Recent recalls involving eggs and salmonella-linked jalapeños, along with investigations into cyclospora and other produce-related illnesses have fueled concerns by consumers that food recalls are becoming more frequent.

While the steady stream of headlines and social media traction can make it seem like the nation's food supply is becoming less safe, a University of Florida (UF) food-safety scientist says current numbers are consistent with previous years.

“What has changed is how quickly people hear about them and the variety of channels spreading misinformation promoting viral traction,” said Keith Schneider, professor of food safety at the UF Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS). “That increased visibility, combined with misinformation and speculation online, can make individual incidents seem like evidence of a growing problem when they may actually reflect a longstanding pattern.”

To help the public digest facts behind the headlines, Schneider explains what consumers should know about recalls, outbreaks and the food-safety system.

Q: Has the number of food recalls and foodborne outbreaks taking place today increased from past numbers?

A: Not necessarily. We tend to hear about them much more often because we have much greater access to information.

We now have 24-hour news and social media, so when there is an outbreak or recall, people can hear about it repeatedly throughout the day. An actual news report can go viral, but so can information from someone who may not understand food safety or the science behind an outbreak.

That can make it feel like we are seeing an unprecedented number of outbreaks when, in reality, many of the same foodborne pathogens and types of outbreaks have occurred for years.

The reality is that we get an estimated 1.2 million cases of salmonella every year, which averages about 100,000 cases a month. There are about 20 million cases of norovirus each year. So, the numbers we’re seeing this summer are not out of the ordinary. The large number of cyclospora cases is unusually high for that organism. On average, we typically see 1,000 to 2,000 cases each year, so more than 20,000 cases is concerning.

Q: Do the recent food recalls mean our food system is becoming less safe?

A: No. In many cases, a recall is evidence that the food-safety system is working as it was designed to work.

We cannot make food completely risk-free. Food is grown outdoors, handled by people and, in many cases, eaten raw. There will always be some level of risk.

The important thing is having systems that can identify a problem, determine how serious it is, identify the affected product and remove it from store shelves or consumers' hands.

It is not possible to prevent every single problem from ever occurring. The goal is to identify problems as quickly as possible and limit their impact.

Q: Why are we able to identify some foodborne illnesses now that we couldn't identify as easily in the past?

A: Our ability to detect pathogens has improved dramatically.

We have newer, faster and more affordable testing methods. When those tools become available, we can begin finding illnesses that previously may not have been identified.

Cyclospora is a good example. It is a parasite that can cause significant gastrointestinal illness, but it is difficult to detect. When better testing methods become available and health officials begin looking for it more frequently, we naturally find more cases.

That doesn't necessarily mean the organism suddenly appeared. In some cases, we are simply getting better at seeing what was already there.

Q: Why do some recalls involve very large companies or well-known grocery stores?

A: Large companies distribute enormous amounts of food, so problems involving those products are more likely to be detected.

Imagine one supplier distributes a million units of a product. If there is a contamination problem, there is a much greater chance that multiple people will become sick and that health officials will see a pattern.

A small farm selling a few dozen units may have the same contamination rate, but if only one person becomes sick, that illness may never be connected to the farm or producer.

That doesn't mean a large food company is necessarily less safe. Sometimes it simply means the scale of its distribution makes a problem easier to see.

Q: Why does it take so long to investigate which food caused an outbreak?

A: Finding the actual source of an outbreak is complicated. Investigators have to look at what sick people ate, where those foods came from, how they were grown and processed and whether the same pathogen can be found in the food or environment.

Sometimes, the epidemiological evidence implicates a particular food before investigators can find the pathogen in that food. That distinction is important. An association does not necessarily prove that a particular food caused an outbreak.

We have seen situations in the past where investigators initially focused on one food and later determined that another ingredient was responsible. That's why these investigations take time because we want to make sure the implicated product is truly associated with the outbreak.

Q: What is the bigger goal of investigating these outbreaks?

A: Finding the source is important because it gives us an opportunity to prevent the same problem from happening again.

If an investigation shows that contaminated water contributed to a problem, for example, growers can change their irrigation practices. If a processing or sanitation problem is identified, the industry can make changes to prevent it from happening again.

That's where food-safety research and Extension programs play an important role. We don't just want to know what went wrong. We want to understand why it happened and what can be changed to reduce the risk in the future.

Food safety will never mean zero risk. The goal is to understand the risks we can control, reduce them as much as possible and give consumers accurate information so they can make informed decisions.

Q: What role does social media play in how consumers perceive food recalls?

A: Social media can be useful for getting information out quickly, but it has also magnified misinformation.

Consumers will see the same food-safety story hundreds of times in a day. They may also encounter claims from people with no expertise in food safety being presented alongside information from scientists, public health agencies or journalists.

That can create the impression that a particular food is suddenly dangerous when the actual risk may be limited to a specific product, supplier or lot.

For example, if one lettuce product is implicated in an investigation, that does not mean every lettuce product is dangerous. That is the danger with misinformation.

Consumers need to pay attention to the specific product, brand, lot number or supplier identified in the recall rather than assuming an entire category of food is unsafe.

Q: What should consumers do when they hear about a food recall or outbreak?

A: Go to trusted public health sources rather than relying on social media. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration maintain information about current foodborne illness investigations and recalls.

Consumers should review the recall details and determine whether the product they purchased is included. If it is, follow the instructions provided by public health officials.

There is no reason to automatically stop eating an entire category of food because one product has been recalled.