Security Printing and Imaging : Recall

Pork Recall, Part Two...

StevenSimske — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:40:00 GMT

I chatted with my friend and fellow HP colleague, Mick Keyes, a business/technology strategist in Dublin and an expert on Track and Trace, about the Irish pork recall. Mick provided me with some of the personal aspects of the recall.

According to Mick, This a bad one ok. The effects are becoming obvious. Over 1000+ workers laid off in past few hrs as processing plants grind to a halt. 12 EU sites have banned all Pork from Ireland (this is a 400 Million euro export business that is affected). You can see how the whole banking/Credit crunch is intersecting with this in real time. Plants can't get credit to pay workers or suppliers so its immediate "close down" and layoff workers. Industry now reckons this is going to cost $1 billion over all..and they want a Govt. bail out. Retailers want compensation. Consumers want compensation. It is a mess. Very sad listening to small family owned business crying on radio shows in abject desperation. The size of recall (i.e. ALL pork products/Whole industry ) is raising question about how effective Traceability systems are in protecting those that haven't done "anything wrong".

Terrible to think about all these affected people, with little recourse. And, they have to pull all products when 10% (of the farms) of the 10% (dating from the correct period) of the products on the shelf are affected. Not a sustainable method forward. As times get tougher and wallets thinner, we're simply going to have to have a better way to manage how we separate the good from the bad. And, with higher confidence so consumers do not turn away from the industry en masse. Tomatoes, milk, pork--that just about covers my Uncle's entire diet. If Guinness is recalled, he's going hungry for the Holidays. I'll bet he's noticing. Food may be the tipping point that many thought pharmaceutics would be.

The point on the availability of credit cannot be overstated. Without access to easy credit--a reversal of the past 15+ years--there is no margin for error. When profits can't be made, there's nothing in reserve. The just-in-time supply chain can quickly become the just-no-time response. If there's no slack in the system, then contingencies must be incorporated in the design. In future blogs, I will describe how come of these concerns are being addressed.

-Steve

Irish Pork Recall another Track and Trace Debacle

StevenSimske — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:06:00 GMT

The latest food recall is a potential disaster for one of Ireland's biggest industries. On the second week of the Advent season (right when shopping for Christmas ham is hitting its stride), consumers have been asked to destroy all Irish pork products dating back to September for fear of dioxin contamination. Because of the nature of track and trace systems currently in place, this may amount to as much as

More information on the reasons for the recall are given at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7769893.stm

According to the Telegraph (a big UK news service), the pork industry is Ireland's fourth largest industry, with Ireland's 400 pig farms (providing work for 7,000 people in Ireland, including 1,200 on the farms) contributing about 400 million Euros (approximately 600 million dollars) to the Irish economy each year. The contamination of the pork was traced back to animal feed from one supplier used in more than 40 farms. Based on this, 90% of the pork destroyed will probably be wasted (i.e. no contamination), but since the dioxin concentration in the contaminated pork is 80-200 times the safe level for consumption, there is little room for error.

Also, about 90% of the pork products on sale were processed before September, and it is not obvious that or how this will be taken into account in the recall. Clearly, a substantial percentage of the pork products are contaminated, but much uncontaminated pork will be destroyed as well. A full-compliance, global produce track and trace system would not only reduce the waste, but would increase consumer confidence in the recall. Even with the wide swath of recall, will some contaminated products be missed?

It's bad enough that the pork producers suffer a devastating hit to their industry in an already treacherous economy. It's far worse to know that the damage may be much worse than it has to be.

-Steve

Do You Recall This Much Recall?

StevenSimske — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:04:00 GMT

We are rolling into the Thanksgiving Holiday here in the States, which traditionally coincides with a modicum of gluttony. Historically, the time right after harvest was the time of festivals--might as well eat the food and let it ferment inside you rather than your cellar!. Given the recent news and FDA announcements, one wonders what is safe to eat at all...

The youngest might not want their formula:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081126/ap_on_he_me/infant_formula_6

Don't put tomato sauce on your veggies:

http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/wegmans11_08.html

Heck, don't have the veggies, period!:

http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/stopnshop11_08.html

Don't try cheese as an alternative dessert:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27914220/

Or an alternative cheese as an alternative-alternative!:

http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/panos11_08.html

Don't try a dietary supplement in place of the big meal:

http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/balancedhealth11_08.html

Or try fat loss capsules to keep the weight off!:

http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/fashionsanctuary11_08.html

And don't try rewarding the pooch with an extra helping:

http://www.petcare.mars.com/

Guess it's time to start that diet! Either that, or time for a reliable food track and trace mandate. On that sour (sweet, bitter, salty, MSG or other taste, for that matter) note...

Happy Thanksgiving!

Cheers, Steve

ePedigree Delay a Sign of An Eventual Supply Chain U.N.?

StevenSimske — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:49:00 GMT

I have been remiss in discussing the delay in the California ePedigree until 2015. This has been interpreted as a long-term delay for track and trace and overall product safety. For a nice overview and analysis of the problem, see http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=17793.

However, ePedigree initiatives are underway by the WHO, FDA, EU, AQSIQ (China), GS1 and other standards/regulatory organizations. A full serialization+pedigree requirement may be delayed until 2015, but it is unlikely that ePedigree will not already be in place before then. Recent passing of PRO-IP and Country-of-origin labeling (COOL) legislation in the US indicates that the US,too, will continue with initiatives before 2015.

The delay of California ePedigree legislation, moreover, may be indicative of another passing of the torch. Much as the recent Presidential (and Congressional) election results likely signal a more collaborative, less "independent" US foreign policy, the delay in ePedigree may signal a more collaborative, less independent nation-to-nation legislation in the future.

Will the big players--WHO, FDA, EU, AQSIQ, GS1, ISO, and others--work together to create a reasonable roadmap for product track and trace, pedigree and provenance? In effect, create a "United Nations" for track and trace? I, for one, hope so. With the increasingly convoluted supply chains for virtually all products resulting in chaos during recall, fraud and even normal node-node shipping situations (how many retailers can confidently tell you everywhere a product has been on its way to their shelves?), how long can it be before the legitimate market says, "enough is enough"? Plus, a universal process will reduce confusion, lower cost, and improve response time around the planet.

Is the current combination of counterfeiting, diversion, factory overrun, smuggling, return fraud and other supply chain crime the commerce equivalent of the two World Wars? A series of events so drastic that the set of collective players decides to band together into a United Nations to try to prevent such a meltdown in the future? (I realize the United Nations is by no means perfect--but we have been without nuclear combat for 63 years...). Maybe so. And maybe the delay in the California ePedigree shows that the US, rather than defining the path forward, is willing to work with the rest of the Supply Chain United Nations in formulating the optimum set of requirements moving forward.

-Steve

Tomatoes that terrorize--or the recall to recall

StevenSimske — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:15:00 GMT

There are three topics that, as part of the HP community blog team, we are not to discuss on our blog: religion, politics and the ingredients in a hot dog. The topic I discuss tonight is a close fourth. So, I will try to be a little delicate here.

The recent tomato recall (http://www.fda.gov/oc/opacom/hottopics/tomatoes.html) may end up being as severe to the tomato industry as the cod moratorium has been to the Newfoundland fishing industry. Based on the cost of present goods and the infrastructure depreciation, etc., a year's loss of sales translates into roughly 10% lost value in an entire industry. Meaning that no tomato sales this year, and the tomato industry is worth 90% of what it was worth before this year...for a long, long time. Was that 10% factored into the "streamlined" supply chain the tomato--like any other agricultural--industry uses to reduce costs, provide just-in-time inventory, and devalue tomato picking? Of course not. Like counterfeiting, massive recalls are simply not modeled by the proponents of the just-in-time, multi-input, massive throughput supply chains that describe virtually every product type on the planet today.

We all know the stories about how many different cattle you're eating when you eat a burger (again, I must not talk about the hot dogs)--it's in the dozens. But do we know how many different raw material providers are involved in the production of a pharmaceutical? Of a tea bag? Of an automobile? Dozens, hundreds, thousands? The more there are, the harder it is to audit each and every element of the product provenance. So many have given up trying. Close your eyes, pretend it won't happen to you, and when it does, well, pull everything off the shelves--TOTAL RECALL. Aside from the incredible waste of such a recall, the lauded efficiencies of scale under non-recall situations simply don't ring true either.

For the food industry, one need look no further than Pollan's excellent book, the Omnivore's Dilemma (http://www.michaelpollan.com/omnivore.php), to see how "supply chain efficiency" has resulted in tragic inefficiency (fossil fuels are converted into corn syrup that converts us into obese diabetics). An Amazon.com (Bunny Crumpacker's) review of it (http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meals/dp/1594200823) notes ominously:

"Each bushel of industrial corn grown, Pollan notes, uses the equivalent of up to a third of a gallon of oil. Some of the oil products evaporate and acidify rain; some seep into the water table; some wash into rivers, affecting drinking water and poisoning marine ecosystems. The industrial logic also means vast farms that grow only corn. When the price of corn drops, the solution, the farmer hopes, is to plant more corn for next year. The paradoxical result? While farmers earn less, there's an over-supply of cheap corn, and that means finding ever more ways to use it up."

All this to have a just-in-time inventory? When gas hits $10/gallon (and it will...soon) will it still be worth it? It costs nearly $1000/day to run a farm tractor already (just ask a farmer). Why have we allowed this to happen?

So, add recalls to the lengthening list of why outsourcing to unaffiliated parties is a recipe for disaster. Here is the potentially delicate subject. I am not against all out-sourcing, and a true Flat Earth is not a bad thing. But we all know that the earth looks flat from space (the earth is size-proportionately smoother than a cue ball), but up close it has all these inconvenient hills, dales, valleys, vales, arroyos, lifts, canyons and rifts. It's messy in the details. Nothing is flat, not even Friedman's cerebral cortex (sorry, too easy a joke there, but Friedman seems to think that people with the manufacturing jobs somehow won't learn how to design and be creative--a huge oversight, in my opinion). If you outsource to people you're intentionally hiring to save costs, you have opposing motivations. You want them to cost less, they don't care if you succeed. You think they're cheaper than employees, they think you're too overstretched to look too closely.

In short, you're asking them to try to cheat you. Guess what? In many cases, they're happy to oblige. And it serves you right. Outsourcing to disenfranchised third parties is a very short-term strategy that has been deployed for medium-to-long-term already. Take a cup of cluelessness, add a dash of denial, and you've got a supply chain that doesn't hold to inspection.

Which brings us back to those terrorizing tomatoes. What went wrong? Sure, Sam and Ella, that dynamic duo, reared their ugly heads. The problem was, no one knew where their necks were. The supply chain is simply too convoluted, with too many on and off ramps, that trying to do a partial recall is simply not worth the effort.

Time to reclaim the supply chain. It's not just about counterfeiting. It's about knowing what you're actually getting.

-Steve