A group of international researchers said on Mar. 17 that current food safety measures and highly sensitive testing methods may lead to more edible food being discarded, increased packaging, and higher costs for consumers.
The topic is important because foodborne pathogens are responsible for about 420,000 deaths and 600 million cases of illness each year. The researchers argue that while food safety remains a key concern, replacing strict "zero-detection" standards with evidence-based targets for "sufficiently safe" food could make the global food system more sustainable without compromising public health.
Their article outlines how regulators might balance food safety with other priorities such as supply security, sustainability, and nutritional health. Lead author Prof Martin Wiedmann from Cornell University said, "Although the public expects food to be completely safe, there will always be some risk of foodborne illness. Zero risk doesn't exist, and we shouldn't be aiming for that either. Just as we don't limit highway speeds to 10 miles per hour to minimize road deaths, we need to take a balanced approach that considers possible negative consequences of extreme food safety measures."
The authors point out that many rules treat any detection of pathogens like Listeria monocytogenes as unacceptable without considering factors such as dose or exposure level. This can result in discarding large amounts of otherwise safe food due to ultra-sensitive tests detecting microbes unlikely to cause disease in humans or bacteria that only indicate possible contamination. Such actions reduce available food supplies and waste resources. Co-author Prof Sophia Johler at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich said, "A tremendous amount of food is wasted that would have been sufficiently safe to eat. Too often, trade-offs such as environmental or economic costs are only considered after a traditional microbial risk assessment. We cannot afford to carry on like this at a time when we desperately need to reduce our impact on the planet and assure not only food safety but food security."
The study also notes that hazard-based assessments dominate current regulations by focusing on pathogen detection rather than actual risks posed to consumers. The researchers suggest shifting toward flexible risk-based approaches that assess probabilities of harm and adjust safety measures accordingly.
Co-author Dr Sriya Sunil at Cornell University said, "There's well-established evidence that focusing on end-product testing is generally ineffective to ensure safety. Overemphasis on end-product testing may distract from other food safety measures (e.g., applying validated and verified process controls), which can provide greater public health benefits." Wiedmann added that specialists across social sciences, economics, and life sciences must collaborate using advanced models—including geographic information systems, artificial intelligence, and genomics—to better assess and communicate risks.
