Marler Blog

El Mexicano Takes Hit for DHEC E. coli Misstep

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Wed, 16 May 2012 18:26:57 -0800

Last week the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) did what public health departments should do – announce to the public that an outbreak – especially an E. coli O157:H7 - is happening. However, the DHEC for whatever reason chose to announce the outbreak and then only name the type of restaurant, and hope the public was too stupid or bored to notice that there were close to a dozen Mexican restaurants in the Spartanburg area.

According to a press release today from the DHEC released (apparently worked on by the restaurant under investigation) the DHEC announced that it “finds no ongoing transmission of disease or current public health threat related to a Spartanburg-area Mexican restaurant.”

The DHEC further announced:

"While it is our policy not to release information during a pending investigation unless it affects the health of the citizens of South Carolina, the El Mexicano on East Main Street in Spartanburg has voluntarily agreed to release its name to the public." DHEC Director Catherine Templeton said. "We’ve found no conclusive link between the restaurant and those who have gotten sick during this outbreak."

Translation: Thank you El Mexicano for jumping in front of the bus. And, although the restaurant is the common denominator to the nearly dozen illnesses – including two children who have developed life threatening hemolytic uremic syndrome – no environmental or food samples tested positive for E. coli O157:H7. However, “[t]he most recent case began experiencing symptoms on May 3 and the restaurant was investigated “on May 11 where the facility scored an “A” rating.” Hmmm, I wonder if the same food was in the restaurant in April that was in the restaurant on May 11, or I wonder if the victims ate the evidence?

My strong suspicion is that DHEC Director Catherine Templeton knows nothing about public health and the good work of epidemiology. My bet is that she also cares a whit about the public’s right to know.

Diamond Pet Food Plant Link to Salmonella Outbreak - FDA 483

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Wed, 16 May 2012 08:45:23 -0800

As of May 11, at least 15 people in nine states and one person in Canada had been confirmed infected with Salmonella from contact with the contaminated dry dog food or from contact with a pet that had eaten the tainted product, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The Form 483 report, posted by the FDA late Tuesday afternoon, was the result of a week-long inspection that began April 12 after an outbreak of human Salmonella Infantis infection was traced to contaminated pet food manufactured at the Diamond Pet Foods plant in Gaston, S.C.

The report states that Diamond was using cardboard and duct tape on some of its equipment and that there were damaged paddles on the conveyor. The inspectors also noted that some surfaces at the facility were encrusted with food residues.

FDA inspectors specifically listed these four observations:

OBSERVATION 1

All reasonable precautions are not taken to ensure that production procedures do not contribute contamination from any source.

Specifically, no microbiological analysis is conducted or there is no assurance that incoming animal fat will not introduce pathogens into their production and cause contamination of finished product. Also, the firm's current sampling procedure for animal digest does (sic) preclude potential for adulteration after sampling and during storage in warehouse. On 4/13/12, an employee was observed touching in-line fat filter and oil with bare hands.

OBSERVATION 2

Failure to provide hand washing and hand sanitizing facilities at each location in the plant where needed.

Specifically, there are no facilities for hand washing or hand sanitizing in the production areas where there is direct contact with exposed finished feed/food.

OBSERVATION 3

Failure to maintain equipment, containers and utensils used to convey, hold, and store food in a manner that protects against contamination.

Specifically, paddles in conveyor (South or Middle conveyor leading to the screeners going to packaging) were observed to have gouges and cuts, which exhibited feed residues. The damage to the paddles may allow for harborage areas for microorganisms and are difficult to clean and sanitize.

OBSERVATION 4

Failure to maintain equipment so as to facilitate cleaning of the equipment.

Specifically, firm utilizes cardboard, duct tape, and other non cleanable surfaces on equipment. These materials were observed to have residues adhering. The foam gaskets around access doors to the bucket elevators were observed in deteriorating condition and exhibited an accumulation of feed residues and dust.

Diamond Pet Foods recalled nine brands of dry pet foods manufactured at its Gaston plant between Dec. 9, 2011 and April 7, 2012. Several other companies whose food was also produced in the facility have joined the recall. See eFoodAlert for the most up-to-date information on the recall and product distribution.

It is past time for transparency in public health

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Tue, 15 May 2012 22:32:41 -0800

Lynne Shackleford and I likely did not make friends in South Carolina public health today. She for even writing an article – “State agency criticized for refusal to name Spartanburg restaurant linked to E. coli.” And, me for criticizing a South Carolina Health Department during a break today speaking on last years cantaloupe Listeria outbreak at the Colorado State Health Department.

Here is the issue:

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control confirmed Friday it is investigating 11 cases associated with the same restaurant, but has declined to identify the establishment. Two of the cases are patients with Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, which is characterized by kidney failure caused by E. coli.

DHEC spokesman Adam Myrick said he understands the concerns of consumers, but the agency does not believe there is a current health risk. He said inspectors visited the restaurant on Friday, and it scored 96 out of 100 on an inspection.

"When it comes to balancing business interests with the public's health, we're always going to make a decision based on what's in the best interest of the health of our citizens," DHEC Director Catherine Templeton said in a written statement. "If we had any reason to believe there was ongoing transmission of disease or a current public health threat, we would readily disclose more information about the restaurant associated with the disease outbreak investigation."

I had a different take:

A nationally recognized food safety advocate is lambasting DHEC's decision to keep the name of the restaurant under wraps.

"People have a right to know. Consumers have a right to decide if they want to eat at a particular place, and it makes no sense to me how DHEC can justify protecting them while putting a target — literally a target — on every other Mexican restaurant in that area," said Bill Marler, a nationally recognized attorney and author who specializes in food-borne illness cases….

Marler has represented thousands of clients in claims against food companies, securing more than $600 million for victims of E. coli, Salmonella and other food-borne illnesses. He has testified in front of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce and is a national speaker on food safety issues.

"When you hide information from people, it distorts the free market," Marler said. "If people don't know why people are getting sick, or the source of that illness, they can't vote with their pocketbooks and nothing ever changes. Why would a restaurant change its practices if there's no accountability? There's no incentive to change." ...

If it's a mass production supply issue, Marler said, multiple restaurants in this area, and even in multiple states could have been affected.

Marler doesn't favor a state law specifying a timeline for when an agency should disclose the name of a restaurant once it has been linked to a food-borne illness because it takes time to investigate and positively trace bacteria to a facility.

"They should get the data right, release the name to the public and let the chips fall where they may," he said.

Social media and the Internet have opened the door for people to warn others of the culprit in food poisoning cases, he said.

"It's different nowadays because of social media and the Internet," Marler said. "You can't — and I'm not suggesting you should — but you can't hide names anymore."

It is time to give the public its right to know.

So, who did not cook their Salmonella Tuna Scape?

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Tue, 15 May 2012 05:23:25 -0800

I know, you thought it was sushi.

Hat tip to Dr. Marion Nestle of New York University and Alan Reilly of Food Safety Authority of Ireland for noticing what was right before our eyes:

Who would have known that you were supposed to cook Tuna Scape before you ate it? Perhaps the grocery stores and restaurants who sold it?

My guess is that the 258 persons infected with the outbreak strains of Salmonella Bareilly (247 persons) or Salmonella Nchanga (11 persons) reported from 24 states and the District of Columbia and the 32 ill hospitalized where not told.

See all the pictures and full FDA Report.

"Cantaloupe Listeria Outbreak and Recall: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly"

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:19:55 -0800

I have the honor to speak to the Colorado Department of Heath in Golden Tuesday.

Cantaloupe Listeria Outbreak and Recall: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

View more PowerPoint from Bill Marler

For video for slide 7, see Death Toll Continues to Mount in Cantaloupe Listeria Outbreak. And, on a slightly lighter note on slide 18, John Stewart on food safety.

FDA 483 Inspection of Tuna Scrape Plant finds Violations

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Sun, 13 May 2012 20:54:03 -0800

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. 32 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.

FDA 483 Inspection Report (download PDF):

Mr. Dominic Sebastian, Managing Director, Moon Fishery (India) Pvt. Ltd., 11/722/D, Chemical Industrial Estate, Aroor, Alleppy 688534 Kerala India

Observation No. 1

Your HACCP plan does not list one or more critical control points that are necessary for each of the identified food safety hazards.

Specifically, your HACCP plan for raw tuna does not list critical control points at the following process step to control the hazards of Clostridium botulinum, histamine and allergens.

A. There is no Critical Control Point listed on your HACCP plan for the process of cutting, scraping, and vacuum packaging performed in your processing room, kept at a temperature of REDACTED C to control the hazard of pathogen growth and histamine formation.

B. There is no Critical Control Point listed on your HACCP plan for Clostridium botulinum and allergen labeling applied to the primary packaging.

C. There is no Critic al Control Point listed on your HACCP plan for metal detection.

D. In your HACCP plan for receiving tuna, the only critical limit listed is temperature, with no critical limit listed for vessel monitoring and histamine testing records to show that tuna was not temperature abused on the harvesting vessel.

Observation No. 2:

You are not monitoring the sanitation conditions and practices with sufficient frequency to assure conformance with Current Good Manufacturing Practices including safety of water that comes into contact with food or food contact surfaces, including water used to manufacture ice condition and cleanliness of food contact surfaces maintenance of hand washing, hand sanitizing and toilet facilities, and protection of food, food packaging material, and food contact surfaces from adulteration.

A. You are not monitoring the safety of water as evidenced by:

1. Tanks used for storage of process waters have apparent visible debris, filth and microbiological contamination. Sand and activated carbon filter units used in manufacturing of water are not sanitized, and ventilation for tanks is not filtered to protect against contamination. There is no laboratory analysis for water used in ice manufacturing at the REDACTED facility to show the water used to make ice is potable. Ice manufacturing lacks sanitary controls: ice manufacturing equipment at the Moon Fishery facility is located outside and is susceptible to adulteration from pests and the environment. Apparent bird feces were observed on the ice manufacturing equipment at Moon Fishery; insects and filth were observed in and on the equipment. Ice manufacturing equipment at your REDACTED facility is rusty and situated so that the ice cannot be protected against adulteration, as the ice manufacturing process is constructed into the flooring of the ice facility. Tuna processed at your facility, which is consumed raw or cooked, comes in direct contact with water and ice.

B. You are not monitoring the condition or cleanliness of food contact surfaces as evidenced by:

1. Some of the floor and wall tiles in the tuna processing area are broken and cracked, not allowing for proper cleaning.

2. After cleaning, the ceiling directly above the in-process tuna line was observed to have visible product residue.

3. After cleaning, product residues and rust were observed on knives and utensil storage boxes. These knives are used to cut raw tuna.

C. You are not monitoring protection from adulterants as evidenced:

1. Peeling paint was observed directly above the in-process tuna line.

D. You are not monitoring hand washing, hand sanitizing and toilet facilities as evidenced by:

1. There was no hand drying devices available in the employee rest rooms on the first floor.

The ongoing battle against non-O157 E. coli

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Sat, 12 May 2012 08:21:49 -0800

Dina ElBoghdady from the Washington Post wrote again on the ongoing process to list pathogens that sicken over 100,000 a year in the U.S. as adulterants – “USDA to test beef for more strains of E. coli.”

For those readers of my blog (thanks mom), I have taken up much space – even more than raw milk – on these pages in an effort to get certain additional E. coli’s deemed adulterants in the eyes of the USDA/FSIS. If you type in the word “Petition” into the search bar above you can track my history on the issue or read – “It is past time for the USDA/FSIS to deem "the Big Six" E. coli as adulterants” and all the attached links. So, it likely comes as no surprise that I found myself in the Washington Post this morning:

Bill Marler, a Seattle lawyer who had represented victims of the Jack in the Box outbreak, was not satisfied. He petitioned the USDA to ban dozens of E. coli strains from the food supply. In support, he detailed the case of Maryland woman who died after eating bagged baby spinach, a Utah woman who suffered permanent kidney damage after eating a fast-food meal, and an Oklahoma woman who also suffered kidney failure. Marler said each victim had been infected by a different E. coli strain.

The Petition came after I spent $500,000 to see what the incidence of non-O157 E. coli was in the retail hamburger supply.

However, where this issue is did not come about because of my petition. There were good scientists at the CDC and at FSIS - Dr. Hagen and Dr. Raymond - consumer groups like CSPI, STOP, CFI, Consumer Federation, PEW, and yes, industry leaders like BPI (of “pink slime” fame), Costco - and many unnamed – who stepped up and said the time had come.

Now, let’s make sure that the June 4, 2012 start date stays. OMB, we are watching.

As the mother of one child said. “If these tests save just one life, isn’t it worth it?”

There has been coverage on this before too.

Spartanburg Mexican Restaurant Related to E. coli Outbreak

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Fri, 11 May 2012 22:15:20 -0800

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) is requesting heightened surveillance for persons presenting with symptoms consistent with Shiga toxin producing E. coli (i.e., enterohemorrhagic E. coli), including diarrhea that is often bloody, hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) in children or thrombocytopenia purpura in adults.

DHEC is investigating an outbreak of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) related to dining at a Spartanburg-area Mexican restaurant during the last week of April, 2012. Preliminary lab results indicate the E. coli serotype being O157:H7. Of the 3 cases interviewed thus far, two reported the infection has progressed to hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a severe condition associated with STEC infection that can lead to kidney failure. Interviews with an additional 8 cases are in progress.

A quick internet search found these restaurants in Spartanburg meeting the description:

1. Bronco Mexican Restaurant

2. Corona Mexican Restaurant

3. El Mexicano Restaurant

4. Mexico Lindo East

5. Moe's Southwest Grill

6. Monterrey Mexican Restaurant

7. Taco Bell

8. Tijuana Restaurant

9. Mexico Lindo

10. Taco Dog

11. Chipotle Mexican Grill

Seriously, how pissed would you be if you owned ten of the restaurants above? DEHC, if you have enough evidence to announce an outbreak, tell the public where it happened.

Update: According to comments in Spartanburg Press, it is El Mexicano Restaurant.

16 Sick by Diamond Dog Food in 9 States and Canada

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Fri, 11 May 2012 15:27:05 -0800

A total of 15 individuals infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Infantis have been reported from 9 states. Additionally, one ill person has been reported from Canada.

The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (1), Connecticut (1), Michigan (1), Missouri (3), North Carolina (3), New Jersey (1), Ohio (2), Pennsylvania (2), and Virginia (1). One new ill person was reported from Pennsylvania. Additionally, one ill person has been reported from Canada.

Among the 10 patients with available information, 5 (50%) were hospitalized. No deaths have been reported.

Multiple brands of dry dog food produced by Diamond Pet Foods at a single manufacturing facility in South Carolina have been linked to some of the human Salmonella infections.

A Mother's Angst over feeding Raw Milk to her Child

bmarler@marlerclark.com (Bill Marler) — Fri, 11 May 2012 09:11:35 -0800

“There’s just an inherent risk in feeding your children raw milk that you can’t ― you can’t ― ignore."

That’s what one mother told Oregon Public Broadcasting this week.

Jill, who asked not to be identified on-air, described the ordeal that her two-year-old daughter has had to endure since becoming sick from raw milk.

"She had strokes early on and pressure in the brain, and most recently had emergency surgery to remove some dead bowel and colon. And now has an ostomy, that will get reversed in six to eight weeks," Jill told OPB News.

Click here to download and listen to the full show.

Jill's child's illness is part of an outbreak at an Oregon farm whose raw milk is the suspected source of an E. coli outbreak that has sickened 19 has now been associated with two more foodborne illness victims. Health officials also repoted that two adults who had consumed raw milk from Foundation Farm had contracted infections from two different pathogens - Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium.