FSnet Aug. 21/08 -- III
US: FDA
announces final rule amending the food additive regulations
to allow for the irradiation of fresh iceberg lettuce and
fresh spinach
US: FDA OKs
irradiating iceberg lettuce, spinach
US: FDA
approves irradiation of iceberg lettuce, spinach
US: FDA to
allow radiation of spinach and lettuce
US: Safe
harbor from food irradiation — organics
CANDA:
Federal meat inspectors to have new role
CANADA: Most
people unaware of Listeria infection, others need quick
attention
CANADA:
Tories coy about plan to shift food inspection powers to
industry
CANADA: Meat
recall shows need for better inspections, says prof
Why consumers
should avoid raw salmon: If it isn't frozen first, it could
harbor tapeworm larvae cooking or freezing fish at minus 31
degrees fahrenheit or colder for 15 hours will kill
diphyllobothrium larvae
US: Food
safety bills in works may exceed ‘a dozen’
CALIFORNIA:
'Governor Schwarzenegger, veto this bill!' Pleads food
safety advocate William Marler
How £275 food
allergy tests 'feed on fear and could be health hazard'
AUSTRALIA:
Snapshot survey on the microbiological quality of kebabs in
New South Wales
AUSTRALIA:
Implementation sub committee coordinated food survey
planning workshop in Brisbane
NEW ZEALAND:
NZFSA Food Recall advertising survey
how to
subscribe
US: FDA
announces final rule amending the food additive regulations
to allow for the irradiation of fresh iceberg lettuce and
fresh spinach
21.aug.08
CFSAN Constituent Update
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a final
rule today amending the food additive regulations to provide
for the safe use of ionizing radiation for the control of
foodborne pathogens and extension of shelf-life in fresh
iceberg lettuce and fresh spinach. FDA has determined that
this use of ionizing radiation will not adversely affect the
safety of the food.
This final rule is a partial response to a food additive
petition (FAP 9M4697) that had been filed by The National
Food Processors Association (now the Grocery Manufacturers'
Association) on behalf of The Food Irradiation Coalition. In
2007, the petitioner requested a response to a part of the
original scope of the petition while the remainder would
remain under review. Specifically, the petitioner requested
a response to amend the food additive regulations to provide
for the safe use of ionizing radiation for the control of
food-borne pathogens and extension of shelf-life in fresh
iceberg lettuce and fresh spinach up to a maximum absorbed
dose of 4.0 kilogray (kGy).
This final rule will permit the irradiation of fresh iceberg
lettuce and fresh spinach to a maximum absorbed dose of 4.0
kGy, which is effective in reducing microbial pathogens that
have been associated with these crops in the past.
There will be a 30-day period for submitting objections or a
request for a hearing to Docket No. FDA-1999-F-2405]
(formerly 1999F-5522). Electronic objections may be
submitted to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
http://www.regulations.gov or written submissions may be
sent to the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852.
US: FDA OKs
irradiating iceberg lettuce, spinach
21.aug.08
The Packer.com
John Chadwell
http://thepacker.com/icms/_dtaa2/content/wrapper.asp?alink=2008-174224-567.asp&stype=topstory&fb=
The Food and Drug Administration now allows food processors
to irradiate fresh spinach and iceberg lettuce to kill E.
coli and other pathogens.
But despite heightened consumer awareness of food safety
issues in the wake of outbreaks — including a 2006 E. coli
outbreak linked to bagged spinach — it’s not clear consumers
would pay a premium price for treated product.
The regulation goes into effect Aug. 22. The FDA first
approved irradiation of red meat in 1997 and since then has
approved irradiation of poultry, fresh fruits and vegetables
and spice, particularly to ward off insects.
FDA spokesman Sebastian Cianci said the new rule allows for
a higher dosage than previously approved for produce to kill
the pathogens, and does so without significantly affecting
nutritional values. It’s only a tool, however, and doesn’t
replace the need for good agricultural practices.
All treated produce must have on the label the radura symbol
and wording saying the product has been irradiated, Cianci
said.
“It’s not going to be a silver bullet,” said Jim Gorny,
executive director of the University of California-Davis
Postharvest Technology Research and Information Center. “It
will come down to how well the products will be able to
tolerate the dosages needed. Most fruits and vegetables
don’t tolerate irradiation very well.”
He said irradiation is safe, but its adoption by the
industry would require a massive consumer education
campaign. The stumbling block, he said, is not about the
technology itself.
“The reason I’m not optimistic is that commercial
irradiation in ground beef added a cost of about 5 cents per
pound, and it failed because consumers aren’t willing to pay
a premium for a safe product,” Gorny said. “They expect it
to be safe. They ask, ‘If I’m not buying irradiated meat
it’s not safe?’”
Hawaii Pride LLC, Keaau, irradiates 10 million pounds of
fruit each year for shipments to the U.S. mainland.
“To my knowledge, there has never been a negative consumer
reaction to the process of using electronic irradiation, but
executives at various stores are against it because they are
concerned about negative backlash from small numbers of
activists,” said Eric Weinert, vice president.
He said irradiation is a step in the right direction because
it is a proven technology, but maintained retail’s
reluctance to give it the green light is the main hurdle to
its acceptance.
Weinert said the cost can be high for a machine, as much as
$3.5 million, but the variable costs are low when
considering the hundreds of millions of salad bags that
would be treated.
“The key is being able to put it in a situation where you
can keep it full all the time,” he said.
Joe Pezzini, chairman of the California Leafy Green Products
Handler Marketing Agreement, and vice president of
operations for Ocean Mist Farms, Castroville, Calif., said
irradiation would be one more tool toward food safety.
“It’s yet to be seen if it can be practically applicable,”
he said. “We still have a robust, preventative program
through LGMA, which will continue. As we’ve said all along,
as science and technology advances, we will look at all
those measures to see how they can be incorporated into
ensuring safe food.”
Pezzini agreed with Gorny in wondering if consumers will
want irradiated food and said the industry’s understanding
of irradiation is probably very low.
“I would think the big processors are more up on it than the
general produce industry,” he said. “It is very expensive,
though, and is it consumer acceptable, that’s the big
question.”
US: FDA
approves irradiation of iceberg lettuce, spinach
21.aug.08
Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy (CIDRAP)
Robert Roos
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/irradiation/news/aug2108irrad.html
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today approved the
use of irradiation to kill pathogens in fresh spinach and
iceberg lettuce, which were linked to Escherichia coli
O157:H7 outbreaks that sickened hundreds of people in the
fall of 2006.
The intent is to allow irradiation both to eliminate
pathogens and to extend shelf life, according to the FDA's
new rule, to be published tomorrow in the Federal Register
but posted online today. The rule takes effect tomorrow.
Iceberg lettuce and spinach now join meat, poultry,
molluscan shellfish, and dried spices on the list of foods
that can be irradiated for safety in the United States, said
FDA spokesman Sebastian Cianci. The FDA action does not
include other varieties of lettuce.
The approval was sought by the Grocery Manufacturers
Association (GMA), formerly the National Food Processors
Association, Cianci told CIDRAP News. Back in 2000, the
group had petitioned for approval of irradiation for a wide
range of foods, including raw vegetables and fruits. In
December 2007, the GMA asked the FDA for a "partial
response" covering just iceberg lettuce and spinach, Cianci
said.
"Irradiation is effective in reducing levels of potentially
dangerous pathogens such as Salmonella and E coli and will
provide an additional tool that may be helpful to protect
the public from microbial hazards," Cianci said.
Under the FDA rule, packages of irradiated lettuce and
spinach—like other irradiated food products—will have to
bear the radura logo and one of two statements: "treated
with radiation" or "treated by irradiation."
"This final rule will permit the irradiation of fresh
iceberg lettuce and fresh spinach to a maximum absorbed dose
of 4.0 kGy [kiloGray], which is effective in reducing
microbial pathogens that have been associated with these
crops in the past," the FDA said in an e-mailed
announcement.
According to an Associated Press (AP) report published
today, the FDA concluded that this dose of radiation does
not sterilize lettuce or spinach but is enough to
"dramatically" reduce levels of E coli, Salmonella, and
Listeria without impairing the safety or nutritional value
of the foods.
"This isn't going to eliminate the need to wash the product.
The FDA continues to recommend that consumers thoroughly
wash produce uinder running water before they eat it," said
Cianci. "Pre-washed bagged produce can be used without
further washing," but not all bagged produce is pre-washed,
he added.
"This is not to take the place of other controls; it's an
additional pathogen-reduction method," Cianci said.
He said the FDA previously approved irradiation of lettuce,
spinach, and some other commodities to kill insects and
reduce spoilage, which involved doses lower than those used
to kill microbes. He was unsure about to what extent
irradiation has been used to kill insects in produce, if at
all.
The FDA is still pondering allowing the irradiation of other
kinds of produce. Cianci couldn't predict how soon any
additional approvals might come.
Fresh bagged spinach grown in California was blamed for an E
coli outbreak in the early fall of 2006 that involved 204
cases and three deaths. Later that fall, shredded lettuce
from Taco John's restaurants was implicated in two E coli
outbreaks, one in Minnesota and Iowa and the other in
several northeastern states.
See also:
Prepublication copy of the FDA's Federal Register
announcement
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/FDA-1999-F-2405-nfr.pdf
US: FDA to
allow radiation of spinach and lettuce
21.aug.08
Reuters/Chicago Tribune/
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN2128774020080821
WASHINGTON -- Health regulators have approved the use of
ionizing radiation for fresh spinach and lettuce, saying the
technique already approved for other foods can help control
harmful bacteria and other pathogens.
From extensive media coverage:
"In the aftermath of the recent outbreaks, FDA wanted to
fast track an important tool to help industry improve the
safety of fresh produce," Grocery Manufacturers Association
(GMA) spokesman Brian Kennedy said.
But FDA spokeswoman Stephanie Kwisnek said the agency was
making its decision now because it had finished reviewing
all the necessary data.
Despite the approval, it was not immediately clear if food
manufacturers or retailers would soon begin using the
technology amid concerns about costs and consumer reactions.
"There is still a big consumer concern about irradiated
products and I think that is the single biggest issue," said
Martin Cole, head of the National Center for Food Safety and
Technology at the Illinois Institute of Technology.
However, "the scientific community looks at it safety wise
as that there's nothing wrong with it at all."
In the case of spinach and lettuce, irradiation is aimed at
destroying the DNA of E.coli and salmonella, two well-known
instigators of food-borne illness. To be irradiated, food is
packed into containers and moved by a conveyor belt into a
shielded room. There, it's hit by gamma rays or electron
beams.
Either method is the safety equivalent of a person walking
through an X-Ray detector at an airport, said Michael Doyle,
head of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety.
"It is a safe process. You are not going to glow in the
dark." The problem is, people often perceive the latter.
Acceptance of irradiated food would get a boost if it didn't
have to be labeled as such, Doyle said. There's a food
industry proposal before the FDA to do just that, allowing
processors to use the broad term "pasteurized" for several
processes that kill pathogens, including irradiation.
US: Safe
harbor from food irradiation — organics
21.aug.08
The Cornucopia Institute
http://www.cornucopia.org/index.php/safe-harbor-from-food-irradiation-organics/
(This is one of many anti-irradiation posts all over the
InterWebs this evening – dp)
With the FDA’s decision (see FDA: Irradiating Spinach,
Lettuce OK To Kill Germs) endorsing the use of radiation as
a way to zap E. coli and other dangerous germs on fresh
spinach and iceberg lettuce, consumers should know that
federal organic standards explicitly prohibit irradiation of
organic food.
Consumers with concerns about the nutritional quality of
their food will be seeking out organics and we know that
they won’t get answers to their questions at Wal-Mart or the
big supermarket chains. Presumably, this may very well
increase store traffic at the nation’s cooperative grocers
and other independent stores with highly-knowledgeable
staff, as well as increase purchasing of local foods at the
nation’s hundreds of farmers’ markets.
Meg Hannah, Cornucopia’s president, and a geneticist by
training notes: “This irradiation has to be affecting the
vegetables—damage to DNA, enzymes, other molecules. Bacteria
are much more resistant to radiation than higher plants and
animals, so killing them takes a lot of it. And you don’t
want to use too little radiation, because that will result
in survivors, some of which will have mutations, some of
which will create even more dangerous strains.”
There is already a wide body of scientific literature
talking about free-radicals and changes to the chemical
composition of food after treatment with radiation. We think
one of the most compelling arguments is that this will
enable corporate agribusiness to market “old” food. This is
the same selling point, or downside depending on your
perspective, that they were pushing when they were
advocating irradiation of strawberries.
Be advised, old food = lower nutritional quality.
CANDA:
Federal meat inspectors to have new role
21.aug.08
Ottawa Citizen
Sarach Schmidt
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=fbebfe1d-9850-46a6-8a0d-35c7efe50225
OTTAWA - The government inspector stationed at a Toronto
meat-processing plant at the centre of a tainted food recall
would be among those with a new role if a controversial plan
to transfer meat inspection to industry goes ahead as
planned.
Maple Leaf Foods Inc., in conjunction with the Canadian Food
Inspection Agency, has recalled 23 sliced meat products amid
a nationwide outbreak of listeria infection.
Public health officials on Thursday officially linked one
death in Ontario to listeriosis, a food-borne illness caused
by the Listeria monocytogenes bacterium. Three other deaths
where listeria may have been a contributing factor are under
investigation. A direct link has not been made between the
outbreak and the recalled meat products.
A confidential cabinet document, obtained last month by
Canwest News Service, outlines a plan to have the inspection
of meat and meat products "shift from full-time CFIA meat
inspection presence to an oversight role, allowing industry
to implement food safety control programs and to manage key
risks."
An official announcement of the meat-inspection plan,
drafted by Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and approved by
Treasury Board last November, has been put off until a
cabinet committee approves an implementation plan,
"including risk mitigation and communication strategies."
On Thursday, Ritz declined to reveal specifics about the
plan, but said the goal is for inspectors to play a more
"proactive role" and build on an inspection process brought
in under the previous government in 2004, known as the
hazard analysis and critical control point.
"What we're striving to do is do a more proactive role
within the plant situation as opposed to having our
inspectors standing line by line. They'll have a more
oversight role within the plant itself," said Ritz, pointing
out the inspector currently stationed at the plant didn't
catch the problem, likely on lines 8 and 9.
"If the inspector happens to be standing at line 7, he
wouldn't have caught anything anyway. With our proactive
approach the CFIA is working to implement, we think we'll
have far better oversight and tend to catch these things in
a proactive way as opposed to be forced to react as we are
today."
Noting that an additional 200 inspectors have been hired
recently, Ritz added, "we're trying to build a better
mousetrap here."
But opposition politicians say such generalities over
pending changes to the way meat is inspected is unacceptable
as the food-borne bacterial outbreak grows.
"Here we have a crisis at Maple Leaf Foods and we have a
government that is going in the wrong direction. We have to
get some honesty about what direction the government is
going and have full disclosure of what their intentions
are," said Paul Dewar, the New Democrat MP for Ottawa
Centre.
After reviewing the document, Robert de Valk, Ottawa-based
Canadian government affairs representative at the North
American Meat Processors Association, called on the
government to brief industry about its plans.
"Why are we not getting more detail? Instead of developing a
communications strategy, talk to industry about what they
want to do. In the end, it's the plant that's responsible
for food safety, but we would certainly like to know what
they have in mind for each inspector in the plant."
CANADA: Most
people unaware of Listeria infection, others need quick
attention
21.aug.08
The Canadian Press
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5i1UkHB3s2LVmdmJlHhYPtDf4wxuw
TORONTO — A massive recall of deli meats likely has many
Canadians checking their refrigerators and scouring their
memories of past meals over fears they may be among those
afflicted with the bacterial illness listeriosis.
An outbreak of the disease caused by Listeria monocytogenes
is being investigated, prompting the recall of 23 meat
products by Maple Leaf Foods. Officials have yet to
establish a link between the outbreak and the food produced
at the company's meat plant in Toronto.
So far, the infection has sickened 16 people and killed one,
but some health officials believe the number of those
affected will likely rise.
Dr. Andrew Simor, head of microbiology at Sunnybrook Health
Sciences Centre in Toronto, was quoted as saying, "In most
cases, the infection is pretty mild, people might not even
be aware they have it. They might have a mild flu-like
illness, maybe some mild abdominal pain and diarrhea. I
think if people have eaten (any of these foods) but feel
perfectly well, they have nothing more to worry about and
the vast, vast majority of people who have eaten these
products will not get sick."
However, eating foods laced with Listeria can lead to
life-threatening forms of the disease in vulnerable groups,
among them the elderly, those with compromised immune
systems and the unborn fetuses of pregnant women.
Anyone in a high-risk group should seek medical attention if
they suspect they've eaten a potentially contaminated food
and have developed diarrhea and other symptoms of mild
disease, "just to make sure that isn't a warning of more
severe disease to follow," Simor said.
In pregnant women who are infected, the organism can
proliferate in the placenta and cause fetal death or
premature birth, with "severe, overwhelming infection of the
newborn," Simor said.
CANADA:
Tories coy about plan to shift food inspection powers to
industry
21.aug.08
The Canadian Press
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gC9NkqspB-o1I8yAAGcJOeLk4IgA
OTTAWA — Allowing the food industry to police itself would
lead to more recalls as businesses cut corners, critics said
Thursday amid a nationwide outbreak of a dangerous bacterial
infection.
But the Harper government won't say if it's planning
sweeping changes that would transfer food-inspection powers
from government to industry.
A secret cabinet document leaked last month suggested the
Conservatives want to hand over inspection duties.
Liberal Leader Stephane Dion told reporters in Toronto the
Tories backing the plan are the same ones who were at the
helm of Ontario's Conservative government during the tainted
water crisis in Walkerton, which left seven dead and more
than 2,000 seriously ill.
Dion singled out Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Environment
Minister John Baird and Health Minister Tony Clement as "the
same people . . . who are responsible (for) what happened in
Walkerton."
Liberal agriculture critic Wayne Easter accused the Tories
of downloading responsibility for food inspection onto
industry as a "cost-saving measure."
He said the Tory plan could lead to more food-safety
problems during economic slowdowns as businesses tighten
their belts and scrimp on inspections.
"I don't think there's any question about it," he said.
"If you . . . download responsibilities to industry itself,
so that they would be self-policing themselves, that it
would lead to greater problems within our food system."
Speaking to reporters in Ottawa, Agriculture Minister Gerry
Ritz suggested the Tories want industry to play a greater
role in inspecting its own products.
"What we're striving to do is actually do a more proactive
role within the plant situation," he said.
"As opposed to having our inspectors standing line-by-line,
they'll have a more oversight role within the plant itself."
Ritz said the new inspection system the agency is
implementing should pinpoint contamination issues before
products leave the plant.
University of Guelph professor Ann Clark, who has testified
before the agriculture committee, said industry's main goal
is to make money, not provide a public health service such
as food inspection that has historically fallen to
governments.
The food industry's massive scale means recalls potentially
affect millions of people, she said.
"If that same mistake had been made in a small, local
abattoir or bakery or canning plant . . . at worst, you're
going to kill off a few neighbours."
But food-safety expert Doug Powell said companies are likely
to diligently inspect their products since no one wants a
recall associated with their name.
Powell, of the Food Safety Network at Kansas State
University, said governments are "not the be-all and end-all
of food safety knowledge."
"Government's there to set some standards and some level of
accountability," he said.
"The supply chain, from farm right through to retailer or
restaurant often have far higher standards than government
minimal standards."
CANADA: Meat
recall shows need for better inspections, says prof
21.aug.08
Leader-Post
Anne Kyle
http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=736f6bb2-cce3-4058-8258-892879d1ece2
REGINA -- A University of Regina professor says a major meat
recall by Maple Leaf this week lends credence to federal
government plans to increase the role and responsibility of
the private sector in monitoring food safety and risk
management.
"Such a policy should be encouraged because if you empower
the private sector you are making the private sector more
responsible in cases like recalls and risk management. So
the more you empower the private sector the more you will be
able to react quickly because time is of essence here. The
quicker you react the better,'' said Sylvain Charlebois, who
co-authored an international report on food safety.
"It is really unfortunate when it comes to situations like
this because Maple Leaf is considered a role model when it
comes to food safety and is a pioneer in food traceability.
Maple Leaf's track record when it comes to food safety is
actually quite good,'' he said.
The scope of the recall and the problem may be quite
significant because a multinational company like Maple Leaf
covers all provinces and territories and goes beyond
Canada's borders as well, he said.
"But at the same time all food recalls are preventable if
the food is inspected at source because right now when you
look at the foods that consumers consume in Canada, only two
per cent is monitored,'' Charlebois said.
"In order to properly manage risks in Canada I think we need
to invest more money and resources in monitoring foodborne
illnesses from farm to fork. And I don't think we have done
a great job at it.''
Charlebois suggests the only way to make Canada's food
supply safer is to have government agencies and the food
industry share the roles and responsibilities for food
monitoring and risk management.
Why consumers
should avoid raw salmon: If it isn't frozen first, it could
harbor tapeworm larvae cooking or freezing fish at minus 31
degrees fahrenheit or colder for 15 hours will kill
diphyllobothrium larvae
21.aug.08
from a press release
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/gourmetcom-report-offers-insight-tapeworms/story.aspx?guid=%7B4EA62E6B-479C-4BC5-955D-019A135115B6%7D&dist=hppr
NEW YORK -- A gourmet.com report offers insight into the
problem of tapeworms in raw salmon. Raw salmon
dishes--tartare, crudo, sushi, marinated and cured
salmon--are popular at top restaurants these days, and
they're showing up in home kitchens as well. But as seafood
expert Jon Rowley explains in a gourmet.com exclusive
report, a tiny tapeworm larva may be lurking in the raw
salmon flesh, just waiting for you to eat it so that it can
take up residence in your digestive tract.
How can you protect yourself? Rowley offers these invaluable
tips:
-- When eating out, order only salmon that has been fully
cooked.
-- If you do choose to eat raw salmon preparations such as
tartare or crudo, make sure the fish has first been frozen
at minus 31 degrees Fahrenheit or colder for at least 15
hours.
-- If you think you may have contracted a tapeworm from raw
salmon, be sure to contact your physician. Symptoms of
infection may include abdominal cramping, fatigue, diarrhea,
and nausea (though there may be no symptoms at all).
-- Any fish that live in fresh water for part or all of
their lives can harbor tapeworm larvae, so these same rules
apply to trout, tilapia, catfish, and more.
To get the full story and find out how you can protect
yourself, go to gourmet.com.
Gourmet magazine website featuring exclusive content:
www.gourmet.com.
Article link:
http://www.gourmet.com/foodpolitics/2008/08/raw-salmon-tapeworm.
US: Food
safety bills in works may exceed ‘a dozen’
21.aug.08
The Packer.com
Tom Karst
http://thepacker.com/icms/_dtaa2/content/wrapper.asp?alink=2008-17340-500.asp&stype=topstory&fb=
House Agriculture Committee chairman Rep. Collin Peterson,
D-Minn., said in mid-August he would like to move produce
safety oversight functions from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
However, lobbyists and Capitol Hill sources say a more
likely scenario will be the ascension food safety reform
legislation that will maintain FDA oversight of fresh
produce safety, but invest it with new powers and resources.
Peterson was quoted Aug. 17 in The Bemidji (Minn.) Pioneer
newspaper that he wants produce safety oversight transferred
from the FDA to the USDA.
“They’re not perfect, but they are a helluva lot better than
the FDA,” he told the paper.
However, he acknowledged in the same interview that moving
FDA jurisdiction from the House Energy and Commerce
Committee to the Agriculture Committee was a political
problem.
Meanwhile, House Energy and Commerce chairman John Dingell,
D-Mich., plans to offer a second draft of his proposed
legislation called the “Food and Drug Administration
Globalization Act,” according to a Dingell spokesman.
The spokesman, speaking on anonymity, said Dingell was
working with the industry to find consensus on the bill.
“It is a bipartisan bill and Mr. Dingell would like to get
it done as soon as possible,” the Congressional staffer
said.
Kathy Means, vice president of government relations and
public relations for the Newark, Del-based Produce Marketing
Association, said that the Dingell food safety legislation
has some objectionable provisions concerning user fees and
limitations of ports used for imports. However, Means said
PMA is working with all members of Congress to provide
industry input.
CALIFORNIA:
'Governor Schwarzenegger, veto this bill!' Pleads food
safety advocate William Marler
21.aug.08
from a press release
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/governor-schwarzenegger-veto-bill-pleads/story.aspx?guid=%7BC8BBBB3C-F92D-4F7A-994C-5AA2EBA4A4A5%7D&dist=hppr
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- An ambitious and well-meaning attempt
to make California's dairy products safer arrives this week
in the California Assembly in the form of State Bill
201--but the country's top food safety advocates are calling
on California legislators to vote against it. The bill
places regulations on producers of raw milk dairy products
and lays groundwork intended to stem the tide of deadly food
borne illnesses tied to the raw milk industry. It sounds
good, and may have enough support to reach the Governor's
desk, where the same advocates encourage a veto. What's the
problem?
"It's difficult to work so hard against a bill that has such
good intentions," said William Marler, food safety advocate
and attorney. "But SB 201 actually creates a detour around
the regulation of raw milk, and must be re-written before
the bill is ready. There are children on life support
because of raw milk tainted with E. coli and other toxic
bacteria, and there will be more of them in California--and
nationwide--unless changes are made to this legislation."
Rather than detailing the levels of fecal contaminates
acceptable in a regulated raw milk product, the bill
proposes that raw milk be regulated by a HACCP protocol.
HACCP--Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point--is a food
safety and self-inspection system that describes procedures
for producing potentially dangerous foods. There are
national HACCP protocols in place for juice, meat, poultry,
and seafood processing, but none for raw milk. Developing a
HACCP protocol can take years, and if SB 201 is signed as
written, California raw milk will enter a black hole of
regulation. Companies will be free to produce raw milk
essentially unregulated until a HACCP plan is ready.
"Raw milk--given that it is outside the pasteurization
process--has inherent risks," continued Marler. "Illnesses
from raw milk and raw colostrum--E. coli, Campylobacter, and
listeria--are on the rise, and we've seen first-hand a
growing number of consumers whose lives will never be the
same because of this product:
-- Dee Creek Farm - E. Coli O157:H7 - 11 ill, 4 with
Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, or HUS
-- Grace Harbor Farms - E. Coli O157:H7 - 2 children ill,
one with HUS
-- Organic Pastures - E. Coli O157:H7 - 6 ill, 2 children
with HUS
-- Herb Depot - E. Coli O157:H7 - Two children ill
-- Town Farm Dairy - E. Coli O157:H7 - 5 ill, 2 with HUS
-- Alexandre Family EcoDairy Farms - Campylobacter - 15
illnesses, one on a ventilator."
Raw milk is at the center of a nationwide controversy over
its potential value as a nutritional food versus the severe
illnesses that can result from contaminated product.
Pasteurization was developed to rid dairy products of
pathogens like toxic E. coli as well as to assure a longer,
safer shelf life. Proponents of raw milk believe that
pasteurization also eliminates healthful benefits of the
dairy product. (Peer-reviewed literature on the raw milk
controversy can be found by clicking here for pro and here
for con.)
"It's the large producers of raw milk products that SB 201
aims to regulate," said Marler. "Because of the HACCP
loophole, a huge amount of contaminated product could reach
the public. This bill is intended to stop them, but instead
will give them a free ride for years to come. California
Legislators and Governor Schwarzenegger, please send SB 201
back!"
www.marlerclark.com and www.marlerblog.com.
How £275 food
allergy tests 'feed on fear and could be health hazard'
21.aug.08
Daily Mail
Jenny Hope
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1047500/The-275-allergy-tests-feed-fear-health-hazard.html
Commercial testing for food intolerances is 'feeding on
fear' and could endanger people's health, a major inquiry
says.
It found 'highly inconsistent' results from tests costing up
to £275 that experts condemned as having no diagnostic
value.
Altogether 183 'intolerances' were found among researchers
who had just one medically-confirmed allergy and one food
intolerance between them.
The investigation by consumer watchdog Which? throws the
spotlight on a multi-million-pound industry selling tests
that are unregulated, or self-regulated by practitioners.
An astonishing 27million Britons claim to be intolerant to
one food group or another.
Celebrity sufferers include actress Rachel Weisz - who
avoids wheat - and Rod Stewart's former wife Rachel Hunter,
who has problems with lactose.
But Which? says tests being used to identify food
intolerance may put the health of users at risk by wrongly
advising them to avoid essential food groups.
It asked researchers to go undercover and pay for four kinds
of tests claimed to diagnose food intolerances.
These were blood samples tested for IgG antibodies, tests on
strands of hair, changes in a person's electromagnetic field
and kinesiology, which involves resistance to pressure
applied to legs or arms.
The tests found a total of 183 intolerances, even though the
researchers had just one medically confirmed allergy and one
already recognised food intolerance between them.
AUSTRALIA:
Snapshot survey on the microbiological quality of kebabs in
New South Wales
20.aug.08
Food Surveillance News - Winter edition
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/foodsurveillancenewsletter/winter2008.cfm
The NSW Food Authority (NSWFA) will continue to monitor
kebabs for microbiological quality after a snapshot survey
was conducted in early 2008.While no sample tested from the
25 stores contained potentially hazardous levels of bacteria
and the majority of samples were within acceptable
microbiological limits, the survey revealed a slight trend
of more samples with borderline, though acceptable, results
than in a previous survey.
In 2004, NSWFA did a survey of kebabs sold across New South
Wales (Janssonet al., 2008). The survey methodology involved
a combination of observations made during inspection and
microbiological analyses. The results from the survey were
assessed against guidelines developed by Food Standards
Australia New Zealand (FSANZ, 2001) and less than 12% of
samples were found to be unsatisfactory, with the majority
failing due to slightly elevated levels of E. coli.
The detection of E. coli in foods is not a direct indication
that the food is unsafe but more an indication of potential
problems involving the preparing and handling of foods. In
all cases, follow-up work ensued to ensure any issues were
rectified.
As a follow on from the 2004 survey, the recent 2008 survey
investigated kebab businesses with the aim to provide a
second snapshot on the microbiological quality of kebabs
sold in NSW. The survey showed a decrease in the level of
unacceptable results compared with the results of the 2004
survey. Details on the survey methodology and results are as
follows
Method and Material
20% of premises visited during the 2004 survey were
revisited and kebabs purchased from each outlet. Where
businesses had closed down since the 2004 survey, kebabs
were purchased from another shop in the same area.
Similarly, if the business had changed names, kebabs were
purchased from the new business. In total, 48 kebabs from 25
premises across metropolitan Sydney where tested as part of
the 2008 snapshot survey.
Samples were transported to the laboratory on ice and tested
for:
* E. coli using AS 1766.2.4
* Coagulase positive staphylococci using AS 1766.2.4
* Clostridium perfringens using AS 1766.2.8
* Salmonella species using AS 1766.2.5.
Results and Discussion
Comparison of the microbiological results to the FSANZ
microbiological guidelines revealed that 93.7% of samples
were within acceptable microbiological limits (Table 1)
categories. Where samples were considered microbiologically
unacceptable (falling in the unsatisfactory category within
the FSANZ guidelines), this was due to the levels ofE.
coliexceeding 102 cfu per gram. No sample contained
potentially hazardous levels of bacteria.
Table 1: Assessment of results using the FSANZ
microbiological criteria for ready-to-eat foods (FSANZ,
2001).
A summary of the results forE. coli, coagulase positive
staphylococci andC. perfringensis presented in Table
2.Salmonella was not detected in any of the samples tested.
Table 2: Summary of microbiological results for whole doner
kebabs
A frequency distribution was calculated for E. coli results
(Figure 1). From the figure it can be seen that the majority
of samples contained low levels (< 10 cfu/g or < log 1
cfu/g) of E. coli, with levels greater that log 3 cfu/g
(1000 cfu/g) only detected in 3 samples. Frequency
distributions were not calculated for Coagulase positive
staphylococci andC. perfringens as the vast majority of
results were below the level of detection (100 cfu/g). A low
level of Coagulase positive staphylococci was detected in
one sample (100 cfu/g) and two samples contained low levels
(100 and 200 cfu/g) of C. perfringens.
Figure 1: Frequency distribution ofE. colifor doner kebabs
collected from retail outlets
Levels of E. coli exceeding 100 cfu per gram are
unacceptable and might indicate:
* · Poor temperature during the display of raw or
potentially hazardous foods (e.g. shredded lettuce, sauces)
included in kebabs
* · Poor handling during the preparation of kebab components
prior to display with or without poor temperature control
* · Poor personnel hygiene (Hocking, 2003).
The three unacceptable samples were sourced from two
different businesses. One sample contained only slightly
elevated levels ofE. coliand when resampled, results were
within acceptable levels. The other business with two
unacceptable results was inspected and further samples taken
for testing with appropriate enforcement action taken.
Caution must be taken when comparing these results to the
previous survey because, for both surveys, knowledge of the
number of kebabs produced in NSW, what is representative of
a batch and the throughput of individual NSW businesses that
enable a sound statistical design and comparison are not
available. Taking this into account, when compared to the
results obtained from the 2004 survey, the current snapshot
showed a slight improvement in the number of samples falling
within acceptable microbiological limits; 93.7% in 2008,
88.6% in 2004.
In the snapshot survey, the presence of low levels of E.
coli, Coagulase positive staphylococci or C. perfringens may
be due to a variety of factors including:
* Low level contamination on vegetables used raw in kebabs
(e.g. tomato, lettuce, onion)
* Incidental contamination during the handling and
preparation of the kebab
* The presence of low levels of bacteria in ingredients such
as herbs and species used in the sauce served on the kebab
(e.g. hommus, garlic sauce).
The presence of bacteria due to the above factors is not
unexpected. It would not normally constitute a safety risk,
provided proper temperature control is maintained after
preparing kebab ingredients and the final kebab is not kept
for a long period (> 2 hours) at room temperature prior to
eating.
Conclusion
The majority (93.7%) of kebabs surveyed were within
acceptable microbiological limits. Where results were
unacceptable, appropriate action was taken. The survey
revealed a slight trend of more samples with borderline,
although microbiologically acceptable, results than in the
previous survey. This highlights the need for industry to
remain rigorous in applying appropriate food handling
controls.
The full details of the survey can be found on the NSWFA web
site at:
http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/_Documents/corporate_pdf/survey-report-kebabs-2008-final.pdf
References
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (2001).Guidelines for
the microbiological examination of ready-to-eat foods.
Retrieved March 25, 2008, from FSANZ Web site:
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Guidelines%20for%20Micro%20exam.pdf
.
Hocking, A. (2003). Foodborne microorganisms of public
health significance (6th ed.). Marrickville: Southwood
Press.
Jansson, E., Bird, P., Saputra, T. and Arnold, G.
(2008).Food safety survey of retail doner kebabs in NSW.
Food Australia. 60, (3), 95-98.
AUSTRALIA:
Implementation sub committee coordinated food survey
planning workshop in Brisbane
20.aug.08
Food Surveillance News - Winter edition
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/foodsurveillancenewsletter/winter2008.cfm
The first biannual Implementation Sub Committee (ISC)
Coordinated Food Survey Planning Workshop for 2008 was held
on 3 April in Brisbane.
The aim of these workshops is to promote a consistent and
coordinated approach to surveillance and monitoring
activities across Australian jurisdictions and New Zealand.
The main purpose of the Brisbane workshop was to complete
the Coordinated Food Survey Plan (the Plan) for 2008-2011.
The Plan is a three year forward plan for collaborative
survey activities of national or bi-national significance.
The workshop considered detailed proposals for new surveys
to be included in the Plan for 2008-2011. The following
surveys were endorsed at the July 2008 ISC meeting-
Refrigeration Temperatures During Retail Storage , Survey of
Trans Fatty Acids in Australian Foods and Prevalence and
Levels of Nut Allergens in Foods.
The workshop also discussed recent and emerging food related
concerns in Australia and overseas. The issue of recycling
of water by food businesses was flagged again for further
consideration with a view to possible future survey work, as
well as microbiological contamination of eggs and vitamin D
levels in foods.
The workshop was co-chaired by Food Standards Australia New
Zealand and the Queensland Department of Health and was well
attended by representatives of food regulatory agencies in
Australia and New Zealand.
NEW ZEALAND:
NZFSA Food Recall advertising survey
20.aug.08
Food Surveillance News - Winter edition
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/foodsurveillancenewsletter/winter2008.cfm
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) commissioned a
pilot survey to find out how efficient newspaper
advertisements are in communicating information about food
recalls to the public. The survey also explored other
avenues that might be more efficient at reaching people.
Typically, food recalls are advertised in newspapers in a
standard format. While the NZFSA could take other steps to
inform the public (such as website notifications, email
alerts and point of sale notices), it relies heavily on
newspaper advertisements. However, newspaper advertising is
expensive, one-off in nature, and may not deliver the
confidence the authority seeks in managing the risk.
For the survey, the NZFSA contracted UMR Research Limited to
phone 750 New Zealanders aged 18 years and over living in
private households. UMR used a standard phone survey
questionnaire. The survey was conducted in May 2007, 10 days
after a national consumer level recall was made by a
well-known brand of breakfast cereals.
The results of the survey indicated that:
* The current communication strategy for notifying the
public of food recalls results in, at best, a third of
consumers becoming aware of food recalls.
* Currently, newspaper advertisements by themselves appear
effective in ensuring 20% of the population becomes aware of
recalls.
* Television was seen by 74% of respondents as the most
effective means of notifying recalls.
* 56% of respondents still believe that newspaper
advertising is effective.
* 61% of respondents see radio as an effective notification
tool if the case is urgent.
* Press releases do help to get the message across.
* Notices in shops seemed to score relatively well even
though they are not a current requirement in New Zealand,
although one supermarket chain uses them as policy (scored
effective 36%).
With this knowledge from the survey, the NZFSA proposes to:
1. Continue with newspaper advertising as the minimum
advertising media for food recalls.
2. Undertake a cost benefit analysis for the different
options for notifying the public , including consideration
of the cost differences between the different forms of
advertising and the timeframes to get advertising underway
in the different media options. Such a cost benefit analysis
may be useful for considering a requirement to use radio
advertising in urgent situations, or where risk is severe.
For example, such an analysis will investigate how practical
the different media options will be, how quickly
‘advertising’ on radio can be set up compared with a press
release, and will the cost be prohibitive to small/medium
businesses?
3. Investigate whether the food recall awareness of young,
old, pregnant and immune compromised consumers matches those
of the rest of the population.
4. Investigate making a press release a requirement (that
carries no extra cost to the company) as there appears to be
a better coverage across consumers than newspaper
advertising coverage alone.
5. Promote use of shop or point of sale notices.
6. Promote the email alert system in place for recalls from
the NZFSA website to consumers (at that time there were 270
subscribers to recall alerts, 8% of total subscribers to our
website).
The survey provides some good baseline information. If
additional requirements are placed on recalls (e.g. press
release and/or shop notices), the NZFSA may consider running
a similar survey in the future to see if there is greater
recall awareness indicating any such extra measures are
effective.
FSnet is produced by the
International Food Safety Network at Kansas State
University, and is supported at the Gold Fork level by:
Marler Clark.
FSnet is supported at the Sterling Fork level by: CropLife
Canada, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural
Affairs , New Zealand Food Safety Authority, Monsanto
Canada, and the Ontario Cattlemen's Association.
Fsnet is supported at the Silver-plate Fork level by: The
National Restaurant Association, Unilever, Sholl Group/Green
Giant Fresh, Feedlot Health Management Services, McDonald's,
and Syngenta Crop Protection Canada.
The Food Safety Network presents a unique opportunity to
bring together all those associated with agriculture and
food, to enhance the safety of the food supply. To provide
financial support to the Food Safety Network, please visit
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu/en/donations.php. For
information on collaboration or fee-for-service
opportunities, please contact Dr. Doug Powell:
dpowell@ksu.edu
To subscribe to the html version of FSnet, send mail to:
(subscription is free)
listserv@listserv.ksu.edu
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
subscribe fsnet-L firstname lastname
i.e. subscribe fsnet-L Doug Powell
(replace fsnet-L with fsnettext to subscribe to the text
version)
To unsubscribe to the html version of FSnet, send mail to:
listserv@listserv.ksu.edu
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type: signoff fsnet-L
(replace fsnet-L with fsnettext to unsubscribe from the text
version)
For more information about the FSnet research program,
please contact:
Dr. Douglas Powell
associate professor
dept. diagnostic medicine/pathobiology
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS
66506
cell: 785-317-0560
fax: 785-532-4039
dpowell@ksu.edu
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu
archived at
http://archives.foodsafety.ksu.edu/fsnet-archives.htm
|
|