From beef stew to pork jerky to soda pop and cilantro, 2025 has seen more than its share of foreign material contamination recalls. In fact, within the first four months of 2025, foreign object recalls had increased 93% over the same period in 2024, and at least four occurred in October alone. What is the issue and what can be done?
In its guidance, the FDA defines foreign objects to be public health hazards when they measure 7 mm to 25 mm in length, with both USDA and Canada’s CFIA following this same standard. Objects smaller than that are considered to rarely cause injury except in special risk groups (such as small pieces of glass or sharp wire in infant foods); objects larger than that are generally considered too large for a consumer to accidentally eat. However, incidents are taken on a case-by-case basis, so larger or smaller objects can be a hazard. Some make the assumption that if the material is less than 7 mm it does not pose either a regulatory or health risk – that is not the case. Independent of size, regulatory agencies do not allow even small pieces of foreign material in foods and may require companies to undertake recalls.
Foreign objects can get into foods anywhere along the food chain, from ingredients, equipment, or even worker accident or error. In fact, according to a recent Foreign Material Contamination in Food Benchmark Report 2025 from FlexXray, of food industry professionals surveyed (who could select up to two options), nearly half said their most common source of foreign material contamination was equipment failure, as shown in the chart below:
However, when considering that supplier/ingredient inputs and natural sources + organic inputs are both essentially incoming ingredient related, supply chain would be seen to be the greatest source according to those surveyed. Also of interest in the report was that nearly 3/4ths of respondents (73%) stated that they face foreign material incidents multiple times each year, with nearly half having incidents on a monthly basis.
While such high numbers make it seem that preventing foreign material contamination is a nearly impossible task, there are practices that can be implemented both within the food facility and along supply lines to help reduce the potential of incidents.
- Supply chain. Developing a supplier verification program is essential for ensuring the ultimate safety of your finished products, and monitoring for foreign material should be a significant part of this. While this can be as basic as including – and enforcing – foreign material specifications, you can also use third-party audit services or work directly with your suppliers to help them develop safety standards and their own documented validation programs.
- Detection equipment. Within the food processing facility should be methods at each process step to prevent the introduction of foreign materials. While inline systems (e.g., sieves, strainers, magnets, x-ray, optical sorters, etc.) are of high value in “catching” foreign objects before they can get into product, facilities should not rely entirely on equipment for detection. Rather, as stated by more than 60% of survey respondents, employee reporting is still the most common way that foreign objects are identified, making training a critical aspect of foreign object control.
- Training. Practical, interactive/hands-on training can be the best way to educate new workers and reinforce the importance of detection and reporting for veteran workers. This could include a visual exercise of some common contaminants in the hazard range (7-25mm) and discussion of potential sources and detection; increased frequency of foreign objects as the topic of regular food safety meetings; one-point lessons on specific tasks to minimize foreign material introduction; using scheduled checks and changeovers as training; and implementing recognition programs to positively reinforce reporting.
- Preventive maintenance. Survey respondents who said they took steps to improve their preventive maintenanceplans saw a decrease in foreign material incidents. Examples included increased use of x-ray detectable components for equipment repair and conditioning, and increasing checks on parts ahead of their mean time to failure.
- Corrective action plus. Following up any foreign object finding with steps for continuous improvement, along with the corrective action, can go a long way in food safety. This could include auditing your process, monitoring performance, setting KPIs, conducting FMEA (failure mode and effects analysis), etc.
- Food safety culture. Building and enhancing your food safety culture has value throughout the operation. Implementing focused training, building inclusivity, having open communication, and empowering team members can all help to build a culture in which food safety is the top-of-mind priority for everyone.
- External consultants. Many of the companies surveyed benefited from the aid of an external team to find the gaps in their processes, then work with a cross-functional team within the company to make improvements by closing the gaps and developing a plan to implement changes.
Foreign object contamination can be a serious issue. Even if it is detected before anyone is injured, there are the costs and productivity losses of conducting a recall, and potential impacts to the business reputation if the contamination is made public.
If you are facing an incident (or would like assistance in preventing one!), give TAG a call. We can help!
