140 



16 SEAFOOD SAFETY 



• The development of an interagency structure with a single focus on seafood 

 safety could contribute significantly toward increasing communication within the federal 

 regulatory system, but the responsibility for primary control should be with the state. 



• Federal agencies should develop a set of monitoring and inspection practices 

 focusing more strongly on environmental conditions and on contammant levels in the 

 edible portion of seafood at the point of capture. 



• Strong consideration should be given to creating a marine recreational fishing 

 license system that is linked to the distribution of information charactenzing the level 

 and scope of potential risk from eating recreationally caught fish. Strong consideration 

 should also be given to the closure of recreational harvest areas deemed to pose a 

 threat to human health. 



• The CEKT should develop an active and aggressive program, founded on 

 community-based health surveys, to better determine the level and source of seafood- 

 borne illness in the U.S. population. 



• Consideration should be given to the development of agreements with foreign 

 authorities and individual producers to ensure that imponed products are treated in 

 a manner consistent with and equivalent to domestic products. 



• A more pronounced and consistently defined federal role in the risk 

 characterizations leading to seafood health advisories should be developed. A more 

 consistent and focused effort in determining and communicating public health risks 

 from contaminated seafood should also be developed. 



• As more countries require the equivalency of domestic and imported 

 products, it is apparent that the time has come for the international community to 

 begin a process that would minimize the differences existing among national regulatory 

 guidelines and approaches. 



OPTIONS FOR REDUCING PUBLIC HEALTH RISKS 

 Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance Measures 



The current system involves (1) surveillance by federal and state agencies to 

 identify seafood-borne disease (e.g., CDC and state health depanments); (2) evaluation 

 of risk and setting of guidelines and action levels mostly by federal agencies (e.g., EPA 

 and FDA); (3) control of risk by inspection and testing of edible fish and shellfish (e.g., 

 states, FDA, and NMFS); and (4) action to protect consumers by embargo, detention, 

 seizure, or recall, and by issuance of warning advisories (e.g., states and FDA). This 

 system needs revision and strengthening to develop a truly risk-based regulatory 

 process. 



The data base on which regulation depends is inadequate. The disease 

 surveillance system of CDC suffers from inadequate resources and should be refocused 

 to provide a more complete and balanced account of seafood-borne disease. More 

 analytical data on contaminants are needed, which could be obtained by increasing 

 FDA analyses and sponsoring broader integrated studies of marine and fresh waters 

 by EPA and corresponding state agencies. 



Inspection and testing should focus on actual problems (as in HACCP systems), 

 and there should be increased efforts to develop rapid, reliable test methods for 

 dangerous microorganisms, toxins, and contaminants. This will require -a restructuring 



