San Diego Food poisoning lawyer and foodborne illness attorney Sebastian Gibson is keeping a wary eye on the food industry, on food poisoning and foodborne illnesses that have recently swept the country. 

There is now a major change taking place at California grocery stores, including those in San Diego. The change has to do with a new regulation in food law. No, San Diego food attorneys won’t be in the produce aisle or lurking near the beer poisoning. San Diego food poisoning lawyers may not even be watching the video screens for slip and fall accident victims but San Diego food poisoning lawyer Sebastian Gibson will be examining the food labels. That's because the change that is coming will be in the labeling of the food customers purchase.

Until now, most consumers had no idea from which country the food they were eating came from. With the new COOL (Country of Origin Labeling) law taking effect after September 30, 2008, all that will change, with a few exceptions and a few quirks.

Now when you buy that apple, pick up a package of most meats, or bag a head of lettuce, you will be able to glean from either a label, sticker or notice of some kind what country it came from. Unfortunately, as of yet, the law does not extend to dairy products. The law also does not apply to organ meats such as heart, liver or kidney. These exceptions are difficult for a San Diego food lawyer such as Sebastian Gibson to explain.

The law also provides exceptions for processed foods such as bacon or foods that are mixed together such as peas and carrots, but it’s likely to help consumers feel much safer in being able to avoid food from certain countries, especially during food poisoning outbreaks, and feel better able to buy American if they want to.

There are also exceptions in COOL for butchers, fish markets, restaurants, restaurants in hotels, school cafeterias, and small retailers. Additionally if spices, sauce or breading has been added, no labeling is required. Though not exactly food, the law also does not apply to pharmaceuticals, though there are calls to extend the law to them. Produce mixed in displays may simply be labeled as being "from two or more countries of origin."

There are other discrepancies with how the law will be applied. Fish caught off the coast of Alaska by a Chinese or Japanese owned ship may be labeled as a product of China or Japan. Beef raised in another country that spends 30 days in a feed lot in the U.S. can be labeled as coming from the U.S.

It has been suggested by some that it was meat packers who didn’t want the obligation to sort out cattle from Canada and Mexico, who are the reason why at least to start, beef may be labeled with just a North American country of origin label, as opposed to a U.S. country of origin label. Sadly, with this country’s lack of geographical knowledge (just watch Jay Leno when he asks people on the street where Canada is), many people will assume that "North American" means that the beef couldn’t possibly have come from outside the U.S., much less Mexico.

Retailers are given discretion how they label the food. Meat counters, for instance, may simply list all the countries where the meat is produced, or they can label each cut. Hamburger will still likely give the consumer pause as meat that is ground up may come from numerous countries.

Since all chicken and goat consumed in the U.S. comes from the U.S., the chicken and goat industries asked to be included in the law. San Diego food poisoning lawyers also asked to be included in the law, but they couldn't agree what type of label to apply to us.

The law was established in the 2002 Farm Bill, but was successfully delayed by lobbying groups until now. Concern about unsafe imports from China and elsewhere finally overcame food industry efforts to delay it. It was amended in the 2008 Farm Bill to include more foods. Retailers have six months to get to know the regulations and come into compliance (so there’s a grace period here). Then the government is supposed to announce a final set of regulations incorporating seafood and shell fish regulations already in effect.

The law makes one think that lobbying efforts may be the reason for some of the strange distinctions in COOL. For instance macadamia nuts are included, but not walnuts. Did the walnuts have a better lobbyist than the macadamia nut lobbyist, or was the macadamia state senator absent when the Farm Bill was passed?

COOL has long been a goal of U.S. farmers and ranchers who believe that identifying foreign food imports may encourage shoppers and manufacturers to buy more U.S. foods. Meat packers, on the other side of the barbed wire, opposed COOL citing the costs it will involve in its implementation.

But as this country’s economic crisis grows, shoppers may be more and more inclined to buy American not just for safety but to help other Americans. Who nicer to help than American farmers?

Lawmakers and consumer groups are angry that the USDA seems to be attempting to evade congressional intent by allowing steaks and other meat cuts to be labeled with multiple country of origin labels. Congress only intended that exception for ground beef or for animals raised in more than one country. It has been said that there is a chasm of difference between the statutory language that was passed by Congress and the rule allowing multiple of country origin labels drafted by the USDA.

Consumer advocacy groups hope that the USDA will make rule changes as it receives more feedback. Thirty-one Senators, including Barack Obama, when he was a Senator, have already written the Agriculture Secretary calling for more restrictive meat labeling rules. U.S. Cattlemen have also asked the USDA to address the loophole for beef and see that the statute is faithfully implemented.

Once compliance goes into effect, businesses may be fined $1,000 per violation. The law is expected to cost at least $2 billion to implement.

Now when you get food poisoning, whether it is from food you bought at a grocery, when the Department of Health investigates what made you sick, San Diego food poisoning attorneys may be able to determine this more accurately and without causing major economic damage to agricultural interests not at fault.

Also, investigators and San Diego food poisoning lawyers will have an easier time tracking down the country of source. As it has often been raw food, such as peppers from Mexico most recently, the effect of the law will immediately help investigators. Health conscious consumers may feel more loyalty to a retailer who doesn’t just comply grudgingly with the law but who touts their going an extra step or two to let their shoppers know exactly what came from where.

Other food poisoning outbreaks in recent years have involved spinach, and beef. Now with the milk scare from China, there are calls to extend the law to dairy products.

San Diego poisoning Attorney Sebastian Gibson is one of very few lawyers specializing in food poisoning law. If you have a legal matter for which you need a San Diego food poisoning lawyer in this area of law, we invite you to call San Diego food attorney Sebastian Gibson for a consultation.   If you've suffered food poisoning, go to the hospital, have blood test, and if they pump your stomach try to get some of the results for testing.  When it's been determined that you were made sick from a foodborne illness, call San Diego food poisoning lawyer, Sebastian Gibson.