23-05-2025
The Food Recall System Is Broken, and Experts Say We're All at Risk
Recall alerts are often delayed, with serious cases taking three to five weeks — or even longer — to be officially classified by the FDA.
Most consumers never see recall notices, with only 13% visiting recall websites and just 3% subscribed to alerts, according to behavioral research.
Experts say the system fails to reach at-risk communities, citing vague language, legal limitations, lack of direct consumer contact, and poor communication tools as major you hear about a food recall — whether through the news, social media, or a grocery store sign — it's often already been days or even weeks since the issue was first identified. In many cases, the most serious recalls aren't even officially classified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) until three to five weeks after the problem is discovered.
At this year's Food Safety Summit, a panel of public health and industry experts convened to examine this exact breakdown. Their focus wasn't solely on how recalls are issued — but on why so many still fail to reach the individuals they're meant to protect. Despite better tools, more data, and increased urgency, experts say the way we communicate recalls continues to fall short.
Although high-profile recalls often grab headlines, the actual number of U.S. food recalls has remained fairly consistent in recent years. 'It feels like there are more recalls,' said Hilary Thesmar, chief science officer at The Food Industry Association (FMI). 'But when you look at the numbers, we're seeing a pretty steady baseline.'
Related: Recalls Are Rising: This Is How Food Safety Experts Decide What's Safe to Eat
The FDA typically posts more than 175 public recall alerts each year, while the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) manages fewer, generally between 30 and 60 annually. However, classification can be slow, even for the most serious cases. 'It takes about three to five weeks to classify a Class I recall,' Thesmar said. 'In one case, it took almost three years.'
Dr. Donald Prater, principal deputy director for Human Foods at the FDA, echoed the concern: 'Getting products off the shelves rapidly — that's what the whole process is about.'
Technically, recalls happen. Products are flagged. Notices are posted. However, the way that information travels — or fails to — still leaves too many consumers in the dark.
Dr. William Hallman, a behavioral scientist and professor at Rutgers University, shared years of research on how people actually respond to recall messaging. His findings point to a system that assumes far too much from the public. 'Only 13% of Americans have ever visited a government website for food recall information,' Hallman said. 'And just 3% are subscribed to emails or text alerts.'
Even when notices are received, many consumers don't take action. Some don't believe the product is genuinely dangerous. Others simply don't know how to identify what they bought. And far too often, communication is vague — relying on phrases like 'out of an abundance of caution' or 'no illnesses reported to date,' which can unintentionally downplay urgency.
'We're great at selling food to specific people,' Hallman said. 'We're terrible at getting it back.'
Despite the hundreds of food recalls issued each year, many Americans either never learn about them or don't realize that the products in their own kitchens are affected. Hallman pointed to a key flaw: Even when recall notices go out, they often aren't designed to be useful.
Identifying affected products is often challenging. Lot codes can be confusing, expiration dates are printed in illegible fonts, and many items — such as fresh produce — lack any identifying labels. In some instances, the individuals most impacted never see the notice at all.
'Recall notifications are typically written — and only in English,' Hallman noted, pointing to immigrant and food-insecure communities as especially vulnerable. 'If we want people to act, we have to be clearer.'
Dr. Prater acknowledged the need for improvement, stating that 'we have more tools now to reach consumers — and we need to use them better.' He said improving the effectiveness of communication, not just volume, is one of the agency's top priorities. 'Speed and communication are essential,' he said. 'But we also know we can't do this alone.'
Related: Hospitalizations and Deaths From Contaminated Food Doubled in 2024 — Here's Everything You Need to Know
Panelist Amy Philpott, a crisis communications expert and founder of Philpott PR Solutions, highlighted a significant gap: many manufacturers lack a direct line to consumers. 'The first notice often comes from the wrong messenger,' she said. 'Firms often don't know exactly where their product was sold, especially if it moved through multiple distributors.'
Even when they do, legal limitations can stall or strip recall notices of essential context. 'A public notice is a legal document first — which means it often doesn't say what people need to hear,' Philpott added.
She also noted that many companies actively avoid using social media during recalls for fear of consumer backlash. 'That silence can backfire,' she warned, especially when other tools for reaching consumers are already underperforming.
The recall panel didn't conclude with a single solution, but it did provide a rare kind of clarity. As Dr. Darin Detwiler, food safety advocate and author of Food Safety: Past, Present, and Predictions, put it: 'Recall readiness cannot be built on best-case scenarios. It must be grounded in true likelihood — not what's convenient or comfortable.'Delays, confusing language, legal hedging, and poor visibility not only render the system inefficient but also diminish its trustworthiness. 'Every time we hesitate or delay, there's not just the opportunity — but the reality — that someone pays the price,' Detwiler said.
Read the original article on Food & Wine
