, shrimp and conch meat.

About 11% of the domestic seafood samples and 16% of the foreign seafood samples analyzed violated federal standards.

Microbiological contamination from organisms such as salmonella was identified in 36 samples from oysters, shrimp and crab.

Illegal levels of chemical contaminants--mercury or histamine--were present in 20 samples including tuna, shark, swordfish and mahi mahi.

Another 40 product samples were considered economic violations for improper labeling, misbranding or short-weight problems.

* The Pacific region includes California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska.

Source: Food and Drug Administration