Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:59:15.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making Food Safety an Issue: Internationalized Food Politics and French Public Health from the 1870s to the Present

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2011

Patrick Zylberman
Patrick Zylberman
Affiliation:
CERMES, Campus CNRS, 7 rue Guy-Môquet, 94801 Villejuif Cedex, France E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Food safety is an ever more conflictive issue receiving media attention. “The increased activity of interest groups, the impact of the Common Agricultural Policy and changes in the retail economy have combined to transform [a relatively closed] food policy community into an issue network”. This account of recent changes lacks the historical dimension that might endow it with meaning. It is hardly appropriate to describe the current situation as a reawakening after a long slumber. In France at least, complaints about food safety voiced in numerous newspaper articles echo enduring concerns and a permanent sense of alarm. In 1957, Demain ran a catalogue of food scares: industrial bread causing eczema; wine adulterated with sulphur anhydride (for safe transportation); eggs and milk feared by doctors to be toxic (because chickens were being fed with chemicals or fish, and cattle with ground up rubbish); and filthy conditions on cattle and poultry farms. Much the same sort of list could have been drawn up early in the century during meetings of the Société Scientifique d'Hygiène Alimentaire (created in 1904), or run in the press following passage of the 1905 Food Adulteration Act, or printed in popular pamphlets such as Dr Raffray's Le péril alimentaire (1912). As the Common Market took shape in the 1960s, repeated articles in the daily newspapers relentlessly focused on the issue of food and public health. In France, arguments were continually framed in the language of the 1905 act.

Type
Articles
Information
Medical History , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , 01 January 2004 , pp. 1 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

References

1 M J Smith, ‘From policy community to issue network: salomella in eggs and the new politics of food’, Public Administration, 1991, 69: 235–55, on p. 235.

2 For parallel developments in Germany, see H J Teuteberg, ‘Food adulteration and the beginnings of uniform food legislation in late nineteenth-century Germany’, in J Burnett and D J Oddy (eds), The origins and development of food policies in Europe, London, Leicester University Press, 1994, pp. 146–60, p. 146.

3 A Calas, ‘Vos aliments vous empoisonnent’, Demain, 28 Feb. 1957. Société d'hygiène alimentaire, etc.: E Kohn-Abrest, ‘Sur la jurisprudence en matière d'empoisonnement alimentaire, notamment par les gâteaux à la crème’, Ann. Méd. Lég., 1924, 4: 110–18, on pp. 112–16; L Barthe, ‘La nouvelle loi sur les fraudes. Sa répercussion sur l'esprit des fraudeurs et des consommateurs’, Rev. scient., 1910, 48: 649–53, on pp. 649–50; A Rochaix and A Tapernoux, ‘Protection des aliments à la production: campagnes, villes’, in La science de l'alimentation en 1937, 2e Congrès Scientifique International de l'Alimentation organized by the Société Scientifique d'Hygiène Alimentaire, Alençon, Imp. Alençonnaise, 1938, pp. F3–F60. Animal feed: E C Aviragnet, ‘Inconvénients et dangers du lait des vaches nourries de résidus industriels’, Hyg. Viande Lait, 1910, 4: 76–84, and 140–57. Language of 1905 act: see, for instance: L-L Gruart, ‘Nourritures terrestres et…chimiques!’, Le Figaro, 3–4 Feb. 1962. The Food Adulteration Act was promulgated on 1 August 1905.

4 A Cowell, ‘Vaccination option gains support’, International Herald Tribune, 28 March 2001. On foot-and-mouth disease in Britain and related animal health legislation, see J R Fisher, ‘The economic effects of cattle disease in Britain and its containment, 1850–1900’, Agric. Hist., 1980, 54: 278–94, on pp. 283–4, 288.

5 Values and facts: L Levidow, ‘Precautionary uncertainty: regulating GM crops in Europe’, Soc. Stud. Sci., 2001, 31: 842–74, on pp. 845–7. Gray's notion of an “agonistic liberalism” has been provocative: J Gray, Two faces of liberalism, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2000, pp. 105–39.

6 J H Cassedy, ‘Applied microscopy and American pork diplomacy: Charles Wardell Stiles in Germany 1898–1899’, Isis, 1971, 62: 4–20, on p. 5.

7 R N Cooper, ‘Trade policy is foreign policy’, Foreign Policy, 1972–3, 9: 8–36, on pp. 19–20.

8 On European food safety history, see H J Teuteberg (ed.), European food history, a research review, London, Leicester University Press, 1992. Since the 1930s, French and Italian historians have approached food mainly through the history of cookery and taste, although topics like under-nutrition or diets in specific social groups have also been studied. See: J J Hémardinquer (ed.), Pour une histoire de l'alimentation, Paris, Colin, 1970; B Bennassar and J Goy (eds), Histoire de la consommation, Annales ESC, 1975, 30: 402–632; J L Flandrin and M Montanari (eds), Histoire de l'alimentation, Paris, Fayard, 1996, pp. 7–15. One important example of a research programme on food in the French social sciences is cited by R Bonnain-Moerdijk, ‘L'alimentation paysanne en France entre 1850 et 1936’, Etudes Rurales, 1975, 58: 29–49, on p. 29. G Thuillier, ‘Note sur les sources de l'histoire régionale de l'alimentation pour la France du XIXe siècle’, in Hémardinquer (ed.), op. cit., p. 222, briefly suggested a research on food adulteration, but very few studies have been conducted since, with the notable exception of J P Aron, ‘Sur les consommations avariées à Paris dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle’, in Bennassar and Goy (eds), op. cit., pp. 553–62, and J Léonard, Archives du corps. La santé au XIXe siècle, Rennes, Ouest-France, 1986. Thanks to a grant from the CNRS, the Association Lorraine d'Études Alimentaires organized in Nancy in the 1960s a meeting of historians, geographers and public health doctors around Prof. J Parisot. Among the British historians who have studied the health aspects of food safety are: Burnett and Oddy (eds), op. cit., note 2 above; H Kamminga and A Cunningham (eds), The science and culture of nutrition 1840–1940, Amsterdam, Rodopi, 1995; D Smith (ed.), Nutrition in Britain: science, scientists and politics in the twentieth century, London, Routledge, 1997; A Hardy, ‘Food, hygiene, and the laboratory: a short history of food-poisoning in Britain, circa 1850–1950’, Soc. Hist. Med., 1999, 12: 293–311; D F Smith and J Phillips (eds), Food, science, policy and regulation in the twentieth century, London, Routledge, 2000; M French and J Phillips, Cheated not poisoned? Food regulation in the United Kingdom 1875–1938, Manchester University Press, 2000.

9 E Leclainche, Histoire illustrée de la médecine vétérinaire, Paris, Albin-Michel, 1955, vol. 2, p. 110. Not surprisingly, historians have started to study veterinary public health in recent years. See P A Koolmees, ‘Veterinary inspection and food hygiene in the twentieth century’, in Smith and Phillips (eds), op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 53–68, on p. 53 and references.

10 Increased meat consumption: G Désert, ‘Viande et poisson dans l'alimentation des Français au milieu du XIXe siècle’, in Bennassar and Goy (eds), op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 519–36, on p. 526; G Désert and R Specklin, ‘Les réactions face à la crise’, in G Duby and A Wallon (eds), Histoire de la France rurale 3. De 1789 à 1914, Paris, Seuil, 1992 [1976], pp. 383–428, on p. 418. Statistics 1856: L J J Lunier in the discussion following A Proust, ‘Sur l'exportation des viandes de porc salées d'Amérique et le diagnostic différentiel de la trichinose et de la fièvre typhoïde, au nom d'une commission composée de MM Bouley, Brouardel, Chatin, Colin (d'Alfort), Laboulbène, et Proust rapporteur’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1884, 13: 189–211, on p. 209; Mathieu, ‘Rapport sur un projet d'importation en France de bœufs sur pieds de la République Argentine et de l'Uruguay, comme viande de boucherie’, Bull. Soc. Centr. Méd. Vét., 1877, 31: 353–61, on p. 354. Statistics 1870–1970: M Gervais, M Jollivet, and Y Tavernier, ‘Le progrès et ses difficultés (de 1949 à nos jours)’, in G Duby and A Wallon (eds), Histoire de la France rurale 4. Depuis 1914, Paris, Seuil, 1992 [1977], pp. 120–73, on p. 130. On supply and demand: Désert and Specklin, op. cit., p. 418; G Désert, ‘Bilan économique à la veille de la Première Guerre mondiale’, in Duby and Wallon (eds), op. cit., vol. 3, p. 437; Mathieu, op. cit., p. 353; Lunier, see Proust, op. cit., p. 209. See also C Thouvenot, ‘La viande dans les campagnes lorraines. Évolution d'une habitude alimentaire’, Ann. Géogr., 1971, 80: 288–329, on pp. 302–15, and Bonnain-Moerdijk, op. cit., note 8 above, p. 45.

11 Animal health: Anon., ‘La peste bovine dans l'Europe occidentale’, Rev. scient., 1877, 12: 1168–70, p. 1169–70; Leclainche, op. cit., note 9 above, p. 109. Railway revolution: Rev. scient., 1877, p. 1168; Désert, in Duby and Wallon (eds), op. cit., note 10 above, vol. 4, p. 433. Britain 1865–6: Anon., ‘Discussion sur la peste bovine’, Bull. Soc. Méd. Yonne, 1872, 13: vi–ix, on p. vii. According to Fisher (op. cit., note 4 above, p. 287), Cheshire lost two-thirds of its cattle between 1865 and 1867. From 1850 to 1870, British farmers suffered average annual losses due to mortality of 5 per cent, ibid., p. 291. France 1871: M Sinoir, ‘Rapport sur l'épizootie de typhus dans la Mayenne en 1871’, J. méd. Mayenne, 1 May 1873, pp. 17–32, on pp. 18–21; Leclainche, op. cit., p. 113. Netherlands: H Bouley, ‘Des mesures prises contre la peste bovine’, L'Union médicale, 1872, 13: 7–9, on p. 8. Exogenous shock: Fisher, op. cit., note 4 above, p. 279.

12 Animal health regulations: H Bouley, ‘Rapport sur la conférence sanitaire internationale tenue à Vienne (Autriche), en 1872, concernant la peste bovine’, Recueil des travaux du Comité Consultatif d'Hygiène Publique, 1873, 2: 403–25, p. 403. Vienna Veterinary Institute: ibid., p. 406. Functional politics: T G Weiss and R S Jordan, ‘Bureaucratic politics and the World Food Conference: The international policy process’, World Politics, 1976, 28: 422–39, on p. 439.

13 Austria and Hungary: Leclainche, op. cit., note 9 above, pp. 112, 114; Bouley, op. cit., note 12 above, pp. 407, 421. French delegate: ibid., p. 410. Veterinary measures: H Martel, ‘L'inspection des viandes dans ses rapports avec la prophylaxie des maladies. Types d'organisation des services’, Rev. scient., 1908, 10: 393–8, on p. 398.

14 Germany: Bouley, op. cit., note 12 above, pp. 410, 407. Austria's eastern border: ibid., p. 410. Britain: Anon., ‘La peste bovine’, op. cit., note 11 above, p. 1169. Inoculation in 1866: Bouley, op. cit., p. 7. Opposition to slaughter: Fisher, op. cit., note 4 above, p. 286. France: Bouley, op. cit., note 11 above, p. 8; Anon., ‘Discussion’, op. cit., note 11 above, pp. vii–viii; Sinoir, op. cit., note 11 above, pp. 27–9.

15 Bouley, op. cit., note 12 above, pp. 416–17, p. 422. Henry-Marie Bouley (1814–1885), professor of pathological surgery at Maisons-Alfort and general veterinary inspector, had been sent to Britain from 1865 until 1867 by the French government in order to study cattle diseases. A member of the National Academy of Sciences (in 1868) and of the Consultative Committee on Animal Health, he succeeded, in 1879, Claude Bernard in the chair of comparative pathology at the National Museum of Natural History, a position he held until his death.

16 Uniform sanitary police: Bouley, op. cit., note 12 above, p. 417. Never published: Leclainche, op. cit., note 9 above, p. 198.

17 Thouvenot, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 300.

18 Ham: Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, pp. 205–6. Rejected: Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 20; Thouvenot, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 318. Peasant's lunch: J Chatin in the discussion following Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, pp. 240–2. Country/town: Thouvenot, op. cit., pp. 297, 318–20; Bonnain-Moerdijk, op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 35–8. Doctors and red meat: H Larrey in the discussion following A Laboulbène, ‘Relation de la première épidémie de trichinose constatée en France’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1881, 10: 206–28, on p. 228; M Laborde, ‘La trichine et la trichinose’, La Tribune Médicale, 1884, 15: 139–41, 164–5, 174–6, on p. 165; E Sacquépée, ‘Études sur les empoisonnements alimentaires provoqués par les salmonelloses’, Ann. Hyg., 1911, 4s., 16: 385–422, on p. 409. Horse meat: ibid., p. 402; Thouvenot, op. cit., p. 325; Léonard, op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 171–2.

19 S Haeghebaert and colleagues, ‘Épidémie de trichinellose région Midi-Pyrénées’, Bull. Épidém. Hebdo., 1998, no. 28: 121–2, on p. 122; S Debrot and A Constantin, Hygiène et protection de la viande, Paris, Maloine, 1968, p. 247.

20 European market: E Nocard and E Leclainche, ‘Epizooties (maladies transmissibles des animaux à l'homme)’, in J Rochard (ed.), Encyclopédie d'hygiène et de médecine publique, Paris, Rousseau et Vigot, 1891, vol. 2, ch. 6, p. 171; statistics in Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 196. French market: O du Mesnil, ‘Les mesures administratives prises contre la trichinose’, Ann. Hyg., 1881, 3s., 5: 238–46, on p. 238; C Leblanc and J Chatin in the discussion following Laboulbène, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 221; J Rochard in the discussion following J Chatin, ‘Rapport sur un mémoire de M. le Docteur Decaisne, concernant la prohibition des viandes américaines’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1882, 2s., 11: 130–45, on p. 141.

21 Main food: Thouvenot, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 291; Bonnain-Moerdijk, op. cit., note 8 above, p. 33. Pork still ranked high in diets in the 1960s, when steak became very popular, Thouvenot, op. cit., p. 324. French boycott of American pork: B Duncan, ‘Protectionism and pork: Whitelaw Reid as diplomat 1889–1891’, Agric. Hist., 1959, 33: 190–5; J L Gignilliat, ‘Pigs, politics, and protection: the European boycott of American pork 1879–1891’, Agric. Hist., 1961, 35: 3–12, pp. 6–8; and J D Ellis, The physician–legislators of France: medicine and politics in the early Third Republic 1870–1914, Cambridge University Press, 1990, pp. 198–9; also Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above. Panic: Anon., ‘À la Chambre des Députés. De l'importation et de l'inspection des viandes de porc de provenance étrangère’, Echo Soc. Ass. Vét. de France, 1882, 4: 185–213, 249–65, p. 256. Fifty boxes: Laboulbène, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 207. Hedersleben: Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., p. 195; Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets prohibant l'importation en Europe des viandes salées d'Amérique’, Rev. Sanit. Bordeaux, 1883, 1: 1–5, on p. 2.

22 Cooking habits: H Bouley, ‘Viandes de porc de provenance américaine; décret de prohibition motivé par la présence de la trichine;—Doit-il être maintenu?—Y a-t-il lieu de soumettre les viandes de provenances étrangères à une inspection microscopique si le décret de prohibition n'est pas maintenu?’ Recueil des Travaux du Comité Consultatif d'Hygiène Publique, 1883, 12: 243–7, on pp. 245–6. Contrast with Germany: Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 5. No deaths: E Vallin, ‘Les trichines devant le Sénat’, Ann. Hyg., 1882, 4: 545–53, on pp. 546, 548. No case: Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 7. 100 million kilograms: S Hoy and W Nugent, ‘Public health or protectionism? The German–American pork war 1880–1891’, Bull. Hist. Med., 1989, 63: 198–224, on p. 215.

23 Inspection categories: Martel, op. cit., note 13 above, pp. 393–7; H O'Neill, ‘Meat inspection in England, France and Germany’, Sanit. Rec., 1900, 26: 563–5, on pp. 563–4. Centralization: Martel, op. cit., p. 397; M L Panisset, ‘À propos de l'organisation en France d'un contrôle sanitaire des denrées alimentaires d'origine animale’, Hyg. Géné. Appliq., 1906, 1: 601–15, pp. 603–10. The 1919 decree: M J Rennes, ‘L'inspection des viandes n'existe pas en France’, Recueil Méd. Vét., 1920, 96: 534–44, on p. 541. The 5 April 1884 law made meat inspection mandatory for municipalities, but without covering the costs of inspections (Rennes, op. cit., p. 536).

24 Upton Sinclair: J H Young, ‘The pig that fell into the privy: Upton Sinclair's The Jungle and the meat inspection amendments of 1906’, Bull. Hist. Med., 1985, 59: 467–80, on pp. 470, 475–7. Chicago: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., note 22 above, pp. 201, 212. US regulations: Martel, op. cit., note 13 above, p. 396; Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., p. 217. The 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act was accompanied by a new, more stringent Meat Inspection Law (ibid., p. 223). For more on American pure food regulations, see: W J Darby, ‘Historical overview of the safety of the food supply. Introduction’, J. Nutr., 1993, 123: 277–8, on p. 277, Table 1; and Anon., ‘Public health, nutrition and food safety 1900–1999’, Nutr. Rev., 1999, 57: 368–72, on p. 370. Hog infestation: Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 2. D E Salmon: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., pp. 212–13. Trichinae in 1940s: Anon., ‘Public health, nutrition’, op. cit., p. 370.

25 Austria, Denmark: Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 2; H Martel, ‘Les viandes foraines’, Hyg. Géné. Appliq., 1906, 1: 340–54, on p. 351; Martel, op. cit., note 13 above, p. 396. Germany: ibid., pp. 395, 346. Teuteberg (op. cit., note 2 above, pp. 148–9) had a more favourable view. Doubts: Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above, p. 19.

26 French hog infestation: Haeghebaert, et al., op. cit., note 19 above, p. 123; C J Davaine, ‘Les trichines et la trichinose’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1881, 10: 249–58, on p. 250; Vallin, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 548. Low incidence questioned: G C Colin (d'Alfort), ‘Sur les trichines’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1881, 10: 238–49, on p. 246; Chatin, op. cit., note 20 above, p. 132; Laborde, op. cit., note 18 above, pp. 139–40, 164. Still in 1968: Debrot and Constantin, op. cit., note 19 above, p. 247. Crépy-en-Valois: Davaine, op. cit., p. 250; Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 197; Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 2.

27 Academy of Medicine: Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., note 21 above, pp. 185, 187. Senate: Vallin, op. cit., note 22 above, pp. 547–50.

28 Bouley in the discussion following Laboulbène, op. cit., note 18 above, pp. 216–17; Bouley, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 245. Laborde, op. cit., note 18 above, pp. 139, 141.

29 Given how public health institutions used to operate in France, it is very unlikely (contrary to Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 7) that the Minister of Agriculture could have asked for a non-governmental scientific inquiry; cf. note 48. On France's public health institutions, see: Ellis, op. cit., note 21 above; and L Murard and P Zylberman, L'Hygiène dans la République. La santé publique en France ou l'utopie contrariée (1870–1918), Paris, Fayard, 1996. Retailers: Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 206. The reports of the Consulting Committee of Public Hygiene were published on 4 Aug. 1879, 6 Sept. 1880, and 7 Feb. 1881: Bouley, op. cit., note 22, p. 243. Avoiding prohibition: du Mesnil, op. cit., note 20 above, p. 243; Bouley, op. cit., pp. 245–6. Decree of 18 Feb. 1881: Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 257. Main supporter: Bouley in the discussion following Chatin, op. cit., note 20 above, pp. 138–9.

30 Society of Public Medicine: ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 249. Deputies versus hygienists: Vallin, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 550. Ban's supporters: ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., pp. 203–11, 257; J H Gibert in the discussion following Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, pp. 242–3. Vociferous Senate: Vallin, op. cit., pp. 547–8. Villejuif: J N Kapferer, ‘A mass poisoning rumor in Europe’, Public Opin. Q., 1989, 53: 467–81. Foreign Affairs: Duncan, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 191; Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 7. Chambers of Commerce: ibid., p. 7. Importers for repeal: Vallin, op. cit., p. 546. Government for repeal: Duncan, op. cit., p. 191; Gignilliat, op. cit., pp. 7–8. Public health pundits: ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., pp. 213, 258; Vallin, op. cit., pp. 545, 547; Proust, op. cit., p. 199.

31 Recommended: Anon., ‘La trichinose et les décrets’, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 5. Inspectors in ports: Chatin, op. cit., note 20 above, p. 131; Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., note 21 above, pp. 201, 257; Vallin, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 545. Results using microscopes: Davaine, op. cit., note 26 above, p. 258; ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., pp. 257–8; C Livon, ‘Quelques réflexions à propos des travaux de la commission chargée d'examiner les viandes de porc de provenance américaine’, Marseille Médical, 1881, 18: 537–43, on pp. 537–8. In 1923, according to Rochaix and Tapernoux (op. cit., note 3 above, p. 18), if lay inspectors had at that time used microscopes for inspections, the rate of error would have been nearly 33 per cent.

32 Siding with liberalism: Vallin, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 547. Fatalities: ibid., p. 548; Davaine, op. cit., note 26 above, pp. 251–2; Proust in the discussion following Chatin, op. cit., note 20 above, pp. 136, 138; Dr de Pietra Santa, ‘Trichine et trichinose à l'Académie de Médecine de Paris’, J. d'Hyg., 1881, 6: 109–15, p. 115. Prohibition ineffective: Davaine, op. cit., p. 251; Vallin, op. cit., p. 550; Leblanc in the discussion following Chatin, op. cit., pp. 139–40; Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 198. Belgian middlemen made considerable profit from American pork (Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, 8).

33 Achille Adrien Proust (1834–1903) was appointed chef de clinique at the Paris hospital La Charité, in 1862. He was elected to the Academy of Medicine in 1879, became general inspector of Sanitary Services (Ministry of the Interior) in 1884, and occupied the chair of Public Health at the Paris Faculty of Medicine in 1885.

34 Standards at plants: Pietra Santa, op. cit., note 32 above, p. 115. A formal agreement: Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, pp. 203, 207. Minister's comment: Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, op. cit., note 21 above, pp. 259, 264. Doctors advocating: Colin (d'Alfort) in the discussion following Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 252; Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 8. Gambetta: Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 8. No monitoring abroad: Martel, op. cit., note 25 above, p. 341, 352. Experts assessing: Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above, p. 13. Treaty of Rome: D Welch, ‘From “Euro Beer” to “Newcastle Brown”, a review of European Community Action to dismantle divergent “food” laws’, J. Common Mark. Stud., 1983, 22: 47–70, on pp. 52–3, 67. Offal: Le Monde, 10 Apr. 2001.

35 Salmonellosis: H Bauer, ‘Growing problem of salmonellosis in modern society’, Medicine, 1973, 52: 323–30, on p. 329. Nineteenth century: Léonard, op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 168–9. Milder in the twentieth century: Sacquépée, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 396; M A Pointeau-Pouliquen, Les causes des intoxications alimentaires en France depuis 1920, Paris, Arnette, 1958, pp. 51, 53; A Névot, ‘Intoxications alimentaires d'origine carnée observées dans la région parisienne de 1942 à 1947’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1947, 131: 450–1, on p. 450.

36 1949: Pointeau-Pouliquen, op. cit., note 35 above, p. 10; Névot, op. cit., note 35 above, p. 450. Nineteenth century: Sacquépée, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 385. Twentieth century: J Drucker, ‘Épidémiologie des maladies infectieuses en France. Maladies surveillées par le Réseau National de Santé Publique. Situation en 1996 et tendances évolutives récentes’, Bull. Épidém. Hebdo., Feb. 1998, special issue; Pointeau-Pouliquen, op. cit., p. 14; R Legroux, C Jéramec and J-C Levaditi, ‘Statistique du botulisme de l'Occupation 1940–1944’, Bull. Acad. Méd., 1945, 129: 643–5, on p. 644. Unnoticed cases: Névot, op. cit., p. 450.

37 Non-typhoidal salmonella: Pointeau-Pouliquen, op. cit., note 35 above, p. 6. Spread of S. enteritidis: Sacquépée, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 385; Drucker, op. cit., note 36 above, pp. 36–7; and S Haeghebaert and colleagues, ‘Les toxi-infections alimentaires collectives en France en 1997’, Bull. Épidém. Hebdo., 1998, no. 41: 177–81, p. 178. According to Pointeau-Pouliquen (op. cit., pp. 28, 30), beef from the La Villette slaughterhouses was, in 1924, the origin of a salmonellosis outbreak in a school cafeteria, with more than 200 casualties, some of whom died. Eggs: Anon., ‘Réduction du risque de salmonelloses dues aux œufs dans quelques pays d'Europe’, Bull. Épidém. Hebdo., 1997, no. 47: 211; Drucker, op. cit., p. 37; and Haeghebaert, and coll., op. cit., p. 180. The sanitary condition in poultry farms apparently had not improved much by the 1980s: M Biétry, ‘Oeufs aux salmonelles: En France aussi …’, Le Figaro, 11–12 Feb. 1989; and B Werber, ‘Salmonelle sans frontières’, Le Nouvel Observateur, 8 March 1989. An overuse of antibiotics would later contribute to the development of resistant strains of salmonella: ‘Antibiotics on the farm’, International Herald Tribune, 10 Jan. 2001. The 5 f's: Bauer, op. cit., note 35 above, p. 329.

38 According to Bonnain-Moerdijk (op. cit., note 8 above, p. 39), home-made preserves became more common after the First World War. Salmonella in home-cooked meals: Drucker, op. cit., note 36 above, for the 1993–6 period; J Salomon and colleagues, ‘Le botulisme en France en 1997’, Bull. Épidém. Hebdo., 1998, no. 44: 201. Home-cooking and food-poisoning: Haeghebaert, and coll., op. cit., note 37 above, p. 179.

39 Laborde, op. cit., note 18 above, p. 176. Although cooking was generally accepted as an effective means of sterilization (Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 19), it was rather difficult at the time for home-made dishes to meet requirements. Ham, for instance, has to reach an internal temperature of 100°C.

40 State excuse: F Ewald, ‘La précaution, une responsabilité d'État’, Le Monde, 11 March 2000. Chamber of Deputies: Anon., ‘De l'importation et de l'inspection’, note 21 above, p. 193. Prohibition as precaution: ibid., p. 262; P Bert to the Société de Médecine Publique in Proust, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 199. Teaching farmers: ibid., p. 200.

41 American historians: L L Snyder, ‘The American–German pork dispute 1879–1891’, J. mod. Hist., 1945, 17: 16–28; Duncan, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 195; Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 4; Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above, p. 15; and G D Libecap, ‘The rise of the Chicago meat-packers and the origins of meat inspection and antitrust’, Econ. Inq., 1992, 30: 242–62 on p. 250–2. As for German historians, see: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 200. Meat-packing, a major industry: Libecap, op. cit., p. 246; Gignilliat, op. cit., p. 3. American pork exports: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., pp. 216, 221. To this should be added the cost of controls imposed on American cattle or due to the British Cattle Diseases Act of 1878. See Libecap, op. cit., pp. 251–2. Lifted ban: Duncan, op. cit., p. 195.

42 Economic nationalism and filthy conditions: Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, pp. 12 and 11 respectively. France: Désert and Specklin, op. cit., note 10 above, pp. 386–7, 390–1; Léonard, op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 170–1. Bureau of Animal Industry: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 213; Gignilliat, op. cit., p. 10. Federal interventionism: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., p. 214; Libecap, op. cit., note 41 above, p. 255. Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above, pp. 9, 15, 14. In 1938 doubt still surrounded French protective measures against trichinosis. Microscopic examinations of tissue were still not being systematically performed at the end of the 1930s, according to Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 18.

43 Biological community: Hoy and Nugent, op. cit., note 22 above, p. 214. American ambassador to France: Duncan, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 190; Gignilliat, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 12. Foreign representatives, scientific internationalism: Cassedy, op. cit., note 6 above, pp. 7 note 6, 11–12.

44 Welch, op. cit., note 34 above, p. 57.

45 Troyes: E Leclainche , Le Petit Républicain de l'Aube, 17 July 1888, in C Morot, ‘La viande, son inspection et ses inspecteurs’, Ann. Hyg., 1893, 3s, 29: 118–44, on p. 122. Urbanization and new techniques: Teuteberg, op. cit., note 2 above, pp. 146–7. Lafargue: Léonard, op. cit., note 8 above, p. 187. Saucissons dits de Bologne: Morot, op. cit., pp. 118–19. Butcher: ibid., pp. 133–4. Hygiene in factories: Société Universelle de la Croix-Blanche de Genève, Deuxième congrès international pour la répression des fraudes concernant les denrées alimentaires, Paris 17–24 Oct., Paris, Secrétariat Général, 1909, p. 1001.

46 Britain: R A Robinson, ‘Food adulteration in England and France’, Trans. Med.-Leg. Soc., 1909–10, 7: 51–68, on p. 51; A S Wohl, Endangered lives: public health in Victorian Britain, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1983, p. 54; French and Phillips, op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 1, 47. Germany: Teuteberg, op. cit., note 2 above, pp. 151–4; and R Abel, ‘Ueber die Bedürfnisse der Nahrungsmittelgesetzgebung’, in Bericht über den XIV Internationalen Kongress f. Hygiene und Demographie, Berlin, 23–29 Sept. 1907, Band II, Berlin, A Hirschwald, 1908, pp. 298–305, on pp. 299–301.

47 1905 act as public health law: A Chassevant, ‘État actuel de la législation concernant les aliments et la surveillance des aliments dans les différents pays (étude spéciale de cette législation en France)’, Hyg. Géné. Appliq., 1907, 2: 542–50, on p. 544; O'Neill, op. cit., note 23 above, p. 564; Robinson, op. cit., note 46 above, pp. 52, 55. Past regulations: A Rochaix, J Courmont and C Lesieur, Précis d'Hygiène, Paris, Masson, 1940, p. 262; A Chassevant, ‘Rapport sur l'état actuel de la législation concernant les aliments et la surveillance des aliments dans les divers pays’, in Bericht über den XIV Internationalen Kongress f. Hygiene und Demographie, Berlin, 23–29 Sept. 1907, Band II, Berlin, A Hirschwald, 1908, pp. 251–6, on p. 254. The butter and margarine law of 16 April 1897 was also taken up in the 1905 Act. Without providing for controls: Dr Hogg, ‘Organisation de l'inspection des substances alimentaires’, Ann. Hyg., 1881, 3s., 5: 526–35, on pp. 527–8. Pre-1905: Ellis, op. cit., note 21 above, p. 197. Regulating sampling: Chassevant, ‘Etat actuel de la législation’, op. cit., pp. 547–9. Administrative services: Chassevant, ‘Rapport’, op. cit., p. 255. Section 3 of France's Superior Council of Public Hygiene, the main consultative body in public health, focused on food hygiene. Centralization: O'Neill, op. cit., p. 564; Robinson, op. cit., p. 63.

48 Commercial probity: Chassevant, ‘Rapport’, op. cit., note 47 above, p. 253. Complaints: G Thuillier, Pour une histoire du quotidien au XIXe siècle en Nivernais, Paris, Mouton, 1977, p. 151 notes 59 and 60. Markets not health: Rochaix, and coll., op. cit., note 47 above, p. 263. Turning scientific knowledge into a means for effectively protecting consumers took time. Control of the quality of oysters, for instance, went into effect in 1924—after more than two decades of warnings by: Chantemesse in 1896, Mosny in 1899 and Netter in 1907. In fact, it was not public authorities but producers themselves who would, in 1913, set up the first system for inspecting oysters. About this, see Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, pp. 25–8. Control at factories is of rather recent date: N Zylbermann, ‘L'organisation de la sécurité alimentaire en France’, Actualités, concurrence, consommation et répression des fraudes, Sept. 1998, CXIII, suppl., pp. 1–2.

49 Short list: Archives Nationales (hereafter AN), 880495 art. 4, Comité de la Santé Publique du Traité de Bruxelles, [Prof. A Névot] ‘Rapport relatif au contrôle des denrées alimentaires en France’, 30 July 1952. Business practices: ibid. Under the heading “deceit and attempted deceit of the public”, the 1905 act has become art. L 213–1 ff. of the Code de la consommation. Food hygiene is currently regulated through a 26 April 1991 decree (Journal Officiel, 4 May 1991), Annexe 1 of the Code de la santé publique. Food and the 1902 act: Chassevant, ‘Rapport’, op. cit., note 47 above, p. 252. Public health secondary: Anon., ‘Le 1er Congrès international pour la répression des fraudes alimentaires et pharmaceutiques’, Hyg. Viande Lait, 1908, 2: 461–75, on p. 471. EU legislation: Welch, op. cit., note 34 above, pp. 49–50; AN 880495 art. 4, Comité de Santé Publique du Traité de Bruxelles, sous-comité d'experts sur le contrôle sanitaire des denrées alimentaires, ‘Observations françaises sur le rapport collectif néerlandais relatif aux antiseptiques’, 25 Aug. 1954.

50 Modelling of regulations: Chassevant, ‘Etat actuel de la législation’, op. cit., note 47 above, p. 550; L Grosz de Csatàr, ‘L'influence des mesures internationales pour maintenir la bonne qualité des boissons et des aliments’, Trans. Intern. Med. Cong., 7th session, London, 2 to 9 Aug., London, J W Kolckmann, 1881, vol. 4.

51 Paul Brouardel (1837–1906) occupied the chair of pathology at the Paris Medical School in 1879, of which he became dean (1887–1901). He was a member of the National Academy of Medicine (1880), chaired the General Association of French Physicians (1902–6), and presided over the Consultative Committee (later: Superior Council) of Public Hygiene (1884–1904). Brouardel in 1882: F Bordas, ‘L'unification des méthodes d'analyse des produits alimentaires’, Rev. Scient., 1913, 51: 526–9, on p. 526. Brouardel in 1887: A Chassevant, ‘Unification des méthodes d'analyse des denrées alimentaires dans les laboratoires officiels, en vue de la détermination et de la répression des falsifications’, Bull. Sci. Pharmacol., 1906, 13: 675–8, on pp. 675–6.

52 Chemists: Bordas, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 527. The Food Section of the International Congress of Applied Chemistry wanted to see an international network established for sharing scientific data (Chassevant, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 676), and the 9th Section of the Second Congress asked for food standards to be implemented: F Dupont (ed.), 2e Congrès international de chimie appliquée, Paris, Association des Chimistes de Sucrerie et de Distillerie, 1897, vol. 4, p. 350. Incipient internationalization: A Chassevant, ‘Le congrès international pour la répression des fraudes alimentaires et pharmaceutiques, impressions générales’, Hyg. Géné. Appliq., 1908, 3: 577–82, on pp. 577–8; Bordas, op. cit., p. 527; D F Smith and J Phillips, ‘Food policy and regulation: a multiplicity of actors and experts’, in Smith and Phillips (eds), op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 1–16, on p. 5. Dr N Wright (chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in the 1950s) wrongly stated that the idea of a Codex Alimentarius was launched at the first conference, held in Brussels in 1894: N Wright, ‘International aspects of pure food and pure food legislation’, in A J Amos, Pure food and pure food legislation, papers of the 1960 Centenary Conference, London, Butterworths, 1960, pp. 73–106, on p. 80. In truth, three Austrian physicians introduced a proposal for a Codex Austriacus, but it was left undiscussed: F Sachs (ed.), 1er Congrès international de chimie appliquée, Brussels, G Deprez, 1894, 7 Aug. session, p. cliv.

53 Wording hardly changed: C Franche, ‘Les falsifications au Mexique et le contrôle chimique international de Mexico’, Rev. Intern. Falsif., 1905, 18: 163–5, on p. 164; Chassevant, ‘Etat actuel de la législation’, op. cit., note 47 above, p. 544; idem, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 577; Croix-Blanche, op. cit., note 45 above, p. 56; Wright, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 74; FAO/66479, Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission, ‘Report of the First Session’, Rome, 25 June–3 July 1963, p. 53; J P Dobbert, ‘Le Codex Alimentarius: vers une nouvelle méthode de réglementation internationale’, Ann. Franç. Droit Intern., 1969: 677–717, pp. 680, 693. Belgium: Chassevant, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 676; idem, ‘Rapport’, op. cit., note 47 above, p. 256; Bordas, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 527. Croix-Blanche, op. cit., p. 60.

54 France resented: Chassevant, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 580. Ruau 1909: Croix-Blanche, op. cit., note 45 above, p. 57. Codex: Croix-Blanche, ibid., p. 58. Poorly organized border inspections: Martel, op. cit., note 13 above, p. 397. Worthwhile: Croix-Blanche, op. cit., p. 59. Far from realized: Croix-Blanche, ibid., p. 58. Not the only one: Bordas, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 528.

55 Administrative reforms in Germany: Teuteberg, op. cit., note 2 above, p. 155. Usual topics of food hygiene: J Parisot, ‘État du problème de l'alimentation rationnelle en France’, in L Viborel (ed.), Savoir prévenir, Paris, L Viborel, 1939, pp. 59–75, on pp. 72, 64. Control at production: Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 3. Rochaix (op. cit., note 47 above, p. 145) cites examples of milk control laws: Great Britain's 1926 Milk and Dairies Order and 1936 Milk Special Designations Order, Germany's legislation of 31 July 1930, Denmark's act of 22 October 1925. In France, the 7 July 1933 Law on Meat, Milk and Bovine Tuberculosis (implemented by a decree of 24 January 1934) and the 2 July 1935 Act on Dairies and Pasteurisation of Milk did not lead to decisive action. Nutrition rather than food control: Parisot, op. cit., p. 63. Call for uniform standards: League of Nations, A/59/1936/II/B, H Queuille, ‘Alimentation, rapport présenté par la deuxième commission à l'Assemblée’, Genève, 5 Oct. 1936, p. 3.

56 FAO/59911, Joint FAO/WHO Conference on Food Additives, ‘Report’, Geneva 19–22 Sept. 1956, pp. 3–4. That little was known about food additives in 1953 sounds odd, since food colouring and additives had often come to the attention of medical congresses. For France, see P Brouardel, ‘Accidents causés par l'addition des antiseptiques aux aliments’, Ann. Hyg. Pub., 1903, 49: 420–44; and A Chassevant, ‘Colorants dont l'emploi peut être autorisé pour la fabrication des produits alimentaires’, Hyg. Géné. Appliq., 1910, 5: 321–33. About this question in general, see Koolmees, op. cit., note 9 above, p. 62. British objections: FAO, op. cit., p. 5; AN 880495 art. 4, René Truhaut in Brussels Treaty Organisation, doc. no. A/2410, 19 Oct. 1954, ‘Rapport de la 5e Réunion du sous-comité pour le contrôle des denrées alimentaires’, Luxembourg, 6–8 Oct. 1954. Signed in March 1948 by the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, the Brussels Pact would be renamed the Western European Union in October 1954 when Germany and Italy joined. Though focused on regional security, this pact had a much wider scope. It set up a Food Regulation Working Party for handling the issue of food colours and additives.

57 Mandatory labels: AN 880495 art. 4, L Truffert, ‘Rapport sur le 1er Symposium sur les matières étrangères et éléments synergiques dans les aliments’, Vienna, 6–9 July 1955; M G Périer de Féral, ‘Comment comprendre la déclaration des substances étrangères dans les aliments’, in Commission Internationale des Industries Agricoles (Paris) and Bureau International Permanent de Chimie Analytique (Paris) (eds), 3e Symposium sur les substances étrangères dans les aliments, Como, 14–18 May 1957, Milano, Unione Tipografica, 1958, pp. 392–405, on p. 393. Brussels Pact: See AN 880495 art. 4, Minister of Public Health to Prof. A Névot, Direction générale de l'Hygiène publique et des Hôpitaux/Direction de l'Hygiène publique/3, 19650, 1 Feb. 1950; Brussels Treaty Organisation, op. cit., note 56 above, 19 Oct. 1954; and Truffert, op. cit. Major change: AN 880495 art. 8, Ministre de l'Agriculture au Ministre de la Santé Publique et de la Population, AR-C 83134, 18 May 1961.

58 Technical standards advanced faster: Wright, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 77. Vienna: ibid., p. 80. Old request: Bordas, op. cit., note 51 above, p. 528. Permanent Codex Council: Wright, op. cit., p. 80. Two regions: ibid., p. 81. Geneva October 1962: FAO/59911, op. cit., note 56 above, p. 4.

59 Protein Advisory Group: J Ruxin, ‘The United Nations Protein Advisory Group’, in Smith and Phillips (eds), op. cit., note 8 above, pp. 151–5. Thirty countries: FAO/59911, op. cit., note 56 above, p. 4. Objectives: FAO, ibid., p. 6. OEEC: A S Milward, The European rescue of the nation-state, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1992, pp. 286–7, 301. Codex meeting 1998: Direction Générale de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la Répression des Fraudes (hereafter DGCCRF), Rapport d'activité: Qualité et sécurité, 1999, www.finances.gouv.fr/DGCCRF.

60 Green Pool conferences: Milward, note 59 above, pp. 301–8. General Principles Committee: Dobbert, op. cit., note 53 above, p. 685. France chaired the Committee again in 1998 when discussions revolved around the issue of “legitimate factors other [than science]”: DGCCRF, Rapport d'activité, 1998, www.finances.gouv.fr/DGCCRF. The European Council of the Codex Alimentarius was later renamed the Advisory Group for Europe of the Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission.

61 Health and trade: FAO/59911, op. cit., note 56 above, Appendix E1. Mad cow crisis: C Goethals, S C Ratzan, V Demko, ‘The politics of BSE: negotiating the public's health’, in S C Ratzan (ed.), The mad cow crisis: health and the public good, London, UCL Press, 1998, pp. 95–110, on pp. 99–100, 102. Smith and Phillips, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 6.

62 AN 880495 art. 4, [Dr A Caillet], ‘Note pour Monsieur Boyon, conseiller technique’, DGS/HP/2, n.d. [late 1972–early 1973]; Dr Charbonneau [A Caillet], ‘Note pour Monsieur le Ministre’, DGS/HP/2, 6 Oct. 1972; J Foyer, Ministre de la Santé Publique au Ministre de l'Agriculture, 27 Nov. 1972; Ministre de la Santé Publique au Ministre de l'Agriculture, DGS/1722, 13 Aug. 1972. The Commission on Animal Feed was created by the Minister of Health in 1956 (arrêté of 5 May and Journal Officiel of 25 May), recreated jointly by the Ministers of Health and Agriculture in 1960 (arrêté 22 February, J.O., 12 March). It was modified on 20 January 1967 (J.O., 14 February), and again on 1 February 1973 (J.O., 23 March).

63 This “dual structure” inevitably developed in European Union committees of experts: G P E Walzenbach, ‘Convergent co-ordination patterns in the French and German core executive: The case of the BSE crisis’, West Eur. Polit., 1999, 22: 64–86, on p. 73.

64 EEC Food Regulation Working Party: AN 880495 art. 4, Dr Lacambre, ‘Note pour Monsieur le Ministre, Coopération économique européenne’, DGS/HP 102S, account of the meeting of the Subcommittee of Food Regulation in Brussels on 5–7 Oct. 1960; and AN 880495 art. 8, Dr Lacambre, ‘Note pour Monsieur le Ministre, Coopération économique européenne’, DGS/HP 25S, 21 Feb. 1961. Industry collaboration on jam: Dr Lacambre, ibid. Monnet: Milward, op. cit., note 59 above, p. 284. Usual procedure: Truffert, ‘Rapport’, 6–9 July 1955, op. cit., note 57 above. Milk: FAO/59672, Joint FAO/WHO Experts Committee, ‘Code of principles concerning milk and milk products’, in WHO/FAO, Milk Hygiene, 1962, Annex 1, preamble, pp. 747–50, on p. 747; Wright, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 84. Milk had been standardized at the 1908 Conference on Food Adulteration in Geneva: Rochaix and Tapernoux, op. cit., note 3 above, p. 28. In France, a 25 March 1924 decree set standards for the milk industry.

65 Lack of nutritionists, food dirigisme: AN 880495 art. 4: Dr Marcheboeuf, ‘Compte-rendu de mission de la délégation française à la 2e Conférence de la Nutrition en Amérique latine, Rio de Janeiro 5–13 juin 1950’, Aug. 1950.

66 Antibiotics: A Nordon, ‘Les antibiotiques ajoutés à la nourriture du bétail ne sont pas un danger pour l'homme’, L'Aurore, 2 Apr. 1965. Under-representation of Ministry of Health: Dr Lacambre, 5–7 Oct. 1960, op. cit., note 64 above; AN 880495 art. 4: Ministre de la Santé publique au Ministre de l'Agriculture, 13 Aug. 1972; Dr Charbonneau, ‘Note pour Monsieur le Ministre’, DGS/HP/2, 26 July 1972; Ministre de l'Agriculture [E Duchêne-Marullaz, director of the cabinet] to the Ministre de la Santé publique, RF-R1 84364, 4 Aug. 1972 and to the vice-chairman of the Conseil d'État, RF-A1 81583, 1 March 1973.

67 Codex as a matter of consensus: Dobbert, op. cit., note 53 above, p. 701. This was a rather original procedure at the time, as compared with the Stresa Agreement about appellations d'origine and cheese trademarks (1 June 1951, implemented on 1 Sept. 1953), signed by Austria, Denmark, France, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland: Dobbert, op. cit., p. 704; Wright, op. cit., note 52 above, p. 83. Codex standards prevail: G Moore and A Tavares, ‘Mesures récentes prises par l'Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture en conséquence de l'Accord de l'Organisation Mondiale du Commerce sur l'application des mesures sanitaires et phytosanitaires’, Ann. Franç. Droit Intern. 1997, 43: 544–50, on pp. 544, 548. EEC working groups: Dr Lacambre, 5–7 Oct. 1960, op. cit., note 64 above.

68 Health still ranks behind agriculture—whereas the EU Agriculture Council meets monthly, the Health Council is convened twice a year: Walzenbach, op. cit., note 63 above, p. 70.

69 Shift 1975: Welch, op. cit., note 34 above, pp. 49–50. Permanent Scientific Committee on Food: ibid., 54. Directives 1975, 1962, 1968: Welch, op. cit., pp. 51–3, 81. The WHO/FAO Code of Principles concerning Milk adopted similar rules at the same time: FAO, op. cit., note 64 above, p. 750.

70 Fruits, vegetables, and eggs: Welch, op. cit., note 34 above, p. 51. Consensus rule 1998: DGCCRF (1999), op. cit., note 59 above. BGH: Moore and Tavares, op. cit., note 67 above, p. 549; DGCCRF (1999), op. cit.; Refuse to examine: ibid.

71 Optional solutions 1973: Welch, op. cit., note 34 above, pp. 56, 58. Local mores at the heart of principles: AN 880495 art. 8, note 57 above. Austria, etc.: Dobbert, op. cit., note 53 above, pp. 699–700, 691; FAO/66479, op. cit., note 53 above, p. 19. Jenkins: Welch, op. cit., p. 54. Monitoring production lines: Zylbermann, op. cit., note 48 above, p. 1. Salmonella: O Blond, ‘Une salmonelle peut en remplacer une autre’, La Recherche, 2001, no. 339: 38–9, on p. 39.

72 This does not mean that food customs and traditions do not change. Witness the recent shift in the habits of certain fashionable Britons who now eat pork offal, a result of French pork exports to the United Kingdom: Milward, op. cit., note 59 above, p. 285 note 82.

73 P Baldwin, Contagion and the state in Europe 1830–1930, Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 2–15, 524–8.

74 J Gray, Endgames: questions in late modern political thought, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1997, p. 184. Guidance to community: C Noiville, ‘Principe de précaution et organisation mondiale du commerce. Le cas du commerce alimentaire’, J. Droit Intern., 2000, 127: 263–97, on p. 288. Other legitimate factors: Noiville, ibid., pp. 289–90; A Martin, M Chambolle, C Badier, G Tufféry, ‘L'expertise est-elle codifiable?’, La Recherche, 2001, no. 339: 46–50, p. 49, in relation to the French Food Standards Agency. Conference 1955: FAO/66479, op. cit., note 53 above, p. 8. State's usual role: for instance, the 1963 decree (J.O., 4 Aug. 1963) organizing the defences with regard to the food supply and food contamination.

75 A few years after the Codex's first meeting, the French Ministry of Agriculture set up a work group to study “the whole range of issues raised by food” (Le Monde, 11 Nov. 1964). This group mainly concentrated on the population's needs (quantity of food), just as the Institut national de l'alimentation (created in 1936) did in response to the 25th Assembly of the League of Nations. Protecting consumer health became a goal in 1971, when the Secretary of State for Agriculture aired a proposal for organizing two inspectorates for handling, respectively, pesticides and school restaurants (Le Monde, 24 May 1971). The government took a further step in 1976 when the Minister of Agriculture proposed gathering around the newly created Direction of Food Quality various inspectorates that were under the Ministry's veterinary branch (Le Monde, 18 March 1976). Twenty years later, following the “mad cow” panic, this same Ministry tried to expand its legal powers for inspection and “repression of fraud” (Les Échos, 11 Sept., 28 Nov. and 16 Dec. 1996; Le Figaro, 3 Dec. 1996). But what room was left for the Ministry of Health? This sensitive issue has never been addressed. The 1997 proposal for a food standards agency triggered a clash in parliament and between the two rivals, Agriculture and Health. This agency finally came into being on 26 March 1999. For further information about the French state's current role in food safety, see: Haut Comité de la Santé Publique, Pour une politique nutritionnelle de santé publique en France. Enjeux et propositions, Rennes, Éditions de l'École Nationale de la Santé Publique, 2000, ch. 5: ‘Acteurs, structures et organisations impliqués dans le champ de la nutrition’, pp. 163–83.

76 Speech by Romano Prodi, President of the European Commission, Plenary Session, European Parliament, Strasbourg, 5 Oct. 1999, Speech/99/121. A European Food Safety Authority was set up on 21 January 2002: EC Regulation no. 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

77 Melbourne Conference and Codex meeting: Noiville, op. cit., note 74 above, p. 293. Appropriate forum: DGCCRF (1999), op. cit., note 59 above.

78 Get-along-go-along: AN 880495 art. 4: Dr Charbonneau [A Caillet], ‘Note pour Monsieur le Ministre’, DGS/HP/2, 6 Oct. 1972. Customs delegate: Ministre de l'Agriculture [Duchêne-Marullaz] au Ministre de la Santé Publique, RF-A1 81118, 1 Feb. 1973; Ministre de l'Agriculture [G-J Bernardy] au Ministre de la Santé Publique, RF-A1 82918, 12 May 1972. strogen and antibiotics: [Probably Dr A Caillet] handwritten notes [probably Apr. 1973], one recto-verso page: “La question de l'administration de certaines substances…”, AN 880495 art. 4. A start was made at harmonizing European regulations about strogen and antibiotics in 1981.

79 Spillover: Milward, op. cit., note 59 above, p. 12. Art: C E-A Winslow, The evolution and significance of the modern public health campaign, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1923, p. 1. Certain circumstances: W Drozdiak, ‘Virus shuts Europe's open borders’, International Herald Tribune, 16 March 2001. See the French Senate's report on the consequences of meat-and-bone meal for animal and human health: Le Figaro, 17 May 2001.