Donated Unlabeled Hot Pockets Recalled - Nestle Prepared Foods Company, a Mount Sterling, Ky. establishment, is recalling approximately 26,400 pounds of pork and beef products due to misbranding and undeclared allergens - the product(s) contains eggs, milk, soy, and wheat, known allergens, which are not declared on the product label. Interesting point here - These items were donated to a charitable organization, in which the product was further distributed to a food bank in Missouri. The products may have been repackaged and further distributed and sold to additional food banks in Missouri. The products do not have the USDA mark of inspection and do not identify the ingredients.
USDA Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-118-2017-release
Nestle Prepared Foods Company Recalls Pork and Beef Products Due To Misbranding and Undeclared Allergens
Class I Recall
118-2017
Health Risk: High
Nov 8, 2017
Friday, November 10, 2017
CDC MMWR - Waterborne Disease Outbreaks from Drinking Water - 2013 to 2014
As an important raw material for most food operations, water must be evaluated as part of the hazard analysis. The source of the water as well as how that water is stored and used must be considered. In CDC's report, disease outbreaks associated with drinking water (period 2013-2014) are reviewed. By their definition, "for an event to be defined as a waterborne disease outbreak, two or more cases must be linked epidemiologically by time, location of water exposure, and illness characteristics; and the epidemiologic evidence must implicate water exposure as the probable source of illness."
A summary of key findings:
CDC MMWR
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6644a3.htm?s_cid=mm6644a3_e
Surveillance for Waterborne Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water — United States, 2013–2014
Weekly / November 10, 2017 / 66(44);1216–1221
- "Legionella was implicated in 24 (57%) outbreaks, 130 (13%) cases, 109 (88%) hospitalizations, and all 13 deaths (Table 1). Eight outbreaks caused by two parasites resulted in 289 (29%) cases, among which 279 (97%) were caused by Cryptosporidium, and 10 (3%) were caused by Giardia duodenalis. Chemicals or toxins were implicated in four outbreaks involving 499 cases, with 13 hospitalizations, including the first reported outbreaks (two outbreaks) associated with algal toxins in drinking water."
- "Thirty-five (83%) outbreaks were associated with public (i.e., regulated), community or noncommunity water systems,¶ and three (7%) were associated with unregulated, individual systems. Fourteen outbreaks occurred in drinking water systems with groundwater sources and an additional 14 occurred in drinking water systems with surface water sources. The most commonly cited deficiency, which led to 24** (57%) of the 42 drinking water–associated outbreaks, was the presence of Legionella in drinking water systems"
- "All of the outbreak-associated deaths reported during this surveillance period as well as all of the outbreaks reported in hospital/health care settings or long-term care facilities, were caused by Legionella. A review of 27 Legionnaires’ disease outbreak investigations in which CDC participated during 2000–2014 identified at least one water system maintenance deficiency in all 23 investigations for which this information was available, indicating that effective water management programs in buildings at increased risk for Legionella growth and transmission (e.g., those with more than 10 stories or that house "
- "Cryptosporidium was the second most common cause of both outbreaks and illnesses, demonstrating the continued threat from this chlorine-tolerant pathogen when drinking water supplies are contaminated."
- "Legionnaires’ disease is a lung infection that is fatal for about one in 10 persons who become infected. Legionella, the bacterium that causes Legionnaires’ disease, grows well in warm water, but can be killed by disinfectants, such as chlorine. Persons can get Legionnaires’ disease when they breathe in small droplets of water contaminated with Legionella."
- "Legionella grows best in building water systems that are not well maintained, especially where levels of chlorine or other disinfectants are low and water temperatures are optimal for its growth. Legionnaires’ disease outbreaks most often occur in hotels, long-term care facilities, and hospitals. The most common sources are potable water (e.g., drinkable water used for showering), cooling towers, hot tubs, and decorative fountains."
CDC MMWR
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6644a3.htm?s_cid=mm6644a3_e
Surveillance for Waterborne Disease Outbreaks Associated with Drinking Water — United States, 2013–2014
Weekly / November 10, 2017 / 66(44);1216–1221
PA Establishment Recalls Raw Poultry Product for Foreign Metal Contamination
A Mifflintown, Pa. poultry establishment, is recalling approximately 10,839 pounds of raw poultry products that may be contaminated with metal pieces. According to the report, "The problem was discovered on November 2, 2017 by an establishment employee who observed metal foreign material in a chicken breast while performing routine duties. The establishment took corrective actions to recover products before reaching commerce." So not sure why a recall needed to be issued since it appears the product did not leave the building.
USDA Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-119-2017-release
Empire Kosher Poultry Inc. Recalls Chicken Products Due To Possible Extraneous Material Contamination
Class I Recall
119-2017
Health Risk: High
Nov 9, 2017
USDA Recall Notice
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2017/recall-119-2017-release
Empire Kosher Poultry Inc. Recalls Chicken Products Due To Possible Extraneous Material Contamination
Class I Recall
119-2017
Health Risk: High
Nov 9, 2017
Thursday, November 9, 2017
FDA Report - Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program FY 2015
FDA issued their 2015 Pesticide Monitoring Program Report. Overall, the findings showed low levels of violations, and basically these numbers were similar to the previous year. It must be remembered that this is targeted sampling...that is, FDA will focus their effort on looking on those items/locations where there is more likely to be an issue.
In comparison of domestic versus imported foods, imported products were more likely to have violative pesticide levels.
In comparison of domestic versus imported foods, imported products were more likely to have violative pesticide levels.
Frozen Green Beans Recalled Due to Positive Listeria Test
A Canadian firm with a US repack facility is recalling frozen green beans after Connecticut Dept of Consumer Protection found one Listeria positive sample.
Based upon information gleaned from a company write-up in Business View Magazine (Sept 2017) this product is probably not domestic. And like all Listeria related outbreaks, it will be a question of whether more product will be pulled into the recall. Much of that will depend on the investigation into the packing facility's Listeria Control Plan.
This is the type of product that would fall under the Foreign Supplier Verification program with the foreign company being the FSVP Importer having the US facility. And this is why the address in the announcement is the facility in Virginia.
In the Business View write-up, the following passage is interesting. Clearly, they see their product as meeting ready-to-eat standards. As Lee Corso would say...'not so fast my friend'.
https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm584148.htm
Nature’s Touch Frozen Foods Voluntarily Recalls Nature’s Touch Frozen Organic Fine Whole Green Beans Because of Possible Health Risk
For Immediate Release
November 7, 2017
Based upon information gleaned from a company write-up in Business View Magazine (Sept 2017) this product is probably not domestic. And like all Listeria related outbreaks, it will be a question of whether more product will be pulled into the recall. Much of that will depend on the investigation into the packing facility's Listeria Control Plan.
This is the type of product that would fall under the Foreign Supplier Verification program with the foreign company being the FSVP Importer having the US facility. And this is why the address in the announcement is the facility in Virginia.
In the Business View write-up, the following passage is interesting. Clearly, they see their product as meeting ready-to-eat standards. As Lee Corso would say...'not so fast my friend'.
Another growing item of concern to Tentomas [company founder] is food safety. “There’s been a major shift change in both regulatory as well as consumer behavior in how we eat these products,” he states. “Consumers today are eating raw and frozen fruits and vegetables, putting them in their smoothies and putting them in their salads, and there have been some major recalls in 2016 for both frozen fruits and a massive one in frozen vegetables. So, the food safety landscape has changed significantly. And what you’re seeing is the industry looking at their product as truly ‘ready-to-eat.’ Therefore, we need to establish the food safety parameters that come with a ready-to-eat product. And we see more significant change coming in enforcing the guidelines. That’s going to be one major change that will be positive for consumers because it will result in dramatic decreases in potential contamination of frozen fruits and vegetables. As an industry, we have a tremendous responsibility in making sure that we improve the food safety profile as consumers are eating more and more of it.”FDA Recall Notice
https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm584148.htm
Nature’s Touch Frozen Foods Voluntarily Recalls Nature’s Touch Frozen Organic Fine Whole Green Beans Because of Possible Health Risk
For Immediate Release
November 7, 2017
Friday, November 3, 2017
This Week in Mislabeled Product - Ending 11/3/17
Five Whole Foods Market stores in Northern California are voluntarily recalling frosted Pumpkin Drop cookies because the products contained tree nut allergens (walnuts) that were not listed on the product label. One reaction has been reported to date.
aylor Farms Florida, an Orlando, Fla. establishment, is recalling approximately 732 pounds of salads with chicken products due to misbranding and undeclared allergens. The products contain fish (anchovies), a known allergen, which is not declared on the product label. The problem was discovered on Oct. 26, 2017, when Taylor Farms Florida received a consumer complaint about the taste of the salad dressing. After conducting an internal investigation, the firm determined that the products incorrectly contained Caesar salad dressing instead of Bacon Ranch salad dressing. The Caesar salad dressing contains anchovies.
Allergy Alert Issued in Five Northern California Whole Foods Market Stores for Undeclared Walnuts in Pumpkin Drop Cookies
For Immediate Release
October 27, 2017
aylor Farms Florida, an Orlando, Fla. establishment, is recalling approximately 732 pounds of salads with chicken products due to misbranding and undeclared allergens. The products contain fish (anchovies), a known allergen, which is not declared on the product label. The problem was discovered on Oct. 26, 2017, when Taylor Farms Florida received a consumer complaint about the taste of the salad dressing. After conducting an internal investigation, the firm determined that the products incorrectly contained Caesar salad dressing instead of Bacon Ranch salad dressing. The Caesar salad dressing contains anchovies.
Allergy Alert Issued in Five Northern California Whole Foods Market Stores for Undeclared Walnuts in Pumpkin Drop Cookies
For Immediate Release
October 27, 2017
FSMA Guidance Document - Co-manufacturers Working with Brand Owner's Suppliers
FDA released a guidance document today that allows co-manufacturing companies more time to comply with supplier preventive controls when those co-manufacturing operations are involved in packing products for a brand owner where the suppliers of ingredients for the product are under the control of the brand owner. The co-manufacturer's food safety plan will state that which activities of the supplier approval and supplier verification are under the brand owner's control.
From the Guidance document:
"If a contract prevents a co-manufacturer from being able to review a brand owner’s documentation of supplier verification activities, the co-manufacturer would not be able to verify suppliers based on its review of that documentation. Consequently, the co-manufacturer would need to conduct supplier verification activities (e.g., on-site audits) that might otherwise not be required." "To provide time for contracts to be revised to allow co-manufacturers to review all necessary documentation from the brand owner, FDA is announcing that, under certain circumstances and on a temporary basis, we do not intend to take enforcement action against a receiving facility that is a co-manufacturer, and that is not in compliance with certain supply-chain program requirements for food manufactured for the brand owner."
Supplier Approval
FDA does not intend to take enforcement action under the following circumstances: (1) a brand owner conducts supplier approval activities, (2) the co-manufacturer describes these activities in its food safety plan, and (3) the co-manufacturer conducts any necessary supplier approval activities not conducted by the brand owner. For example, FDA does not intend to take enforcement action when a brand owner (rather than the co-manufacturer) evaluates supplier performance as part of approving a supplier, the co-manufacturer’s food safety plan states that the brand owner will consider supplier performance before a supplier is approved, and the co-manufacturer conducts any other necessary supplier approval activities (e.g., hazard analysis of the food). The co-manufacturer is always responsible for following written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients, and documenting use of the procedures (21 CFR §§ 117.420 and 507.120).
Supplier Verification
FDA does not intend to take enforcement action under the following circumstances: (1) a brand owner determines and/or conducts supplier verification activities for its co-manufacturer, (2) the
co-manufacturer describes these activities in its food safety plan, and (3) the co-manufacturer conducts any necessary supplier verification activities not conducted by the brand owner. For example, FDA does not intend to take enforcement action when an audit is determined to be the appropriate supplier verification activity but a co-manufacturer does not independently obtain a supplier audit or review the conclusions of a supplier audit obtained and reviewed by the brand owner, the co-manufacturer’s food safety plan states that the brand owner will obtain and review audits of the supplier, and the co-manufacturer conducts any other necessary supplier verification activities (e.g., sampling and testing of the raw material or other ingredient).
We do not intend to take enforcement action regarding the affected provisions until November 6, 2019.
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/UCM583490.pdf
Guidance for Industry: Supply-Chain Program Requirements and Co-Manufacturer Supplier Approval and Verification for Human Food and Animal Food
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations
November 2017
From the Guidance document:
"If a contract prevents a co-manufacturer from being able to review a brand owner’s documentation of supplier verification activities, the co-manufacturer would not be able to verify suppliers based on its review of that documentation. Consequently, the co-manufacturer would need to conduct supplier verification activities (e.g., on-site audits) that might otherwise not be required." "To provide time for contracts to be revised to allow co-manufacturers to review all necessary documentation from the brand owner, FDA is announcing that, under certain circumstances and on a temporary basis, we do not intend to take enforcement action against a receiving facility that is a co-manufacturer, and that is not in compliance with certain supply-chain program requirements for food manufactured for the brand owner."
Supplier Approval
FDA does not intend to take enforcement action under the following circumstances: (1) a brand owner conducts supplier approval activities, (2) the co-manufacturer describes these activities in its food safety plan, and (3) the co-manufacturer conducts any necessary supplier approval activities not conducted by the brand owner. For example, FDA does not intend to take enforcement action when a brand owner (rather than the co-manufacturer) evaluates supplier performance as part of approving a supplier, the co-manufacturer’s food safety plan states that the brand owner will consider supplier performance before a supplier is approved, and the co-manufacturer conducts any other necessary supplier approval activities (e.g., hazard analysis of the food). The co-manufacturer is always responsible for following written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients, and documenting use of the procedures (21 CFR §§ 117.420 and 507.120).
Supplier Verification
FDA does not intend to take enforcement action under the following circumstances: (1) a brand owner determines and/or conducts supplier verification activities for its co-manufacturer, (2) the
co-manufacturer describes these activities in its food safety plan, and (3) the co-manufacturer conducts any necessary supplier verification activities not conducted by the brand owner. For example, FDA does not intend to take enforcement action when an audit is determined to be the appropriate supplier verification activity but a co-manufacturer does not independently obtain a supplier audit or review the conclusions of a supplier audit obtained and reviewed by the brand owner, the co-manufacturer’s food safety plan states that the brand owner will obtain and review audits of the supplier, and the co-manufacturer conducts any other necessary supplier verification activities (e.g., sampling and testing of the raw material or other ingredient).
We do not intend to take enforcement action regarding the affected provisions until November 6, 2019.
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/UCM583490.pdf
Guidance for Industry: Supply-Chain Program Requirements and Co-Manufacturer Supplier Approval and Verification for Human Food and Animal Food
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations
November 2017
Outbreak of E. coli Affects Hundreds of Marine Recruits
About 300 marine recruits were stricken with E. coli infection this past week, and of that, 85 are still ill. The outbreak occurred at Marine Corps Depot San Diego along with some personnel at Camp Pendleton, The investigation continues as to the cause.
Fox 5 News - San Diego
http://fox5sandiego.com/2017/11/02/dozens-of-marine-recruits-remain-sick-from-e-coli/
Dozens of Marine recruits remain sick from E. coli
Posted 8:51 PM, November 2, 2017, by City News Service
Fox 5 News - San Diego
http://fox5sandiego.com/2017/11/02/dozens-of-marine-recruits-remain-sick-from-e-coli/
Dozens of Marine recruits remain sick from E. coli
Posted 8:51 PM, November 2, 2017, by City News Service
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Airline Stops Foodservice Operations After Supplier Found with Listeria on Non-contact Surfaces
American Airlines suspended its food service for flights out of Los Angeles after it food supplier, Gates Gourmet, was found to have 'traces' of Listeria on non-food contact surfaces. including drains and floors.
It is hard to know the real risk with the the little information provided. We would need to know much more (were food contact surfaces positive, how pervasive was the contamination throughout the operation, what trends were seen, what practices were or were not in place, the accessibility of the non-contact areas to being a risk to food, etc), to opine on the appropriateness of this action. Just because Listeria is found in a drain, in itself, would not constitute a risk and can really be considered normal. It seems the supplier was pretty confident in the low risk of the situation.
Business Insider
http://www.businessinsider.com/american-airlines-flights-no-food-after-listeria-outbreak-lax-catering-kitchen-2017-11
American Airlines flights are going without food after listeria found at catering kitchen
Benjamin Zhang
It is hard to know the real risk with the the little information provided. We would need to know much more (were food contact surfaces positive, how pervasive was the contamination throughout the operation, what trends were seen, what practices were or were not in place, the accessibility of the non-contact areas to being a risk to food, etc), to opine on the appropriateness of this action. Just because Listeria is found in a drain, in itself, would not constitute a risk and can really be considered normal. It seems the supplier was pretty confident in the low risk of the situation.
Business Insider
http://www.businessinsider.com/american-airlines-flights-no-food-after-listeria-outbreak-lax-catering-kitchen-2017-11
American Airlines flights are going without food after listeria found at catering kitchen
Benjamin Zhang
11/1/17
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)