CDC Report - Two Outbreaks of Trichinosis Linked to Consumption of Walrus Meat

If you ever have the opportunity to eat walrus meat, make sure it is cooked well.  There were two recent outbreaks of trichinosis or trichinellosis (five cases each) in Alaska that were associated with consumption of walrus meat.  The disease is caused by the parasite trichinella and is acquired when the larvae of the worm in ingested when consuming contaminated meat of animals including bear, cougar, wild boar and walruses.  Domestic pigs were once a source, but not really any more since controls were put in place by the industry to improve farming conditions.

Initial infection leads to nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, fatigue, fever, and abdominal discomfort. This is followed within a few weeks by headaches, fevers, chills, cough, swelling of the face and eyes, aching joints and muscle pains, as the larvae get into the blood stream and start to encyst into the muscles.. "If the infection is heavy, patients may experience difficulty coordinating movements, and have heart and breathing problems. In severe cases, death can occur."

Cooking wild meat to an internal temperature of 160ºF will take care of the issue.  Canning wild meat is another alternative to consider.

CDC - MMWR
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6626a3.htm?s_cid=mm6626a3_e
Two Outbreaks of Trichinellosis Linked to Consumption of Walrus Meat — Alaska, 2016–2017

CDC Report - 2016-2017 E.coli non-O157 Outbreak in Canada Associated with Flour

CDC issued a field note on the 2016-2017 E. coli non-O157 outbreak in Canada associated with flour.  In all, 29 people were infected in Canada and one in the US.   Robin Hood flour was the identified brand.  According to the report, "Eleven of these sixteen patients reported they ate or probably ate raw dough during their exposure period."  "Eight patients were hospitalized, and one developed hemolytic uremic syndrome. Clinical isolates were typed as E. coli O121:H19."

CDC MMWR
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6626a6.htm?s_cid=mm6626a6_e
Notes from the Field: An Outbreak of Shiga Toxin–Producing Escherichia coli O121 Infections Associated with Flour — Canada, 2016–2017
Weekly / July 7, 2017

Energy Bars Recalled After Complaints of Nut Allergic Reactions

Clif Bar is recalling certain varieties of its energy bar products after receiving 'a small number' of consumer complaints of peanut or tree nut allergic reactions, although these were not confirmed.

This is the type of issue where good allergen verification records are needed.  Are there other products run in the facility with peanuts and tree nuts, and if so, were good sanitation and other allergen procedures followed.   What about supplier control?  Do any of the suppliers handle peanut and tree nuts that could have accidentally made their way into a non-nut ingredient.

FDA Recall Notice

https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm565833.htm
Voluntary Recall of CLIF BUILDER'S Bar Chocolate Mint Flavor, CLIF Kid Zbar Protein Chocolate Mint and CLIF Kid Zbar Protein Chocolate Chip Flavors
For Immediate Release
July 5, 2017

Results of Sampling Retail Foods for Listeria

USDA led a multiyear study to look at Listeria in foods at retail.

• Six broad groups were tested - seafood, produce, dairy, meat, eggs, and combination foods) 
• Samples were collected weekly at large national chain supermarkets and independent grocery stores between December 2010 and March 2013.
• 27,389 total samples were taken with 
• 116 samples tested positive by the BAX PCR system for L. monocytogenes, and the pathogen was isolated and confirmed for 102 samples (0.3%)
• 571 samples that tested positive for Listeria-like organisms

A few takeaways

• Screening samples used a 25 gram sample. If a larger sample size was used, would the percent positive be higher?
• Sampling ended over 4 years ago.  If sampling and testing were conduced today, would we expect lower numbers?
• Cut raw vegetables were the highest at 1%., but the scariest is the pre-made salads - seafood salad and deli-type salads (and pre-made sandwiches) since those would be consumed without any preparation and the numbers/gram were generally lower.
• While the percentage of cheese samples that were positive are low, there where some high numbers on those that tested positive.

Journal of Food Protection
http://jfoodprotection.org/doi/abs/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-16-420?code=fopr-site
Survey for Listeria monocytogenes in and on Ready-to-Eat Foods from Retail Establishments in the United States (2010 through 2013): Assessing Potential Changes of Pathogen Prevalence and Levels in a Decade
John B. Luchansky,1 Yuhuan Chen,2* Anna C. S. Porto-Fett,1 Régis Pouillot,2 Bradley A. Shoyer,1 Rachel Johnson-DeRycke,3† Denise R. Eblen,3† Karin Hoelzer,2‡ William K. Shaw Jr.,3 Jane M. van Doren,2 Michelle Catlin,3 Jeehyun Lee,4§ Rohan Tikekar,4§ Daniel Gallagher,5 James A. Lindsay,1 The Listeria Market Basket Survey Multi-Institutional Team,‖ and Sherri Dennis2

Penn State Extension educators develop plan to educate plain sect on food safety

Penn State News
http://news.psu.edu/story/471486/2017/06/13/impact/penn-state-extension-educators-develop-plan-educate-plain-sect-food
Penn State Extension educators develop plan to educate plain sect on food safety
June 13, 2017

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Technology has changed the way we communicate and learn. Computers, video conferencing and online courses are just a few of the tools educators commonly use to impart knowledge.

But what if you normally use technology to teach but can't?

That was the challenge Penn State Extension food-safety educators like Jeff Stoltzfus, who is based in Lancaster County, faced earlier this year when asked to use today's technology to educate Amish and Mennonite farmer — some of whom reject modern ways — about new food-safety regulations.

Chicken Salad Recalled for Being Tuna Salad - Allergen Mislabeling

Whole Foods is recalling chicken salad product that contains...tuna salad.  While this mislabeling issue may seem small and easy to make, it is reason for a Class I recall due to undeclared allergens, in this case, fish in the product but not on the label.  The issue was discovered at store level as store employees were unpacking the product.

According to the report, this company had a similar issue in the past.  In January of 2017, they shipped egg salad labeled as chicken salad.  Again, this is a allergen mislabeling issue.  This would be where one would want to have an Allergen Preventive Control or a Critical Control Point to ensure the labels match the product produced.

It seems that Jessica Simpson made the same mistake...thinking Chicken of the Sea was chicken.  Don't be like Jessica Simpson, control your labels!

USDA Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-080-2017-release
Willow Tree Poultry Farm Recalls Chicken Salad Products Due To Misbranding And Undeclared Allergens
Class I Recall 080-2017
Health Risk: High
Jul 1, 2017

CDC Reports on a 2016 Salmonella Outbreak Related to Peppers

CDC released a report detailing a 2016 Salmonella outbreak related to peppers.  This is the first time this report has been issued.  Investigators had difficulties in determining the type of pepper as well as the source of the pepper.  Because the lack of 'actionable' information, no warning was issued to consumers.

In June 2016, PulseNet identified a cluster of 16 Salmonella Anatum infections with an indistinguishable [unique] pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pattern from four states.  Thirty-two patients in nine states were identified with illness onsets from May 6–July 9, 2016.  The combined evidence indicated that fresh hot peppers were the likely source of infection; however, a single pepper type or source farm was not identified.  Much of this related to different foods people ate, whether specific peppers were included in salsa recipes, etc.   The only link was related to testing in in April 2016, the same PFGE pattern had been uploaded to PulseNet from an isolate obtained from an Anaheim pepper, a mild to medium hot pepper.

This demonstrates the challenges posed by our food system, especially for produce items like peppers that are used primarily as an ingredient in many different foods, such as salsa.  Cross contamination from the peppers to other items may muddy the investigation.

 
CDC MMWR
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6625a2.htm
Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Anatum Infections Linked to Imported Hot Peppers — United States, May–July 2016
Weekly / June 30, 2017 / 66(25);663–667
Rashida Hassan, MSPH1; Joshua Rounds, MPH2; Alida Sorenson, MPH3; Greg Leos, MPH4; Jeniffer Concepción-Acevedo, PhD1; Taylor Griswold, MS1; Adiam Tesfai, PhD5; Tyann Blessington, PhD5; Cerise Hardy, MPH5; Colin Basler, DVM1 (View author affiliations)

Target Store Pulls Hampton Creek Food Products

Target stores removed Hampton Creek products from their stores.  These products are under the 'Just' brand and include Just Mayo, Just Mustard, and Just Chocolate Chip.  There is no official word yet on the actions were taken, but will stop selling the products ' pending a full review.'

Bloomberg News
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-22/target-begins-removing-hampton-creek-s-products-from-stores
Target Begins Removing Hampton Creek's Products From Stores
By Olivia Zaleski
‎June‎ ‎22‎, ‎2017‎ ‎5‎:‎24‎ ‎PM Updated on ‎June‎ ‎22‎, ‎2017‎ ‎9‎:‎24‎ ‎PM

 - Target received information alleging possible health concerns
 - The allegations included claims about mislabeled products

USDA ERS Publishes Food Safety Costs for Produce Operations Complying to Increased Food Safety Standards (LGMA)

The USDA Economic Research Service released a 64 page report on the costs associated with meeting safety standards established by the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement (LGMA).  The costs with the LGMA should be similar to what will be required by the FSMA Produce Safety Rule.  This is based upon 7 produce operations and was conducted in 2012.

The paper acknowledged that it is difficult to assess the costs, and thus come up with average cost/farm or cost/acre for compliance.  They were able to determine where those costs went on average:

• food safety staff - 38%
• foremen food safety time - 32% 
• audits - 17%
• lost product due to animal intrusion - 11%
• water testing - 2%
• Other costs not uniformly collected included harvest worker training, glove use, raw product testing, and external record keeping management systems.

Estimated costs for foreman (based upon time allocation) ranged from 80,000 to 1,012,000 million.

Firms averaged

Table 3

Range of costs per firm for different food safety practices

                                                                        Range of costs ($) Number of observations  

                                                                        Low                High

Cost per firm:

Total field-level audits                                   27,150            305,430                 6

Raw product testing                                                0              90,000                 6

External record keeping                                          0                8,868                 7

Training                                                          19,900              71,398                 4

Protective clothing                                         12,000              52,000                  5

Total water testing                                           7,000               85,000                  7

Lost product                                                            0             304,000                 7

Equipment cleaning/sanitizing                       21,000             250,000                 4

Hired toilet/handwashing facilities                45,451              130,367                3 

and services

Note: In reporting individual costs per firm, there is a mix of costs for different-sized operations, and also a mix of costs for leafy greens and the whole produce operation. The  combination of firms reporting data for any cost also varies. As a result, the numbers in table 3 cannot be added together to get a low and a high for all costs. Source: USDA, Economic Research Service.

How solid are these costs?  Good question.  They are based upon interviews...so if you ask someone what they are spending on mandated oversight....there may be a tendency to look at worst case scenario. Plus were there savings from improved practices?...hard to say.  I believe these costs increases are there, especially compared to processing facilities that already have much of the infrastructure in place.

Economic Information Bulletin Number 173
https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/83771/eib-173.pdf?v=42893
Food Safety Practices and Costs Under the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement
Linda Calvin, Helen Jensen, Karen Klonsky, and Roberta Cook
June 2017