Fish & Seafood

FDA Study Finds Limited Seafood Mislabeling in US

LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which maintains jurisdiction over misbranded food under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, has released the results of a two-year investigation into seafood labeling. It found that 85% of the seafood tested was properly labeled.

The work included 700 DNA samples collected from wholesalers in 14 states, prior to restaurant or retail sale. What’s more, FDA targeted types of seafood most often suspected to be mislabeled. The identified mislabeling was found in two species, snapper and grouper, which represent less than two percent of total seafood sales.

NFI Logo“This extensive federal analysis brings the challenge of mislabeling into a much clearer focus, while at the same time calling into question other mislabeling ‘studies’ that suggest the issue is widespread and in need of a legislative fix,” said John Connelly, president of the McLean, Virginia-headquartered National Fisheries Institute (NFI).

NFI has previously called for more enforcement of federal and state labeling laws, rather than new legislation, noting that multiple anti-fraud laws already exist.

“What the FDA found reinforces the need for implementation of rules already on the books. We don’t need more regulations and rhetoric, we need more enforcement,” said Lisa Weddig, secretary of the Better Seafood Board (BSB).

Established by the NFI, the BSB provides a mechanism for the fish and seafood industry’s partners in the supply chain – restaurants, retail operations, producers and processors – to report suppliers suspected of committing economic fraud. It works together with the National Restaurant Association on the labeling issue through a memorandum of understanding that includes educational outreach and even menu audits.

“Eighty-five percent of seafood was labeled correctly and the mislabeling was focused on two species,” said Connelly. “Our job is to work with companies and focus on those problem areas.”

He continued, “This type of information gives regulators important insights and helps them focus their resources. New laws don’t do that.”