Bill Overview
Title: Matt Haller EtO Awareness Act
Description: This bill requires foods and food additives that have been sterilized with ethylene oxide or propylene oxide to be conspicuously labeled as such.
Sponsors: Rep. Newman, Marie [D-IL-3]
Target Audience
Population: People who consume foods and food additives sterilized with ethylene oxide or propylene oxide
Estimated Size: 300000000
- Ethylene oxide (EtO) is commonly used for sterilization in the food industry.
- Oxides like EtO are used for a variety of foods and food additives, which have a global market.
- Consumers of sterilized foods and the food industry will be directly impacted by this labeling.
- There is a significant global demand for processed and packaged foods that may utilize such sterilization methods.
- Awareness and health initiatives like these tend to inform and affect large portions of the population, especially in areas with high consumption of packaged foods.
Reasoning
- The EtO Awareness Act affects a broad range of consumers, especially those who frequently purchase processed and packaged foods.
- We should integrate a mix of responses, including those skeptical of the labeling benefits, those who value transparency, and those unaware of the sterilization processes.
- Consideration of demographic diversity is crucial, as different age groups and occupations may view the impact of labeling differently.
- Budget constraints suggest that the implementation will focus heavily on consumer education through labeling without direct impacts on the product availability or price.
Simulated Interviews
Marketing Specialist (Brooklyn, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's great to have more information on how our food is processed.
- As a mother, I want to know exactly what goes into the products I give my kids.
- I hadn't thought much about sterilization methods before, so this is eye-opening.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Food Scientist (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm familiar with EtO, and while it's safe, labeling can prevent misinformation.
- I'm concerned about potential consumer panic due to misunderstanding the labels.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freelance Writer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency is always good, people should know what they're consuming.
- This might affect my choices, possibly more organic or raw foods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support the policy because it aligns with my store's values of transparency.
- It might increase demand for non-sterilized products, benefiting my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (Orlando, FL)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate being informed, but don't see myself changing my habits.
- It's good to know but convenience often wins out.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (Portland, OR)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Fully support any move towards greater transparency in food labeling.
- This is important for making informed choices about environmental impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Supply Chain Manager (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not sure how this will impact us operationally, but consumer awareness is critical.
- Might increase the workload if labeling requires more checks and balances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Registered Nurse (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Informative labels are crucial for making health-conscious choices.
- I'll use this information to guide my patients on safer food options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Farmer (Omaha, NE)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's overdue; people should know about the chemicals in their food.
- This will hopefully drive more people towards fresh produce.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Tech Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's interesting to know how my food is sterilized, but convenience is my priority.
- Depending on the information, I might consider altering my buying habits slightly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 2: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Year 3: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Year 5: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Year 10: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Year 100: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Key Considerations
- The scope of labeling requirements might influence initial costs based on the variety of products affected.
- Consumer awareness campaigns may need parallel development to inform public understanding of EtO and its labeling.
- The policy's success depends significantly on the cooperation of food manufacturers and the readiness of retailers to adopt new label formats.