Net effects explains the benefits to children from maternal fish consumption despite methylmercury in fish.

In 2001 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued precautionary advice to pregnant women to limit fish consumption over concern that the methylmercury content might harm their children's neurodevelopment. This concern was based largely on results from an epidemiological study of mothers primarily exposed to methylmercury from consuming pilot whale. Subsequently, FDA and the World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization (WHO/FAO) undertook independent assessments of fish consumption that considered net effects from both fish nutrients, primarily omega-3 fatty acids, as beneficial and methylmercury as harmful. Both assessments estimated that when mothers regularly consume fish during pregnancy, their children are likely to have improved neurodevelopment compared to children of non-fish eaters despite their exposure to methylmercury. These estimated improvements included gains of two to over five full scale IQ points from levels of maternal consumption that are achievable in most of the world. Consistent with those estimates, human research on fish consumption and child neurodevelopment from more than 200,000 mother-child pairs now collectively reports 51 beneficial associations with neurodevelopmental outcomes and three adverse associations, the latter with no discernable pattern. These associations include full scale IQ gains similar to, or somewhat higher than, those estimated by FDA and FAO/WHO. Also consistent with the FDA and FAO/WHO estimates, research has reported beneficial associations with fish consumption when pregnant women are exposed to methylmercury from fish in excess of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Reference Dose (RfD). Our analysis evaluates how the net effects approach as utilized by FDA and FAO/WHO provides a holistic explanation for these results with implications for public health policy. This concordance of net effects modeling and empirical scientific evidence supports a clarification of current public health recommendations to focus on greater fish consumption by pregnant women for their children's neurodevelopment.

Ranking Food Safety Priorities of the Fresh Produce Industry in the United States.

A broad understanding of community member food safety priorities in the fresh produce supply chain does not currently exist. This information is essential to improve food safety knowledge and practices effectively and efficiently throughout the fresh produce industry; therefore, the goal of this study was to identify and rank community produce safety priorities in the United States. Survey questions were designed and approved by food safety experts for participants to rank 24 fresh produce safety priorities. The anonymous survey was distributed online via Qualtrics™ to fresh produce community members from November 2020 to May 2021. A score was calculated for each priority by summing weighted ranking scores across responses. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to determine frequencies and distribution of response and identify factors (e.g., role in produce safety, size/location of organization/operation) that influenced rankings. A total of 281 respondents represented fourteen different roles in the fresh produce industry, with most identified as growers (39.5%). Produce operations were distributed across the U.S. and annual produce sales ranged from below $25,000 to over $5,000,000. Health and hygiene, training, postharvest sanitation, traceability, and harvest sanitation were ranked as the top five food safety priorities. These findings provide insight into community member priorities in fresh produce safety and can be used to inform intervention efforts, ranging from specialized training for produce growers and packers, industry-driven research projects, and gaps in risk communication strategies.

Risk-based Decision Making Definition: A Scoping Review of Food, Agricultural, Environmental, and Medical Literature.

Risk-based decision making (RBDM) is a term that is used frequently as an aspirational goal in many fields, including health, engineering, environmental science, regulatory and, more recently, food safety. When RBDM is used in the literature, many different types of criteria are used to characterize a decision process as being "risk-based." Like the parable about the blind men and the elephant, everyone is confident they know what RBDM means even though there is no universal definition. The use of RBDM is gaining wide acceptance and implies a level of rigor and focus that many decisionmakers and stakeholders are interested in adopting. However, without one clear definition, there are questions about what a RBDM approach really means. This study summarizes peer-reviewed and gray literature that uses the term "RBDM" from the last 50 years in the agricultural, environmental, and medical areas. The criteria discussed were identified and organized into themes. A foundational definition is proposed to represent the most fundamental use of RBDM in the literature, and three themes covering the additional concepts presented in some of the literature were identified and added as themes within the definition. Results from this research will inform practitioners interested in following the principles of RBDM, and will help guide researchers who are interested in advancing this approach. The most immediate use will be to guide the development of a roadmap for a risk-based food safety system for low- and middle-income countries and to aid the global food safety community in moving toward RBDM.