Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 179
Filtrar
3.
J Law Health ; 33(1): 17-46, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31841616

RESUMO

The United States government, until recently, did not require the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). On July 29, 2016, President Barack Obama signed into law the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS). This law directs the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to create regulations that require manufacturers to disclose certain bioengineered products on food labels. On December 20, 2018, the USDA released the final regulations for the NBFDS, which requires food manufactures, importers, and certain retailers to ensure bioengineered foods are appropriately disclosed. The final regulations include provisions that will leave the majority of GMO derived foods unlabeled. The final regulations also restrict approximately 100 million Americans from accessing GMO information by allowing QR codes to replace clear and transparent labeling, an issue that will be discussed in further detail later in this Note. This Note explores why you, as a consumer, may want to know whether your food contains GM products, and furthermore, why you as a consumer have a moral and legal right to know.


Assuntos
Qualidade de Produtos para o Consumidor/legislação & jurisprudência , Rotulagem de Alimentos/ética , Rotulagem de Alimentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Rotulagem de Alimentos/tendências , Alimentos Geneticamente Modificados , Legislação sobre Alimentos/ética , Legislação sobre Alimentos/tendências , Austrália , Direitos Civis , Meio Ambiente , União Europeia , Humanos , Hipersensibilidade , Conhecimento , Obrigações Morais , Praguicidas , Religião , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Agriculture/legislação & jurisprudência , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislação & jurisprudência
4.
Am J Public Health ; 109(12): 1631-1635, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31693415

RESUMO

This commentary introduces a special section of AJPH on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the US government's largest antihunger program and third-largest antipoverty program. SNAP demonstrably lifts adults, children, and families out of poverty, thereby constituting a vital component of this nation's public health safety net.Despite its well-documented benefits, SNAP is under political and budgetary siege, mainly from congressional representatives and lobbying groups opposed to a federal role in welfare. In part, SNAP is protected from total annihilation by its unusual authorizing legislation-the Farm Bill.This commentary provides a brief overview of the political history of SNAP and its Farm Bill location as background to the deeper analyses provided in this series of articles.


Assuntos
Assistência Alimentar/história , Assistência Alimentar/organização & administração , Política , Saúde Pública , Atitude , Assistência Alimentar/economia , Assistência Alimentar/legislação & jurisprudência , Abastecimento de Alimentos/estatística & dados numéricos , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Humanos , Fome , Desnutrição/epidemiologia , Pobreza , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Agriculture/legislação & jurisprudência
7.
J Acad Nutr Diet ; 119(3): 395-399, 2019 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30642813

RESUMO

The 2018 Farm Bill was finalized in mid-December of 2018 after months of discussion and debate between policymakers. The Farm Bill has many implications for low-income and food-insecure populations in the United States. One program within the Farm Bill that helps bridge the nutrition gap for low-income Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants is the Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive Grant Program (FINI). This commentary explores the best practices and promising findings of FINI projects to inform future policy discussions and implementation of FINI. In addition, we discuss knowledge gaps and opportunities within the context of the extant literature. Stakeholders and FINI grantees reported positive impacts of FINI grants, describing outcomes across farmers, grocery store owners, local economies, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants (eg, increased fruit and vegetable consumption). The 2018 Farm Bill was largely in alignment with the Academy's recommendations, and preserved the integrity of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as well as increased funding for FINI.


Assuntos
Agricultura/legislação & jurisprudência , Assistência Alimentar/legislação & jurisprudência , Abastecimento de Alimentos/economia , Reembolso de Incentivo/legislação & jurisprudência , United States Department of Agriculture/legislação & jurisprudência , Fazendas , Humanos , Pobreza/economia , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Estados Unidos
17.
Epidemiol Infect ; 144(14): 2940-2947, 2016 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27311445

RESUMO

Food-product recall data for recalls due to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) from 2000 to 2012 were obtained for establishments regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). Statistical tests were used to assess the factors associated with recovery of product following STEC recalls along with the relationship between cluster detection and jurisdictions. Our results indicated that the percentage of recalled product recovered following a recall action due to STEC was dependent on the complexity of distribution, type of distribution, amount of time between production and recall dates, and the number of pounds of product recalled. Illness-related STEC recalls were associated with a lower percentage of product recovery which was probably impacted by larger amounts of product recalled, broader production scope, and delays from epidemiological and traceback investigations. Further, detection of illnesses related to STEC recalls seemed to be enhanced in states with additional resources and a history of successful foodborne investigations. This makes an argument for additional resources dedicated to public health agencies specifically for the surveillance of foodborne illnesses.


Assuntos
Infecções por Escherichia coli/epidemiologia , Microbiologia de Alimentos , Doenças Transmitidas por Alimentos/epidemiologia , Produtos da Carne/microbiologia , Escherichia coli Shiga Toxigênica/fisiologia , Infecções por Escherichia coli/microbiologia , Escherichia coli O157/fisiologia , Microbiologia de Alimentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Microbiologia de Alimentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Transmitidas por Alimentos/microbiologia , Humanos , Produtos da Carne/estatística & dados numéricos , Vigilância da População , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , United States Department of Agriculture/legislação & jurisprudência
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...