Feel like there's a food recall every day? That shouldn't stop you from eating

There is no poop apocalypse. 

Food recalls throughout 2018 may have some American consumers nervous to put anything in their mouths, but the U.S. food system is still among the safest in the world, especially considering the sophistication of the country’s supply chains, the sheer number of people eating in this country and the reporting tools in place.

It seems like there is a new federal-government warning every day – No romaine! Watch out for beef! Don't even think about Honey Smacks! – which may lead us to believe our food supply isn't safe.

Experts say the opposite is true.

More:To grow sales, yogurt makers change their culture to expand beyond breakfast

More:After much back and forth, stocks largely end lower on lingering concerns

More:More than 10,000 Verizon employees sign up for voluntary buyout

The average American eats close 960 pounds of food a year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service. And only a tiny percentage of all those millions of products is recalled – usually before any of those 300 million-plus Americans even put it in their mouths.

"There are always going to be glitches, either environmental or human error, but I feel quite confident that our food supply is safe," said Catherine Strohbehn, an Iowa-based food safety consultant. "Nothing is 100 percent risk-free. Our goal is always to mitigate the risk as much as possible."

Here's a breakdown of what's going on:

Image is perception

No food company or commodity wants to be the one associated with a foodborne illness or a death, so producers are quick to alert the public that there is – or could be – a problem. A recall may not reflect well on a brand or a crop in the short run, but it's better than the alternative.

"We have widely recognized brands. They use advanced systems, and they are the ones that are committed to make sure the customers don’t get sick, because it’s ultimately bad for business to sicken your customers," said Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, the director of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety.

Remember the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli deaths? That was one of the most infamous outbreaks of all time; more than 700 people got sick and four children died. 

Now, everything from the suspected presence of an allergen to possible metal pieces in food gets corporate attention.

"A company that is aware of a problem, but doesn't fix it? Bad business decision," said Don Schaffner, a professor of food science at Rutgers University. "Someone will get sick, and the lawyers will be all over them."

Look at your grocery bill

Making your food even safer would double, if not triple, what you're charged at supermarkets and restaurants currently, according to Diez-Gonzalez. The money would go to cover everything needed to make a well-protected food system even more so, such as a better-trained and paid workforce, irradiation equipment and more state-of-the-art processing facilities.

If farmers and factories invested in those ways, how would they cover those expenses? That's not something the American consumer is willing to pay for.

"We have one of the cheapest food supplies in the world," he added. "Oftentimes, our food supply industry doesn’t get a lot of credit for producing fairly safe food at a relatively low cost to consumers."

Where does food come from?

So your food grows in the ground or comes from an animal, whether it's salad fixings or the ingredients in your sandwich. 

Hence the crux of the food safety issue.

"With Mother Nature, it’s hard to control 100 percent with birds flying overhead or deer romping through or maybe you're in an area of the country where there are a lot of wild pigs or domestic animals or small animals," said Strohbehn. "Unless you're growing it in a sterile greenhouse or hydroponically without soil...certain items are harder to control."

And even hydroponics isn't a panacea. Potential problems include water issues and human error messing up the theoretically-aseptic environment, she added.

Reporting may not be your friend

Many countries, like those in Latin America, Africa and parts of Asia, don't collect statistics about recalls and food-related illnesses, which makes the data of those that do all the more damning. When more lax governments do issue warnings, it's often too late, like China's 2008 tainted milk scandal that killed six babies and sickened an estimated 300,000.

"It’s chicken-and-egg," said Diez-Gonzalez. "We’re seeing more cases because we can detect it. Because we can detect it, we think we have more. In other countries, they don’t see the cases because they don’t have the public health system we have here. They don’t have data, so no one gets outraged. People are still getting sick and dying."

He compared the U.S. to Mexico, where he grew up in the 1960s and 1970s. There, he said, suffering from a foodborne illness was normal and people learned to live with it.

"It was part of life. It was like getting a cold; you get it once a year, you deal with it. There was no outrage. There was no 'getting sick with diarrhea is unacceptable.' There’s a very different paradigm," Diez-Gonzalez said. "The sky’s falling on our heads because we’re creating this illusion that we have this problem."

Part of those key detection and reporting steps are technology, programs and tools that become more sophisticated every year. Today, for example, investigators can use genome sequencing to identify specific strains of pathogens in foods, linking seemingly disparate cases or even whole outbreaks to one another.

"We’re getting better and better at finding smaller and smaller outbreaks," said Schaffner. "The food supply is getting safer, but it's hard to see that because part of that is being more sensitive to smaller and smaller problems."

Follow USA TODAY reporter Zlati Meyer on Twitter: @ZlatiMeyer