FSIS has just issued the Verification Testing for Non-O157 STEC for Beef Trimmings. While this new wrinkle in the E. coli-Beef trim issue has caused a lot of concern, the anticipated outcome may not come anywhere close to the hype.
Domestic product http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISNotices/29-12.pdf
Imported http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISNotices/30-12.pdf
Background - On June 4th, FSIS will begin testing for six non-0157 serogroups (O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145) in addition to O157:H7. Like E. coli O157:H7, these E. coli serogroups are viewed as adulterants in non-intact raw beef products and product components (raw ground beef and beef trim).
A few interesting notes:
1) FSIS does not expect establishments to reassess their HACCP plans because of this testing implementation. (Facilities should address non-O157 STEC in their Hazard Analysis.)
2) FSIS will not schedule a for-cause FSA in response to a non-O157 positive sample result. Outside of that, FSIS will follow Directive 10,010.3 Rev 3 including resampling. (And corrective action for positive product, which will include holding and dispositioning of positive product). http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISDirectives/10010.1Rev3.pdf
3) “FSIS recognizes that establishments will begin taking steps to address non-O157 STECs in their HACCP systems and performing activities to gather data to validate that their food safety systems are adequately designed to control non-O157 STECs. Establishments are to document and identify in their initial validation activity plans the time frame in which they will have accumulated sufficient data to conclude that their food safety systems are demonstrated to be adequate to control for the relevant non-O157 STECs”.
4) FSIS will not require establishments to adjust their existing testing programs for non-O157 STEC.
5) A confirmed positive is an isolate that has stx and eae genes and one or more of the target serogroup genes (O45, O26, O113, etc.). A positive is not just a positive for the genes, but the bacterium must be isolated and biochemically confirmed, so establishments should be prepared to deal with false positives.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
FDA's Reportable Food Registry Report Provides Important Insight into Food Supply Issues
The FDA just released the second annual report for the Reportable Food Registry, RFR.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FoodSafetyPrograms/RFR/ucm200958.htm?source=govdelivery
The Reportable Food Registry is an electronic portal where food companies report issues with a food where that food is likely to cause illness. So if Company A ships nuts to Company B, and Company B tests those nuts and finds Salmonella, then by law, Company B must report this incident to the FDA via the Reportable Food Registry.
This has been a great tool in keeping unsafe food out of commerce. It allows FDA to use industry information to police the food supply chain.
Industry professions can see an important aspect of this RFR report is that it indicates where in the food system issues have occurred. Accordingly, companies who purchase products can look at this list and find issues with products or ingredients they use and then ensure these items are addressed through HACCP or a supplier control program. Here are some examples (Table 6) – undeclared allergens in bakery products, Salmonella in nuts, spices/seasonings, and produce, Listeria in prepared foods and dairy. Reports on Imported foods (Table 13) shows a slight increase from year 1 to 2 in total recalls, but certainly an increase in the number of Salmonella related issues coming in on imported foods.
It is also important to note that the RFR can put companies at risk of being pulled into a recall. This was the case last year when Salmonella was discovered in hydrolyzed vegetable protein. And even with companies whose process rendered the ingredient as no risk (these companies were going to put the HVP into a product that was to be cooked), they still recalled product. Traceability is paramount in being able to quickly respond to a supplier issue that gets reported to FDA by another company.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FoodSafetyPrograms/RFR/ucm200958.htm?source=govdelivery
The Reportable Food Registry is an electronic portal where food companies report issues with a food where that food is likely to cause illness. So if Company A ships nuts to Company B, and Company B tests those nuts and finds Salmonella, then by law, Company B must report this incident to the FDA via the Reportable Food Registry.
This has been a great tool in keeping unsafe food out of commerce. It allows FDA to use industry information to police the food supply chain.
Industry professions can see an important aspect of this RFR report is that it indicates where in the food system issues have occurred. Accordingly, companies who purchase products can look at this list and find issues with products or ingredients they use and then ensure these items are addressed through HACCP or a supplier control program. Here are some examples (Table 6) – undeclared allergens in bakery products, Salmonella in nuts, spices/seasonings, and produce, Listeria in prepared foods and dairy. Reports on Imported foods (Table 13) shows a slight increase from year 1 to 2 in total recalls, but certainly an increase in the number of Salmonella related issues coming in on imported foods.
It is also important to note that the RFR can put companies at risk of being pulled into a recall. This was the case last year when Salmonella was discovered in hydrolyzed vegetable protein. And even with companies whose process rendered the ingredient as no risk (these companies were going to put the HVP into a product that was to be cooked), they still recalled product. Traceability is paramount in being able to quickly respond to a supplier issue that gets reported to FDA by another company.
Case of BSE, or Mad Cow, found in California
A cow in California was diagnosed with BSE, or Mad Cow. This is the fourth documented case of BSE in a cow in the US.
It poses no real risk to the US food supply.
The cow, more than 30 months old of age, had died and was to be rendered. Because the cow died, it was tested for BSE. Analysis resulted in what is being called an atypical case, and thus is believed to have occurred spontaneously through a mutation.
BSE is a neurological disease causing brain and spinal cord degeneration. It is caused by a prion which is misfolded protein, that aggregates in the brain to form plagues. These prions can arise in animals that have a specific gene variant, and then this disease can be transmitted to other animals that come in contact with infected tissue of the diseased animal. This transmission occurs because the infectious prion causes a protein in the normal animal’s brain to deform into the infectious state.
BSE in cows has been a problem in the past when animal byproducts were used to supplement animal feed. In the UK more than 180,000 cows may have been infected (starting in 1986) and resulted in as many as 165 people dying within 10 years afterward (up to 2009). In humans, the CJD variant can occur when people consume infected tissue.
The practice of feeding animal by-products to ruminants is banned in the United States. Additionally, the US has an active monitoring system for all suspect animals and older animals as well as controls for the removal of SRMs (specific risk materials), including spinal and brain tissue, during slaughter.
New case of mad cow disease in California
http://www.philly.com/philly/health/20120424_ap_newcaseofmadcowdiseaseincalifornia.html?page=2&c=y
SAM HANANEL and LAURAN NEERGAARD
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The first new case of mad cow disease in the U.S. since 2006 has been discovered in a dairy cow in California, but health authorities said Tuesday the animal never was a threat to the nation's food supply.
The infected cow, the fourth ever discovered in the U.S., was found as part of an Agriculture Department surveillance program that tests about 40,000 cows a year for the fatal brain disease.
No meat from the cow was bound for the food supply, said John Clifford, the department's chief veterinary officer.
"There is really no cause for alarm here with regard to this animal," Clifford told reporters at a hastily convened news conference.
Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), is fatal to cows and can cause a fatal human brain disease in people who eat tainted beef. The World Health Organization has said that tests show that humans cannot be infected by drinking milk from BSE-infected animals.
It poses no real risk to the US food supply.
The cow, more than 30 months old of age, had died and was to be rendered. Because the cow died, it was tested for BSE. Analysis resulted in what is being called an atypical case, and thus is believed to have occurred spontaneously through a mutation.
BSE is a neurological disease causing brain and spinal cord degeneration. It is caused by a prion which is misfolded protein, that aggregates in the brain to form plagues. These prions can arise in animals that have a specific gene variant, and then this disease can be transmitted to other animals that come in contact with infected tissue of the diseased animal. This transmission occurs because the infectious prion causes a protein in the normal animal’s brain to deform into the infectious state.
BSE in cows has been a problem in the past when animal byproducts were used to supplement animal feed. In the UK more than 180,000 cows may have been infected (starting in 1986) and resulted in as many as 165 people dying within 10 years afterward (up to 2009). In humans, the CJD variant can occur when people consume infected tissue.
The practice of feeding animal by-products to ruminants is banned in the United States. Additionally, the US has an active monitoring system for all suspect animals and older animals as well as controls for the removal of SRMs (specific risk materials), including spinal and brain tissue, during slaughter.
New case of mad cow disease in California
http://www.philly.com/philly/health/20120424_ap_newcaseofmadcowdiseaseincalifornia.html?page=2&c=y
SAM HANANEL and LAURAN NEERGAARD
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The first new case of mad cow disease in the U.S. since 2006 has been discovered in a dairy cow in California, but health authorities said Tuesday the animal never was a threat to the nation's food supply.
The infected cow, the fourth ever discovered in the U.S., was found as part of an Agriculture Department surveillance program that tests about 40,000 cows a year for the fatal brain disease.
No meat from the cow was bound for the food supply, said John Clifford, the department's chief veterinary officer.
"There is really no cause for alarm here with regard to this animal," Clifford told reporters at a hastily convened news conference.
Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), is fatal to cows and can cause a fatal human brain disease in people who eat tainted beef. The World Health Organization has said that tests show that humans cannot be infected by drinking milk from BSE-infected animals.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Update - Salmonella linked to tuna used in sushi
Update 5/3/12
CDC reports that there is now close to 260 people infected with two different strains of Salmonella.
CDC Release 5/2/12
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
Based on an epidemiologic link and results of
laboratory testing, CDC has combined this Salmonella Bareilly investigation with an ongoing
multistate outbreak investigation of Salmonella serotype Nchanga infections. The two
associated PFGE patterns have been grouped together as the "outbreak strains."
A total of 258 persons infected with the outbreak
strains of Salmonella Bareilly (247 persons)
or Salmonella Nchanga (11 persons) have been
reported from 24 states and the District of Columbia.
4/17/12
According to the CDC, the Salmonella Bareilly that caused close to 150 illnesses has been linked to tuna used in sushi. The raw tuna served was frozen, but of course, was not cooked. While freezing will eliminate parasites, it will not eliminate Salmonella. The majority of tuna linked to this outbreak was from India. The US importer, Moon Marine, has begun recalling close to 59,000 lbs of tuna.
When producing a ready-to-eat food such as sushi grade tuna, the highest degree of sanitation and operating cleanliness must be maintained. This requires that the producer maintain tight production controls and procedures each and every day. This tuna meat, or tuna scrape, is a lower grade product and is essentially meat that was scrapped from the backbone of the tuna and had the look of a ground product.
A lawsuit has already been filed against the importer. As an importer, they have the responsibility for ensuring the processing plants they purchase from have adequate quality and safety systems in place.
Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly Infections Associated with a Raw Scraped Ground Tuna Product
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
CDC Release 4/17/2012
A total of 141 persons infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Bareilly have been reported from 20 states and the District of Columbia.
The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (2), Arkansas (1), Connecticut (6), District of Columbia (2), Florida (1), Georgia (6), Illinois (13), Louisiana (3), Maryland (14), Massachusetts (9), Mississippi (2), Missouri (4), New Jersey (8), New York (28), North Carolina (2), Pennsylvania (6), Rhode Island (5), South Carolina (3), Texas (4), Virginia (8), and Wisconsin (14). 21 ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.
Collaborative investigation efforts of state, local, and federal public health agencies indicate that a frozen raw yellowfin tuna product, known as Nakaochi Scrape, from Moon Marine USA Corporation is the likely source of this outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly infections. Nakaochi Scrape is tuna backmeat that is scraped from the bones of tuna and may be used in sushi, sashimi, ceviche, and similar dishes. The product looks like raw ground tuna.
Consumers should not eat the recalled product, and retailers should not serve the recalled raw Nakaochi Scrape tuna product from Moon Marine USA Corporation.
This investigation is ongoing. CDC and state and local public health partners are continuing surveillance to identify new cases.
U.S. NEWS WSJ
Updated April 16, 2012, 6:48 p.m. ET
Tuna Blamed in Salmonella Outbreak Is Recalled
By BILL TOMSON WSJ 4/15/12
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304299304577348030392954406.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The Food and Drug Administration said Monday a California supplier of raw tuna used in sushi was behind a salmonella outbreak that has sickened more than 100 people in 20 states.
Moon Marine USA Corp. in Cupertino, Calif., has begun recalling 58,828 pounds of raw yellowfin tuna because it may be contaminated, the FDA said. Many of the people who became ill reported eating an item known as spicy tuna, the agency said, and most of the illnesses occurred in New York.
CDC reports that there is now close to 260 people infected with two different strains of Salmonella.
CDC Release 5/2/12
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
- 32 ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.
4/17/12
According to the CDC, the Salmonella Bareilly that caused close to 150 illnesses has been linked to tuna used in sushi. The raw tuna served was frozen, but of course, was not cooked. While freezing will eliminate parasites, it will not eliminate Salmonella. The majority of tuna linked to this outbreak was from India. The US importer, Moon Marine, has begun recalling close to 59,000 lbs of tuna.
When producing a ready-to-eat food such as sushi grade tuna, the highest degree of sanitation and operating cleanliness must be maintained. This requires that the producer maintain tight production controls and procedures each and every day. This tuna meat, or tuna scrape, is a lower grade product and is essentially meat that was scrapped from the backbone of the tuna and had the look of a ground product.
A lawsuit has already been filed against the importer. As an importer, they have the responsibility for ensuring the processing plants they purchase from have adequate quality and safety systems in place.
Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly Infections Associated with a Raw Scraped Ground Tuna Product
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
CDC Release 4/17/2012
A total of 141 persons infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Bareilly have been reported from 20 states and the District of Columbia.
The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (2), Arkansas (1), Connecticut (6), District of Columbia (2), Florida (1), Georgia (6), Illinois (13), Louisiana (3), Maryland (14), Massachusetts (9), Mississippi (2), Missouri (4), New Jersey (8), New York (28), North Carolina (2), Pennsylvania (6), Rhode Island (5), South Carolina (3), Texas (4), Virginia (8), and Wisconsin (14). 21 ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.
Collaborative investigation efforts of state, local, and federal public health agencies indicate that a frozen raw yellowfin tuna product, known as Nakaochi Scrape, from Moon Marine USA Corporation is the likely source of this outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly infections. Nakaochi Scrape is tuna backmeat that is scraped from the bones of tuna and may be used in sushi, sashimi, ceviche, and similar dishes. The product looks like raw ground tuna.
Consumers should not eat the recalled product, and retailers should not serve the recalled raw Nakaochi Scrape tuna product from Moon Marine USA Corporation.
This investigation is ongoing. CDC and state and local public health partners are continuing surveillance to identify new cases.
U.S. NEWS WSJ
Updated April 16, 2012, 6:48 p.m. ET
Tuna Blamed in Salmonella Outbreak Is Recalled
By BILL TOMSON WSJ 4/15/12
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304299304577348030392954406.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The Food and Drug Administration said Monday a California supplier of raw tuna used in sushi was behind a salmonella outbreak that has sickened more than 100 people in 20 states.
Moon Marine USA Corp. in Cupertino, Calif., has begun recalling 58,828 pounds of raw yellowfin tuna because it may be contaminated, the FDA said. Many of the people who became ill reported eating an item known as spicy tuna, the agency said, and most of the illnesses occurred in New York.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
NY Times reports E. coli on Chicken...oh noooooo
What would we do without the occasional ‘shocking’ story about raw meat containing bacteria, in this case, a study that E. coli was found on chicken? Yes, raw meat, including chicken, can and will have E. coli associated with it, as well as some pathogens such as Salmonella and Campylobacter. This will occur whether it is conventionally processed, organic, or even farm raised. Those processing chicken put in steps to help reduce the level of bacteria, but it is nearly impossible to eliminate all bacteria on a raw product (one that you would still want to buy). I don’t want a farmer or processor treating my chicken to a point that eliminates all of the bacteria, and neither should you. It would not be a chicken that you would want to buy.
Have we become such germaphobes that we cannot longer tolerate the thought that E. coli might be on a raw chicken or raw beef. What, you don’t think that soon after you put on your underwear that you have a few E.coli on them? Or on our hands after we use the restroom? And what do we do, we wash them. And for raw meat and poultry products…..we cook them (and keep our kitchen counter clean as well).
A few problems with this study, one pointed out by our own Dr. Cutter in the NY Times article below. (You can link to the published report http://www.pcrm.org/health/reports/fecal-contamination-in-retail-chicken-products.)
They constantly refer to the E. coli contamination as feces. Although linked, these are two different images. Yes, there may be a few E.coli in your underwear, or even on your hands after you use the restroom, but would you call it feces? Have you ever seen feces on a raw chicken breast? Does your chicken breast smell like poop? E. coli is of fecal origin, and it can cross contaminate onto food and surfaces such as your hands, but to what degree are feces particles present…microscopic at best. And if that thought still concerns you, then you better live in a bubble with your colon direct linked to the sewer pipe.
Another issue is that the study does not look at actual levels of E. coli per bird, just the absence or presence. Therefore, it is possible that there may only be an extremely low level of E.coli there…and based upon real scientific studies, we know that this is the case. So we start with a bird where there are billioins and billions of E. coli present in the intestine, the bird is eviscerated, cleaned, and packaged. Now, there only has be a few organisms present for the test to show a positive. I am surprised the number isn’t even higher….but that would be no more concerning.
Is it surprising that the person who conducted the study is a vegan? So what is the agenda? I have no problems with those people who choose not to eat meat. But please don’t push that agenda onto others through the use of ill designed studies.
The real take away…cook your food….and use a thermometer to verify.
48% of Chicken in Small Sample Has E. Coli
By STEPHANIE STROM
NY Times Published: April 11, 2012
A recent test of packaged raw chicken products bought at grocery stores across the country found that roughly half of them were contaminated with the bacteria E. coli.
E. coli, which the study said was an indicator of fecal contamination, was found in 48 percent of 120 chicken products bought in 10 major cities by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a nonprofit group that advocates a vegetarian diet among other things. The study results were released Wednesday.
“Most consumers do not realize that feces are in the chicken products they purchase,” said Dr. Neal D. Barnard, president of the group. “Food labels discuss contamination as if it is simply the presence of bacteria, but people need to know that it means much more than that.”
Food safety specialists said the findings were a tempest in a chicken coop, particularly because the test was so small and the E. coli found was not a kind that threatened public health.
Have we become such germaphobes that we cannot longer tolerate the thought that E. coli might be on a raw chicken or raw beef. What, you don’t think that soon after you put on your underwear that you have a few E.coli on them? Or on our hands after we use the restroom? And what do we do, we wash them. And for raw meat and poultry products…..we cook them (and keep our kitchen counter clean as well).
A few problems with this study, one pointed out by our own Dr. Cutter in the NY Times article below. (You can link to the published report http://www.pcrm.org/health/reports/fecal-contamination-in-retail-chicken-products.)
They constantly refer to the E. coli contamination as feces. Although linked, these are two different images. Yes, there may be a few E.coli in your underwear, or even on your hands after you use the restroom, but would you call it feces? Have you ever seen feces on a raw chicken breast? Does your chicken breast smell like poop? E. coli is of fecal origin, and it can cross contaminate onto food and surfaces such as your hands, but to what degree are feces particles present…microscopic at best. And if that thought still concerns you, then you better live in a bubble with your colon direct linked to the sewer pipe.
Another issue is that the study does not look at actual levels of E. coli per bird, just the absence or presence. Therefore, it is possible that there may only be an extremely low level of E.coli there…and based upon real scientific studies, we know that this is the case. So we start with a bird where there are billioins and billions of E. coli present in the intestine, the bird is eviscerated, cleaned, and packaged. Now, there only has be a few organisms present for the test to show a positive. I am surprised the number isn’t even higher….but that would be no more concerning.
Is it surprising that the person who conducted the study is a vegan? So what is the agenda? I have no problems with those people who choose not to eat meat. But please don’t push that agenda onto others through the use of ill designed studies.
The real take away…cook your food….and use a thermometer to verify.
48% of Chicken in Small Sample Has E. Coli
By STEPHANIE STROM
NY Times Published: April 11, 2012
A recent test of packaged raw chicken products bought at grocery stores across the country found that roughly half of them were contaminated with the bacteria E. coli.
E. coli, which the study said was an indicator of fecal contamination, was found in 48 percent of 120 chicken products bought in 10 major cities by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a nonprofit group that advocates a vegetarian diet among other things. The study results were released Wednesday.
“Most consumers do not realize that feces are in the chicken products they purchase,” said Dr. Neal D. Barnard, president of the group. “Food labels discuss contamination as if it is simply the presence of bacteria, but people need to know that it means much more than that.”
Food safety specialists said the findings were a tempest in a chicken coop, particularly because the test was so small and the E. coli found was not a kind that threatened public health.
Monday, April 9, 2012
100 ill from Salmonella Bareilly
CDC reports that more than 100 people in 19 states are ill from Salmonella Bareilly. CDC states that, this time, at there is no confirmed link to any product. But various news reports state that sushi (spicy tuna rolls) are being looked at closely.
Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly InfectionsCDC, Apr 6
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
Highlights
· A total of 100 persons infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Bareilly have been reported from 19 states and the District of Columbia.
· The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (2), Arkansas (1), Connecticut (5), District of Columbia (2), Georgia (4), Illinois (9), Louisiana (2), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (4), Mississippi (1), Missouri (1), New Jersey (7), New York (23), North Carolina (2), Pennsylvania (3), Rhode Island (4), South Carolina (3), Texas (3), Virginia (5), and Wisconsin (9).
· 10 ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.
· The investigation has not conclusively identified a food source.
· The investigation is ongoing into individual food items and their sources.
CDC and FDA are working together on the investigation and will provide updates as soon as they are available.
· If a specific food source is identified for this outbreak, public health officials will alert the public and take further steps to prevent additional illnesses.
More salmonella cases reported in outbreak
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-more-salmonella-cases-reported-in-outbreak-20120406,0,4200695.story
By Ryan Haggerty Tribune reporter
Chicago Tribune
1:35 p.m. CDT, April 6, 2012
Seven more people have been confirmed as victims of a nationwide salmonella outbreak, including one more person in Chicago, state and federal health officials announced today.
In all, 100 people across the country and nine in Illinois have been made ill in the outbreak, whose source has still not been determined, officials with the Centers for Disease Control said.
The outbreak, which was first confirmed Wednesday, involves salmonella bareilly, an unusual strain of the salmonella bacterium, CDC officials said.
It has been connected to reported illnesses that have occurred between Jan. 28 and March 25 in 19 states, plus the District of Columbia. Those affected said they had eaten sushi, sashimi or similar foods in the week before their symptoms began, according to the CDC.
Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Bareilly InfectionsCDC, Apr 6
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/bareilly-04-12/index.html
Highlights
· A total of 100 persons infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Bareilly have been reported from 19 states and the District of Columbia.
· The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (2), Arkansas (1), Connecticut (5), District of Columbia (2), Georgia (4), Illinois (9), Louisiana (2), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (4), Mississippi (1), Missouri (1), New Jersey (7), New York (23), North Carolina (2), Pennsylvania (3), Rhode Island (4), South Carolina (3), Texas (3), Virginia (5), and Wisconsin (9).
· 10 ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.
· The investigation has not conclusively identified a food source.
· The investigation is ongoing into individual food items and their sources.
CDC and FDA are working together on the investigation and will provide updates as soon as they are available.
· If a specific food source is identified for this outbreak, public health officials will alert the public and take further steps to prevent additional illnesses.
More salmonella cases reported in outbreak
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-more-salmonella-cases-reported-in-outbreak-20120406,0,4200695.story
By Ryan Haggerty Tribune reporter
Chicago Tribune
1:35 p.m. CDT, April 6, 2012
Seven more people have been confirmed as victims of a nationwide salmonella outbreak, including one more person in Chicago, state and federal health officials announced today.
In all, 100 people across the country and nine in Illinois have been made ill in the outbreak, whose source has still not been determined, officials with the Centers for Disease Control said.
The outbreak, which was first confirmed Wednesday, involves salmonella bareilly, an unusual strain of the salmonella bacterium, CDC officials said.
It has been connected to reported illnesses that have occurred between Jan. 28 and March 25 in 19 states, plus the District of Columbia. Those affected said they had eaten sushi, sashimi or similar foods in the week before their symptoms began, according to the CDC.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
FDA releases 2nd edition of Bad Bug Book
FDA has recently released the second edition of the Bad Bug Book.
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodSafety/FoodborneIllness/FodborneIllnessFoodbornePathogensNaturalToxins/BadBugBook/UCM297627.pdf
This is a great online reference for foodborne pathogens and toxins (bacteria, viruses, parasites, and natural toxins). There are 5 new chapters in this book – below is a quick summaries of each (as well as grayanotoxin). Each chapter also has an insert – For Consumers: A Snapshot – that provides an overview of each pathogen.
Cronobacter - Causes illness, including bacteremia and meningitis, primarily in infants and immocompromised adults. Can survive in low moisture foods, and has been an issue in powdered infant formulas. “The illness it causes is rare, but when it occurs, infants younger than 2 months old are at highest risk. The death rate is high, from 10 percent to 80 percent… It can then multiply after liquid is added to the formula, especially if the formula is stored at an incorrect temperature, and cause illness in babies who drink it..” To avoid illness in infants, it is important to follow food safety instructions when preparing infant formula.
Enterococcus, “Anyone can become infected with the Enterococcus bacterium, but the people most likely to suffer serious problems are those who already have other serious illnesses. In otherwise healthy people, it may cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, vomiting, fever, and chills, starting 2 to 36 hours after they eat contaminated food. Enterococcus can be passed to people in different ways, and not much is yet known about how often it’s transmitted by food. But it is known that meat and milk that aren’t processed or cooked properly or that are handled in unsanitary ways are among the foods that can transmit it. A major concern about Enterococcus is that it has become resistant to some antibiotics that were used to treat it – that is, those antibiotics no longer kill it. You can help protect yourself from getting foodborne illness from this and other bacteria or viruses by following basic food-safety tips; for example, by not using unpasteurized (“raw”) milk or certain cheeses and other food made from it, by thoroughly cooking meat or food that contains meat, and by washing your hands, kitchen equipment, and other surfaces before and after you handle food.”
Francisella tularensis, “The bacterium Francisella tularensis causes a disease called tularemia (nicknamed “rabbit fever”). Tularemia can take different forms, depending on how the bacterium enters the body. If it enters through the mouth when a person eats or drinks contaminated food or water, it can cause tularemia that affects the throat or intestines, although this is an uncommon form of the disease. Symptoms of this type range from mild to severe in otherwise healthy people, and it rarely causes death. In the more serious cases, untreated throat infection may spread to vital organs (such as the lungs, brain, or liver), and may cause extensive bowel damage, with bleeding and infection of the bloodstream, especially in people with weak immune systems. People can develop tularemia of the throat or intestines by eating undercooked meat from an infected animal (particularly rabbits) or drinking contaminated water. Eating food or drinking water contaminated by animal waste, such as rodent droppings, also can cause this form of tularemia and many other diseases. Cooking food well is one of the safety tips that can help protect you from getting this form of tularemia, especially if you eat the kind of wild animals known to be carriers, such as rabbits.”
Phytohaemagglutinin, “Eating undercooked bean can cause you to have extreme nausea, severe vomiting, and diarrhea. They contain a protein that’s found naturally in many plants (and animals, including humans), where it performs important functions. But when it reaches high levels in some plants, particularly kidney beans, the protein can act as a toxin. Cooking the beans properly destroys the toxin. Don’t use slow cookers (the kinds of pots that you plug in and that cook food at low temperatures for several hours) to cook these beans or dishes that contain them. Slow cookers don’t get hot enough to destroy the toxin in kidney beans. Studies done by British scientists suggest that beans should be soaked in water for at least 5 hours, the water poured away, and the beans boiled in fresh water for at least 30 minutes.”
Venomous fish, “lionfish (Pterois volitans), a known venomous species from the Pacific Ocean, recently has become invasive and over-abundant along the U.S. south Atlantic coast and in the waters surrounding several Caribbean island countries, presenting new opportunities for human consumption.”
Grayanotoxins – “If bees make their honey from the pollen and nectar of flowers from some types of rhododendron, the honey may contain grayanotoxin, a substance poisonous to humans. Other plants from the same family that may contain it, in the Eastern part of the U.S., include mountain laurel and sheep laurel. Sickness that results from eating honey that contains grayanotoxin is sometimes called “mad honey” poisoning. It has occurred in the past in the U.S., but now appears to be very rare here. Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms of grayanotoxin poisoning. A rarer symptom is burning, tingling, and numbness around the mouth. The toxin affects nerve cells, including not only the nerves that affect the brain, but also those that affect the heart and other muscles. For this reason, grayanotoxin poisoning causes not only problems like dizziness, weakness, confusion, vision disturbances, and heavy sweating and saliva flow, but also irregular or very slow heartbeat, low blood pressure, and fainting. These poisonings are rarely fatal.”
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodSafety/FoodborneIllness/FodborneIllnessFoodbornePathogensNaturalToxins/BadBugBook/UCM297627.pdf
This is a great online reference for foodborne pathogens and toxins (bacteria, viruses, parasites, and natural toxins). There are 5 new chapters in this book – below is a quick summaries of each (as well as grayanotoxin). Each chapter also has an insert – For Consumers: A Snapshot – that provides an overview of each pathogen.
Cronobacter - Causes illness, including bacteremia and meningitis, primarily in infants and immocompromised adults. Can survive in low moisture foods, and has been an issue in powdered infant formulas. “The illness it causes is rare, but when it occurs, infants younger than 2 months old are at highest risk. The death rate is high, from 10 percent to 80 percent… It can then multiply after liquid is added to the formula, especially if the formula is stored at an incorrect temperature, and cause illness in babies who drink it..” To avoid illness in infants, it is important to follow food safety instructions when preparing infant formula.
Enterococcus, “Anyone can become infected with the Enterococcus bacterium, but the people most likely to suffer serious problems are those who already have other serious illnesses. In otherwise healthy people, it may cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, vomiting, fever, and chills, starting 2 to 36 hours after they eat contaminated food. Enterococcus can be passed to people in different ways, and not much is yet known about how often it’s transmitted by food. But it is known that meat and milk that aren’t processed or cooked properly or that are handled in unsanitary ways are among the foods that can transmit it. A major concern about Enterococcus is that it has become resistant to some antibiotics that were used to treat it – that is, those antibiotics no longer kill it. You can help protect yourself from getting foodborne illness from this and other bacteria or viruses by following basic food-safety tips; for example, by not using unpasteurized (“raw”) milk or certain cheeses and other food made from it, by thoroughly cooking meat or food that contains meat, and by washing your hands, kitchen equipment, and other surfaces before and after you handle food.”
Francisella tularensis, “The bacterium Francisella tularensis causes a disease called tularemia (nicknamed “rabbit fever”). Tularemia can take different forms, depending on how the bacterium enters the body. If it enters through the mouth when a person eats or drinks contaminated food or water, it can cause tularemia that affects the throat or intestines, although this is an uncommon form of the disease. Symptoms of this type range from mild to severe in otherwise healthy people, and it rarely causes death. In the more serious cases, untreated throat infection may spread to vital organs (such as the lungs, brain, or liver), and may cause extensive bowel damage, with bleeding and infection of the bloodstream, especially in people with weak immune systems. People can develop tularemia of the throat or intestines by eating undercooked meat from an infected animal (particularly rabbits) or drinking contaminated water. Eating food or drinking water contaminated by animal waste, such as rodent droppings, also can cause this form of tularemia and many other diseases. Cooking food well is one of the safety tips that can help protect you from getting this form of tularemia, especially if you eat the kind of wild animals known to be carriers, such as rabbits.”
Phytohaemagglutinin, “Eating undercooked bean can cause you to have extreme nausea, severe vomiting, and diarrhea. They contain a protein that’s found naturally in many plants (and animals, including humans), where it performs important functions. But when it reaches high levels in some plants, particularly kidney beans, the protein can act as a toxin. Cooking the beans properly destroys the toxin. Don’t use slow cookers (the kinds of pots that you plug in and that cook food at low temperatures for several hours) to cook these beans or dishes that contain them. Slow cookers don’t get hot enough to destroy the toxin in kidney beans. Studies done by British scientists suggest that beans should be soaked in water for at least 5 hours, the water poured away, and the beans boiled in fresh water for at least 30 minutes.”
Venomous fish, “lionfish (Pterois volitans), a known venomous species from the Pacific Ocean, recently has become invasive and over-abundant along the U.S. south Atlantic coast and in the waters surrounding several Caribbean island countries, presenting new opportunities for human consumption.”
Grayanotoxins – “If bees make their honey from the pollen and nectar of flowers from some types of rhododendron, the honey may contain grayanotoxin, a substance poisonous to humans. Other plants from the same family that may contain it, in the Eastern part of the U.S., include mountain laurel and sheep laurel. Sickness that results from eating honey that contains grayanotoxin is sometimes called “mad honey” poisoning. It has occurred in the past in the U.S., but now appears to be very rare here. Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms of grayanotoxin poisoning. A rarer symptom is burning, tingling, and numbness around the mouth. The toxin affects nerve cells, including not only the nerves that affect the brain, but also those that affect the heart and other muscles. For this reason, grayanotoxin poisoning causes not only problems like dizziness, weakness, confusion, vision disturbances, and heavy sweating and saliva flow, but also irregular or very slow heartbeat, low blood pressure, and fainting. These poisonings are rarely fatal.”
Monday, April 2, 2012
60 Minutes segment "Is Sugar Toxic?"
In case you missed it, here is the 60 Minutes segment on sugar, ‘Is Sugar Toxic?’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56Gpf1f5_A
Too much sugar is bad, that is hard to deny. But with consumers having made it such a big component of their diet, will they be willing to change their diet? Hopefully segments like this will get people to think about their diet with the goal of reducing sugar….significantly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56Gpf1f5_A
Too much sugar is bad, that is hard to deny. But with consumers having made it such a big component of their diet, will they be willing to change their diet? Hopefully segments like this will get people to think about their diet with the goal of reducing sugar….significantly.
FDA will not ban BPA at this time
The controversy will continue as FDA has decided not to ban BPA from food packaging materials at this time (due to inconclusive evidence). A ban would have had a huge impact on the food supply, as companies rushed to find suitable replacements. Continued study will occur.
U.S. Denies Request to Ban Chemical in Food PackagingBloomberg
By Jack Kaskey - Mar 30, 2012 6:07 PM ETFri Mar 30 22:07:58 GMT 2012
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-30/u-s-denies-request-to-ban-chemical-in-food-and-drink-packaging.html
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration rejected a request to ban a contested chemical from cans and other packaging because opponents didn’t provide enough data to support a rule change.
Continued study of bisphenol A, known as BPA, including completion of federal studies currently in progress, is the most appropriate course of action, the agency said in an e-mail today. The chemical has been used in epoxy linings since the 1960s to extend the shelf life of canned foods and beverages.
Manufacturers of baby bottles and cups have stopped using polycarbonate containing BPA in response to consumer concerns it may affect children. Campbell Soup Co. (CPB) is among food makers phasing out the use of BPA, while beverage companies such asCoca-Cola Co. (KO) have kept the chemical, saying it’s safe.
“The information provided in your petition was not sufficient to persuade FDA, at this time, to initiate rulemaking to prohibit the use of BPA in human food and food packaging,”David H. Horsey, an acting associate FDA commissioner, said today in a letter to the Natural Resources Defense Council.
NRDC, a New York-based environmental advocacy group, petitioned the FDA in 2008 to ban its use in food and drinks packaging. BPA, produced by combining phenol and acetone, mimics the female hormone estrogen and may affect the brain and prostate gland in fetuses and young children, according to theNational Institutes of Health.
Quickly Processed
A ban would hurt profits at can-maker Silgan Holdings Inc. (SLGN)and others in the $60 billion industry, Ghansham Panjabi, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co., said before the FDA announcement. The biggest U.S. producer of BPA is Saudi Basic Industries Corp. (SABIC), followed by Bayer AG (BAYN) and Dow Chemical Co. (DOW)
About 4.7 million metric tons of BPA valued at about $8 billion will be produced this year, according to a report by GlobalData, a London-based publisher of business intelligence. Three times as much BPA goes into polycarbonate plastics, used in items ranging from plastic bottles to DVDs, as is used in epoxy resins.
The FDA plans to complete an updated safety review of BPA this year and will make any changes to the chemical’s status based on the science, Douglas Karas, an agency spokesman, said in an e-mail. People of all ages metabolize and rid their bodies of BPA faster than rodents used in studies, he said.
Federally funded research confirms that the human body quickly processes and eliminates BPA, making it “very unlikely” that the chemical causes harm, the American Chemistry Council, a Washington-based industry group, said in a statement today.
‘Dangerously Off Course’
Sarah Janssen, a senior scientist at the NRDC, said the FDA’s denial of a ban shows “a major overhaul” of chemical regulation is needed. The Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based advocacy group, said consumers can no longer trust the FDA to protect the health of their families.
“The agency has veered dangerously off course,” Jane Houlihan, the group’s senior vice president for research, said today in a statement. “Pregnant women and new parents should no longer think FDA has their backs.”
The North American Metal Packaging Alliance, a Washington-based industry group, praised the FDA’s decision.
“A ban without conclusive scientific evidence of risk would compromise the safety of canned foods and beverages,” John Rost, the alliance’s chairman, said in an e-mailed statement.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jack Kaskey in Houston at jkaskey@bloomberg.net
U.S. Denies Request to Ban Chemical in Food PackagingBloomberg
By Jack Kaskey - Mar 30, 2012 6:07 PM ETFri Mar 30 22:07:58 GMT 2012
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-30/u-s-denies-request-to-ban-chemical-in-food-and-drink-packaging.html
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration rejected a request to ban a contested chemical from cans and other packaging because opponents didn’t provide enough data to support a rule change.
Continued study of bisphenol A, known as BPA, including completion of federal studies currently in progress, is the most appropriate course of action, the agency said in an e-mail today. The chemical has been used in epoxy linings since the 1960s to extend the shelf life of canned foods and beverages.
Manufacturers of baby bottles and cups have stopped using polycarbonate containing BPA in response to consumer concerns it may affect children. Campbell Soup Co. (CPB) is among food makers phasing out the use of BPA, while beverage companies such asCoca-Cola Co. (KO) have kept the chemical, saying it’s safe.
“The information provided in your petition was not sufficient to persuade FDA, at this time, to initiate rulemaking to prohibit the use of BPA in human food and food packaging,”David H. Horsey, an acting associate FDA commissioner, said today in a letter to the Natural Resources Defense Council.
NRDC, a New York-based environmental advocacy group, petitioned the FDA in 2008 to ban its use in food and drinks packaging. BPA, produced by combining phenol and acetone, mimics the female hormone estrogen and may affect the brain and prostate gland in fetuses and young children, according to theNational Institutes of Health.
Quickly Processed
A ban would hurt profits at can-maker Silgan Holdings Inc. (SLGN)and others in the $60 billion industry, Ghansham Panjabi, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co., said before the FDA announcement. The biggest U.S. producer of BPA is Saudi Basic Industries Corp. (SABIC), followed by Bayer AG (BAYN) and Dow Chemical Co. (DOW)
About 4.7 million metric tons of BPA valued at about $8 billion will be produced this year, according to a report by GlobalData, a London-based publisher of business intelligence. Three times as much BPA goes into polycarbonate plastics, used in items ranging from plastic bottles to DVDs, as is used in epoxy resins.
The FDA plans to complete an updated safety review of BPA this year and will make any changes to the chemical’s status based on the science, Douglas Karas, an agency spokesman, said in an e-mail. People of all ages metabolize and rid their bodies of BPA faster than rodents used in studies, he said.
Federally funded research confirms that the human body quickly processes and eliminates BPA, making it “very unlikely” that the chemical causes harm, the American Chemistry Council, a Washington-based industry group, said in a statement today.
‘Dangerously Off Course’
Sarah Janssen, a senior scientist at the NRDC, said the FDA’s denial of a ban shows “a major overhaul” of chemical regulation is needed. The Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based advocacy group, said consumers can no longer trust the FDA to protect the health of their families.
“The agency has veered dangerously off course,” Jane Houlihan, the group’s senior vice president for research, said today in a statement. “Pregnant women and new parents should no longer think FDA has their backs.”
The North American Metal Packaging Alliance, a Washington-based industry group, praised the FDA’s decision.
“A ban without conclusive scientific evidence of risk would compromise the safety of canned foods and beverages,” John Rost, the alliance’s chairman, said in an e-mailed statement.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jack Kaskey in Houston at jkaskey@bloomberg.net
2 cases of botulism linked to tofu
Tofu, sold in NY City, has been linked to 2 cases of botulism. The tofu was purchased by a couple in a NY City store. The tofu was displayed in a non-refrigerated, water filled bin. This is the first cases of botulism in NYC in more than 15 years.
‘Tofu is made by coagulating soy milk and pressing the resulting curds. The process begins by soaking, grinding, boiling and straining dried or fresh soybeans. Coagulation of the protein and oil (emulsion) suspended in the boiled soy milk is the most important step in the production of tofu. This process is accomplished with the aid of coagulants. Two types of coagulants (salts and acids) are used commercially. The third type of coagulant, enzymes, is not yet used commercially but shows potential for producing both firm and "silken" tofu’. (adapted from Wikeapedia).
Clostridium botulinum spores would survive the boiling and then be able to grow in the non-refrigerated product (in the absence of a secondary inhibitor. Tofu products vary greatly, even in terms of inclusion of antimicrobial parameters.) The spores will germinate and grow in the protein rich, non-refrigerated product. The product sitting in water would ensure a sufficient water activity as well as help support an anaerobic environment, both essential for C. botulinum. As C. botulinum grows, it produces a neurotoxin. If ingested, the neurotoxin enters the bloodstream and shuts down muscle function, potentially leading to death through the inability of the victim to breath.
Tofu is a considered a potentially hazardous food (TCS food) and thus requires refrigeration during distribution, at retail, and by the consumer.
Tofu suspected of giving botulism to two people in QueensBotulism is a rare but potentially fatal foodborne illness
By Kerry Wills / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Saturday, March 31, 2012, 2:18 AM
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/tofu-suspected-giving-botulism-people-queens-article-1.1053799#ixzz1qtIZYyHM
Two people got botulism - a rare but potentially fatal foodborne illness - after buying tofu at a store in Flushing.
‘Tofu is made by coagulating soy milk and pressing the resulting curds. The process begins by soaking, grinding, boiling and straining dried or fresh soybeans. Coagulation of the protein and oil (emulsion) suspended in the boiled soy milk is the most important step in the production of tofu. This process is accomplished with the aid of coagulants. Two types of coagulants (salts and acids) are used commercially. The third type of coagulant, enzymes, is not yet used commercially but shows potential for producing both firm and "silken" tofu’. (adapted from Wikeapedia).
Clostridium botulinum spores would survive the boiling and then be able to grow in the non-refrigerated product (in the absence of a secondary inhibitor. Tofu products vary greatly, even in terms of inclusion of antimicrobial parameters.) The spores will germinate and grow in the protein rich, non-refrigerated product. The product sitting in water would ensure a sufficient water activity as well as help support an anaerobic environment, both essential for C. botulinum. As C. botulinum grows, it produces a neurotoxin. If ingested, the neurotoxin enters the bloodstream and shuts down muscle function, potentially leading to death through the inability of the victim to breath.
Tofu is a considered a potentially hazardous food (TCS food) and thus requires refrigeration during distribution, at retail, and by the consumer.
Tofu suspected of giving botulism to two people in QueensBotulism is a rare but potentially fatal foodborne illness
By Kerry Wills / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Saturday, March 31, 2012, 2:18 AM
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/tofu-suspected-giving-botulism-people-queens-article-1.1053799#ixzz1qtIZYyHM
Two people got botulism - a rare but potentially fatal foodborne illness - after buying tofu at a store in Flushing.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
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.
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
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
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Cola, BPA, and Our Aversion to Risk
Recently, Campbell Soup made the decision to move away from cans that contain BPA the lining. Was it justified? FDA initially concluded that BPA was not a risk, but after public pressure, they are reevaluating its safety.
Another controversy brewing is the caramel color that gives cola soft drinks their brown color. The chemical, 4-methylimidazole (4-MI), is formed when the caramel color is manufactured. According the FDA, the levels found in soda are well below any concern. The FDA spokesman, Doug Karas stated "A consumer would have to consume well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents”. However, the consumer watchdog group, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), doesn’t agree. They have petitioned FDA to have 4-MI banned.
How do the risks associated with certain chemicals in our food stack up against non-food related risks? For the consumer, this question is difficult to answer. In evaluating the risk associated with a chemical, numerous studies are completed. The scientists issue reports and from these reports, numerous interpretations are made, including ones by industry associations, consumer advocacy groups, and government agencies. Then some of these interpretations make their way to the consumer, either through the mass media (TV, newsprint) or through social media (websites, blogs).
The studies that are conducted to determine risk are rarely perfect. Animal models, where large quantities are injected into small animals such as rats, are often used for toxicity determinations. With these, there is always a question of how realistic it is when compared to humans and their normal living conditions. When large scale human surveys are used to determine risk, it is often difficult to control all of the variables including what people eat, their daily habits, and their genetic makeup. In the end, we hope that conclusions that are drawn are done are unbiased and done in the best interest of the public.
Public opinion polls have been done that show that that is an increasing concern in the consumers’ perception of food hazards. The apparent lack of trust on these technical risk assessments and this can be linked to a number of factors. One is the stories that are reported in the news media and how they are reported. In addition to television and print news, many people now use the internet for their information. On the internet, we see the whole gamut of information, from the scientific studies themselves to the totally unscientific opinion pieces.
One of the primary fears that people have is cancer. Certainly past tragedies provide an underpinning for the public’s concern. Asbestos and tobacco are two examples of cancer related items that have received a high level of media coverage and have led to people being skeptical. So when a linkage is made between a chemical in food and cancer in the news or the media, it will get attention. The question of the level of risk, however, is often more difficult to discern.
How should one respond? First, consumers should inform themselves as best they can by using valid sources of information. It is also important to understand the bias of those providing the information, and try to obtain a balance in what is read. Remember that the information out there is rarely clear cut, so it is important for consumers to make a determination where they feel comfortable.
Links
http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/06/soda-wars-can-the-color-in-your-cola-give-your-cancer/?iid=hl-main-lede?xid=gonewsedit#ixzz1oRRVsFCH
http://www.forbes.com/sites/amywestervelt/2012/03/05/under-pressure-from-parents-advocacy-groups-campbells-goes-bpa-free/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2011/10/25/bpa-is-still-ok/
Another controversy brewing is the caramel color that gives cola soft drinks their brown color. The chemical, 4-methylimidazole (4-MI), is formed when the caramel color is manufactured. According the FDA, the levels found in soda are well below any concern. The FDA spokesman, Doug Karas stated "A consumer would have to consume well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents”. However, the consumer watchdog group, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), doesn’t agree. They have petitioned FDA to have 4-MI banned.
How do the risks associated with certain chemicals in our food stack up against non-food related risks? For the consumer, this question is difficult to answer. In evaluating the risk associated with a chemical, numerous studies are completed. The scientists issue reports and from these reports, numerous interpretations are made, including ones by industry associations, consumer advocacy groups, and government agencies. Then some of these interpretations make their way to the consumer, either through the mass media (TV, newsprint) or through social media (websites, blogs).
The studies that are conducted to determine risk are rarely perfect. Animal models, where large quantities are injected into small animals such as rats, are often used for toxicity determinations. With these, there is always a question of how realistic it is when compared to humans and their normal living conditions. When large scale human surveys are used to determine risk, it is often difficult to control all of the variables including what people eat, their daily habits, and their genetic makeup. In the end, we hope that conclusions that are drawn are done are unbiased and done in the best interest of the public.
Public opinion polls have been done that show that that is an increasing concern in the consumers’ perception of food hazards. The apparent lack of trust on these technical risk assessments and this can be linked to a number of factors. One is the stories that are reported in the news media and how they are reported. In addition to television and print news, many people now use the internet for their information. On the internet, we see the whole gamut of information, from the scientific studies themselves to the totally unscientific opinion pieces.
One of the primary fears that people have is cancer. Certainly past tragedies provide an underpinning for the public’s concern. Asbestos and tobacco are two examples of cancer related items that have received a high level of media coverage and have led to people being skeptical. So when a linkage is made between a chemical in food and cancer in the news or the media, it will get attention. The question of the level of risk, however, is often more difficult to discern.
How should one respond? First, consumers should inform themselves as best they can by using valid sources of information. It is also important to understand the bias of those providing the information, and try to obtain a balance in what is read. Remember that the information out there is rarely clear cut, so it is important for consumers to make a determination where they feel comfortable.
Links
http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/06/soda-wars-can-the-color-in-your-cola-give-your-cancer/?iid=hl-main-lede?xid=gonewsedit#ixzz1oRRVsFCH
http://www.forbes.com/sites/amywestervelt/2012/03/05/under-pressure-from-parents-advocacy-groups-campbells-goes-bpa-free/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2011/10/25/bpa-is-still-ok/
Monday, March 5, 2012
Social Media Taking Over for Mom
The Progressive Grocer discusses a study" Clicks & Cravings: The Impact of Social Technology on Food Culture, which finds social/digital media is replacing Mom as the go-to culinary source of knowledge for many people." These surveys are great references - we sense that more people are using social media as a tool for deciding what to eat, how to prepare it, and then chatting about it with others, but here is a study to support those notions.
http://www.progressivegrocer.com/top-stories/headlines/consumer-insights/id34891/social-media-redefining-our-relationship-with-food/
"The study was jointly developed and conducted by consumer research firm The Hartman Group and Publicis Consultants USA, a food and nutrition marketing agency. Study results show almost half of consumers learn about food via social networking sites, such as Twitter and Facebook, and 40 percent learn about food via websites, apps or blogs."
Impact on food safety - the internet is the wild west of information, where anyone can write anything. It is alway important for people to use trusted sites, and to review information provided in that recipe against validated information (foodsafety.gov for example). If a recipe suggests that you undercook an item, for example to cook chicken to 150F instead of 165F, you should consider not using that recipe.
http://www.progressivegrocer.com/top-stories/headlines/consumer-insights/id34891/social-media-redefining-our-relationship-with-food/
"The study was jointly developed and conducted by consumer research firm The Hartman Group and Publicis Consultants USA, a food and nutrition marketing agency. Study results show almost half of consumers learn about food via social networking sites, such as Twitter and Facebook, and 40 percent learn about food via websites, apps or blogs."
Impact on food safety - the internet is the wild west of information, where anyone can write anything. It is alway important for people to use trusted sites, and to review information provided in that recipe against validated information (foodsafety.gov for example). If a recipe suggests that you undercook an item, for example to cook chicken to 150F instead of 165F, you should consider not using that recipe.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Avoiding High Risk Foods
Consumers who want to reduce the risk of foodborne illness should consider avoiding these foods.
Avoid high-risk foods, food-safety expert recommends
Friday, February 24, 2012
http://live.psu.edu/story/58000
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- It seems that hardly a week goes by without another reported case of some food being blamed for causing people to get sick. Most recently, a national restaurant chain's clover sprouts were linked to a Midwestern outbreak of pathogenic E. coli, and dozens of cases of Campylobacter in four states have been linked to the consumption of raw milk from a Pennsylvania dairy.
As consumers, we start to ask whether any foods are safe to eat.
While it is unlikely that we can completely eliminate the risk of foodborne illness, we can certainly identify a few food items that pose a higher risk of making us ill and avoid them, advises a food-safety expert with Penn State's College of Agricultural Sciences.
"One just needs to look through U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports to see that there are certain foods that show up time and again," said Martin Bucknavage, extension food-safety specialist. "In my opinion, these are foods we certainly should consider removing from our diet if we are interested in reducing our chances of contracting foodborne disease."
Following are a few foods Bucknavage suggests avoiding:
-- Raw sprouts. In the last 15 years, there have been at least 30 reported cases of foodborne illness linked to raw sprouts.
"Pathogenic bacteria come in on the seeds or beans, and during the sprouting process, the conditions are right for these bacteria to multiply," he explained. "Processors will sanitize seeds to remove bacteria, but that measure has not been foolproof."
-- Raw milk. People have consumed raw milk for ages, but from time to time, pathogenic bacteria make their way into the milk, Bucknavage noted.
"In the recent outbreak of foodborne illness related to raw milk sold in southern Pennsylvania, 77 people became infected by Campylobacter, which will cause severe diarrheal conditions for as long as a week or more."
Bucknavage conceded that there are avid proponents of drinking raw milk, who point to the fresh taste and the perceived health benefits.
"However, these health benefits have not been scientifically proven, and the working part of the cow, the udders, are close to the ground and can become contaminated with pathogenic organisms such as Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria and E. coli," he said.
"While most of those who sell raw milk keep the dairy environment as clean as they can and regularly test the health of the cows, a long history of outbreaks shows that there is a real risk of dangerous bacteria making their way into milk. This is why pasteurization became a standard practice in the late 1800s."
-- Raw oysters. These are another food that has a loyal following, Bucknavage pointed out. But he explained that oysters are filter feeders and can capture pathogenic bacteria and viruses if they are harvested in contaminated waters.
"A process such as depuration -- allowing oysters to live in cleaned water for a period of time -- can help, but use of this practice is limited," he said.
-- Undercooked ground beef. While some people undercook hamburgers intentionally, the majority do it because they do not use the correct endpoint for cooking, according to Bucknavage. They should measure the recommended internal temperature of 160 F using a meat thermometer.
"It would be fair to say that most people measure whether something is cooked by visual evaluation -- the lack of pink color," he said. "But this is an unreliable method.
"Some people will point out that they eat steak with pink in the middle. But this is different than hamburger. In the process of making hamburger, the meat is ground, and the exterior parts where the bacteria reside are mixed throughout the meat. Because of this, we need to achieve a higher cooking temperature in the center of the meat."
Chicken is another example of a food that often is undercooked, whether on purpose or by accident, Bucknavage lamented. Poultry has been shown to have a high prevalence, or contamination rate, of Campylobacter, he noted.
"To properly cook poultry, an internal temperature of 165 degrees Fahrenheit or higher is required," he said. "Otherwise, organisms such as Campylobacter can survive."
Along with avoiding high-risk foods, it is also important to practice effective cleaning and sanitizing of food-preparation surfaces and cooking utensils, Bucknavage said, as well as storing food under proper conditions. "Doing this, we can go a long way in protecting ourselves and our families from contracting foodborne illness."
Avoid high-risk foods, food-safety expert recommends
Friday, February 24, 2012
http://live.psu.edu/story/58000
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- It seems that hardly a week goes by without another reported case of some food being blamed for causing people to get sick. Most recently, a national restaurant chain's clover sprouts were linked to a Midwestern outbreak of pathogenic E. coli, and dozens of cases of Campylobacter in four states have been linked to the consumption of raw milk from a Pennsylvania dairy.
As consumers, we start to ask whether any foods are safe to eat.
While it is unlikely that we can completely eliminate the risk of foodborne illness, we can certainly identify a few food items that pose a higher risk of making us ill and avoid them, advises a food-safety expert with Penn State's College of Agricultural Sciences.
"One just needs to look through U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports to see that there are certain foods that show up time and again," said Martin Bucknavage, extension food-safety specialist. "In my opinion, these are foods we certainly should consider removing from our diet if we are interested in reducing our chances of contracting foodborne disease."
Following are a few foods Bucknavage suggests avoiding:
-- Raw sprouts. In the last 15 years, there have been at least 30 reported cases of foodborne illness linked to raw sprouts.
"Pathogenic bacteria come in on the seeds or beans, and during the sprouting process, the conditions are right for these bacteria to multiply," he explained. "Processors will sanitize seeds to remove bacteria, but that measure has not been foolproof."
-- Raw milk. People have consumed raw milk for ages, but from time to time, pathogenic bacteria make their way into the milk, Bucknavage noted.
"In the recent outbreak of foodborne illness related to raw milk sold in southern Pennsylvania, 77 people became infected by Campylobacter, which will cause severe diarrheal conditions for as long as a week or more."
Bucknavage conceded that there are avid proponents of drinking raw milk, who point to the fresh taste and the perceived health benefits.
"However, these health benefits have not been scientifically proven, and the working part of the cow, the udders, are close to the ground and can become contaminated with pathogenic organisms such as Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria and E. coli," he said.
"While most of those who sell raw milk keep the dairy environment as clean as they can and regularly test the health of the cows, a long history of outbreaks shows that there is a real risk of dangerous bacteria making their way into milk. This is why pasteurization became a standard practice in the late 1800s."
-- Raw oysters. These are another food that has a loyal following, Bucknavage pointed out. But he explained that oysters are filter feeders and can capture pathogenic bacteria and viruses if they are harvested in contaminated waters.
"A process such as depuration -- allowing oysters to live in cleaned water for a period of time -- can help, but use of this practice is limited," he said.
-- Undercooked ground beef. While some people undercook hamburgers intentionally, the majority do it because they do not use the correct endpoint for cooking, according to Bucknavage. They should measure the recommended internal temperature of 160 F using a meat thermometer.
"It would be fair to say that most people measure whether something is cooked by visual evaluation -- the lack of pink color," he said. "But this is an unreliable method.
"Some people will point out that they eat steak with pink in the middle. But this is different than hamburger. In the process of making hamburger, the meat is ground, and the exterior parts where the bacteria reside are mixed throughout the meat. Because of this, we need to achieve a higher cooking temperature in the center of the meat."
Chicken is another example of a food that often is undercooked, whether on purpose or by accident, Bucknavage lamented. Poultry has been shown to have a high prevalence, or contamination rate, of Campylobacter, he noted.
"To properly cook poultry, an internal temperature of 165 degrees Fahrenheit or higher is required," he said. "Otherwise, organisms such as Campylobacter can survive."
Along with avoiding high-risk foods, it is also important to practice effective cleaning and sanitizing of food-preparation surfaces and cooking utensils, Bucknavage said, as well as storing food under proper conditions. "Doing this, we can go a long way in protecting ourselves and our families from contracting foodborne illness."
Friday, February 24, 2012
Norovirus Outbreaks 2012
The leading cause of foodborne disease is making its mark this winter. Just this February, Norovirus caused more than 200 attendees at a cheerleader camp in Washington State to become ill. In St. Maarten, a cruise ship returned to port as 31 became ill. In Virginia, an elementary school was closed because so many students were ill. And in New Jersey, more than 400 college students become ill at three universities located in the same county.
There are some important reasons that lead to so many people becoming ill from Norovirus. One is the virus’s low infectious dose. It is estimated that it may take only 10 viral particles to make someone ill. Then, there is the ability of the virus to survive for up to two weeks on dry surfaces and in water for months. The virus can be spread through a number of ways including through contaminated food or water, from contaminated surfaces, directly from a sick person, or from the intake of aerosolized droplets of vomitus.
The main symptom of Norovirus infection is another factor for its spread – acute-onset vomiting. This prevents people from becoming sick in a secure location. Rather, rapid onset can occur at a dinner table, on a carpet, or on the bus. People usually become ill within 24 hours of exposure, although longer incubation periods do occur. Once someone is sick, they can experience symptoms for 24 to 72 hours, and can remain contagious for up to 3 days.
Because of this short incubation time, low infectious dose, and ease of spread, one can see why it spreads through a school or a cruise ship so quickly. While rarely fatal, people who become ill need to watch so that they do not become dehydrated.
The most important key in preventing infection is frequent, but correct hand washing – scrubbing hands with soap and warm water. Additionally, it is important for people to stay home when ill, especially when they may have been exposed to someone who has had the illness. They should also stay home for at least 48 hours after systems have subsided. Contaminated surfaces must be cleaned using a strong chlorine bleach solution, 1 cup of bleach o one gallon of water. Cooking will destroy the organism.
CDC link for additional information
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/revb/gastro/norovirus.htm
Outbreak cases
http://www.inquisitr.com/193064/norovirus-outbreak-2012-washington-state-cheerleading-competition/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/13/crown-princess-departs-af_0_n_1272706.html
http://www.nbc12.com/story/16958672/norovirus-outbreak-causes-school-to-close
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2012/02/mercer_county_colleges_report.html
There are some important reasons that lead to so many people becoming ill from Norovirus. One is the virus’s low infectious dose. It is estimated that it may take only 10 viral particles to make someone ill. Then, there is the ability of the virus to survive for up to two weeks on dry surfaces and in water for months. The virus can be spread through a number of ways including through contaminated food or water, from contaminated surfaces, directly from a sick person, or from the intake of aerosolized droplets of vomitus.
The main symptom of Norovirus infection is another factor for its spread – acute-onset vomiting. This prevents people from becoming sick in a secure location. Rather, rapid onset can occur at a dinner table, on a carpet, or on the bus. People usually become ill within 24 hours of exposure, although longer incubation periods do occur. Once someone is sick, they can experience symptoms for 24 to 72 hours, and can remain contagious for up to 3 days.
Because of this short incubation time, low infectious dose, and ease of spread, one can see why it spreads through a school or a cruise ship so quickly. While rarely fatal, people who become ill need to watch so that they do not become dehydrated.
The most important key in preventing infection is frequent, but correct hand washing – scrubbing hands with soap and warm water. Additionally, it is important for people to stay home when ill, especially when they may have been exposed to someone who has had the illness. They should also stay home for at least 48 hours after systems have subsided. Contaminated surfaces must be cleaned using a strong chlorine bleach solution, 1 cup of bleach o one gallon of water. Cooking will destroy the organism.
CDC link for additional information
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/revb/gastro/norovirus.htm
Outbreak cases
http://www.inquisitr.com/193064/norovirus-outbreak-2012-washington-state-cheerleading-competition/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/13/crown-princess-departs-af_0_n_1272706.html
http://www.nbc12.com/story/16958672/norovirus-outbreak-causes-school-to-close
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2012/02/mercer_county_colleges_report.html
Monday, February 20, 2012
E. coli O26 infections linked to Clover Sprouts
Raw sprouts are responsible for another outbreak of foodborne illness and at least the fourth outbreak linked to the same restaurant chain, Jimmy Johns. In this latest case, there are 12 people infected with STEC O26 (CDC and AP link below).
After the last outbreak linked to the restaurant chain in late 2010 where close to 120 people became ill with Salmonella, the chain switched from alfalfa sprouts to clover sprouts. But sprouts are sprouts – they are a higher risk food item in that it can be difficult to remove organisms such as Salmonella and E.coli from the seeds, and the process that allows the seed to sprout also may allow the organism to grow. Now, it appears the chain will drop sprouts from its menu (http://www.kirksvilledailyexpress.com/news/x1793836666/Jimmy-Johns-permanently-pulls-sprouts-from-menu).
Tainted sprouts again linked to Jimmy John’s, outbreak is fourth linked to restaurantBy Associated Press, Published: February 15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/tainted-sprouts-again-linked-to-jimmy-johns-outbreak-is-fourth-linked-to-restaurant/2012/02/15/gIQAGxFVGR_story.html
WASHINGTON — Raw sprouts from the sandwich chain Jimmy John’s have been linked to an outbreak of foodborne illness — again.
The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Wednesday that 12 cases of E. coli poisoning in five states are linked to raw clover sprouts eaten at Jimmy John’s restaurants. The outbreak comes a year after raw alfalfa sprouts from one of the chain’s suppliers were linked to 140 salmonella illnesses. Sprouts from the chain’s suppliers were also linked to a 2009 salmonella outbreak in several Midwestern states and were suspected in an E. coli outbreak in Boulder, Colo. in 2008.
After the last outbreak linked to the restaurant chain in late 2010 where close to 120 people became ill with Salmonella, the chain switched from alfalfa sprouts to clover sprouts. But sprouts are sprouts – they are a higher risk food item in that it can be difficult to remove organisms such as Salmonella and E.coli from the seeds, and the process that allows the seed to sprout also may allow the organism to grow. Now, it appears the chain will drop sprouts from its menu (http://www.kirksvilledailyexpress.com/news/x1793836666/Jimmy-Johns-permanently-pulls-sprouts-from-menu).
Tainted sprouts again linked to Jimmy John’s, outbreak is fourth linked to restaurantBy Associated Press, Published: February 15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/tainted-sprouts-again-linked-to-jimmy-johns-outbreak-is-fourth-linked-to-restaurant/2012/02/15/gIQAGxFVGR_story.html
WASHINGTON — Raw sprouts from the sandwich chain Jimmy John’s have been linked to an outbreak of foodborne illness — again.
The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Wednesday that 12 cases of E. coli poisoning in five states are linked to raw clover sprouts eaten at Jimmy John’s restaurants. The outbreak comes a year after raw alfalfa sprouts from one of the chain’s suppliers were linked to 140 salmonella illnesses. Sprouts from the chain’s suppliers were also linked to a 2009 salmonella outbreak in several Midwestern states and were suspected in an E. coli outbreak in Boulder, Colo. in 2008.
Labels:
CDC,
e.coli,
food safety,
outbreak,
salmonella,
sprouts
Friday, February 17, 2012
Raw Milk Testing Requirements - Outbeak of Campylobacter in Family Cow Raw Milk
In a recent report (below), there are now 77 cases of campylobacterosis from the consumption of raw milk associated with Family Cow. What standards are in place for a dairy to sell raw milk? Attached is the section on testing schedule from Pennsylvania's guidenance for those selling raw milk. Note that there is no requirement for continuous testing. In general, APC, coliform, and somatic cell counts are required twice per month and these parameters serve as indicators of sanitary quality, However, actual pathogen testing is only required once every six months. Now, dairies selling raw milk may be testing more frequently. Probably a good question for the producer of your raw milk.
Raw Milk Testing Standards
Guideance -
PERMITS ALLOWING THE SALE OF
RAW MILK FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_24476_10297_0_43/AgWebsite/Files/Publications/Draft_-_Revision_of_Raw_Milk_Guidance_Doc_Final.pdf
9. Regular Testing of Raw Milk.
a. Responsibility. A raw milk permit holder is responsible to arrange for the regular sampling and testing required with respect to the raw milk permit, and to pay for this testing.
9b.
Pennsylvania Approved Dairy Laboratories. All raw milk samples submitted for testing must be analyzed at an official laboratory (a laboratory which is under the direct supervision of the Department) or a Pennsylvania approved dairy laboratory (a laboratory authorized or designated
by the Department as allowed to perform specific milk testing).
c. Testing Schedule. A raw milk permit holder must coordinate raw milk testing on the following
schedule, and the raw milk samples must meet the following standards:
Raw Milk Testing Standards
Guideance -
PERMITS ALLOWING THE SALE OF
RAW MILK FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_24476_10297_0_43/AgWebsite/Files/Publications/Draft_-_Revision_of_Raw_Milk_Guidance_Doc_Final.pdf
9. Regular Testing of Raw Milk.
a. Responsibility. A raw milk permit holder is responsible to arrange for the regular sampling and testing required with respect to the raw milk permit, and to pay for this testing.
9b.
Pennsylvania Approved Dairy Laboratories. All raw milk samples submitted for testing must be analyzed at an official laboratory (a laboratory which is under the direct supervision of the Department) or a Pennsylvania approved dairy laboratory (a laboratory authorized or designated
by the Department as allowed to perform specific milk testing).
c. Testing Schedule. A raw milk permit holder must coordinate raw milk testing on the following
schedule, and the raw milk samples must meet the following standards:
Another illness case linked to The Family Cow's raw milk
CHAMBERSBURG - The number of cases of sickness linked to The Family Cow raw milk stands at 77 in four states.Friday, February 10, 2012
Expanding the list of bad [foodborne disease causing] bacteria?
There is currently a push to put a zero tolerance on four strains of drug-resistant salmonella in uncooked meat (link below). This comes after the 2011 outbreak of Salmonella linked to ground beef where 20 people were reported to become ill. (http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/typhimurium-groundbeef/020112/index.html). The responsible organism was a multi-drug resistant strain of Salmonella Typhimurium.
Another recent expansion was the addition of 6 strains of E. coli non-O157 STEC. Although the testing program was to go into effect in March of 2012, it was pushed pack to June of 2012. The reason relates to the lack of validated test methods to detect the specific pathogenic strains (link below).
Looking for a given bacterial species is difficult enough, but when we have to look for strains of bacteria containing specific genes, reliable testing is not always easy. Throw in the fact that the product being tested is raw, and that the prevalence of bacteria is very low, and it makes one question to what degree can we track and eliminate the sources. (For example, FSIS reports the prevalence of Salmonella in ground beef is about 2% (http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Progress_Report_Salmonella_Testing.pdf), and in a 2009 study by ARS, the level for MDR Salmonella was only 0.6% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19201965)).
Will consumers benefit? Will public health be better served? Will regulatory requirements for zero tolerance be enforceable or achievable?
Interesting note, a consumer group recently requested that FDA put a zero tolerance of Vibrio vulnificus on oysters (http://cspinet.org/new/201202091.html) to help protect those who choose to consume raw oysters. Vibrio vulnificus is a natural contaminate in waters where oysters are harvested, especially in the warmer months. In most all cases, the organism affects those who have underlying medical condition, primarily past or present alcohol abuse. Are oyster fisherman going to start testing oysters before delivering to the local shuck house? Why not just make it illegal to consumer raw oysters?
Salmonella Outbreak Spurs Call to Expand List of Banned Bacteria
February 08, 2012, 1:59 PM EST
Bloomberg Businessweek
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-08/salmonella-outbreak-spurs-call-to-expand-list-of-banned-bacteria.html
By Stephanie Armour
Another recent expansion was the addition of 6 strains of E. coli non-O157 STEC. Although the testing program was to go into effect in March of 2012, it was pushed pack to June of 2012. The reason relates to the lack of validated test methods to detect the specific pathogenic strains (link below).
Looking for a given bacterial species is difficult enough, but when we have to look for strains of bacteria containing specific genes, reliable testing is not always easy. Throw in the fact that the product being tested is raw, and that the prevalence of bacteria is very low, and it makes one question to what degree can we track and eliminate the sources. (For example, FSIS reports the prevalence of Salmonella in ground beef is about 2% (http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Progress_Report_Salmonella_Testing.pdf), and in a 2009 study by ARS, the level for MDR Salmonella was only 0.6% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19201965)).
Will consumers benefit? Will public health be better served? Will regulatory requirements for zero tolerance be enforceable or achievable?
Interesting note, a consumer group recently requested that FDA put a zero tolerance of Vibrio vulnificus on oysters (http://cspinet.org/new/201202091.html) to help protect those who choose to consume raw oysters. Vibrio vulnificus is a natural contaminate in waters where oysters are harvested, especially in the warmer months. In most all cases, the organism affects those who have underlying medical condition, primarily past or present alcohol abuse. Are oyster fisherman going to start testing oysters before delivering to the local shuck house? Why not just make it illegal to consumer raw oysters?
Salmonella Outbreak Spurs Call to Expand List of Banned Bacteria
February 08, 2012, 1:59 PM EST
Bloomberg Businessweek
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-08/salmonella-outbreak-spurs-call-to-expand-list-of-banned-bacteria.html
By Stephanie Armour
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Recall of Cooked Eggs Highlights Need for Tight Food Safety Control of RTE Foodservice Product
The Cooked Egg recall this month once again shows how one glitch in a food safety system at one facility can have a ripple effect throughout the food chain. In this case, positive test results for Listeria on cooked eggs necessitated that the company recall up to 1 million cooked eggs. This in turn, has resulted in a dozen or so associated product recalls where these eggs were used as an ingredient as well as the removal of eggs from salad bars where eggs were served sliced, diced, or crumbled.
Consumers demand fresh, already-prepared foods, and so refrigerated ready-to-eat (RTE) foods are now a staple in many retail and convenience food stores. Most stores would be hard pressed to prepare every prepared RTE food item from scratch. They rely on their suppliers to pre-prepare many of these items, such as cooked eggs, to be mixed in as an ingredient to make a product or directly served as the finished product. Even many restaurants now use pre-prepared food items, some fully cooked, some partially cooked. Because of this, suppliers of these pre-prepared RTE items must have excellent food safety systems in place. These systems must account for the shipping, handling, and serving of foods without any additional cook step by the retail or foodservice company. Throw in the fact that consumers also want foods without preservatives , including lower salt, and one can see the increased challenges.
Listeria is one hazard associated with ready-to-eat refrigerated foods. This organism grows at refrigeration temperatures, so it can be found in the food plant environment that is not adequately cleaned. In addition to Listeria, there can be other hazards if there is temperature abuse of the product, such as Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium botulinum, and Staphylococcus aureus.
Hopefully this case raises the flag to all those who prepare RTE foods or food components as well as those who buy them. A small glitch in the system, such as this case where there was a repair in the packaging area, can produce a chain reaction of issues downstream, and more importantly, have the potential to produce illness in those who consumer the contaminated food.
Recall Reveals An Egg's Long Path To The Deli Sandwich
by Nancy Shute NPR February 9, 2012
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/02/07/146540839/recall-reveals-an-eggs-long-path-to-the-deli-sandwich
Consumers demand fresh, already-prepared foods, and so refrigerated ready-to-eat (RTE) foods are now a staple in many retail and convenience food stores. Most stores would be hard pressed to prepare every prepared RTE food item from scratch. They rely on their suppliers to pre-prepare many of these items, such as cooked eggs, to be mixed in as an ingredient to make a product or directly served as the finished product. Even many restaurants now use pre-prepared food items, some fully cooked, some partially cooked. Because of this, suppliers of these pre-prepared RTE items must have excellent food safety systems in place. These systems must account for the shipping, handling, and serving of foods without any additional cook step by the retail or foodservice company. Throw in the fact that consumers also want foods without preservatives , including lower salt, and one can see the increased challenges.
Listeria is one hazard associated with ready-to-eat refrigerated foods. This organism grows at refrigeration temperatures, so it can be found in the food plant environment that is not adequately cleaned. In addition to Listeria, there can be other hazards if there is temperature abuse of the product, such as Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium botulinum, and Staphylococcus aureus.
Hopefully this case raises the flag to all those who prepare RTE foods or food components as well as those who buy them. A small glitch in the system, such as this case where there was a repair in the packaging area, can produce a chain reaction of issues downstream, and more importantly, have the potential to produce illness in those who consumer the contaminated food.
Recall Reveals An Egg's Long Path To The Deli Sandwich
by Nancy Shute NPR February 9, 2012
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/02/07/146540839/recall-reveals-an-eggs-long-path-to-the-deli-sandwich
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Eli Manning and E.coli
In an article in International Business Times, a doctor (and poet) "makes an arm-chaired" diagnosis that that Eli Manning had an E. coli infection prior to the playoff game with San Francisco.( http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/293025/20120204/eli-manning-sick-coli-flu-super-bowl.htm). There are two issues with this - first, being sick for a day or so with diarrhea is insufficient evidence for calling Eli's bout of diarrhea an E. coli related illness. E. coli infections are extremely serious and will last for more than a day or two. It is unlikely that Eli would have ever made it to the playoff game if he truly had an E.coli infection.
Second, and more importantly, when we call everything a foodborne disease, (such as a day of having diarrhea), we lose the importance of why food safety is so important. It is not until someone is sitting on the pot for 3 or 4 days straight not knowing whether they will live another day, or they end up in the hospital due to severe dehydration, do people grasp what a foodborne infection is. When people trivialize foodborne illness, they are less likely to take actions to prevent it.
So my "arm-chaired" analysis.......viral infection.
Second, and more importantly, when we call everything a foodborne disease, (such as a day of having diarrhea), we lose the importance of why food safety is so important. It is not until someone is sitting on the pot for 3 or 4 days straight not knowing whether they will live another day, or they end up in the hospital due to severe dehydration, do people grasp what a foodborne infection is. When people trivialize foodborne illness, they are less likely to take actions to prevent it.
So my "arm-chaired" analysis.......viral infection.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Outbreaks in the News this week (2/7/12)
There have been some interesting foodborne illness outbreaks in the news this week (Feb 7, 2012). Here is a quick summary.
Clostridium perfrigens outbreak due to taco meat served at N.D. basketball game. How it probably happened - the spore-forming organism survived the heat treatment and then grew in the taco meat when that cooked meat was not held at the proper temperature. Temperature control of cooked food can be an issue in venues like this. Unfortunately, people are not willing to question servers when they receive meat products that are not hot. People preparing and handling food may not have been trained.
http://www.ksfy.com/story/16689309/clostridium-perfringens-cause-of-pierre-outbreakWatermelon the likely source for Salmonella outbreak – Over 35 people became ill (it occurred in England, so they became unwell) from eating ready-to-eat (pre-sliced) watermelon. How it probably happened - during the watermelon slicing operation Salmonella was transferred from the outer surface to the interior surface. This Salmonella could have originated on the raw fruit, and then been spread through the wash water. If the sliced water melon was not refrigerated, Salmonella could grow on the more pH neutral fruit, making the situation worse.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9056645/One-person-dies-after-salmonella-outbreak-linked-to-watermelons.htmlUpdate – Outbreak of Campylobacter from consumption of contaminated raw milk affects 43 people in 4 states. The dairy has resumed sales. (That raw milk group is a dedicated bunch).
http://www.therecordherald.com/news/x962217783/Raw-milk-sales-resume-at-The-Family-Cow-in-Chambersburg3 cruise ships disinfected after norovirus outbreak
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/travel/ship-with-stomach-virus-outbreak-sets-sail-from-port-everglades-with-new-passengers/2012/02/06/gIQAc8aztQ_story.html?tid=pm_lifestyle_popSaturday, February 4, 2012
Salmonella and Taco Bell - CDC to release or not to release
CDC released the final report on a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis which was associated with eating food from a Mexican-style fast food restaurant chain, Restaurant Chain A. This report, issued on January 19, 2011 (http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/restaurant-enteriditis/011912/index.html) indicated that 68 individuals from 10 different states became ill from October, 2011 through November, 2011.
Much of the controversy now is that CDC or the FDA did not release the name of the restaurant which we now know is Taco Bell. It is not agencies’ policy to release the name of establishments when it is determined that the release of this information will have no impact on other people becoming ill. (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/hidden-outbreak-restaurants-stay-anonymous/story?id=15505386). Having been to many food safety conferences over the years where CDC and FDA presented case study reports, I have seen that they never state the name of the company involved in the case being presented.
On one side, I can see the value in not releasing this name. Often, the case is ongoing, so they need cooperation from the establishment. Additionally, releasing this information can have a huge financial impact on the company. We assume these investigations are air-tight, but that is absolutely the case. We just need to look at how tomatoes were wrongly blamed in 2008 when peppers were actually the source. In that salsa outbreak, the tomato industry was devastated. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=columnist_skrzycki&sid=agA9XKef6P20). In many investigations, the indictment of a food and associated producer is based on a statistical analysis without actual product testing, as was the case with Taco Bell.
On the other side, as a consumer, I want to know which establishments present a likely risk to me and my family. The fact that an given establishment is involved indicated that they have a insufficient food safety system. An added concern is the fact that there seems to be no clue as to the actual cause of the Salmonella contamination. So, to what degree do we look at this company and question whether they have a potential condition under control? In a statement, (http://blogs.ajc.com/business-beat/2012/02/02/taco-bell-salmonella-outbreak-remains-mystery/?cxntfid=blogs_business_beat) Taco Bell indicates that it is probably at the suppler level. Is that giving you any confidence in the safety of their food?
Man treated for rabies after field dressing infected deer
A Pennsylvania man was treated for rabies after exposure from an infected deer he had shot and field dressed.
A few important points:
Hunters should avoid field dressing deer that look abnormal or that had acted abnormally (including hides with large or multiple lesions, internal organs with abscesses or that are foul smelling, or an animal that has exhibited unusual behavior, such as this case where the animal is growling.) In most all cases, the hunter should still take down the animal and then contact the Game Commission.
Always wear latex gloves when field dressing a deer, being sure to keep fluids from contracting your own skin. (That includes refraining from spreading blood on your face as you pretend to be the Great Hunter.)
A little more on rabies from the CDC:
A few important points:
Hunters should avoid field dressing deer that look abnormal or that had acted abnormally (including hides with large or multiple lesions, internal organs with abscesses or that are foul smelling, or an animal that has exhibited unusual behavior, such as this case where the animal is growling.) In most all cases, the hunter should still take down the animal and then contact the Game Commission.
Always wear latex gloves when field dressing a deer, being sure to keep fluids from contracting your own skin. (That includes refraining from spreading blood on your face as you pretend to be the Great Hunter.)
A little more on rabies from the CDC:
Rabies is a preventable viral disease of mammals most often transmitted through the bite of a rabid animal. The vast majority of rabies cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) each year occur in wild animals like raccoons, skunks, bats, and foxes.Hunters risk run-in with rabieshttp://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120203/NEWS/202030348/-1/NEWS01
The rabies virus infects the central nervous system, ultimately causing disease in the brain and death. The early symptoms of rabies in people are similar to that of many other illnesses, including fever, headache, and general weakness or discomfort. As the disease progresses, more specific symptoms appear and may include insomnia, anxiety, confusion, slight or partial paralysis, excitation, hallucinations, agitation, hypersalivation (increase in saliva), difficulty swallowing, and hydrophobia (fear of water). Death usually occurs within days of the onset of these symptoms
People usually get rabies from the bite of a rabid animal. It is also possible, but quite rare, that people may get rabies if infectious material from a rabid animal, such as saliva, gets directly into their eyes, nose, mouth, or a wound.
Scratches, abrasions, open wounds, or mucous membranes contaminated with saliva or other potentially infectious material (such as brain tissue) from a rabid animal constitute non-bite exposures. Occasionally reports of non-bite exposure are such that postexposure prophylaxis is given.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Recall of cooked eggs due to Listeria postive test results
Recall of cooked eggs and products made from those eggs due to Listeria contamination. Eggs were sold by Michael Foods under the brand names Columbia Valley Farms, GFS, Glenview Farms, Papetti's, Silverbrook and Wholesome Farms. These were institutional sized pails sold to other companies to be used in further packaging or used in foodservice. They were not sold directly to consumers. There have been no associated illnesses.
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal (link below), “
Also, this is another case where positive results obtained through a third party testing laboratory, perhaps done on behalf of a customer, has triggered a recall that has affected a widening number of other customers.
FDA recall notices:
Michael Foods, Inc. is recalling specific lot dates of hard-cooked eggs in brine sold in 10- and 25-pound pails for institutional use that were produced at its Wakefield, Nebraska facility because the product has the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm289920.htm
Allison’s Gourmet Kitchens Recalls Prepared Salads that Contain Hard Cooked Eggs - The recalled Prepared Salads that contain hard cooked eggs were distributed in Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Kansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, Tennessee and Missouri.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm290212.htm
Wegmans Food Markets, Inc. is recalling hard-cooked eggs, as well as prepared foods that contain hard-cooked eggs, sold between January 23 and February 1, 2012 because the eggs have the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. …products sold in Wegmans prepared foods and deli departments….
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm290198.htm
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal (link below), “
"The recall was initiated after lab testing revealed that some of the eggs within the recalled lot dates may have been contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. A recall of three lot dates was announced on Thursday, January 26. As a precautionary measure, the recall was expanded today to include additional lot dates. Michael Foods reached the decision to expand this recall after a thorough investigation which indicated a specific repair project that took place in the packaging room as the likely source of the contamination. The company has taken a number of corrective steps to address the issue and prevent recurrence"Interesting to note was that work was done in the packaging room. This is a common issue – repair work either introduces Listeria, or releases it from some location where it has been in an inactive state, probably for some time. Whenever work is done, in a kitchen or a processing room, extra attention must be paid to cleaning and sanitizing the area where the work occurred. Additionally, heavy verification testing is recommended to ensure that an organism like Listeria is not present.
Also, this is another case where positive results obtained through a third party testing laboratory, perhaps done on behalf of a customer, has triggered a recall that has affected a widening number of other customers.
FDA recall notices:
Michael Foods, Inc. is recalling specific lot dates of hard-cooked eggs in brine sold in 10- and 25-pound pails for institutional use that were produced at its Wakefield, Nebraska facility because the product has the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm289920.htm
Allison’s Gourmet Kitchens Recalls Prepared Salads that Contain Hard Cooked Eggs - The recalled Prepared Salads that contain hard cooked eggs were distributed in Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Kansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, Tennessee and Missouri.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm290212.htm
Wegmans Food Markets, Inc. is recalling hard-cooked eggs, as well as prepared foods that contain hard-cooked eggs, sold between January 23 and February 1, 2012 because the eggs have the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. …products sold in Wegmans prepared foods and deli departments….
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm290198.htm
Raw Milk and Campylobacter - Outbreak in PA
There are now close to 40 cases of Campylobacteriosis related to raw milk sold by a Pennsylvania dairy (Franklin County). Although the Campylobacter bacteria has been isolated from bottles of the milk, proponents march on in defense of raw milk – either denying it was the milk, or claiming their right to drink raw milk (read comment on the bottom of page by an advocate).
Campylobacter is a very serious illness. From the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/divisions/dfbmd/diseases/campylobacter/):
Campylobacteriosis is an infectious disease caused by bacteria of the genus Campylobacter. Most people who become ill with campylobacteriosis get diarrhea, cramping, abdominal pain, and fever within two to five days after exposure to the organism. The diarrhea may be bloody and can be accompanied by nausea and vomiting. The illness typically lasts one week. Some infected persons do not have any symptoms. In persons with compromised immune systems, Campylobacter occasionally spreads to the bloodstream and causes a serious life-threatening infection.
I believe that people do have the right to drink raw milk, eat raw eggs, and eat raw oysters. But, people need to understand the real risk associated with these products AND society should not pick up the cost once they become sick, or perhaps even ensuring compliance of raw milk producers (that should be built into the cost of product).
Number of people with illnesses linked to raw milk rising in Pa., Md. W.Va.
Lab tests confirm bacteria's presence in raw milk from Chambersburg dairyFebruary 02, 2012|By JENNIFER FITCH | waynesboro@herald-mail.com
http://articles.herald-mail.com/2012-02-02/news/31019695_1_raw-milk-unpasteurized-milk-dairy-farm
Campylobacter is a very serious illness. From the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/divisions/dfbmd/diseases/campylobacter/):
Campylobacteriosis is an infectious disease caused by bacteria of the genus Campylobacter. Most people who become ill with campylobacteriosis get diarrhea, cramping, abdominal pain, and fever within two to five days after exposure to the organism. The diarrhea may be bloody and can be accompanied by nausea and vomiting. The illness typically lasts one week. Some infected persons do not have any symptoms. In persons with compromised immune systems, Campylobacter occasionally spreads to the bloodstream and causes a serious life-threatening infection.
I believe that people do have the right to drink raw milk, eat raw eggs, and eat raw oysters. But, people need to understand the real risk associated with these products AND society should not pick up the cost once they become sick, or perhaps even ensuring compliance of raw milk producers (that should be built into the cost of product).
Number of people with illnesses linked to raw milk rising in Pa., Md. W.Va.
Lab tests confirm bacteria's presence in raw milk from Chambersburg dairyFebruary 02, 2012|By JENNIFER FITCH | waynesboro@herald-mail.com
http://articles.herald-mail.com/2012-02-02/news/31019695_1_raw-milk-unpasteurized-milk-dairy-farm
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Revisiting Third Party Food Safety Audits
Once again third party audits take heat for an outbreak, in this case, the Listeria outbreak in Jenson Farms Cantaloupes.. In the USA Today, two viewpoints are presented. Both present valid points, but there is more that can be said. Third party food safety audits provide a snapshot evaluation of the food safety system of an organization and give an assessment of whether that facility is following that food safety system. One important limitation is that audits, as currently completed, are not as good at determining the validity of that system, in other words, how well that system is actually working to make safe food. An astute auditor can see signs that the plan is valid through results of pathogen testing, through the process parameters that are set up, but there are factors that limit this.
- Auditors often cover a broad range of facilities and process types (even within the same commodity) and so it is difficult to have an in depth understanding of every process in every facility an auditor visits. They will not have the vast knowledge of a given pathogen as compared to a PhD who has studied that pathogen for years.
- Audits are often one day in duration, so there is little time to get into the nuts and bolts of the process. Audits will look at the broad systems that are in place and make sure they are being followed (such as GMP’s, supplier control, pest control, HACCP), but to look at the validity of a process can take days, especially when there is the lack of support documentation such as pathogen testing.
- In most cases, auditors are not conducting microbiological analysis of the environment or of the finished product. They may look at results that are on file, but they themselves are not swabbing surfaces or pulling product from the end of the line and sending to a qualified laboratory. As was seen in the PCA case, a company may only show select results from a less reputable laboratory. So to what degree can an auditor, in a day or so, evaluate the laboratory being used, the methods that laboratory is using, and the sampling scheme used by the plant?
- Auditors will count, in part, that the facility actually knows what it is doing. If a facility has been processing cantaloupes for years, it is easy to make the assumption they must have some clue of what they are doing. They can question why a change was made, in this case the change in process, but to make a call on the safety of that change is more difficult.
- Companies being audited do want to pass the audit. Their business depends on it. When they hire an auditor, it is less likely they will put themselves in a position to fail….and that may mean hiring someone they know who will not put them through the ringer. Indeed, this a conflict of interest. But this practice of having the supplier pay for their own audit was started years ago by the purchasing companies requiring the audits. To get out of paying for audits of every supplier, they had the idea to make the supplier pay for the audit. Sure, the customer company provides a list of audit firms or auditors from which the supplier can choose, but still, the supplier still hires that person.
Because of these limitations associated with third party audits, they are not a guarantee of product safety. Rather, they are just a part of the entire food safety system that a company uses to ensure safe food. If a company uses the fact that they passed an audit as sole reason for why they believe their food is safe, then that company probably does not have true food safety systems in place. The goal of the audit for the food company is to assess their systems and provide feedback on where improvement is needed. Each aspect of the audit is there for a reason, so food companies need to embrace the intent of the requirement, not just to throw something in place to pass the audit.
While there has been a ratcheting up of requirements through GFSI (SQF and BRC) on both what is required in audits and what is required for someone to be a qualified auditor, some of these issues still exist. Even with government based inspection, there are similar shortcomings. Audits are an important part of our food safety system, whether internal, second party, third party , or government, but the responsibility for food safety ultimately falls on the company producing the food. Food companies must use these audits as guideposts for continual improvement. Employees, managers, and just as importantly, executive management must thoroughly understand their process and product. They must challenge themselves, with the help of auditors, to ensure their food safety system has addressed all possible food safety hazards.
by Martin Bucknavage 12/1/12
Friday, January 13, 2012
Venison and STEC E. coli
In this CDC report, high school students became infected with STEC E. coli from the mishandling / undercooking venison. Here, a group of students collected deer, processed them, and then prepared them as kebobs…..at school. 2 of them were hospitalized with STEC E.coli, (29 were ill, most were not E.coli related, rather some other type of illness).
Studies have shown that deer do carry pathogenic E. coli. From the linked CDC report: “A study of white-tailed deer feces in Minnesota and Wisconsin found non-O157 STEC in 5% of samples (9). … Prevalence rates of E. coli O157 in deer have ranged from 0.25% to 2.4% (10–12). Previous outbreak investigations and case reports have linked E. coli O157 infections to deer (13–15).”
STEC E. coli is a very serious pathogen that can result in kidney failure and death. It is important for those processing, handling, and preparing venison to follow accepted practices of cooking, cleaning, chilling, and preventing cross contamination. In regard to cooking, wild game meat such as venison should be cooked o 165ºF.
Studies have shown that deer do carry pathogenic E. coli. From the linked CDC report:
STEC E. coli is a very serious pathogen that can result in kidney failure and death. It is important for those processing, handling, and preparing venison to follow accepted practices of cooking, cleaning, chilling, and preventing cross contamination. In regard to cooking, wild game meat such as venison should be cooked o 165ºF.
Prevening Allergen Related Recalls Due to Mislabeling
The leading cause of recalls is allergens. Case in point, 3 allergen-related recalls over the last two days due to mislabeling. In two cases, the wrong preprinted label was placed on the food item, in the other, the wrong sauce mix packet added to the food package.
Prevention – making labeling a CCP – a critical control point to prevent a chemical hazard – allergens. There are many companies that use multiple labels with varying allergens on each. Having the additional attention that goes along with designating a process step as a CCP will require more thorough monitoring, verifying, and reporting. For example, the label operator must sign-off on each pack or case of labels by reviewing the days production sheet as well as the formulation sheet in order to check for compliance with the label. In addition, there would be verification of labels and formulation by QC and production supervisors, as well as daily sign-off by the HACCP coordinator. All would be need to be trained in label review with an eye towards allergen identification. I would argue that this step must be a CCP because based on industry history, hazards are not being prevented. From a cost savings standpoint, although this added step will require operator time, it is cheaper than conducting a recall.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
CDC lists Multistate Foodborne Outbreaks for 2011
CDC has updated their Multistate Foodborne Outbreak listing for 2011 (http://www.cdc.gov/outbreaknet/outbreaks.html). This is a nice reference page for reviewing major food outbreaks that have occurred over the past 6 years. (An outbreak, as defined by CDC is “When two or more people get the same illness from the same contaminated food or drink”)
A few things to note:
- This does not include recalled products – products recalled due to only the presence of pathogens (pathogens were detected in the product, but there were no illnesses reported). There have been many recalls that have occurred due to positive analysis for a pathogen, especially now with the Reportable Registry (http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodsafetyprograms/rfr/default.htm). And so it follows, it does not include recalls for allergens – the major cause for companies to conduct recalls.
- This list does not include single state outbreaks – so this list is manly large companies that produce products. This does not mean that smaller establishments do not have issues.
- A few items were actually not food, but rather pets (frogs and chicks/ducklings in 2011, and water frogs and frozen rodents, which are used to feed slithering pets, in 2010). One item was dog food, which we will count as food – you dog food eaters know who you are.
- There appears to be an increase in the number of entries each year on this listing. I don’t suspect things are getting worse, but rather detection and reporting are getting better.
- Of the 41 entries over the 6 year period where a cause can be found (dropping the pet related entries and the laboratory entry), fresh ground meat had 6 entries, alfalfa sprouts had 5, leafy greens had 5, and cantaloupe had 3.
- Salmonella related outbreaks accounted for roughly 2/3 of the entries. This is due to the wide prevalence of Salmonella in the enviornment.
- FDA regulated product entries accounted for 25 entries, USDA for 11, and I suspect that two of the outbreaks were from facilities that had both USDA and FDA oversight.
- Roughly 27 are what one would consider ready to eat (no required consumer cooking step). 14 entries were products would be considered products that required cooking, that if done sufficiently by the consumer, would have prevented illness (reasons why vary - cookie dough traditionally eaten raw, pot pies – poor cooking instructions, raw meat – no thermometer use).
- As a consumer, I avoid alfalfa sprouts, use a thermometer to cook my ground meat, really wash my cantaloupes, pray my chopped lettuce was not harvested from a farm located next to a cow barn, cook my cookie dough to have crunchy cookies, and refuse to buy my kids turtles, frogs, and snakes (that have to fed frozen rodents.) I have also ceased from eating dog food.
Multistate Foodborne Outbreaks
When two or more people get the same illness from the same contaminated food or drink, the event is called a foodborne outbreak. Public health officials investigate outbreaks to control them, so more people do not get sick in the outbreak, and to learn how to prevent similar outbreaks from happening in the future.
CDC and partners ensure rapid and coordinated surveillance, detection, and response to multistate foodborne outbreaks.
Outbreaks by Year
2011
· Ground Beef - Salmonella Typhimurium
· Romaine Lettuce - Escherichia coli O157:H7
· Kosher Broiled Chicken Livers - Salmonella Heidelberg
· Turkish Pine Nuts - Salmonella Enteritidis
· Jensen Farms Cantaloupes - Listeria monocytogenes
· Ground Turkey - Salmonella Heidelberg
· Whole, Fresh Imported Papayas - Salmonella Agona
· African Dwarf Frogs - Salmonella Typhimurium
· Alfalfa and Spicy Sprouts – Salmonella Enteritidis
· Travel to Germany - Shiga toxin-producing E. coli O104
· Chicks and Ducklings - Salmonella Altona and Salmonella Johannesburg
· Microbiology Laboratories - Salmonella Typhimurium
· Turkey Burgers - Salmonella Hadar
· Lebanon Bologna - Escherichia coli O157:H7
· Del Monte Cantaloupe - Salmonella Panama
· Hazelnuts - Escherichia coli O157:H7
Friday, January 6, 2012
Regrouping after Listeria on Cantaloupe
One bad cantaloupe [farmer] can spoil the whole bunch….in the LA Times article (below), we see another example of negative impact on an entire industry caused by a producer using less-than-good practices. Interestingly stated, “…California shipped more cantaloupe in a day than Colorado[where the incident occurred] in their whole season. Millions and millions of cantaloupe, healthy and fine." Now these California producers are not planting as much while trying to spin the story as best they can.
January 5, 2012, 3:53 p.m
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cantaloupe-crop-20120106,0,6658258.story?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20latimes%2Fbusiness%20%28L.A.%20Times%20-%20Business%29&utm_source=feedburner
In this digital news age where any tragedy is reported instantly, and then pounded on for days, while often providing little or no information to the specifics, we can’t expect consumers to act much differently. Consumers want to avoid risk, and if that means forgoing an entire commodity item, then so be it. There are other, perceivably safer alternatives in the marketplace for consumers to choose.
The point that is hard to understand is how do producers or processors not choose to follow best practices. Do they know what best practices are for their industry? Do they truly understand the risks associated with their product and process?
Because of this gap in what is done and what should be done by a some less-than-good companies, and this is probably a small group, government steps in with regulations such as those to be enacted by the new Food Safety Modernization Act legislation. And still, many companies and industry groups fight against new legislation or having to comply with the proposed regulation. Granted, some components of the regulation may be initially overkill or not well thought out, but this is where the comment period provides a chance for those with issues to voice their objections. And the better industry groups work with the agencies to iron out the rough spots within the proposed regulation.
In the news, we hear of companies who decide to get out of the business rather than comply with new regulations. Some see this loss of a local employer at tragic. Not me. If companies are not willing to keep up, if they are not willing to continually update themselves and their employees on the science and technology associated with making safe food, then it is best for the industry that they leave it to those who are. Certainly, there is a cost to continual improvement, but resources are available through industry groups, government agencies, and academic institutions (including Extension). It’s not “get big or get out”, it’s “get smart or get out”.
California cantaloupe farms regroup after listeria outbreak
California's Central Valley is 1,300 miles from the Colorado farm linked to a deadly listeria outbreak. But that hasn't registered with the public. Cantaloupe growers hope to change that.
By Diana Marcum, Los Angeles Times January 5, 2012, 3:53 p.m
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cantaloupe-crop-20120106,0,6658258.story?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20latimes%2Fbusiness%20%28L.A.%20Times%20-%20Business%29&utm_source=feedburner
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Study: Cost of Foodborne Illness in US Estimated at $77 billion
This study gives us an idea of the costs related to foodborne illness, and is great to use in presentations, but as the author points out, the numbers are limited in their application to justify any particular action in reducing foodborne illness.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/news/jan0312cost.html
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/news/jan0312cost.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)