USDA Study Demonstrates Most Consumers Do Not Practice Proper Food Safety Procedures

A study conducted by USDA, demonstrated that a vast majority of consumers do not follow proper practices in the kitchen.

• Most people do not properly wash hands  -  "the study revealed that consumers are not washing their hands correctly 97 percent of the time".
• Most people do not use thermometers, and those that do, only half know the proper cooking temperatures - "results reveal that only 34 percent of participants used a food thermometer to check that their burgers were cooked properly. Of those who did use the food thermometer, nearly half still did not cook the burgers to the safe minimum internal temperature."
• People tend to cross contaminate other surfaces / food. After handling raw poultry 
• 48 percent of the time are contaminating spice containers used while preparing burgers,
• 11 percent of the time are spreading bacteria to refrigerator handles, an
• 5 percent of the time are tainting salads due to cross-contamination.

This is not surprising, and shows the reason why even  raw meat processors need to control pathogenic organisms.

Changing behaviors is not easy.  It does not help that many high schools have moved away from subjects that cover this.

USDA
https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2018/06/28/study-shows-most-people-are-spreading-dangerous-bacteria-around
Study Shows Most People Are Spreading Dangerous Bacteria Around the Kitchen and Don’t Even Realize It 

Blockchain - Opportunities and Challenges from a Food Safety Perspective

Blockchain is a term receiving a lot of hype as the must-have for food safety.  Well, at least the IT folks are pushing food safety as a main reason for investing into the technology.  There are benefits of having verifiable and seamless transactions

So what is blockchain - it is a tool by which each segment of the supply chain, or block, is identified from raw material through to the time is is sold.  The blockchain technology records each interaction with an item and assigns it a digital certificate so that the information associated with that block, or supply chain segment, can not be changed or adulterated later.  This prevents company form hiding the true origin and movement of the material as it moves through the chain.  

Traceability and recall are the real benefits.  Having such a system would allow quick identification of  recalled ingredients, and then coupling that with where those ingredients were used, and where that product was distributed or stored.

There can be endless amounts of information recorded with each transaction.  This can include 1) source information such as specific producing company, harvesting fields, or varieties harvested, 2) safety parameters such as temperatures, pH, or Aw, and 3) quality parameters.

One can establish validated contacts, or smart contacts, that help ensure product sourcing and provide means for seamless transactions.  For example, one can ensure that suppliers were indeed certified organic.  "Transactions can be verified and approved by consensus among the community, [theoretically] making fraud more difficult and significantly lowering the costs of validation and authentication" (PMA)

Are there limitations?  Sure. 1) Blockchain is not a specific thing but a process, and requires integration into a a company's existing systems....not always easy to do. How does a company's own procedures mesh into the system.  2) Coding issues, whether there are input issues or deletions, may create confusion, delays, or refusals due to misinformation.. 3) The information collected is only as good as the data input into the system. 3) It does create visibility, so what impact does that have on confidentiality of a company's process and to what degree does a company want to keep their supply chain information away from others, including potential competitors?  For example, maybe I don't want my downstream customer seeing my upstream supplier with the thought that my customer may cut me out so that they can make the product themselves.

So this is a tool that improves visibility and transactions along the supply chain.  No doubt a time saver for the food professional who has to hunt down supplier information.  It will help validate suppliers and ensure sourcing information.  But A savior for food safety?  That may be a stretch. Certainly IBM would like you to believe it.  In the end it still comes down to the basics - the blocking and tackling of people ensuring food safety basics.

To what degree are consumers demanding transparency to know exactly where their food comes from?  There are probably some out there who really, really care, but for me, I'm good with knowing my pizza is from Gigiarelli's or Pizza Perfect, my beer is from Troegs (Nugget Nectar), and my sub is from Giovanni's using those Amoroso's buns.

Supply Chain Quarterly.com
http://www.supplychainquarterly.com/news/20171201-lets-rein-in-the-blockchain-exuberance/
Forward Thinking
Commentary: Let's rein in the blockchain exuberance
By Mark Solomon | December 1, 2017

Pew Releases Report on Making Meat and Poultry Safer

Pew Charitable Trusts, a non-profit organization dedicated to encourage responsive government and support scientific research on a wide range of issues including food safety, released a report on making meat and poultry safer.  A few of their recommendations:

• Government agencies should fund research into how to best manage herds or flocks to maintain animal health and keep harmful bacteria out, including the use of clean feed, vaccines, and prebiotics and probiotics.
• Regulatory agencies should provide incentives for the implementation of pre-harvest food safety interventions
• Industry should consider individual pre-harvest interventions within the larger context of managing the health of the herd or flock and implement adequate controls to protect animal health and keep pathogens out,
• All stakeholders should develop information technology infrastructure and capacity to encourage sharing of efficacy and safety data among industry, academia, governmental researchers, and regulatory agencies

Good for them.  Now just need some funding to make it more of this happen.

The full report can be found here.  Good reference information on pre-harvest interventions.

Pew Charitable Trusts - Press Release 

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/news-room/press-releases/2017/07/17/pew-safer-meat-requires-reducing-risks-where-food-animals-are-raised
Pew: Safer Meat Requires Reducing Risks Where Food Animals Are Raised
Report highlights effective measures to decrease contamination on farms and feedlots
July 17, 2017
Safe Food Project

FDA Phone Survey Finds that Food Safety Knowledge Among Consumers Still Lacks

 FDA conducted a phone survey of consumers to gain an understanding of food safety knowledge and attitudes.  Phone surveys can be sketchy, so it is always important to review results with some skepticism.  Here are a few of the results that are interesting:

1. While the majority people owned a thermometer, not many people actually used them, especially on products where thermometer use would be most helpful - when cooking hamburgers (only 10%) and cooking chicken (19%).
2. Not everyone washes their hands - 15% surveyed don't when handling raw meats and 25% don't wash their hands before preparing food.
3. But it is interesting that about half the people think that they are more likely to get foodborne illness when eating out rather than in the home. 

Food Safety Survey Shows Consumer Knowledge Up, Still Room to Grow

November 17, 2016

Question - Are Transportation Companies Preparing for Food Safety Requirement per FSMA

Are your transportation companies preparing for upcoming FSMA regulations?  The FSMA Rule on Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food was enacted to help maintain the safety of both human and animal food during transportation by establishing criteria, e.g., conditions and practices, training and record keeping, for the sanitary transportation of food.

According to the article in Bulk Transporter - probably not.  But they should begin.....getting an organization in the habit of executing food safety controls will take time.

A few highlights from the article:

• Carriers must develop and implement procedures that describe how they will comply with provisions for temperature control and how they will provide this information to shippers and receivers.
• Drivers will need to be trained on temperature management and reporting requirements, and temperature records for each shipment must be retained for one full year.
• Food shippers must specify in writing to carriers the sanitary requirements for transport vehicles and temperature control systems for all shipments of “Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food” (TCS food).
• Food receivers must carry out loading and unloading operations under conditions that will prevent TCS food from reaching unsafe temperatures.
• Condensation inside a refrigerated or tank trailer may get more attention.
• Carrier personnel must be trained.

So it would behoove you to ask the question of your logistical provider.

Bulk Transporter

http://bulktransporter.com/fleet-management/bulk-food-haulers-need-prepare-advance-fda-s-comprehensive-food-transport-requireme

Bulk food haulers need to prepare in advance for the FDA’s comprehensive food transport requirements

Oct 5, 2015 Charles Wilson | Bulk Transporter

 

NEW RULES covering food transportation and distribution will begin to take effect starting in June. However, there is growing concern that many food transporters still are not ready to deal with these new rules.

 

The lack of preparedness was a key point addressed during a panel discussion that took place during the 2015 Mid-America Trucking Show in Louisville, Kentucky.

Study - When cooking chicken, too many use risky practices

A study in Food Protection Trends found that people cooking chicken 1) did not wash their hands before serving or after handling raw chicken, 2) did not properly wash their hands with some not using soap, 3) washed their chicken even though that creates a cross contamination risk,  4) did not use a thermometer, and 5) when a thermometer was used, the still undercooked it.

Surprising....unfortunately not.

Food Protection Trends - Sept / Oct 2014Chicken Preparation in the Home: An Observational Study
  
By Christine M. Bruhn

Abstract

Poultry has been linked to foodborne illnesses caused by Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp.
This study reports on observed handling behavior when 120 volunteers prepared chicken and salad in
their homes. A food safety attitudes and knowledge questionnaire was administered to volunteers after meal preparation had been video recorded. In the questionnaire, consumers stated that they were knowledgeable about safe-food handling and had heard of people becoming ill from eating chicken. 

The video recording, however, revealed that personal hygiene was insufficient, with 65% of meal
preparers not washing their hands prior to meal preparation, 40% not washing their hands after
handling raw chicken, and 45% washing the chicken prior to preparation. Hand-washing duration was less than 20 seconds, and in one-third of the handwashing events, soap was not used. Most people
judged thoroughness of cooking by appearance.

When chicken temperature was taken, 60% of the cooked chickens registered 165°F or above.
However, 39% of households stopped cooking even though the internal temperature of the poultry
registered below 165°F. These results suggest that educational messages should focus on thorough
washing of hands with soap, not washing chicken, and using a calibrated thermometer to determine
doneness. To increase consumer protection, the poultry industry should adopt additional approaches to reduce pathogen levels.
 
 

Study - 1/4 of Used Kitchen Hand Towels Analyzed Contained E. coli

A study on cleanliness of used handtowels published in Food Protection Trends shows that about 1/4 of the used hand towels collected from over 80 kitchens and analyzed had E. coli present. This is one of the primary reasons why dishes should be air dried instead of wipe dried.  The kitchen hand towel gets used over and over throughout the day, and people often forget what they used the towel to wipe last (insert butt joke here).  It is not uncommon for towels to be used for a number of days.  This not only provides more opportunity for introduction of bacteria, but allows for the growth of bacteria.  Leaving them air dry does not get rid of the bacteria. It is important that people change out towels throughout the day as they go from task to task.  Then the used towels should be collected to prevent reentry into the kitchen without first going into the wash.  When washing, hot water, detergent and bleach.

 

From the report:

"E. coli numbers also were related to the frequency of washing, with numbers on towels being lower the more often they were washed. Age of the towel and days since last time washed did not influence the concentration of any of the bacteria in the towels. The results suggest that E. coli is particularly easily removed during washing or requires an unusually long time to colonize and grow in the towels. Coliforms, E. coli and Salmonella can survive the drying of kitchen cleaning cloths and regrow if the cloth becomes soiled again (3)."

 

 Of course, not all E. coli are pathogens, but they are indicators of insanitary conditions, that is, show a high correlation to fecal contamination, and may indicate the potential for other pathogens to be present.

 

 

Food Protection Trends  Sept - Oct, 2014

Bacterial Occurrence in Kitchen Hand Towels

    

By Charles P. Gerba, Akrum H. Tamimi, Sherri Maxwell, Laura Y. Sifuentes, Douglas R. Hoffman and David W. Koenig

 

 Abstract

The common occurrence of enteric bacteria in kitchen sponges and dishcloths suggests that they can play a role in the cross-contamination of foods, fomites and hands by foodborne pathogens. This study investigated the occurrence of bacteria in kitchen towels often used to dry dishes, hands and other surfaces in the domestic kitchen. A total of 82 kitchen hand towels were collected from households in five major cities in the United States and Canada and the numbers of heterotrophic bacteria, coliform bacteria, and Escherichia coli in each towel were determined. In addition, identification of the enteric bacteria was performed on selected towels. Coliform bacteria were detected in 89.0% and E. coli in 25.6% of towels. The presence of E. coli was related to the frequency of washing.

Poll - Americans think more oversight will lessen their fears of unsafe food

Results from The Harris Poll indicate that people are concerned about the safety of their food and that food recalls are an issue.  In light of this, many feel that more government is needed.

It would be interesting to ask people some different questions:
Have actually become sick from food, provided they really know the symptoms of foodborne illness?  In our informal polling, we find that very few have had foodborne illness in their lives, never mind in the last few years.
Do you actually worry about the food currently in your house?  Again, most we talk with say no.

In this report, it is interesting that people rarely blame their own actions, but rather look to the few cases of foodborne illness that arise (mostly because of the amount of press that accompanies it), where it was indeed some big companies fault.

They also look at local food as inherently more safe...which as we know, is not necessarily the case.

Each day, 300 million people eat 2 to 3 meals a day (hopefully),  and yet we focus on that on those few cases that occurred somewhere in the nation within the past month.

This is not to say we can't do better.  Certainly each link along the food chain has to their part to ensure safety and quality of the food, including the consumer.

In the end, will the cost of additional oversight actually reduce the real risk of unsafe foods, or even the perceived risk?

(I hate news reports on polling people….it almost adds credence to what people already think even if it is wrong…for example a poll finds that out of 2000 people, most think that sasquatches exist…hell, that many people can’t be wrong, maybe they do exist ).

PR Newswire
Nearly Three-Quarters of Americans Looking to Government for More Food Safety Oversight
Vast majority at least somewhat concerned about food health and/or safety recallshttp://www.einpresswire.com/article/188993634/nearly-three-quarters-of-americans-looking-to-government-for-more-food-safety-oversight
PR Newswire
NEW YORK, Feb. 5, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Food recall announcements have become something of a news cycle staple in the past few years. From spinach and peanut butter to chicken and pet foods, there seems to be little left in the U.S. food supply that should not be viewed with at least a modicum of suspicion. As such, it's likely not surprising that strong majorities of U.S. adults say food recalls have them at least somewhat concerned (86%, with 58% somewhat concerned and 28% seriously concerned) and believe there should be more government oversight in regards to food safety (73%). 

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll® of 2,236 adults surveyed online between January 15 and 20, 2014. (Full results, including data tables, available can be found here)

Food recall concerns – and calls for increased government oversight where the food supply is concerned – are stronger among some subsets of Americans than others:
Women are more likely than men to indicate being both seriously (31% women, 25% men) and somewhat (61% and 55%, respectively) concerned; they are also more likely than their male counterparts to believe there should be more government oversight in regards to food safety (77% and 69%, respectively).
Americans in low income households – specifically households with an annual income under $35,000 – are more likely than those in higher earning households to describe food recalls as a serious concern (36% in households earning <$35k, 21% in households earning $35k-$49,999, 26% in $50k+ households).
Turning to political leanings, Democrats (32%) are more likely than Republicans (25%) to characterize food recalls as a serious concern. The call for more government oversight rings most loudly from the Democrats' camp (86%) and least so from Republicans (60%), with Independents in the middle (70%).

Warehouse supevisor faces 5 yrs in prison for falsifying food safety records

A warehouse supervisor may face up to 5 years in prison and a 250,000 fine for falsifying temperature records on an exported frozen chicken. That is a huge price to pay for a guy who probably did not benefit greatly from pushing the shipment before it was ready…..probably too much in a hurry or just didn’t care. Was it the lack of training, or did his managers put expectation in the wrong place – speed instead of safety? Clearly a lack of understanding on the impact of food safety deviations and the severity of punishment on falsifying documentation as related to international agreements.

Can you imagine having to tell your kids you won’t be coming home for 5 years because you will be spending time in the big house with a cell mate named Butch….all for failing to do the job correctly.



Man admits conspiracy in poultry exports to Russia from PascagoulaPublished: May 22, 2013
http://www.sunherald.com/2013/05/22/4683370/man-admits-conspiracy-in-poultry.html
2 other Jackson County men face trial

By ROBIN FITZGERALD — rfitzgerald@sunherald.com

GULFPORT -- An Ocean Springs man has admitted conspiring to violate a trade agreement with Russia by authorizing the export of poultry at higher temperatures than required.

Terry White, 38, was a warehouse supervisor for Gulf Coast Cold Storage in 2009 when he directed others to falsify blast-freezer records and restack loads of poultry to disguise portions considered too "hot" to load onto ships.

The business is a tenant at the Port of Pascagoula.

White accepted a plea agreement Tuesday to conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States. The maximum penalty is five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

He avoided trial on four other charges with additional penalties of up to 18 years in prison and fines of $760,000.

CDC Releases Report on Commodities Responsible for Foodborne Illness

The CDC released a study that attributes foodborne illness to food commodities. "CDC developed a comprehensive set of estimates using data from more than a decade of foodborne disease outbreaks and previously published estimates on how many illnesses can be attributed to each food category." Of course, every news outlet has issued a relase listing a highlight or two from this CDC report.
With any report of this nature, there is a lot of extrapolation. One of the biggest is the fact that many foods involved in outbreaks were classified as complex foods - foods with more than one commodity involved. And the number of reported illnesses is small considering it is over a ten year period (270,000 illnesses compared to an estimated 460,000,000 cases that would have estimated to occur 46 million X 10 years OR less than 1%).
And it cannot be overlooked that the data is now 5 years old.
There is some information we can glean from the report. Produce and meat/poultry are important commodities when it comes to foodborne illness. Norovirus is the leading cause of illness, Some excerpts are listed below. Beyond that, it makes for press releases keeping food safety in the news.

For full report: http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/19/3/11-1866_article.htm

 

Attribution of Foodborne Illnesses, Hospitalizations, and Deaths to Food Commodities by using Outbreak Data, United States, 1998–2008

Painter JA, Hoekstra RM, Ayers T, Tauxe RV, Braden CR, Angulo FJ, et al. Attribution of foodborne illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths to food commodities by using outbreak data, United States, 1998–2008. Emerg Infect Dis [Internet]. 2013 Mar [date cited]. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1903.111866

• During 1998–2008, a total of 13,352 foodborne disease outbreaks, causing 271,974 illnesses, were reported in the United States (Technical Appendix 1 Table 1 [PDF - 723 KB - 8 pages]). Of those outbreaks, 4,887 (37%), causing 128,269 (47%) illnesses, had an implicated food vehicle and a single etiology; 300 of those outbreaks were excluded because information about the vehicle was insufficient to categorize the ingredients. We also did not include the 3% of outbreaks that had multiple etiologies reported.
• Norovirus caused the most outbreaks (1,419) and outbreak-associated illnesses (41,257), far above the median for all agents (29 outbreaks, 1,208 illnesses).
• Produce commodities (fruits-nuts and the 5 vegetable commodities) accounted for 46% of illnesses; meat-poultry commodities (beef, game, pork, and poultry) accounted for 22%. Among the 17 commodities, more illnesses were associated with leafy vegetables (2.1 million [23%]) than any other commodity. The high estimate for illnesses attributable to leafy vegetables was many times higher than the low estimate (Figure 2, panel A), which indicates that leafy vegetables were frequently found in complex foods. After leafy vegetables, the commodities linked to the most illnesses were dairy (1.3 million [14%]), fruits-nuts (1.2 million [12%]), and poultry (900,000 [10%]). Norovirus comprised 57% of all illnesses.
• Most bacterial illnesses were attributed to dairy (18%), poultry (18%), and beef (13%) commodities (Table 1). Most chemical illnesses were attributed to fish (60%, most caused by the marine biotoxin ciguatoxin).
• Most viral illnesses were attributed to leafy vegetables (35%), fruits-nuts (15%), and dairy (12%). Of the 20 outbreaks associated with simple foods and caused by norovirus transmitted by dairy, 14 (70%) were transmitted by cheese products.

FSMA Preventive Control Proposed Rule – Key Points for Food Processors

Official Title - Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/ucm334115.htm

 There has been a lot of press regarding the FDA’s proposed rule on preventive controls. It has been hailed by many as a needed step for a safer food supply. If anything, it certainly helps to bring most every processor up to the same level in terms of HACCP based preventive measures.

The rule requires that FDA registered firms have a written food safety plan which is based upon HACCP principles.

For the food processor who has a HACCP plan in place and has undergone third party audits, there is nothing overwhelming within this rule. The challenge will be for those companies that do not have a HACCP system in place yet, (or a good plan in place). All companies who have registered their facility with the FDA, including those that do not ship out of state, may be subject to the FSMA preventive control rule. However, there are exemptions from the requirements for a Food Safety Plan for firms based upon size and whether they can be considered ‘on-farm’.

For firms with an active, functioning HACCP plan, the biggest thing to revise will be in the hazard analysis and the need to identify preventive controls. Preventive controls, as defined, can be CCPs or certain prerequisite programs that are needed to control potential hazards. Also, in addition to biological, chemical and physical hazards, we now include radiological hazards.

In current HACCP, the focus is on hazards controlled within the process by CCPs. In this, we acknowledge that prerequisite programs as making certain ‘hazards not likely to occur’. In the FSMA rule, all potential hazards must be addressed, and then for any considered reasonably likely to occur, the preventive control must be identified that renders the product safe (non-adulterated), whether that be a CCP or other program. In doing the hazard analysis, it will be important to include an assessment the severity of the illness or injury associated with the hazards.

Similar to what is done with CCPs, all preventive controls must have documented procedures. There must be monitoring, verification, and record keeping. However, unlike a CCP, there may not be a measurable parameter (critical limit). Validation for the preventive controls may not be needed (for sanitation and allergen control).

For example, one would need to identify sanitation as a preventive control for Listeria with a RTE food item when there is exposure of that product to the environment before packaging. They would need procedures for cleaning, verification that cleaning was done, and documentation to show this.

Facilities are required to have a written Recall Plan. At this time, there are no requirements for an environmental monitoring program, finished product testing, or supplier verification, although there is this with regard to process control (Proposed § 117.80(a)(5) would require that chemical, microbial, or extraneous-material testing procedures be used where necessary to identify sanitation failures or possible cross-contact and food contamination). FDA does ask for comments regarding the need of these being addressed. 

Food defense / intentional contamination will not be addressed in this rule.

Overall, FDA takes a less prescriptive approach with regard to the preventive control rule. While this gives processors opportunity to use a number of different methods to meet standard, it can be an issue when being inspected when that inspector doesn’t agree with that method. (We see that now with USDA inspectors with regard to validation…..’how do you know that process works’).

It is important to remember that this is just the proposed rule. This is the comment period and this closes on May 16th. At that time FDA will review and then reissue the rule, which then becomes implemented 60 days after being issued. Large firms will have one year to implement, small firms will have 2 years, and very small firms will have 3 years.

For more detailed summaries (prepared by lawyers) see http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/ucm334115.htm or http://leavittpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Proposed-Rule-On-Preventive-Controls-Key-Provisions.pdf

Other points to note – (Items I found interesting):

FDA Proposed Rules for Food Safety Plans and Produce Food Safety

On Friday, Januray 4, 2013, the FDA rolled out two proposed rules.

 

1) Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food 

• Preventive Controls – applies to facility that manufacture, process, pack or hold food that fall under FDA jurisdiction. This rule requires that facilities have food safety plans in place for the preventive control of potential hazards, both within the process (HACCP) and those associated with the prerequisite programs. The document is 680 pages.
• http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2013-00125_PI.pdf

 

2) Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption

• Proposed Standards for Produce Safety – covers those fruits and vegetables that are likely to be consumed raw (spinach not potatoes). This document is 547 pages.
• http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2013-00123_PI.pdf

 

Being proposed rules, there is a comment period before a final rule is issued. Then there will be a period of time from when the final rule is published until it is enacted

Fear the Grocery Carts?

Here is a study just released in Food Protection Trends. The study shows that grocery carts are a bit unsanitary as indicated by the presence of bacterial indicators (APC, coliforms, generic E. coli). While the study is a bit soft in the methodology (should have actually checked for pathogens, should have used better methods for testing), it does show that shopping carts are not the cleanest things in the world, and there is the possibility that carts can be a source of contamination, primarily children riding in those carts (putting their fingers on the cart seat and then sticking those same fingers in their mouth).  

But before we all go crazy worrying about grocery carts, it is important to point out this is just one of many risks that we all face each day. How about that grass where the kid is crawling….might that be a place where birds, dogs, or cats may have pooped? The refrigerator where juices from raw meats may have dripped…did it get on the apples?. That grocery store conveyor, where the packs of raw meat may have dripped…could those drops contaminated your other food packages?. How about those reusable grocery bags that never get washed after being used to carry raw meat? Where did you put your hands while eating lunch on a park bench where earlier, a group of the pigeons deposited their load as they flew by? Certainly it is important that we take precautionary measures such as washing our hands, cooking our food, and washing our grocery bags, but for each study that comes out that demonstrating the somewhat obvious, we cannot let the potential of contacting a contaminated surface become the bane of our lives. As they say, the key to a healthy immune system is a constant challenge.


Bacterial Contamination of Shopping Carts and Approaches to Control

Charles P. Gerba* and Sheri Maxwell
Dept. of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA
Food Protection Trends, Vol. 32, No. 12, Pages 747–749

Summary

Placing children in grocery shopping carts has been implicated recently as a source of infection with Salmonella and Campylobacter in young children. This study was conducted to assess the occurrence total bacteria, coliform bacteria and Escherichia coli on grocery shopping cart handles and seats. A total of 85 shopping carts in parking lots of grocery stores were tested in five major metropolitan areas across the United States. The total numbers of heterotrophic bacteria were as great as 1.1 × 107 on the handle and seat. Coliforms were detected on 72% (62) of the carts. E. coli was identified on 18 of 35 carts (51%) on which coliform identifi­cation was conducted. The results of this study suggest the need for improved sanitation of shopping cards/baskets to reduce exposure to pathogens and potential transmission of microbial infections among shoppers.

Dumb Ways to Die - Eating Poisonous Mushrooms

3 people died from eating wild mushrooms.  As you read the story below, please click on youtube link below for a little ditty that provides a nice accompaniment to the story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJNR2EpS0jw&sns=em

Nov 21, 7:30 PM EST

3rd person dies in Calif. from mushroom poisoning

By TRACIE CONE
Associated Press

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MUSHROOM_DEATHS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-11-21-19-21-28

FRESNO, Calif. (AP) -- A third person has died from eating poisonous mushrooms at a California senior care facility where a caretaker found the fungus in the backyard and used it to make soup, authorities said Wednesday.

The 90-year-old man died on Saturday, state Department of Social Services spokesman Oscar Ramirez told The Associated Press. The Placer County Sheriff's Office identified him as Frank Warren Blodgett.

Ramirez said an official with Gold Age Villa in Loomis called Monday to report the third death. State officials are continuing to investigate the incident that sheriff's investigators have described as a terrible accident.

Three other people were sickened when they ate the soup made from the poisonous mushrooms on Nov. 8, including the caretaker who made it. Their conditions have not been made public.

Rachael Ray, the Scourge of Food Safety

If you care about the safety of food in any way, you must agree that Rachael Ray is one of the most dangerous of the food show personalities. In the event you don’t watch The View, (and I don’t, but saw this story on the Meatingplace blog http://www.meatingplace.com/Industry/Blogs/Details/33748?allowguest=true), Ms. Ray claims that pink ground meat is safe as long as it is local/organic….that you know the source of your meat. However, research has shown that organic or local foods are not inherently safer than conventional products. That is, they can and will contain the pathogens…if not more. So where does she get her misguided information? And how can ABC televise this?

Maybe it is time for a lawyer guy like Bill Marler to put a little courtroom smack-down on ABC and Rachael Ray. Not likely to happen. But it is certainly criminal that a show can espouse such dangerous, misguided practices to the public. Shame on her for pretending to know something about food and ABC for broadcasting it.

Undercooking beef, pork, or chicken, regardless of the source, poses a risk. If you want your burger pink inside, either understand and accept the risk of foodborne illness or buy irradiated ground beef. Otherwise, use a thermometer to ensure that the center point reaches 160ºF for beef.
So if you must,
http://abc.go.com/watch/clip/the-view/SH002253950000/PL5554876/VD55208821/rachael-ray-on-the-view/moments

USDA Program Report indicates that pesticides on food are not a risk in US Food Supply

In a report on USDA’s monitoring program for pesticide residues in food, USDA states that pesticides do not pose a safety concern in foods. Pesticide usage is actively controlled by EPA, FDA and USDA. 

USDA Releases 2010 Annual Summary for Pesticide Data ProgramReport confirms that U.S. food does not pose a safety concern based upon pesticide residues.
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5049944

WASHINGTON, May 25, 2012 -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has posted data from the 2010 Pesticide Data Program (PDP) Annual Summary. This information, along with an explanatory guide for consumers, can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/pdp. The 2010 PDP report confirms that food does not pose a safety concern based upon pesticide residues.

In May of 1991, USDA initiated the PDP to test commodities in the U.S. food supply for pesticide residues. Since passage of the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), one of PDP’s focuses has been on testing foods that are most likely consumed by infants and children. AMS partners with cooperating state agencies to collect and analyze pesticide residue levels on selected foods. In implementing the FQPA, the EPA uses data from the PDP to enhance its programs for food safety and help evaluate dietary exposure to pesticides.

Each year, USDA and EPA work together to identify foods to be tested on a rotating basis. In 2010, surveys were conducted on a variety of foods including fresh and processed fruit and vegetables, oats, eggs, catfish, baby food, groundwater, and treated and untreated drinking water. Similar to previous years, the 2010 report shows that overall pesticide residues found on foods tested are at levels well below the tolerances set by the EPA. The report does show that residues exceeding the tolerance were detected in 0.25 percent of the samples tested. For baby food – included for the first time in this report – the data showed that no residues were found that exceeded the tolerance levels. Some residues were found with no established tolerance levels but the extremely low levels of those residues are not a food safety risk, and the presence of such residues does not pose a safety concern.

Statement from EPA:
“The data confirms EPA’s success in phasing- out pesticides used in children’s food for safer pesticides and pest control techniques. The very small amounts of pesticide residues found in the baby food samples were well below levels that are harmful to children.”

Statement from FDA:
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration assesses whether pesticide chemical residues found on food may be unlawful under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and determines if followup is necessary under its own regulatory pesticide program. FDA is able to conduct its own tests, interpret the reported violations, and determine if additional testing is needed in order to take enforcement action, as appropriate. Based on the PDP data from this report, parents and caregivers can continue to feed infants their regular baby foods without being concerned about the possible presence of unlawful pesticide chemical residues.”

Statement from USDA:
“Age-old advice remains the same: eat more fruits and vegetables and wash them before you do so. Health and nutrition experts encourage the consumption of fruits and vegetables in every meal as part of a healthy diet. This message is affirmed in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans released last year, in USDA’s My Plate, as well as federal nutrition guidance that urges people to make half their plate fruits and vegetables.”

Since its inception, the program has tested 105 commodities including fresh and processed fruit and vegetables, meat and poultry, grains, catfish, rice, specialty products, and water. The data is a valuable tool for consumers, food producers and processors, chemical manufacturers, environmental interest groups, and food safety organizations. 

The findings of the Pesticide Data Program Annual Summary, Calendar Year 2010 can be downloaded at www.ams.usda.gov/pdp. Printed copies of it will be available later this year and can be obtained by writing to the Monitoring Programs Division, Science and Technology, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA, 8609 Sudley Rd., Suite 206, Manassas, VA 20110; by faxing (703) 369-0678; by calling (703) 330-2300, Ext. 110; or by submitting an e-mail request to amsmpo.data@ams.usda.gov.

Pet treats linked to illness in dogs?

In an MSNBC report, 1,000 dogs have become sickened by jerky pet treats made in China. Numerous other news outlets have written reports based upon the MSNBC report (USA Today news release below). At this point there are no associated recalls.

Of course, it is best to go to the original source, which is the FDA report. FDA indicates that extensive testing was done on these treats, but they have not found anything associated with these products that could cause illness to this point. Upon further reading of the FDA news release, one may get the sense that an issue may be related to overfeeding a protein dense product such as jerky. Think about it, if you ate enough jerky to constitute a high proportion of your daily food intake, your kidneys and liver would be getting a serious workout, and after a few days, you would be in a serious world of hurt. And like many dog owners, including myself, we have a tendency (or need) to give our dogs that extra treat, or two, or three…….

While FDA continues to analyze products (and perhaps something will show up), it is important to follow the FDA recommendations (below).

FDA RELEASE
http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm295445.htm

Questions and Answers Regarding Chicken Jerky Treats from China
 Why did FDA issue a cautionary update in November 2011?In 2011, FDA saw an increase in the number of complaints it received of dog illnesses associated with consumption of chicken jerky products imported from China.
FDA previously issued a cautionary warning regarding chicken jerky products to consumers in September 2007 and a Preliminary Animal Health Notification in December of 2008. The number of complaints being received dropped off during the latter part of 2009 and most of 2010. However in 2011, FDA once again started seeing the number of complaints rise to the levels of concern that prompted release of our earlier warnings.
Since the issuance of the CVM Update on November 18, 2011, the agency has received numerous additional complaints regarding chicken jerky products.
What are the products involved?The cautionary update specifically refers to chicken jerky products that are imported from China. These dried chicken jerky products, intended for dogs, may also be sold as tenders, strips or treats.
What are the signs of illness that are being reported?The signs that may be associated with chicken jerky products include decreased appetite; decreased activity; vomiting; diarrhea, sometimes with blood; increased water consumption and/or increased urination. These signs may occur within hours to days of feeding the products.
Laboratory tests may indicate kidney problems, including Fanconi-like syndrome. Although many dogs appear to recover, some reports to the FDA have involved dogs that have died.

FDA continues to investigate the problem and its origin. Some of the illnesses reported may be the result of causes other than eating chicken jerky.
What is FDA testing for?Since 2007, FDA has been actively investigating the cause of illness in pets reported in association with the consumption of chicken jerky products. Samples have been tested by FDA laboratories, by the Veterinary Laboratory Response Network (Vet-LRN), and by other animal health diagnostic laboratories in the U.S for multiple chemical and microbiological contaminants.

Product samples were tested for Salmonella, metals, furans, pesticides, antibiotics, mycotoxins, rodenticides, nephrotoxins (such as aristolochic acid, maleic acid, paraquat, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, toxic hydrocarbons, melamine and related triazines) and were screened for other chemicals and poisonous compounds. DNA verification was conducted on these samples to confirm the presence of poultry in the treats. Samples have also been submitted for nutritional composition (which includes glycerol concentrations), vitamin D excess and enterotoxin analysis. Some samples from recent cases (2011-2012) have been submitted for multiple tests and we are awaiting results. More samples are in the process of being collected for testing.
What are the results of testing?Samples collected from all over the United States have been tested for a wide variety of substances and to date, scientists have not been able to determine a definitive cause for the reported illnesses.
Has there been any indication that metal contamination in chicken jerky products may be the cause of illness in dogs?FDA’s previous testing of chicken jerky product samples did not show toxic levels of metals. In addition, results from March 2012 toxic metal analyses, which included tests for heavy metals, have again shown samples of chicken jerky products to be negative for toxic metals.
 

A metal bristle from a grill brush, an example of a metal hazard

As reported by CBS News New York, a man swallowed a metal bristle and caused a severe laceration of his intestine. The bristle, off the grill cleaning brush, had become embedded in the steak and was unknowingly swallowed as the man ate his steak. As it moved through the intestine, it pierced the intestine, leading to a life threatening infection.

When evaluating hazards in food, there is a tendency to minimize the seriousness of metal hazards. This is a great example of how a piece of metal can be missed during chewing as well the type of damage it can cause.

New Jersey Man Recovering After Eating Metallic Bristle From Grill Brushhttp://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/05/21/new-jersey-man-recovering-after-eating-metallic-bristle-from-grill-brush/#.T7qpLEQFU1c.mailto

RIVER EDGE, N.J. (CBSNewYork) – Think twice before you put the metal to the barbeque this grilling season.

A New Jersey man’s brush with death last week was apparently due to a grilling tool.

Michael DeStafan went to Hackensack University Medical Center thinking he had appendicitis after experiencing excruciating pain in his stomach.

Doctors conducted tests and found a 1 ½-inch-long metallic object had pierced the 54-year-old’s large intestine.  Doctors thought he had swallowed a nail, fish hook or paper.

DeStafan’s wife figured out one of the metal bristles on his grill brush broke off, got stuck to the grill grate and embedded itself in the shell steak her husband had cooked and eaten days before visiting the hospital.
Doctors performed emergency surgery to remove the wire and repair the hole that it made in DeStefan’s large intestine.

“”There was an infection, they just didn’t know how big the infection was, or how much of a hole it had torn inside my intestines, and they didn’t know that until they went in,” DeStafan said. “When I went under he told me I have to do this immediately, because we don’t know what we’re going to find, and there’s a chance that you might not make it.”

DeStafan is hoping his brush with death serves as a warning to others.

“I hope no one will have to go through that,” DeStafan said. “I want people to be aware of the fact that something as simple and innocent as going outside and grilling steaks and hamburgers for your family and friends could potentially be life-threatening.”

The Record reports half a dozen similar cases have been documented in Rhode Island.

DeStafan has since ditched the brush and instead uses a stone to clean the grill.

CDC research shows outbreaks linked to imported foods increasing

The US currently imports about 16% of food consumed. For seafood, that figure is about 85%. Currently about 1% of imported food is checked by the FDA at the port of entry. Over a 5 year period (2005 to 2010), there have been 39 outbreaks and close to 2400 illnesses linked to imported foods.

While we get a glimpse of the risk associated with imported foods through outbreak reports, it is hard to really know the true extent. FDA has limited capabilities, especially with import analysis, although the Food Safety Modernization Act includes measures which will help support FDA.

Much of it comes down to making sure those who import those food products. Are they doing what they need to do to ensure their foreign suppliers have capable food safety systems in place? Are they conducting verification testing?

As consumers, we try to by local where we can, but there is still demand to have an assortment of fruits, vegetables and seafood year round. And do we do ourselves a disservice by forgoing these items just because it is from another county in that we are giving up important components of a healthy diet?

CDC research shows outbreaks linked to imported foods increasing
Fish and spices the most common sources
March 14, 2012

 http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/p0314_foodborne.html

 Foodborne disease outbreaks caused by imported food appeared to rise in 2009 and 2010, and nearly half of the outbreaks implicated foods imported from areas which previously had not been associated with outbreaks, according to research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, presented today at the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases in Atlanta.

Lean Finely Textured Beef ( AKA Pink Slime) is safe

It is hard to miss the hysteria around so called ‘pink slime’, or to be technically correct , lean finely texturized beef, or LFTB. LFTB is basically meat protein that is recovered from fat trimmings that would have otherwise been lost. In the process of butchering a cow, fat is trimmed away. In trimming, it is hard to get only fat with no meat protein attached. The LFTB process was developed to separate that meat protein from the fat. Ammonium hydroxide is used as a processing aid to keep microbial levels in control.

The meat protein that is generated is finely ground, so it appears more as a paste than what we would call meat. Is it safe? Like any meat product, as long as it is cooked correctly, it is safe. The ammonium hydroxide is a GRAS (generally recognized as safe) chemical and when used at these very low levels, poses no health risk.

The issue is primarily related to the appearance, and once it was dubbed pink slime, it became difficult for consumers to accept. Because of this, many fast food chains discontinued its use (it was added in a small percentage to give more burger for the dollar.) Meat provided for school systems also buy beef with LFTB as a way to keep the cost of food down. Granted, it is not very appealing to look at. But neither are many other food ingredients when seen being used in food production. And, it is a process that recovers value from the byproducts, instead of wasting it.

Dr. Mills of Penn State Animal Science provides some nice comments regarding LFTB.

http://live.psu.edu/story/58528

Here is a link that reviews the safety of ammonium hydroxide.

http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=Questions_and_Answers_about_Ammonium_Hydroxide_Use_in_Food_Production