Promofoods, an international manufacturer of canned tuna, has decided to recall eight million cans of its tuna due to consumer complaints of dizziness and nausea. This recall has cost the company millions of dollars in lost revenue, along with the inevitable loss of consumer confidence in the brand. The company’s response has been to seek scientific confirmation of the safety of its product. By testing samples of the recalled tuna, Promofoods has determined that none of the chemicals that typically cause dizziness and nausea are present in its product, and so it has begun the process of rebuilding its brand. This testing is, of course, necessary, as consumers have the right to know whether the product is safe to consume. However, before the company can launch its new product, it needs to address the three remaining questions.

Question one: What are the chemicals that are suspected of causing dizziness and nausea? It is somewhat puzzling that Promofoods did not test every chemical that consumers have claimed cause their symptoms. The company’s response suggests that only three chemicals caused the symptoms. However, the recall letter notes that “the company has received numerous complaints from consumers of dizziness, nausea, and headaches after eating a can of tuna.” This statement suggests that there are other chemicals that consumers claim exacerbate their symptoms. However, if the company only tested the three that were found in the samples, then there can be no assurance that the recalled cans were free of additional chemicals. Question two: Were the levels of the chemicals found listed above dangerous? Because all of the chemicals that are suspected of causing nausea and dizziness are present naturally, it is unlikely that the levels of each of the chemicals in the recalled cans were dangerous. This fact is just as well, as the level of any one of these chemicals would probably have not caused nausea or dizziness in a healthy individual. However, if the levels of these chemicals were higher than normal, then it is possible that they could cause adverse health effects. Question three: Was the testing of the samples conducted by qualified chemists? The chemists who conducted the testing for the company are qualified to perform the work, but given their corporate background, it seems unlikely that they are capable of identifying chemicals that are toxic in small amounts. Another group of chemists, possibly from an independent lab, should be brought in to test every sample of the recalled tuna to ensure that the levels of the chemicals found in the samples are well below dangerous levels. If the levels of the chemicals are low, then it is possible, though certainly not certain, that Promofoods will be able to rebuild its reputation and entice consumers to buy its tuna again.

Question four: Was the testing of the samples necessary? The tests that Promofoods performed were necessary, but the results of the testing do not necessarily prove that its canned tuna is safe and healthy. At this point, the company cannot return to the market until it has further assurance that its product is safe. It may have to conduct more tests at another time.