Ag Insight

Comments sought on labeling meat, poultry products made from animal cells

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) to solicit comments on the labeling of meat and poultry products made using cultured cells derived from animals under FSIS jurisdiction.

FSIS will use the comments in connection with regulatory requirements for the labeling of such food products. According to Sandra Eskin, deputy undersecretary for food safety, the notice is an important step to ensure the appropriate labeling of meat and poultry products made using animal cell culture technology.

In early 2019, USDA and FDA announced a formal agreement to jointly oversee the production of human food products made using animal cell culture technology and derived from the cells of livestock and poultry. The goal was to ensure that such products are safe, unadulterated and truthfully labeled.

Under the agreement, FDA will oversee cell collection, growth, and differentiation of cells and will transfer oversight at the cell harvest stage to FSIS. FSIS will then oversee the cell harvest, processing, packaging, and labeling of products.

FDA and FSIS also agreed to develop joint principles for the labeling of products made using cell culture technology under their respective labeling jurisdictions. Most fish and seafood fall under FDA’s jurisdiction, whereas meat, poultry and some fish are under FSIS’s authority.

Current FSIS regulations requiring sanitation and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems are immediately applicable and sufficient to ensure the safety of products cultured from the cells of livestock and poultry, the agency believes.

FSIS already has received thousands of comments on the topic in response to a 2018 joint public meeting with FDA regarding two petitions for rulemaking (from the United States Cattlemen’s Association and Harvard Law School Animal Law and Policy Clinic). The agency, however, needs specific types of comments and information for developing labeling regulations.

Comments on specific topics in rulemaking related to labeling include consumer expectations about the labeling of these products, especially in light of the nutritional composition and qualities such as taste, color, odor or texture; names for the products that would be neither false nor misleading; economic data; any consumer research related to labeling nomenclature for products made using animal cell culture technology.

The ANPR also discusses how FSIS will generally evaluate labels for these products if they are submitted before the agency completes rulemaking.

Those wanting to view ANPR details can visit the FSIS website at www.fsis.usda.gov/policy/federal-register-rulemaking/federal-register-rules.

Pandemic-related aid to farm operations, households estimated at $35.1 Billion in 2020

To mitigate the effects of the coronavirus pandemic, Congress passed six economic relief and stimulus bills in 2020, including one authorizing USDA to create the Coronavirus Food Assistance Programs (CFAP 1 and CFAP 2). The programs provided direct payments to farm operations due to the decline in commodity prices in the first half of 2020.

Other federal departments and agencies created broader programs from which both farm operations and family farm households were eligible to receive assistance. For example, the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) offered forgivable loans, and the Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program (EIDL) provided forgivable advances.

Most family farm households were also eligible for Economic Impact Payments (EIP), administered by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). And family farm households that lost off-farm wages were eligible for the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) administered by the U.S. Department of Labor.

Total COVID-19-related relief to the U.S. agriculture sector was an estimated $35.1 billion in 2020. Farm operations received $29.5 billion (84%) of that total, according to the 2021 Farm Income Forecast: September Update, while farm households received $5.6 billion (16%).

Food safety practices for frozen products

As students, parents and caretakers adjust to a physical return to classrooms this fall, USDA is reminding families to follow food safety practices to prevent foodborne illness when it comes to preparing frozen foods. Among other things, the agency advises:

Check the Package

Not all frozen foods are fully cooked or ready-to-eat, and it can be difficult to tell when foods are not-readyto-eat when they have browned breading, grill marks or other signs that normally show a product has been cooked. In a USDA study, 22% of participants preparing frozen foods were not sure if the products were raw or fully cooked despite reading the product instructions, and among these participants, nearly half incorrectly believed they were fully cooked.

Always check the product packaging to see if the food is fully cooked (and therefore ready-to-eat) or not ready-to-eat. Look for phrases such as “Cook and Serve,” “Ready to Cook” and “Oven Ready” that indicate they must be fully cooked to safe internal temperatures to be eaten safely.

Wash Hands and Surfaces

Following proper handwashing steps before, during and after preparing frozen food reduces the risk of transferring harmful bacteria from your hands to food and other surfaces. The five steps to handwashing are: 1. Wet your hands with clean, running water and apply soap. 2. Lather your hands by rubbing them together with soap. Lather the backs of your hands, between your fingers and under your nails. 3. Scrub your hands for at least 20 seconds. 4. Rinse your hands well under clean, running water. 5. Dry your hands using a clean towel.

Use a Food Thermometer

Although there are cooking instructions on frozen food packages, the only way to know if the food has been thoroughly cooked to a safe internal temperature is to measure it with a food thermometer. Cook notready-to-eat frozen foods to the following temperatures: • Beef, pork, lamb and veal (steaks, roasts and chops) – 145 F with a three-minute rest time. • Ground meats (beef, pork, lamb and veal) – 160 F.

• Poultry (whole or ground) – 165 F.

All ready-to-eat or fully cooked frozen foods should be thoroughly heated to 165 F.

Keep Out of the Danger Zone

After cooking or heating frozen foods, they need to be eaten or refrigerated promptly for safe storage. When foods are in the “Danger Zone” (40 F – 140 F) for too long, bacteria can reach dangerous levels and cause illness. Store food in the refrigerator within two hours after cooking or heating (one hour if over 90 F).

If packing frozen foods for lunch or to take outside of the home, fully cook or heat the food and then pack with a cold source (such as a frozen gel pack, water bottle or juice) to keep out of the Danger Zone.

Properly handled leftovers may be safely refrigerated at 40 F up to four days. Use an appliance thermometer to make sure your refrigerator is below 40 F.

H-2A program numbers show major increases

Between 2010 and 2019, positions certified by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) under the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Workers Program increased more than 220%.

The H-2A program allows agricultural employers in the United States to bring in foreign farmworkers to fill seasonal labor contracts lasting less than a year.

All agricultural product categories experienced significant growth in H-2A employment, but the increase was most pronounced in product categories with high labor requirements and seasonal employment, such as fruit and tree nuts, vegetables and melons.

In 2019, DOL certified 258,000 individual H-2A positions, compared with 79,000 in 2010. During the same period, the number of firms requesting H-2A workers increased 95% from about 5,200 to 10,100 firms.

A growing share of H-2A certifications is going to farm labor contractors (FLCs), likely because contractors are finding it more difficult to recruit domestically, prompting them to turn their recruitment efforts abroad. In addition, individual agribusinesses may be finding it difficult to hire locally and thus, more often, turn to FLCs to navigate the H-2A application and recruitment process rather than doing it themselves.

Moreover, employing H-2A workers incurs additional costs that make it more expensive than hiring domestic workers. These costs include visa fees, housing and travel, which many small producers may find prohibitive for short-term contracts.

An FLC, on the other hand, can effectively share the cost of application fees, travel and housing among multiple producers—making the hiring of H-2A workers through FLCs more feasible.

The number of H-2A positions certified in the vegetables and melons category grew from about 20,600 in 2010 to 88,900 in 2019—an increase of 330%. At the same time, the number of certifications in the fruit and tree nuts category increased nearly 400% from about 18,100 to 85,800. Certifications increased 127% in the greenhouse and nursery category, 106% in the field crops category, and 63% in the animal products category.