Food Safety News

A Turning Point for E. Coli Testing?

pdoggy@midrivers.com (John Munsell) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:07 -0800

A response to the OIG audit of FSIS inspections

We just might be witnessing a watershed change in USDA attitudes regarding testing for E. coli O157:H7, corrective actions subsequent to adverse lab test results, and tracebacks to the true source of contamination.

Due diligence must be addressed these next 12 months to monitor USDA/FSIS' willingness to implement meaningful reforms as suggested by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Public revelation by OIG of faulty FSIS meat inspection policies should provide the required incentive to FSIS to not only author policies that better promote public health, but to also be more transparent.

The following comments will serve as my brief response to OIG's audit report, and to FSIS' response to OIG's recommendations.

In the middle of page one, OIG states "....regardless of how stringently the industry tests for E.coli, there is always an inherent risk of its presence in slaughter plants" (emphasis added).

In this Audit Report, OIG makes references to the fact that E. coli contamination emanates from hides and viscera. OIG is thus refreshingly candid, acknowledging that E.coli originates on kill floors, not at downstream entities that do not have manure-covered hides or intestines on their premises. If FSIS had made this common-sense admission years ago, and had focused its search for E. coli at the source, rather than the destination, the number of outbreaks would have been greatly diminished compared to what we continue to currently experience.

On page two, the Audit Report states "We also found that FSIS needs to consider shifting more of its testing resources to sampling trim, instead of [sampling] ground beef, for E.coli." This is not ground-breaking news to FSIS. On Dec. 5, 2006, an industry meeting was conducted in Denver regarding control of E. coli O157:H7 in slaughter operations. At the meeting, Dr. Daniel Engeljohn (FSIS official) stated that the agency would commence testing trim in 2007 because the incidence of E. coli is three times greater in trim than in ground beef.

FSIS has known this fact for over five years now.

OIG also stated "A recent study stated that trim testing has a higher probability of finding E. coli O157:H7 than ground beef testing." OIG further stated that FSIS should "... begin testing more trim so that it can (1) maximize its [testing] results, (2) better promote public health, and (3) trace contamination problems to the source." This is but yet another disciplinary rejoinder to FSIS that if it truly desires to promote public health, it must write policies enabling tracebacks to the SOURCE of contamination.

Folks outside the industry do not fully comprehend why testing trim, rather than ground beef (as OIG suggests), would benefit public health, requiring an explanation. The report states on page 14 that one reason FSIS has sampled more ground beef (than trim) is "....agency officials are responding to the public's expectation that it will test ground beef, as the final product, for E. coli O157:H7."

The report also says that FSIS officials have stated "....they want to achieve an optimal balance between sampling costs and protecting public health." This FSIS statement flies in the face of OIG's previously mentioned conclusion that testing trim promotes public health.

In a legal brief a few years back, Dr. Engeljohn stated that the agency prefers to test meat as close to the consumer as possible.

This statement has great PR benefits to the agency, which is thus portrayed as the quintessential, aggressive 24/7 protector of all consumers. What FSIS slyly avoids revealing is the fact that such testing is conducted as far away from the source slaughter plant as possible.

Testing ground beef downstream, rather than trim at the source slaughter plant, insulates source slaughter plants from pathogen accountability. It also minimizes the threat of potential legal actions against FSIS from source slaughter plants impacted by exposure of the true origin of contamination. While testing ground beef has some advantage to public health, the primary beneficiary of testing ground beef downstream is the source slaughter plant upstream.

So, how did FSIS respond to this OIG suggestion? On page 16, the "Agency Response" is "If necessary changes are identified, FSIS will develop proposed changes....." Clearly, FSIS will not acknowledge the necessity of changing testing to primarily focus on trim. Furthermore, FSIS has established a deadline of April, 2013 to reveal changes. Not only is FSIS disputing OIG's suggestion to primarily focus testing on trim, but has given itself almost a full year to devise a stratagem to circumvent OIG's common-sense recommendation.

Page 20 of the OIG Report includes two scenarios of which I was unaware, and should cause heads to roll at the agency. The two scenarios are:

"Additionally, while we were visiting the plants, we noted that plant managers sometimes exploit ambiguities in FSIS' sampling policies or procedures so that they can avoid receiving noncompliance records if FSIS inspectors find a positive E. coli O157:H7 test result.

For example, FSIS allows plants to avoid a noncompliance if they have a written policy in place to send bins [of tested trim] to cooking that FSIS samples from and finds E. coli. One plant quality assurance manager told OIG that the plant had implemented a policy to send every bin to cooking that FSIS samples, so that it could never receive a noncompliance due to FSIS' testing results.

OIG maintains that FSIS should eliminate this policy ambiguity because noncompliance records trigger more serious enforcement actions and require corrective action that would improve how the plant controls E. coli."

The primary problem here is that while OIG perceives the need for corrective actions when a plant experiences recurring E. coli positives, FSIS sees no need for corrective actions.

As if the first scenario isn't embarrassing enough, OIG reveals this second scenario on page 20: "A second policy ambiguity involves FSIS allowing plants to avoid noncompliance if an FSIS test and a plant test both result in a positive on a single sample."

This logic is stupefying: although trimmings tested by both FSIS and the plant both come back positive, removing all doubt of lab accuracy, FSIS implements no enforcement actions at the clearly noncompliant source slaughter plant.

When company-conducted testing reveals the presence of E. coli, the impacted lot is diverted to a cooking plant, same as is done when E. coli is detected in FSIS-conducted testing. Such diversions conveniently circumvent the need for corrective actions to prevent recurrences, a foundational requirement of true HACCP. As such, the source slaughter plants and FSIS jointly place sole emphasis on prevention of SHIPMENT into commerce of contaminated meat, blithely ignoring ongoing PRODUCTION problems that are sanitary dressing failures on the kill floor.

When contaminated meat is detected, and diverted, FSIS congratulates the slaughter plant exclaiming "Your HACCP Plan is working!" No NRs, and no corrective actions, although recurring lab positives prove ongoing sanitary dressing failures.

Pretty nifty, eh?

These policies are unconscionable, imperil public health and adroitly avoid the need for corrective actions to prevent recurrences. Perhaps OIG is only now realizing how FSIS has covertly abrogated its responsibility to protect consumers from foodborne outbreaks. FSIS and the slaughter plants are equal accomplices in such sinister, scurrilous policies ... which have not been transparent.

Bottom line: all adverse lab reports deserve individual NRs. FSIS refusal to issue NRs at source slaughter plants in spite of recurring lab positives imperils public health. Corrective actions to prevent recurrences cannot be accomplished by diversion to cooking. Meaningful corrective actions can only be accomplished on the kill floor, not by a sleight of hand, i.e., diversion. FSIS disagrees.

On page 25, OIG's Recommendation 7 to FSIS states in part "Improve communication by issuing guidance to industry to assist plants in selecting laboratories based on the capabilities of the testing laboratories." The agency's response included a link to policy guidance announced on March 8, 2012. Utilizing this guidance, I proposed an idea to the USDA's Front Line Supervisor in Montana in April, which if approved would clarify FSIS expectations of small plants' procedures to contract with outside labs.

The Front Line Supervisor forwarded my suggestions to askFSIS on April 17. As of Saturday, May 19, askFSIS had not yet provided an answer to Montana's Front Line Supervisor. When askFSIS was implemented, many plant owners and I sent questions to askFSIS. Some received quick responses. Unfortunately, most responses were delayed, were confusing, and some answers delicately skirted the issue.

As a result, most plant owners with whom I visit no longer use askFSIS, for obvious reasons. When the agency cannot even respond to a Front Line Supervisor within a month, we start to grasp how FSIS uses askFSIS as a PR front, but is frequently useless. The agency's refusal to provide meaningful answers, in an expedited fashion, also shows the agency's bias against small plants.

I respectfully suggest that OIG should investigate askFSIS, which if it is the agency's primary outreach to small plants, should be jettisoned and replaced by a group that will be held accountable.

In conclusion, a popular industry mantra about eight years ago was that "We can't test our way to safe food." I agree. Testing alone doesn't produce safe food.

Instead, consistently efficacious sanitary kill floor dressing procedures produce safe food.

Testing can produce SAFER food, but only if adverse lab results lead to meaningful corrective actions to prevent recurrences. Contents of this OIG report reveal that FSIS intentionally avoids issuing NRs subsequent to recurring lab positives for E. coli O157:H7.

How frequently can a slaughter plant experience lab positives? Page 36 of the OIG report refers to a plant which experiences 7, 15, 48 or more positives in one day. The recent FSIS Traceback suggestions reveal that depending on a slaughter plant's size and number of samples it takes daily, the plant could experience 5 - 8 percent or more positives before the agency will commence even considering whether these high numbers of positives might constitute a "High Event Period." Such thinking reveals the hypocrisy of the agency's alleged "Zero Tolerance" standard towards E. coli O157:H7.

Therefore, FSIS has knowingly enacted policies (some ambiguous and non-transparent) insulating slaughter plants from implementing corrective actions after E. coli O157:H7 is detected in their meat. The same policies have effectively thwarted traceback attempts, with full FSIS endorsement.

Rather than giving FSIS almost a year to correct these inane practices, the agency should be forced to testify before the appropriate entity no later than June 15 to explain if OIG's allegations are correct, and implement initial changes within two months.

John W. Munsell is manager of the Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE) in Miles City, MT

Allergen Alert: Barbecue Sauce With Anchovies

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:06 -0800

Honeyville Honey Farm of Durango, CO is recalling certain bottles of Honeyville Honey Barbecue Sauce because an ingredient, Worcestershire sauce, contains anchovies.

An onsite FDA inspection this month revealed that the product's labeling did not reveal the presence of anchovies.

People who have allergies to anchovies run the risk of serious or life threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products.

The company says no adverse reactions have been reported to date.

The recalled 15 oz. "Honeyville Honey Barbecue" was manufactured after Aug. 1, 2011 and distributed nationwide through wholesale and retail Internet sales and in retail stores from Aug. 1, 2011 to May 21, 2012. The recalled sauce UPC number is 0-3880171212-9.

The recalled Honeyville Honey Barbecue Sauce may be returned to the place of purchase or should be discarded immediately. For more information contact Honeyville at 800-676-7690 (9 a.m. to 5 p.m. MST) or info@honeyvillecolorado.com.

Allergen Alert: Sorbet With Milk Protein

mrothschild@foodsafetynews.com (Mary Rothschild) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:05 -0800

Harris Teeter is recalling HT Traders Sorbet in lemon, raspberry, mango, coconut and orange flavors due to possible undeclared milk protein.

This recall affects the below products:

- HT Traders Sorbet Lemon UPC #72036 98196

- HT Traders Sorbet Raspberry UPC #72036 98195

- HT Traders Sorbet Mango UPC #72036 98194

- HT Traders Sorbet Coconut UPC #72036 98197

- HT Traders Sorbet Orange UPC #72036 98193

If you have a milk allergy or are concerned about the recalled product, please return the product to Harris Teeter for a full refund.

For additional information regarding the recall contact Harris Teeter at 1-800-432-6111, Option 2 between 8:30 a.m. and 6 p.m.

Curtailed Funds Continue to Hurt Local Public Health

mrothschild@foodsafetynews.com (Mary Rothschild) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:03 -0800

Since 2008, local public health departments in the United States have lost nearly 40,000 employees, and the situation continues to deteriorate, according to the most recent survey, conducted in January and February, by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO).

One health official told NACCHO that "fiscal year 2013 is shaping up to be the worst fiscal year for us ... We may have to reduce or eliminate certain programs, should the financial situation worsen."

Another official was even gloomier: "Next year will present a large challenge and even threatens our continuance. In 25 years I've not confronted this level of threat to our existence as a going entity. Our situation is dire."

Hardest hit areas have been clinical health services, emergency preparedness and maternal and child health programs. Food safety efforts have also suffered.

The most recent study brief notes that annual cuts in food safety programs may mean an area's restaurant inspections may occur less frequently. Previous reports have said nearly half the states are at risk of losing career epidemiology field officers and that the nation may be ill-prepared to handle a major food safety emergency.

The research brief released this week also highlighted these findings:

- Fifty-seven percent of all local health departments reduced or eliminated services in at least one program area in 2011, a larger percentage than in any 12-month period since the recession began.

- Nearly two-thirds of the U.S. population lives in an area experiencing at least one program area cut, while 39 percent reside in areas reporting three or more program area decreases.

- Curtailed funding pushed health departments to eliminate more than 5,000 staff positions during the second half of 2011, more than triple the number they gained.

For this latest report, the seventh in a series, NACCHO surveyed 957 local health departments selected as part of a statistically random sample designed to provide national and state-level estimates. A total of 663 local health departments across 47 states participated, a response rate of 69 percent.

More Than 900 Complaints to FDA Blame Jerky Treats for Pet Illnesses

mrothschild@foodsafetynews.com (Mary Rothschild) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:02 -0800

Since November, the Food and Drug Administration has now received between 900 to 1,000 complaints of dog illnesses and deaths blamed on chicken jerky treats from China, according to a report this week by JoNel Aleccia for msnbc.news.

As Aleccia revealed previously, three main brands of chicken jerky treats appear to be connected to the mysterious illnesses in dogs: Canyon Creek Ranch or Waggin' Train jerky treats or tenders, produce by Nestle Purina PetCare Co., and Milo's Kitchen Home-style Dog Treats, made by Del Monte Corp.

Both manufacturers have said their products are safe and that any illnesses are unrelated to the jerky treats.

Since the FDA issued a warning in November about reports of dog illnesses associated with products imported from China, the agency still has not said why these products might be making animals sick.The FDA has been conducting chemical and microbial testing but apparently has not found a reason to recall the products.

The FDA has said that tests of blood from some of the stricken animals have indicated kidney failure (increased urea nitrogen and creatinine) and that urine tests have indicated Fanconi syndrome (increased glucose).

Aleccia reported that Milo's Kitchen paid at least one dog owner $100 in exchange for a release of all liability for a claim, even though a company spokeswoman said a consultant's review of veterinarian records concluded that the jerky treats could not be definitively linked to the animal's illness.

To lodge a complaint with the FDA about pet food and pet products visit this link.

Tainted Spinach Detected by Program Budget Cuts Will Ax

ggoetz@foodsafetynews.com (Gretchen Goetz) — Thu, 24 May 2012 01:59:01 -0800

Microbiological Data Program scheduled to shut down in July

The discovery of Salmonella in bagged organic baby spinach that led to a nationwide recall Tuesday has been attributed to a small government testing program that, ironically, is set to be eliminated in the 2013 federal budget plan.

The Microbiological Data Program, a network of 11 labs that screen fresh produce for pathogens, discovered the contamination during routine testing, according to a program employee. The program, also known as MDP, has been fighting to survive for years as the produce industry has lobbied to have it eliminated.

Now, after its $5 million in funding was cut out of the coming year's budget, MDP, housed within the USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service, is scheduled to be shut down in July.

In its budget request for FY 2013, the Obama administration justified cutting MDP, calling it a "lower-priority program because it has a low impact and is not central to the core mission of AMS, which is to facilitate the competitive and efficient marketing of agricultural products."

But this latest recall, along with an MDP-prompted recall of nearly 800 cases of bagged lettuce mixes in April, has raised questions about whether this surveillance system really is dispensable.

Industry members have claimed that the program -- originally only a monitoring system but now relied on by FDA for recall tip-offs -- has overstepped its bounds and caused unnecessary harm to fruit and vegetable producers.

"Does a single sample positive make any sense to cause a recall without reported illnesses? We do not believe this program is adding to public safety. There must be other alternatives," read the minutes of a United Fresh Food Safety & Technology Council meeting in January 2011.

But those involved in the small program argue that its impact is huge.

"Product has been removed based on MDP results that may well have prevented an outbreak," said Dan Rice, director of New York State's Food Laboratory, a designated MDP lab, in an interview with Food Safety News.

MDP labs tests produce, both imported and domestic, using samples collected at distribution centers. This means that by the time results come back (in around a week), produce is likely still in commerce and a recall of the product could still prevent illnesses.

With a loss of funding from MDP, state labs will not only stop monitoring produce, but they will also lose staff members funded by MDP money.

"We're going to be losing staff that are trained in the most recent molecular methods for screening," he explained. "These are ag sector food testing labs so we use those people to respond to outbreaks."

MDP does a lot with the little money it has, says Rice.

"It's a very efficient program. It's less than $5 million a year and 22,000 samples a year get tested."

In addition to prompting at least 19 produce recalls in the past two years, MDP testing can also help pinpoint the source of an outbreak linked to fruits or vegetables.

In 2009, routine testing by the program discovered Salmonella Javiana in green onions. The bacteria were found to be indistinguishable from the strain that was causing an ongoing outbreak linked to green onions, thus the specific source of the outbreak was located.

Over the 3 year interval between 2008 and 2011, MDP isolated 33 pathogens associated with human illness - 28 strains of Salmonella, 2 of E. coli O157:H7 and 3 of Listeria monocytogenes, according to a presentation given Wednesday by Rice at the Association of Public Health Laboratories Annual Meeting in Seattle.

Although the demise of MDP as a USDA program looks certain, there has been talk among government officials of migrating the program over to FDA to be funded by that agency, which is in charge of all other aspects of produce safety.

In a document that outlined United Fresh's government relations priorities for 2012, the group said that now that the program has been zeroed out, "it will be necessary to ensure that USDA sunsets the program and that protocols shift to FDA. Then, regulatory agencies at the state and federal level must agree on the appropriate steps to protect public health, without massive penalties to growers, when a positive sample unrelated to any illness, is found."

But it's not clear whether FDA will be ramping up fresh produce testing to replace MDP's surveillance in the near future. The proposed produce safety rule, which was mandated under the Food Safety Modenrization Act, has been languishing in the White House Office of Management and Budget and when the proposal is released, it will mark only the beginning of the rulemaking process for creating national produce safety standards.

Helena Bottemiller contributed reporting to this article.

Tempeh Starter Linked to Outbreak Recalled

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:07 -0800

A Rockville, MD company is recalling its Tempeh Starter Yeast and Super Starter Yeast because the products may be contaminated with Salmonella.

The tempeh starter, a fungal culture imported from Indonesia and sold over the Internet, has been linked to an outbreak of Salmonella Paratyphi B infection that has sickened 87 people, 64 of them residents of Buncombe County, NC, where tempeh made with the contaminated starter yeast is known to have been sold.

Tempeh Online sold the starter yeast to Smiling Hara Tempeh, which earlier had to recall all of its soybean tempeh made between January 11 and April 11 after outbreak victims said they had eaten the product. Testing by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services showed the presence of the outbreak strain of Salmonella in samples of the product.

The starter yeast being recalled is packaged in 30 gm, 50 gm, 250 gm, and 1,000 gm sizes in sealed, clear, plastic marked with a small computer-printed label.

The Salmonella Paratyphi B associated with the North Carolina outbreak causes a non-typhoidal illness with symptoms that can be severe, although not as severe as typhoidal strains of the bacteria. The Buncombe County Department of Health says that while the outbreak began through consumption of or direct contact with contaminated tempeh, subsequent cases have been secondary, that is, transmitted person-to-person.

Tempeh is a raw, fermented bean product typically marketed as a meat substitute for vegetarians. Smiling Hara's website says that its unpasteurized product is a "raw food and is intended to be cooked. In the heating process some of the probiotics and digestive enzymes will die, however, some will be retained an the mushroom qualities remain in full." The company says there is a "big difference" between its tempeh and pasteurized tempeh found in the refrigerated sections of grocery stores.

Taylor Farms Recalls Organic Baby Spinach for Salmonella Risk

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:06 -0800

Taylor Farms Retail of Salinas, CA is recalling Organic Baby Spinach that may be contaminated with Salmonella.

A random test conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture on a finished package of spinach detected Salmonella, according to the recall alert.

The company says there have been no reported illnesses attributed to the recalled spinach.

The recall is of:

- Private Selections Organic -Baby Spinach in a 5 oz. clamshell with UPC number 0-11110-91128-5 and package code TFRS 130B and 1503 KT34. The best-by date is 5-25-12. The spinach was distributed inAK, AZ, CA, CO, ID, KS, LA, MO, MT, NM, NV, OR, TX, UT, WA, WY.

- Private Selections Organic - Baby Spinach in a 5 oz. clamshell with UPC number 0-11110-91128-5 and package code TFRS 130B and 1803 KT34. The best-by date is 5-25-12. The spinach was distributed in AK, AZ, CA, CO, ID, KS, LA, MO, MT, NM, NV, OR, TX, UT, WA, WY.

- Marketside Baby Spinach - Organic in a 10 oz. clamshell with UPC number 6-8113132900-2 and package code TFRS130B16. The best-by date is 5-25-12. The spinach was distributed in AR, CO, ID, KS, LA, MO, MS, MT, NM, NV, OK, TX, UT, WY.

The recalled spinach was shipped from Taylor Farms Retail, Inc. on May 9 and May 10, 2012.

The company says it is cooperating with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) regarding the recall.

Customers who have purchased the recalled spinach are urged not to consume it and should dispose of it.

For more information on the recall contact Taylor Farms Retail, Inc. at 866-508-7048 Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. PST.

Taylor Farms says consumers with concerns about an illness from consumption of this product should contact a health care provider.

Charlotte, NC Restaurant to Offer Pasteurized Eggs

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:05 -0800

Toast of Dilworth, the popular North Carolina restaurant linked to a Salmonella outbreak this past spring that sickened 10 people, is switching to pasteurized eggs.

The Charlotte restaurant has signed with the Davidson's Safest Choice brand to provide the heat-treated shell eggs.

Toast of Dilworth was sued in Mecklenburg Superior Court earlier this month by Charlotte resident Bryan McWherter, whose complaint alleges he suffered gastrointestinal injuries from a Salmonella infection caused by eggs he ate at the restaurant in April. Marler Clark, the food safety law firm that sponsors Food Safety News, represents McWherter.

"We want to ensure our customers that we have responded to food safety concerns in a way that eliminates the risk of foodborne illness from eggs, no matter how they are served," says Robert Maynard, managing partner at Toast. "We now use Davidson's Safest Choice pasteurized shell eggs to ensure we provide our customers with assurance they can order our eggs any style, and enjoy safe, great-tasting eggs."

Maynard said there is a misconception that all eggs are pasteurized and the misunderstanding is putting people at risk. Davidson's uses a hot water pasteurizing process to kill Salmonella bacteria.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration estimates 2.3 million contaminated eggs enter the food supply annually. Salmonella is one of the leading causes of foodborne illness in the U.S.

Greg West, president of National Pasteurized Eggs, says pasteurized eggs offer restaurants and other institutions a safe, worry-free option.

Davidson's Safe Choice pasteurized eggs are also cage-free and kosher. The brand is found in grocery stores and restaurants in 50 states, Mexico and Puerto Rico.

Allergen Alert: Lasagna With Soy

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:05 -0800

West Best Foods of Las Vegas, NV is recalling approximately 13,776 pounds of lasagna products because they contain soy, an allergen not declared on the label, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced Tuesday.

The problem was discovered during a routine food safety assessment and may have occurred as a result of an ingredient reformulation, according to the company's recall alert.

FSIS and the company say they have not received reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products.

The recall is for lasagna products with the establishment number "EST. 6080" inside the USDA mark of inspection:

- 24 lb. cases of "WEST BEST FOODS INC LASAGNA WITH MEAT SAUCE"

- 24 lb. cases of "WEST BEST FOODS INC DELUXE BEEF LASAGNA"

The lasagna was produced between April 13 and May 21, 2012 and distributed to hotels and one distributor in Las Vegas.

For more information about the recall contact the company's plant manager, Gabriel Campisi, at 702-367-0662.

Another Bagged Salad Recall

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:05 -0800

Pacific Coast Fruit Co. of Portland, OR is recalling multiple types of bagged processed salads because they might be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.

Some of Pacific Coast Fruit's bagged salads, for retail and food service customers, used produce that has been recalled by River Ranch.

There have been no reported illnesses associated with this recall, according to the company.

Check the news release here to see the recalled products, including UPC code, Pacific Coast Fruit item numbers, and best-by dates or production date.

Pacific Coast recalled salad products were distributed to Fred Meyer, Avanti and Evergreen in Oregon, Washington, Alaska and Idaho.

The recalled retail salads are in a 9.6 oz. - 10 oz. clamshell-style packages. VA food service items are packed in 5 lb. - 20 lb. food service salads bags.

Consumers who purchased these salad products should not consume them and are urged to return them to the place of purchase or destroy the product. For more information contact Pacific Coast Fruit at 503-234-6411 from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. PST Monday through Friday.

Maryland First State to Ban Arsenic in Poultry Feed

hbottemiller@foodsafetynews.com (Helena Bottemiller) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:03 -0800

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley Tuesday signed a bill banning arsenic in poultry feed, making his state the first to have a law against the practice on the books.

The new law, which takes effect Jan 1, prohibits the use, sale, or distribution of commercial feed containing arsenic and specifically mentions two Pfizer drugs that contain arsenic: Roxarsone, which the company voluntarily withdrew from the market last year, and Histostat, which is still on the market.

The move follows a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) study released last summer that found increased levels of inorganic arsenic in the livers of chickens treated with the Roxarsone. The new data raised concerns of a "very low but completely avoidable exposure to a carcinogen," said Michael Taylor, FDA's Deputy Commissioner for Foods, when FDA announced the company was withdrawing the drug in response to the study's findings.

Arsenic is a known human carcinogen and has been linked to a variety of health concerns, including interfering in fetal development, but FDA said the levels found in their poultry study are low enough that consumers are not at risk eating poultry while Roxarsone is phased out of use in the United States.

It is not known how widely the drug might be stockpiled and still used today. When Pfizer announced the withdrawal, FDA said it did not have data on usage in poultry production.

Aside from food safety concerns, which have been raised for many years, there is also overwhelming evidence that feeding arsenicals to poultry has had a harmful impact on the environment.

Maryland knows the impacts first hand. According to Food and Water Watch, the state's poultry producers spread 22,000 pounds of arsenic -- which is found in the fecal waste -- to farmland "which ultimately gets washed into waterways like the Chesapeake Bay."

A recent study by researchers at the University of Maryland found that poultry fed Roxarsone produced poultry litter -- the waste from production, which includes feces, feathers and bedding -- that contains 2.9 to 77 times the arsenic than poultry not fed Roxarsone. Further, the team found that the arsenic in the litter broke down into inorganic, the kind known to be harmful to human health, and it accumulates in soil.

Does Organic Food Make People Insufferable?

dflynn@foodsafetynews.com (Dan Flynn) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:02 -0800

A Loyola University psychological scientist is hung up on the moods people get into because of what they eat.

The researcher is now saying that people with a taste for organics are more likely to be insufferable. He earlier found that bitter food left people with more than a bitter taste in their mouths.

The new study by Kendall Eskine, assistant professor of the department of psychological science at Loyola University, says participants who ate organic goods judged people more harshly than did a control group or the research subjects who ate comfort foods.

The study, which depicts people with organic-food diets as being more judgmental and/or judgmental, is getting lots of media coverage around the country. Eskine, who says he routinely kicks participants out of his research projects, organized his latest subjects into three groups.

He exposed a "needy stranger" to each of the groups: a control group, a comfort-food group and an organic-food group. The comfort group helped out the needy stranger for 24 minutes, the control group for 19 minutes, and the organic group for just 13 minutes.

Eskine said the organic group felt they'd done what they could and did not need to help any more. He called this "moral licensing," meaning these people put their judgmental thoughts above the needs of others.

The idea that organic food could negatively influence the moods of people consuming it is new. KEZT-TV took the idea to its Eugene, OR viewers, most of whom found the idea preposterous.

Still, the study seems to suggest that the self-righteous are more likely to be stressed out about food. Low-fat cheese or free-trade coffee are foods with a "health halo," meaning people tend to think of them as healthier or even safer, whether they are or not.

But such foods also leave their adherents with the notion that organic food and people who eat them are more superior, Eskine figures. One report on the study said people develop a "holier-than-than-thou" sense of superiority.

Eskine is a popular classroom professor at the New Orleans university. It is not clear from his research whether people who eat organic foods might be bad-tempered before they choose to eat organic food or if their foul moods are the result of it.

"Wholesome Foods and Wholesome Morals" Organic Foods Reduce Prosocial Behavior and Harshens Moral Judgments" is freely available in abstract form, but the full version is kept behind a pay wall.

Thanks to Barfblog for bringing this article to our attention.

Taking the Pulse of CDC's PulseNet

ggoetz@foodsafetynews.com (Gretchen Goetz) — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:59:01 -0800

This week at the annual meeting of the Association of Public Health Laboratories in Seattle, officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - which operates PulseNet - explained the crucial role this pathogen database plays in outbreak detection and the challenges that must be met in order for it to remain effective.

In December of 2010, 8 people in 3 different states came down with E. coli infections that were eventually linked to hazelnuts from an Oregon distributor. Fifteen years ago these cases most likely would not have been connected, and the outbreak would have gone undiscovered.

But thanks to PulseNet, the government database that tracks DNA information for foodborne pathogens, the pieces of this outbreak puzzle and thousands of others have been put together since the system was launched in 1996.

Of the 10 largest outbreaks in the U.S. in the last decade, 8 would not have been detected had it not been for information stored in PulseNet, according to John Besser, Deputy Chief of CDC's Enteric Diseases Laboratory Branch, who spoke Sunday at the APHL meeting.

The ability to identify a pathogen's unique DNA fingerprint through pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, or PFGE, and to store this data in a central location, has drastically increased the number of outbreaks detected by connecting cases in different states to the same outbreak and by revealing smaller outbreaks in which only a handful of cases may have been reported.

Beyond improving outbreak detection, PulseNet has increased accountability in the food industry. Pathogens in humans can be more easily linked to pathogens from food or environmental samples with indistinguishable DNA patterns, meaning that suppliers, grocery stores or restaurants responsible for contamination are more likely to be pinpointed.

"We've seen major changes from industry itself through the pressure of outbreaks, recalls and lawsuits," said Besser. "We're having continuous feedback to industry and regulatory agencies on the effectiveness of our control programs."

Future Challenges

But PulseNet - like many government-funded programs - faces uncertainty over how much funding it will receive from year to year. Though 87 public health laboratories currently contribute specimen data to the system, there is still a backlog of samples waiting to be analyzed that can lead to delays in test results.

CDC was allotted $4 million for PulseNet for the 2012 fiscal year, but it is still waiting on a decision from Congress on its 2013 budget.

Some state labs also receive supplemental funding in the form of CDC's FoodNet and FoodCORE programs. States supported by these programs have been able to boost lab capacity but those lacking this funding remain behind in their ability to process samples as quickly as they come in, according to Dale Morse, Senior Advisor at CDC's Division of

Foodborne, Waterborne, & Environmental Diseases.

"By focusing on certain activities they've seen dramatic improvements, but the amount of money has still been fairly small in those states," he told Food Safety News in an interview at the APHL conference.

Another challenge faced by PulseNet is the development of new pathogen tests that don't depend on cultures, meaning that they can be done rapidly without isolating and growing bacteria or viruses before analyzing them. While these culture-independent tests can be fast, the results they produce aren't always as accurate as PFGE, and they produce a different characterization of a pathogen from the type recognized by PulseNet.

"One thing we can say for sure is that these tests provide different types of data than the ones we're used to," he said, addressing APHL meeting attendees. "We know how to interpret culture; we don't necessarily know how to interpret some of the data that is going to be coming our way."

The task, Besser says, is to figure out how to adapt case definitions to be able to use information from these new tests while making sure PulseNet is still a universal system.

Several committees are working on redefining case definitions and better understanding the performance of these new tests, he says.

If PulseNet can evolve to accommodate these new types of information, the process of pathogen identification could potentially be sped up.

"As we all know, culture takes time," Besser noted. "The whole process is very lengthy and depending on how we do this we can chop days or weeks off of the whole process."

Another advantage of incorporating results of culture-independent tests is that they could provide better insight into how closely pathogens are related.

"PFGE is not a cladistics test that allows us to assess relatedness," Besser explained. "There's some real power in having variable case definitions to increase the power of our analyses."

Whatever happens with PulseNet adopting culture-independent tests, it must be decided on in a coordinated effort with input from experts worldwide, notes Besser. And PulseNet must adapt, he says.

"The technology that will replace PFGE is not yet clear, but a change of technology to one that is not dependent on culture-derived isolates is essential for the continued existence of PulseNet," he said in an e-mailed statement to Food Safety News.

The reason the German E. coli outbreak linked to sprouts in the spring of 2011 was so devastating was that Germany lacked the coherent pathogen surveillance system that the U.S. has, he says.

Instead the country was relying on a series of new, different tests that made linking pathogens much more difficult.

That's why Besser says these new analyses must be addressed in a systematic way.

"This issue of culture-independent diagnostics is a high probability, high-impact issue," he said. "The risks of doing nothing are very high but the benefits of doing something are also very high."

PFGE images and charts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

II International Conference on Antimicrobial Research

info@foodsafetynews.com (Food Safety News) — Tue, 22 May 2012 16:01:15 -0800

II International Conference on Antimicrobial Research (ICAR2012), which will be held in Lisbon (Portugal), during 21-23 November 2012. ICAR2012 will be a forum for the presentation, exchange and dissemination of information and experiences on anti-microbe strategies, in biotic or abiotic environments, in planktonic or adhered states, in biologically specific or unspecific ways, in vitro or in vivo, in a general context marked by the threat posed by the increasing antimicrobial resistance of pathogenic microorganisms. "Anti" is here taken in a wide sense as "against cell cycle, adhesion, or communication", when harmful for the human health, industry or economy (infectious diseases, chemotherapy, food, biomedicine, agriculture, livestock, biotechnology, water systems...). It will cover topics on antimicrobial resistance, (early) microbial and resistance detection, enhancement of innate defenses against pathogens, as well as methods & techniques. http://www.formatex.org/icar2012/

Diamond Pet Foods Recalls More Dry Dog Food

mrothschild@foodsafetynews.com (Mary Rothschild) — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:59:07 -0800

Diamond Pet Foods has again recalled batches of dry dog food that may be contaminated with Salmonella, this time to include its Diamond Naturals Small Breed Adult Dog Lamb & Rice Formula dry dog food manufactured on Aug. 26, 2011.

The earlier Diamond Pet Foods recalls involved various formulas manufactured after Dec. 9, 2011 at its production facility in Gaston, SC. This recall involves pet food produced in Meta, MO.

The company says no illnesses have been reported in connection with this latest recall, which presumably means no human or animal illnesses.

However, as of May 11, 15 people in nine states and one person in Canada have been reported sickened with an outbreak strain of Salmonella Infantis from contact with contaminated dog food or infected animals, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As of May 16, the Food and Drug Administration had confirmed two dog illnesses related to the outbreak.

Last week the Calgary Herald in Alberta reported that two cats in a Montreal shelter died, and another was ill, after being fed Diamond Pet Foods products.

The outbreak investigation confirmed a link between some of the illnesses and samples of dry dog food, sold under various brand names, manufactured at Diamond Pet Foods' Gaston, SC production plant.

The company's latest recall is of 6 lb. and 18 lb. and sample bags of Diamond Naturals Small Breed Adult Dog Lamb & Rice Formula with a DSL0801 production code and best-before dates of 26-Aug-2012, 27-Sept- 2012 and 18-Oct- 2012.

The recalled product was distributed in Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin. Further distribution through other pet food channels, including on-line retailers, may have occurred.

For more information on this recall call toll-free at 1-866-918-8756, Monday through Sunday, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. EST.

Pets with Salmonella infections may have decreased appetite, fever and abdominal pain. If left untreated, pets may be lethargic and have diarrhea, fever and vomiting. Infected but otherwise healthy pets can be carriers and infect other animals or humans. Diamond says that if your pet has consumed the recalled product and has these symptoms, you should contact your veterinarian.

Individuals handling dry pet food can become infected with Salmonella, especially if they have not thoroughly washed their hands after having contact with surfaces exposed to this product. People who believe they may have been exposed to Salmonella should monitor themselves for some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever.

Consumers can lodge complaints about FDA-regulated pet foods with area Consumer Complaint Coordinators or at http://www.fda.gov/petfoodcomplaints

River Ranch Expands Bagged Salad Recall

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:59:06 -0800

River Ranch Fresh Foods of Salinas, CA is expanding its earlier recall of retail and foodservice bagged salads because they may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.

The company says there have been no reported illnesses associated with this recall, according to the recall alert.

Retail salad products under this recall were distributed throughout the United States and Canada under various sizes and packaged under the brand names of River Ranch, Farm Stand, Hy-Vee, Shurfresh, and The Farmer's Market.

Foodservice salad products under this recall were distributed throughout the United States and Canada under various sizes and packaged under the brand names of River Ranch and Sysco.

The recalled retail and foodservice salad bags have either "best by" code dates between 12MAY2012 - 29MAY2012 or Julian dates of 118 and 125. The code date is typically located in the upper right hand corner of the bags.

See this list for the specific salad products, size, package type, UPC codes and states of distribution.

No other products, brands or code dates aside from those listed below are affected by this recall.

Consumers who have purchased this product should not consume it and are urged to return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. For more information contact River Ranch at its 24-hour customer service center at 1-888-624-2569.

FDA to Host Public Meeting on Export Food Safety

info@foodsafetynews.com (News Desk) — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:59:06 -0800

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's comprehensive plan to expand the technical, scientific and regulatory capacity of foreign governments and their respective food industries in countries that export foods to the United States will be discussed at a public meeting from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. June 19, 2012 at the L'Enfant Plaza Hotel, 480 L'Enfant Plaza, S.W., Washington, DC.

Known as the "capacity-building plan," this process is being developed by the FDA pursuant to the Food Safety Modernization Act, or FSMA. The law gives FDA new tools to hold imported foods to the same standards as domestic foods.

The public will have an opportunity to provide information and share views that will inform FDA's development of the plan.

Those who want to attend the International Capacity Building with Respect to Food Safety are encouraged to register on-line or contact: Courtney Treece, Planning Professionals, Ltd., 1210 W. McDermott, Suite 111, Allen, TX 75013, telephone: 704-258-4983, fax: 469-854-6992, e-mail: ctreece@planningprofessionals.com.

June 11 is the closing date for advance registration.

For general questions about the meeting or to request special accommodations due to a disability, contact: Juanita Yates, FDA, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, telephone: 240-402-1731, e-mail: juanita.yates@fda.hhs.gov.

For additional information on capacity building, see International Capacity Building under FSMA.

An estimated 15 percent of the U.S. food supply is imported, including 60 percent of fresh fruits and vegetables and 80 percent of seafood.

USDA Takes Meat and Poultry Labeling to the Web

dflynn@foodsafetynews.com (Dan Flynn) — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:59:03 -0800

A new web-based label approval system that will streamline the agency's review process for meat, poultry and egg product labels was introduced Monday by USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

Called the Label Submission Approval System (LSAS), the new approval system will make it possible for food manufacturers to submit label applications electronically, will flag application submission errors that could delay the approval process, and will allow users to track the progress of their submission.

 "This new system will expedite and simplify the review process for meat, poultry and egg product labels," said Dr. Elisabeth Hagen, under secretary for food safety. "Reducing the review times for labels will enhance the agency's ability to ensure that accurate information is applied to product labels and reaches consumers quickly." 

The "Leaders Conference" of the National Meat Association was briefed on the new web-based labeling system last week in Washington D.C. by Phil Derfler, FSIS deputy administration.

"Based on what we heard," says Jeremy Russell, NMA's director of communications and government, "I'd say we're cautiously optimistic that it will streamline the process and increase efficiency."

FSIS reviews labels on the products it regulates to ensure they are truthful and not misleading.

The LSAS is suppose to reduce the time and costs incurred by both the industry and the agency. Until the launch of LSAS, companies mailed or hand delivered paper applications to FSIS, and FSIS reviewed and corrected them before returning them in hard copy.

The agency receives 150 to 200 label submissions daily, and it can take more than three weeks for a label to be reviewed. The web-based system will make approved or corrected labels immediately available to companies, saving time and mailing costs.

The new system also will allow companies to store labels and make changes electronically, removing the need to print and re-submit modified labels for review to FSIS each time a change is made. Label submissions are reviewed on a first-come, first-served basis, and the agency will continue to review labels in the same manner using LSAS.

If a company chooses to use LSAS to submit a label for approval, the system will notify the company if an application is incomplete through an error message. The system assigns each label a tracking number so the progress of its review can be tracked online. The system also includes an option to first see if the label qualifies for a generic approval before proceeding with a submission (generic approval means the label does not have to be submitted to FSIS for review prior to use). 

More information about LSAS, including instructions on accessing the system using Level 2 USDA e-authentication, a user's guide, agency contact information, and frequently asked questions is available on FSIS' website.

FSIS "strongly encourages" companies to consult the LSAS User's Guide before attempting to submit their first label(s) through the new system. Webinars about LSAS will be scheduled and announced in coming weeks.   The LSAS is another result of an on-going USDA review of existing program rules to determine whether any should be modified, streamlined, clarified, or repealed to improve access to USDA programs.

With the intent to minimize burdens on individuals, businesses and communities attempting to access programs, the review was directed by President Obama in Executive Order 13563, signed Jan. 18, 2011. 

In the past two years, FSIS has announced several measures to safeguard the food supply, prevent foodborne illness and improve consumers' knowledge about the food they eat.

In a statement, FSIS said these initiatives support the three core principles developed by the President's Food Safety Working Group: prioritizing prevention; strengthening surveillance and enforcement; and improving response and recovery. The actions include: 

- Zero tolerance policy for six Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) serogroups. Raw ground beef, its components and tenderized steaks found to contain E. coli O26, O103, O45, O111, O121 or O145 will be prohibited from sale to consumers. USDA will launch a testing program to detect these dangerous pathogens and prevent them from reaching consumers.

- Test and hold policy that USDA says will significantly reduce consumer exposure to unsafe meat products, should the policy become final, because products cannot be released into commerce until agency test results for dangerous contaminants are known.

- Labeling requirements that USDA says should provide better information to consumers about their food by requiring nutrition information for single-ingredient raw meat and poultry products and ground or chopped products.

- Public Health Information System, a modernized, comprehensive database about public health trends and food safety violations at the nearly 6,100 plants FSIS regulates.  

Amnesty International Not Sure About Status of Chinese Food Safety Advocate

dflynn@foodsafetynews.com (Dan Flynn) — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:59:02 -0800

Amnesty International (AI) has lost track of Chinese food safety advocate Zhao Lianhai.

AI's Alex Edwards told Food Safety News the last solid information about Zhao, 40, was in January 2011, more than a year ago.

Whether Zhao has "gone missing" as some media outlets have reported, is just lying low or is under house arrest isn't known for certain.

In 2008, powdered milk tainted with the chemical melamine eventually killed six children and sickened at least 300,000 others in China. The tragedy put Zhao in the spotlight -- he was both an official for China's Food Quality and Safety Authority and the parent of an injured infant.

Zhao began speaking out to media and through a website helped organize other parents whose children had been poisoned. The most seriously injured infants suffered from kidney stones, raising questions of compensation for their health problems.

Zhao was arrested in Beijing on Nov. 13, 2009. Amnesty International says he was convicted on Nov. 10, 2010 by Daxing District People's Court in Beijing for "provoking an incident" (Criminal Law article 293). He was sentenced to two and half years in prison.

His lawyers visited the Daxing Detention Center on Nov. 12, 2010 and found Zhao involved in a hunger strike. Zhao's lawyers were told not to appeal and they were prevented from another visit to the detention center.

IA says the official Xinhua News Agency in Hong Kong reported on Nov. 23, 2010 that Zhao accepted the court verdict and would not be filing any appeals. The news agency said Zhao had filed an application for medical parole and it was being processed.

Through his lawyers, the court had urged Zhao to maintain a low profile and keep himself and his family away from the media.

Based on information from Zhao's former lawyers, AI confirmed the food safety activist was released on medical parole on Dec. 28, 2010.

On Dec. 31, 2010, Zhao told the lawyers he had been home to see his family and was then sent to a Beijing hospital for medical treatment. IA said it was not clear what kind of treatment was involved or whether he was still being treated.

The report was consistent with the Dec. 28, 2010 medical parole release date.

Zhao is believed to be under house arrest with armed guards outside his door. He put a 20 minute video on the Internet last April, calling for the release of Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, who was jailed for three months. Speaking out could have been a violation of his medical parole and resulted in a return to jail for Zhao, China experts say.

Zhao is married with two children.

The melamine scandal was a great embarrassment for China's government.

Zhang Yujun, who produced 776 tons of melamine and sold it as "protein powder," and Geng Jinping, who bought it for inclusion in milk, both got death sentences for their roles in the incident.