IDEOLOGICALLY MOTIVATED INTENTIONAL ADULTERATION: THEORY INTO INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION

Ideologically motivated intentional adulteration is an attempt to cause harm to consumers of food. Within the context of the United States of America (US), the current methods of addressing this risk are evolving in the modern post-Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) era. Currently, the US has the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which requires companies to have a food defense plan with a risk assessment, mitigation strategies, and recordkeeping. Additional options from Global Food Safety Initiatives (GFSI) benchmarked standards offer additional options for a company. However, even with these standards companies are still being impacted by intentional adulteration. Historical examples from the poisoning of bread in Hong Kong during British occupation and spreading of bacteria on salad bars by the followers of Rajneesh, to more modern examples of putting needles in strawberries and urinating on production equipment show a food defense system that is not always able to address intentional adulteration. The question of why companies are still having intentional adulteration comes up. The lack of food defense events and primary research on the topic creates a system where individual companies must gather data. Evaluations and surveys at a manufacturing site, N=11, indicates that there is high confidence among front line workers about their level of knowledge, but workers are unable to articulate the basic principles of food defense. Each individual company is required to create a personalized food defense system in the status quo, but the results of the survey given suggests that the data they could gather may be insufficient to create an effective food defense system