WASHINGTON - Target Corp. said Tuesday it was working to add labels that warn consumers when meat is treated with carbon monoxide to make those steaks and chops look fresh as federal regulators faced criticism for allowing a practice that critics call unsafe.
Hormel Foods Corp. and Cargill Inc. also announced they would be willing to add similar labeling if necessary.
"Hormel will comply with any labeling of this product that is determined to be necessary and fair through the legislative or regulatory process," Jeffrey Ettinger, Hormel's chief executive, said during a House hearing.
The meat industry for years has typically used carbon monoxide in packages to help meat retain its red color, with approval by the Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department. But consumer advocates say the practice misleads people by making meat look fresh long after its expiration date.
But under pressure from congressional Democrats, Target said it had sent a letter to USDA officials seeking to add labels that would urge consumers not to rely solely on color or the "use by" date to judge a product's freshness.
Cargill also said it would add labels, subject to USDA approval. Earlier this month, the huge agribusiness company said it was recalling more than 1 million pounds of ground beef that may be contaminated with E. coli bacteria, the second time in less than a month it recalled potentially tainted beef. The cases were not related to carbon monoxide packaging.
"Target places the highest priority on consistently offering safe, high-quality products for our guests," Target said in a statement. "All of the meat we sell meets or exceeds Food and Drug Administration and United States Department of Agriculture guidelines."
Testifying at the House hearing, USDA's Food, Safety and Inspection Service defended its decision to allow sales of the packaged meat without warning labels, saying the use of carbon monoxide was not deceptive. The agency pointed to a past study it said found that consumers rely primarily on the sell-by date, rather than color, to determine a product's freshness.
USDA officials said they would approve Target's proposed labeling if they determine the wording is "truthful and not misleading." They said they would also consider reevaluating whether mandatory labeling for all packaged meat was appropriate. Under government regulations, the USDA must approve labels for use on meat and poultry products.
"Based on the data presented at the time, FSIS stands by its 2004 decision on the suitability of the use of carbon monoxide in meat packaging," said Daniel Engeljohn, deputy assistant administrator at FSIS.
The latest moves come as the House Energy and Commerce Committee reviews food safety in the wake of a spate of recalls involving items from ground beef to pet food and spinach.
In recent weeks, supermarket chains including Safeway, Giant Food and Stop & Shop have agreed to stop selling meats packaged in carbon monoxide after the House panel wrote letters expressing concern and seeking information. Those letters were signed by Democrats John Dingell, the committee chairman, and Bart Stupak, who chairs the committee's oversight panel.
The two lawmakers are pushing legislation that would make food labeling mandatory.
"Carbon monoxide does nothing to prolong food shelf life and carbon monoxide does not make food safer," said Stupak, pointing to internal Hormel e-mail that he said showed the technique was not safe.
"The sole purpose of using carbon monoxide is to fool consumers," he said.
USDA and the FDA have joint responsibility in reviewing the listing of ingredients used in packaging meat and poultry. The FDA has said that carbon monoxide is not a food additive that would require a more rigorous review.
Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., criticized Democrats for seeking to tie carbon monoxide in meat packaging to food safety. No conclusive evidence exists linking such packaging to food-borne illnesses or death, she said, and consumers can be trusted to check the sell-by date or use their nose to check for spoilage.
Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, disagreed.
"Regrettably, we're spending more and more time watchdogging an agency charged with protecting our safety," she said, citing the FDA's unwillingness to undertake a closer review. "We are outraged that it is putting economic interests of the industry over consumer safety."
