I think the FDA should build towards mass food analysis. To sell something en masse you should have to put down a deposit, and the FDA should do an annual analysis of your food (via mass spectometry) from samples from the food store. They should mix dozens of samples from different states to get good coverage.
Should you fail (illegal pesticides, ingredients differ than label, too much lead, whatever) then you lose your deposit, all profits made that year on that product, and go through a process of re-earning the right to sell that product.
For small local brands I'd exempt them until the economics became viable.
we already have this in the FDA. it’s just isolated to nutrient labels for most foods. the deposit is your business. failing a random annual FDA inspection is already extremely financially impactful
what you’re looking for is deeper analysis than nutrition labels. this is actually something small local brands start with. they pay for private “certifications” like organic, non gmo, etc.
What is involved in that inspection and what does it take to actually fully fail it? Is it like most government tests where the first failure means you just have to fix the problems and schedule your retest?
> they pay for private “certifications” like organic, non gmo, etc.
As a consumer these have the _least_ value out of anything on the label to me.
> For small local brands I'd exempt them until the economics became viable.
Why would they suddenly become viable? The only way that would happen is if the price of the product is increased to cover the costs of what you're proposing. This will destroy small suppliers and increase the cost of everything to cover a set of risks that you haven't even fully characterized yet.
> To sell something en masse you should have to put down a deposit, and the FDA should do an annual analysis of your food (via mass spectometry) from samples from the food store
Why don't we see more private enforcement? Class action lawsuits against fraudulent producers and distributors?
According to the article, the switch is occurring somewhere in the supply chain. So in your proposal, what part of the supply chain would bee on the hook for this deposit and profit reaping?
Should you fail (illegal pesticides, ingredients differ than label, too much lead, whatever) then you lose your deposit, all profits made that year on that product, and go through a process of re-earning the right to sell that product.
For small local brands I'd exempt them until the economics became viable.