MA Establishment Recalls Shaved Beef for Plastic Foreign Material

A Massachusetts establishment is recalling shaved beef after a retail outlet notified the firm that the product had "readily visible, long, thin strands of clear soft plastic from packaging material".  They further stated that because "the plastic is readily visible and identifiable, it is highly unlikely that it would be consumed and, therefore, the health risk is extremely low."

USDA FSIS Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/FSIS-Content/internet/main/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/rnr-021-2017
F.B. Packing Co., Inc. Recalls Beef Products Due To Possible Foreign Matter Contamination
Class III Recall 021-2017
Mar 6, 2017
Congressional and Public Affairs Benjamin A. Bell (202) 720-9113 Press@fsis.usda.gov

SoyNut Butter Recalled after Being Linked to E. coli O157:H7 Infections

 The SoyNut Butter Co is recalling 15 oz jars, individual serving cups, and tubs of its nut butter product after that product was linked to 12 cases of E. coli O157:H7 infection.  To date, 12 people have become ill.  Of the 9 people contacted, 9 had exposure to this product.


FDA Recall Notice
https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm544976.htm
The Soynut Butter Co Recalls I.M. Healthy Original Creamy Soynut Butter Because Of Possible Health Risk
For Immediate Release
March 4, 2017

SoyNut Butter Being Linked to E.coli Outbreak

CDC is linking 12 cases of E. coli O157:H7 to a SoyNut Butter product by I. M. Healthy, an Illinois.  The cases have occurred in several states.  11 of the 12 are younger than 18.  Six people have been hospitalized and 4 have developed HUS, or hemolytic uremic syndrome.  If consumers have this brand of soynut butter, they are asked to not to consume it.

SoyNut butter starts with soy beans.  The beans are soaked and then roasted (baked or roasted in oil) The roasted soynuts are ground, blended with oil, and then put in jars.  The presence of E. coli in the product would indicate either an insufficient roasting process or post-process contamination.

CDC Outbreak Investigation
https://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/2017/o157h7-03-17/index.html
Multistate Outbreak of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157:H7 Infections Linked to I.M. Healthy Brand SoyNut Butter
Posted March 3, 2017 12:45PM EST

Veal Products Recalled Due to E. coli (STEC O103)

An Ohio establishment is recalling 40,680 lbs of boneless veal products after the Illinois State Department of Agriculture tested and found a positive non-0157 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (E. coli O103) in a sample of product.  This volume is about 2 months of production.

USDA / FSIS Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-020-2017-release
Ohio Farms Packing Co. Ltd. Recalls Veal Products Due To Possible E. Coli O103 Contamination

RTE Chicken Product Recalled After Complaint of Undercooked Appearance

An Alabama company is recalling cooked RTE chicken products after a customer complaint was made that the product looked undercooked.  There have been no reported illnesses.

Was the product undercooked......hard to say.  Good process control to achieve proper lethality for all product along with verification and record keeping systems demonstrating proper cook would help prevent the need to recall product.

USDA News Release
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/FSIS-Content/internet/main/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-017-2017-release
Wayne Farms, LLC Recalls Ready-To-Eat Chicken Products Due To Potential Processing Deviation
Class I Recall 017-2017
Health Risk: High Feb 28, 2017
Congressional and Public Affairs Allie Ryan (202) 720-9113 Press@fsis.usda.gov

Trader Joe's Unsweetened Apple Sauce Recalled After Complaints for Glass

A California company is recalling three types of Trader Joe's Unsweetened Apple Sauce after the company received three complaints for glass.

The problem with packing in glass is the potential for breakage.  Manufacturing companies go to great lengths to prevent the risk of broken glass in the jars.  The biggest risk comes when jars break in the manufacturing process.  Commonly, jars within an potentially affected radius are removed from the manufacturing line when breakage occurs, and the whole area is cleaned and inspected.

Many manufacturers have moved away from glass to plastic.  Although glass is generally considered superior to plastic in terms of preserving flavor (cooling is faster, no oxygen transmission, etc), plastic does remove the broken glass risk.

FDA Recall Notice

https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm543337.htm

Manzana Products Co., Inc. Issues Voluntary Recall of Apple Sauces Due to Potential Presence of Foreign Material
For Immediate Release
February 25, 2017

Ready-made Salads Recalled Due to Potential Listeria Contamination of Cheese Ingredient

Ready Pac's three production facilities (CA, GA, NJ) are recalling one type of salad due to the potential for Listeria in the Pepper Jack Cheese Ingredient that was used in the salad.  The company stated the recall was conducted after they were notified by their cheese supplier of the issue.  The name of the cheese company was not made available in the release.


USDA News Release
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-015-2017-release
Ready Pac Foods Inc. Recalls Chicken Salad Products Due to Possible Listeria Contamination
Class I Recall 015-2017
Health Risk: High Feb 22, 2017

Congressional and Public Affairs Kristen Booze (202) 720-9113 Press@fsis.usda.gov

WASHINGTON, Feb. 22, 2017 – Three Ready Pac Foods Inc. establishments, located in Swedesboro, N.J., in Jackson, Ga., and the headquarters establishment in Irwindale, Calif., are recalling approximately 59,225 pounds of one variety of chicken salad product that may be adulterated withListeria monocytogenes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

PA Cheese Company Receives FDA Warning Letter - More Listeria Control Improvement Needed

In September '16, a Pennsylvania cheese company issued a recall after product was found to contain Listeria.  In December, after FDA audited the firm, FDA issued a  consumer warning against consuming product from this company.   This week, FDA issued a Warning Letter to the company in response to how the company fixed (?) the issues.

From the company responses as written in this Warning Letter, the company does not understand the fundamentals of Listeria control.  As we have seen in so many cheese-related Listeria outbreaks, the lack of control can lead to serious consequences.  Hopefully, this company is not back into production.  These owners need to get some real education on Listeria control.

FDA findings, Company Response, FDA Response, Notes

Environmental swabs 18 of 50 positive for LM

3 of those positive samples were from food contact surfaces
 - The top of the cheese slicer
 - The cheese slicer string
 - The inside of a plastic crate used to store finished cheese before packaging
One positive product sample  - RTE feta cheese (FDA sample 969273).

1. There were a number of GMP violations found in the audit and addressed within the response.

, - the lift arm and bowl support brackets of the (b)(4) mixer contained areas which appeared to be rusted and contained rough surfaces. 

 - the beater shaft housing area of the (b)(4) mixer, directly above the bowl support brackets, was observed to contain areas which appeared to be rusted and contain food particulates and/or foreign matter. These areas are in close proximity and/or directly adjacent to food contact surfaces
 - The floors in the processing room and walk-in cooler were observed to be in disrepair, containing areas where the concrete is cracked, rough, and peeling [see 21 CFR 110.20(b)(4)]. 

The company responded that they were doing the following.

a) A floor mop is now being used to clean the production floor.
b) (b)(4) is used to clean and sanitize the cheese cloths.
c) An apparatus has been purchased for storage of production equipment.
d) The production area hose is hung up and off the floor.
e) The office area has been cleaned.
f) The (b)(4) mixer has been cleaned, and the rusted surfaces have been repaired.
g) The floors of the processing room and walk-in cooler have been repaired.

FDA indicated that they will review these changes upon re-inspection, 

Note - FDA did not ask the company for verification support to show that these changes had any impact on the Listeria contamination in the facility  I see some issues here in the company responses 1) a floor mop to clean the production floor - really?  That is more likely to spread Listeria - basically a contaminated swab...a very large swab.  2) How were the floors repaired? 3) How did they change their cleaning procedures - both daily for equipment and procedures for the facility?

2. Another area for concern was pest control.  FDA listed these issues.

a) Greater than twenty flies landing on the floor, food processing equipment, food processing utensils, and other food contact surfaces and non-food contact surfaces.
b) Three fly catcher tapes containing multiple flies hanging in different areas of the processing room.
c) Dead flies on the window sills near the batch pasteurizer and three bay sink areas.

The company responded that the company 'installed “new fly catcher tapes . . . and will purchase a fly zapper.”   FDA rightly noted that this corrective action is "inadequate because it does not prevent insects and/or other pests from entering the facility and does not address why the insects have entered your facility. The regulation at issue requires that pests be prevented from entering any area of a food plant and does not permit that pests be killed in close proximity of food production areas."

Note - Fly tape as a corrective action?  Seriously? Who uses fly tape in a food production facility?

In the third item, FDA noted in their inspection that the grounds in which the facility was located had some major issues.

a) Live chickens and pigs coming within approximately one foot of the main door to the production facility and what appeared to be remnants of dead chickens and goats in close proximity to the production facility.
b) Multiple items within approximately twenty feet of the outside perimeter to your production facility which may constitute an attractant, breeding place, and harborage areas for pests, including, but not limited to, a chicken coop, an abandoned truck, a small four-wheeled loader, wood paneling, vegetation over six feet tall, and other small items which appear to be refuse.

The company's response stated that that they cleaned the area and added stone along the drive. However, they did not address the livestock and other animals in proximity to the production area and how those animals would be maintained. The company did not confirm that each item observed around the perimeter of your facility was addressed and corrected for FDA review.

Note - The company does not seem to understand the impact of contamination control from the grounds and the animals on those grounds.  This is not only a concern for Listeria, but also for Salmonella and STEC E.coli.

FDA Warning Lettershttps://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2017/ucm541240.htm
Apple Tree Goat Dairy 2/10/17

Uber-like Home Cooked Meals? Laws Provide Necessary Hurdles

In the NY Post, a Harvard Law Professor argues that current food laws are not conducive to food entrepreneurs who want to create the next Uber-type industry - home prepared meals.

"This is why people more often get sick by eating out than by eating at home. Even if the risk from home-cooked food were as high as or higher than that from restaurant-cooked food, the danger would have to be extraordinarily great to justify a ban.
Instead, home kitchens where food is prepared for sale should be held to separate standards that make sense for the enterprise. Many states already have cottage food laws that allow people to prepare and sell baked goods from home. In those states, the permits could simply be extended to allow the sale of cooked meals over the Internet"

First, a large majority of foodborne illness cases do occur in the home.  While reported cases of illness do not show this, we recognize that reported cases are more likely to be cases related to outbreaks where 2 or more people become ill from eating the same food.  However, the vast majority of cases go unreported with many of these being sporadic cases where one person becomes ill, and it is probable that a good majority of these sporadic cases occur from home practice.

Studies have shown that the many consumers don't have the best practices, including 1) are prone to have cross contamination issues in their kitchen, 2) don't have their refrigerators set at the right temperature, and 3) don't use a thermometer.    What about those live-in 'intruders' making their way into the kitchen space...dogs, cats, and kids.  There have been many instances where food made in the home and then served outside the home have been disastrous.  Just last week, BBQ prepared in a home kitchen was responsible for 32 cases of Staph enterotoxin cases.

Unlike Uber where you get to inspect the car and the driver when it shows up, (and can jump out when things are not going right), you would not have the opportunity to inspect a person's kitchen, or their food handling and preparation skills.   Once you bit into the food, you are not necessarily going to be aware if the food was subject to cross contamination, if it hit the proper end point cooking temperature, or if it was properly stored from time it was prepared to the time it shows up at your door.

Can a concept like this work...sure, but within the laws.  It happened for trucks, maybe homes are next.  I can actually see a company that contracts home cooks to prepare meals.  They would work to make sure the people are properly trained (and have credentials to show) and that the kitchens receive the proper governmental inspections.  The company can help people get the right equipment, develop and implement proper procedures, and provide additional ongoing support and inspection.  The company would establish the internet ordering system (along with pictures of the people preparing the food and the kitchen space in which the food would be prepared).  The company would  then collect a percentage of the fees paid for the food.
One problem is the economics.  Kitchensurfing and Ktichit,  similar concepts except the chef comes to your house, both failed.  The advantage in these cases is that the cooking space was the  customer's own kitchen.  Disadvantage, the need for chef's who were willing to perform their task for an audience, whereas in the concept above, the consumer would be more willing to accept a home cook.   The next and biggest issue is the obtaining the commercial license  for making prepared TCS foods for others.  The company would have to work with the local jurisdiction to determine how this could be achieved within the current regulatory restrictions.  No doubt there would be some costs that go into adapting a kitchen...but again, if it can be done in a truck, why not a kitchen...provided the kitchen meets required standards.

NY Post - Opinion
http://nypost.com/2017/02/21/regulations-make-it-too-hard-to-sell-home-cooked-food/
Regulations make it too hard to sell home-cooked food
By Jacob Gersen
February 21, 2017 | 5:01am