Food Safety in Peril: Why Cutting Key Committees Puts Millions at Risk

In a move that has raised alarm among food safety experts, the White House recently disbanded two critical food safety advisory committees, calling them "unnecessary." But what role did these committees actually play, and what happens now that they’re gone? Let’s break it down.

The Role of Food Safety Committees: Our First Line of Defense

For years, the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods (NACMCF) and the National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection (NACMPI) have played a vital role in protecting public health. These committees brought together independent scientists, industry experts, and consumer advocates to guide policies on foodborne illness prevention, meat and poultry inspection, and emerging food safety risks.

Their recommendations helped shape regulations that reduced food contamination incidents, strengthened recall protocols, and improved pathogen testing. For example, past recommendations have led to stricter E. coli and Salmonella testing standards in meat production, significantly lowering foodborne illness outbreaks, as well as improved recommendations for testing ready-to-eat food, such as fresh produce. These interventions were particularly important, as despite 46% of foodborne illnesses being attributed to produce, poultry caused the largest number of deaths from foodborne illnesses between 1998 and 2008 in the U.S.

What Happens Now That They’re Gone?

Without these committees, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other federal agencies will lack independent scientific guidance on food safety policies. This means:

• Weaker oversight of foodborne disease outbreaks – Committees provided early warnings and scientific strategies for containing outbreaks. Their absence slows response times.
• Less rigorous safety standards – Decisions on food safety will now rely more heavily on internal USDA policies, potentially influenced by corporate lobbying.
• Increased risk of foodborne illness – With food contamination already affecting an estimated 48 million Americans each year, leading to 3,000 deaths (CDC), removing these advisory bodies could lead to even more cases slipping through the cracks.

“The erosion of funding for committees whose purpose is to support strong evidence-based food safety practices is a regressive step. The historic application of science in food safety has reduced harms to consumers and requires continued future investment to help support a healthy, thriving population” - Gavin Wren

A Pattern of Weakening Food Safety Policies?

This isn’t the first time food safety oversight has been reduced. In 2019, the USDA controversially lifted caps on slaughterhouse line speeds, despite warnings from experts that it would increase the risk of food contamination. Now, with the elimination of these committees, the U.S. is once again scaling back protections at a time when stronger oversight is urgently needed.

Factory Farming: A Breeding Ground for Disease

Beyond government oversight, factory farming itself remains one of the biggest threats to food safety. Industrial-scale farms crowd thousands—sometimes millions—of animals together in unsanitary conditions, creating a perfect breeding ground for deadly pathogens like Salmonella, E. coli, and avian flu. Moreover, the excessive use of animal manure as fertilizer, a by-product of factory farming, can lead to the contamination of fruits and vegetables.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly warned that intensive animal farming increases the risk of zoonotic diseases—infections that spread from animals to humans, like COVID-19 and avian influenza. Yet, instead of addressing these risks, policymakers are eliminating the very committees that advised on disease control in the food system.

A Safer Future: Solutions Beyond Factory Farming

Rather than reducing oversight, we should be moving toward a more sustainable and resilient food system, including:

• Reducing overcrowding on farms – Lowering animal density reduces the spread of infectious diseases.
• Moving towards regenerative agriculture - Reducing the requirements for manure to be spread onto the land reduced the risk of contaminating produce.
• Strengthening biosecurity measures – More rigorous farm hygiene and monitoring can cut contamination risks.
• Promoting plant-based and alternative protein sources – Shifting away from industrial animal farming could drastically lower the risk of future pandemics.

By making these changes, we can create a safer food system that protects both public health and the environment.

Disinformation: Who Controls the Narrative?

Another overlooked consequence of disbanding these committees is the potential rise of food safety disinformation. Without expert advisory panels offering independent, science-based recommendations, the door is wide open for corporate interests and social media misinformation to shape public perception.

Why Does This Matter?

A lack of credible oversight allows:

• Viral food myths to spread unchecked – False claims, such as "all organic food is inherently safer" or "you can’t get foodborne illness from plant-based foods," can mislead consumers and cause real harm.
• Public distrust in food regulations – When official sources are removed, people turn to unreliable sources, creating confusion and making public health interventions harder.
• Corporations to push misleading claims – For example, major meat industry players have downplayed the risks of antibiotic resistance, despite scientific evidence that overuse of antibiotics in factory farming is fueling drug-resistant superbugs.

Case Study: COVID-19 and Meat Industry Misinformation

During the COVID-19 pandemic, false claims about virus transmission in meat plants led to panic-buying and supply chain disruptions. Without authoritative voices to clarify risks, misinformation flourished—leading to workers getting sick, consumers fearing food shortages, and industry leaders lobbying for looser safety measures.

‍

The elimination of independent food safety committees could further erode trust in food safety policies, leaving the public vulnerable to corporate spin and unverified health claims.

Final Thoughts: A Dangerous Step Backward

Disbanding these food safety committees is a short-sighted decision that weakens public health protections at a time when foodborne illness, zoonotic diseases, and corporate influence are all on the rise.

Instead of dismantling oversight, policymakers should be:
✅ Strengthening science-based food safety regulations
✅ Increasing monitoring of factory farm conditions
✅ Investing in safer, more sustainable food production

Food safety isn’t a political issue—it’s a public health necessity. Without independent oversight, the risks of disease outbreaks, misinformation, and weakened regulations will only grow. It’s time to demand accountability and action before the next food safety crisis hits.

What You Can Do:

• Contact your representatives and urge them to restore food safety advisory committees.
• Support transparent food policies by demanding corporate accountability.
• Choose safer food options that prioritize sustainability and public health.

It’s not just about policy—it’s about the safety of every meal we eat. Are we willing to risk it?