FSnet Aug. 22/08 -- II BARFBLOG: Seven deaths, dozens of illness investigated in Canadian listeria outbreak: pregnant women reminded of risks CANADA: Food safety and risk management CHILE: Listerosis scare in Santiago's top private clinics and hospitals US: FDA to permit irradiation of spinach, lettuce US: Regulators expected to allow radiation for spinach, lettuce BLOG: Lettuce and Spinach subject to more tainting BLOG: FDA is allowing radiation to be used to kill deadly bacteria on spinach and iceburg lettuce Praise and criticism flows. NEW MEXICO: 3 more salmonella cases linked to Santa Fe café CANADA: Researchers have E. coli disease in sights NORTHERN IRELAND: 500 reasons to celebrate the Eat Safe award KENTUCKY firm recalls frozen stuffed pepperoni pizza sandwich products that may contain foreign materials NEW YORK: Wal-Mart VP urges retailers to join global food safety initiative Optimised quantification of the antiyeast activity of different barley malts towards a lager brewing yeast strain Effect of poultry decontaminants concentration on growth kinetics for pathogenic and spoilage bacteria Inactivation kinetics of inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella Poona on whole cantaloupe by chlorine dioxide gasstar, open Culture-independent methods for identifying microbial communities in cheese how to subscribe BARFBLOG: Seven deaths, dozens of illness investigated in Canadian listeria outbreak: pregnant women reminded of risks 22.aug.08 barfblog Doug Powell http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/listeria-1/seven-deaths-dozens-of-illness-investigated-in-canadian-listeria-outbreak-pregnant-women-reminded-of-risks/index.html My wife is six months pregnant and she hasn’t had deli meats or smoked salmon or other refrigerated, ready-to-eat foods for six months. That’s because the bacterium listeria is fairly much everywhere, difficult to control, and grows in the refrigerator. It also causes stillbirths in pregnant women, who are about 20 times more likely to contract the bug than other adults. The banter in Canada about government or industry taking the lead on food inspection, whether food should be produced in large or small places, is misguided at best and more likely, political opportunism. There’s a lot of sick people out there and more to be uncovered. Listeria happens, but why did it take the Canadian authorities and industry seven weeks to issue advisories? It seems part of a pattern of don’t ask, don’t tell, at least until it’s obvious to a whole bunch of others; there are questions about who knew what when. Epidemiology, the association of something with disease – in this case, deli meats from Maple Leaf – was strong enough for the B.C. Centre For Disease Control to announce a link and a warning, while Ontario stayed mum. Why the difference? These folks are all PhDs in something, what’s going on? Long before the current outbreak, the advice from the Canadian government about listeria was mushy: “Although the risk of listeriosis associated with foods from deli counters, such as sliced packaged meat and poultry products, is relatively low, pregnant women and immunosuppressed persons may choose to avoid these foods.” http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/concen/cause/listeriae.shtml The advice from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control is clear: Do not eat hot dogs, luncheon meats, or deli meats, unless they are reheated. http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/pregnancy_gateway/infection_list.htm It has been documented that many pregnant women are not aware of the risks associated with consuming refrigerated, ready-to-eat foods like cold cuts. http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2007/10/articles/culture-of-food-safety/pregnant-women-not-receiving-food-safety-info/ Whatever the outcome of the Canadian listeria outbreak, it’s time for Canadian bureaucrats to stop dancing and provide straight advice to consumers. Other countries do it.   top CANADA: Food safety and risk management 22.aug.08 Globe and Mail http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080822.EMEAT22/TPStory/TPComment/Ontario/ The tragic outbreak of listeria infection that may have ended as many as five lives in Ontario should prompt a serious debate on how best to ensure the safety of Canada's food supply. Providing citizens with a reasonable assurance that they will not be poisoned by what they eat or drink is one of the most basic functions of modern government. It is no accident that laws governing the safe manufacture of food were among the first examples of meaningful state regulation in most developed countries; the possible consequences of tainted food are tremendous, and preventing them is a matter of critical public interest. There are many ways to do so. Canada's current regime of meat inspection, administered partly by a network of federal inspectors in processing plants and slaughterhouses, is widely respected. But it nonetheless failed to prevent the entry of listeria, an admittedly tricky bacterium, into products at a major Maple Leaf Foods Inc. production facility. That fact alone makes a discussion of possible reforms a worthwhile endeavour. The governing Conservatives apparently have some ideas on the subject. A cabinet document leaked earlier this year suggested shifting from full-time, in-plant meat inspectors to an industry-led regime, with government taking on a supervisory role. This has provoked loud protest from the opposition parties. Such a plan may, however, have its merits. In Britain, the Meat Hygiene Service adopted a similar approach last year, establishing a system of "earned autonomy" in enforcing food-safety standards for good corporate citizens, replacing some in-plant inspectors with a rigorous system of spot checks, and focusing freed-up inspection resources on producers that are deemed to be greater risks. Allowing industry to partially regulate itself can be an effective tactic, as Maple Leaf demonstrated this week. It went well beyond the demands of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency by shutting down the Toronto plant implicated in the listeria outbreak, and heeded virtually every lesson of good product-safety crisis management by quickly recalling all of the plant's products and forthrightly admitting the problem. As Maple Leaf's executives surely understand, losing the trust of consumers is disastrous in any industry, but particularly so when it comes to food. If the overriding goal of public safety is better served by adjusting meat-inspection procedures to better reflect that strong disincentive, and to focus more closely on the producers most likely to disregard it, then Canada's government should consider doing so.   top CHILE: Listerosis scare in Santiago's top private clinics and hospitals 22.aug.08 South Atlantic News Agency Merco Press http://www.mercopress.com/vernoticia.do?id=14320&formato=html Several medical organisations from Chile requested this week the Public Health ministry declare a state of “sanitary alert” following an unprecedented increase in the number of cases of deadly bacteria identified as “Listeria Monocytogenes”, which is transmitted mainly through the food chain. Doctor Luis Miguel Noriega member of the Chilean Infectology Society and resident of Santiago’s Clinica Alemana said that the number of cases has jumped from three for the whole of 2007 to eleven last July. “Most patients infected are pregnant women and the rest immunocompromised cases”, said Dr. Noriega. Researcher Katia Abarca from the University of Chile Molecular Infectology and Virology Lab confirmed Dr. Noriega’s statement saying that several hospitals and clinics “simultaneously reported” cases of patients infected with the Listeria Monocitogenes bacteria and “the situation is under consideration by Chile’s national health authorities”. An investigation is ongoing to try and determine a possible common source of contagion of the different cases or if a progressive change of lifestyle habits could be influencing hygiene recommendations at the moment of preparing food. Noriega recommends, particularly pregnant women, avoiding consuming raw meat, sushi and prepared food from street outlets. “The best way to be on the safe side is to cook food at over 75 degrees Celsius and good hygiene manipulation”. Dr. Abarca said contagion is only through food ingestion with the exception “of a pregnant mother to the baby”.   top US: FDA to permit irradiation of spinach, lettuce 22.aug.08 San Francisco Chronicle George Raine http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/21/MNAF12GA03.DTL&tsp=1 Nearly two years after E. coli bacteria traced to California-grown spinach killed three people and sickened 205, the federal government says it will allow producers of fresh iceberg lettuce and spinach to use irradiation to control food-borne pathogens and extend shelf life. The Food and Drug Administration is amending the food-additive regulations to provide what it calls the safe use of ionizing radiation for just the two leafy greens. The FDA also has received petitions seeking permission to use irradiation for other lettuces and many other foods. Food & Water Watch, a nonprofit consumer rights group that challenges what it calls corporate control and abuse of food and water resources, said that very little testing has been conducted on the safety and wholesomeness of irradiated vegetables. The group also said the action was off target. "It is unbelievable that the FDA's first action on this issue is to turn to irradiation rather than focus on how to prevent contamination of these crops," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "Instead of beefing up its capacity to inspect food facilities or test food for contamination, all the FDA has to offer consumers is an impractical, ineffective and very expensive gimmick like irradiation." On the industry side, there is little demand for irradiation from California growers and shippers of spinach and iceberg lettuce. "I think that from a growers' perspective, we have to consider anything that helps us provide safety for consumers, but whether this takes off depends on consumers," said Cathy Enright, vice president for government affairs for Western Growers, which represents growers, packers and shippers of nearly half of the nation's fresh fruits, vegetables and nuts. "In any marketing decision, we have to look at cost in adapting the technology and consumer acceptance," which will take time to develop, she said. The petition for the voluntary use of ionizing radiation was filed in 2000 by the Grocery Manufacturers Association. At the time, said Robert Brackett, the group's chief scientist, the grocers wanted permission to use irradiation in the preparation of many foods. However, they amended the petition and asked the government to focus on iceberg lettuce and spinach after the 2006 E. coli outbreak. The contamination was traced to spinach co-packaged by Dole and Natural Selection Foods in San Juan Bautista (San Benito County). Spinach virtually vanished from grocery stores as demand plummeted. "That was a big motivation for us," said Brackett, in Washington, D.C. California producers of leafy greens, in the aftermath of the case of the contaminated spinach, formed a voluntary group called the Leafy Green Marketing Agreement, which developed a food safety protocol for its members - nearly all of the major leafy green producers in California. The approved business practices range from accommodating fieldworker sanitation to preventing animal contamination of leafy green vegetables. The marketing effort also kept the producers steps ahead of attempts at government regulation of the industry. The marketing group, said its chief executive, Scott Horsfall, was surprised by the government rule announced Thursday, saying, "It's not something we have talked about in the year and a half we have had the marketing agreement in place." He added, "I do not know anyone clamoring for it. There has to be consumer acceptance. We do not know how big a hurdle that might be. The science needs to be looked at and the cost, too." Others feel it is a step in the right direction. The grocers' association's Brackett said, "It's more of a safety net. No matter how good a job you do with preventative steps - good practices, proper sanitation - there is still a small chance for contamination. This takes care of those small chances." The California spinach was contaminated by feral swine, an investigation later found. Most of the victims were from Wisconsin and Utah. William Marler, a Seattle lawyer representing victims of food-borne illness, is handling lawsuits for 103 families affected by the outbreak. All the suits except four have been resolved, he said Friday. Marler said the ionizing radiation tool "gives potential consumers more choice." He said most of the E. coli problems in recent years have been with mass-produced, bagged product, "and those products are ripe for using some kill step like irradiation to make it safer." Marler, along with the Grocery Manufacturing Association, advocates for national food safety oversight regulation and said this week's FDA rule may prompt more of a discussion about that. "Everyone would have to play by that rule," said Marler.   top US: Regulators expected to allow radiation for spinach, lettuce 22.aug.08 The Fresno Bee Michael Doyle and Robert Rodriguez http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/814761.html Federal regulators are expected today to let processors for the first time use radiation to kill bacteria in spinach and iceberg lettuce. The step will protect consumers and growers, who have been battered by E. coli outbreaks in recent years. But are shoppers ready for irradiated vegetables? Experts point out that meat and some other foods have been treated with radiation for years, with little or no resistance from shoppers. But that may be simply because few are aware of the practice. Anuradha Prakash, an assistant professor at Chapman University and an expert on food irradiation, said consumers are ready to make their food safer given the outbreaks that have occurred in the past few years related to fresh produce. "But there will have to be lots of consumer education before they will accept it," Prakash said. Christine Bruhn, a University of California food science marketing specialist and director of the UC Davis Center for Consumer Research, agreed. She said that while some consumers are ready, most are unaware of the practice. "Maybe the science community has not spoken enough about this," Bruhn said. "But they will be doing it more and more now." The Food and Drug Administration is set to formally give the green light today to a practice officials have concluded is safe. The long-awaited decision comes in the wake of high-profile bacterial outbreaks involving tainted California greens. "I hope we will see a reduction in the number of food-borne illnesses," Dr. Robert Brackett, chief scientist with the Grocery Manufacturers Association, said Thursday. "It gives the industry another tool to increase food safety." Irradiation of beef has been allowed since 2000. Yet only about 15 million pounds of the roughly 8 billion pounds of beef processed annually is irradiated, Dennis Olson, an Iowa State University meat scientist and irradiation expert, told the Chicago Tribune. The beef industry liked the concept, but didn't want to promote irradiation because of consumer concerns, he said. However, Bruhn said Wegmans Food Markets Inc. of Rochester, N.Y., has been offering irradiated ground beef for several years and consumers have responded positively. The FDA's decision is spelled out in a 25-page document being published today in the Federal Register, which emphasizes the safety of food irradiation. "There is no reason to suspect a toxicological hazard due to consumption of an irradiated food," the FDA states. John Reed of Fresno said he isn't worried about irradiating spinach and lettuce. In fact, he welcomes it. "It is a great idea," he said, while shopping at downtown Fresno's farmers market. "With all the scares that there have been involving spinach, this is a good step forward." But Greg Douglas, also at the market, said the government is attacking the problem from the wrong end. He said he believes the problem of contamination should be addressed at the field and processing levels. "Why aren't they looking at the source of what causes these problems?" said Douglas of Fresno. "This just doesn't seem right to me."   top BLOG: Lettuce and Spinach subject to more tainting 21.aug.08 Natural Health News http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2008/08/lettuce-and-spinach-subject-to-more.html Obviously the FDA in this move want you to have food with absolutely NO nutritional value. This next informational piece has been on my main website for at least 10 years. If you want to avoid destruction of your food, order a copy of our Food Cleansing Healthy Handout with your donation. This is delivered electronically in a pdf file. WHAT'S WRONG WITH FOOD IRRADIATION? Irradiation damages the quality of food. Foods that have been exposed to ionizing radiation have second-rate nutrition and "counterfeit freshness." Irradiated fats tend to become rancid. Even at low doses, some irradiated foods lose 20% of vitamins such as C, E, K, and B complex. Because irradiation breaks down the food's cell walls, accelerated vitamin losses occur during storage--up to 80%. Ironically, irradiation both creates harmful free radicals and destroys the antioxidant vitamins necessary to fight them! When electron beams are used, trace amounts of radioactivity may be created. In Europe, food irradiation has been used to camouflage spoiled seafood. Consumers should ask, "Why is the food suddenly so dirty that it has to be irradiated?" Irradiation produces toxic byproducts in the food. Ionizing radiation knocks electrons out of atoms and creates free radicals. These free radicals react with food components, creating new radiolytic products, some of which are toxic (benzene, formaldehyde, lipid peroxides) and some of which may be unique to irradiated foods. No one knows the long term impact of eating unknown quantities of these damaged foods. Studies on animals fed irradiated foods have shown increased tumors, reproductive failures and kidney damage. Chromosomal abnormalities occurred in children from India who were fed freshly irradiated wheat. Irradiation using radioactive materials is an environmental hazard. In Georgia, radioactive water escaped from an irradiation facility; the taxpayers were stuck with $47 million in cleanup costs. In New Jersey, radioactive water was poured into drains that emptied into the public sewer system. Few communities want the increased risks of hosting irradiation facilities and the periodic transport of radioactive materials to and from irradiators. Numerous worker exposures have occurred worldwide. Irradiation is a quick fix with long-term consequences. Irradiation doesn't kill all bacteria; those that survive are radiation-resistant. Eventually these bacteria will require higher doses of radiation. Irradiation doesn't kill the bacterium that causes botulism, or viruses. It can't be used on dairy products, a major source of food poisoning. If the labels are removed, irradiation will be used very widely because producers will 'follow the leader' and irradiate to prevent themselves from liability for food poisoning, no matter how remote the possibility. The costs, as always, will be passed on to the consumer. Irradiation doesn't solve the problem, it just covers it up. In a 1997 CBS nationwide poll, 77% of US consumers did not want irradiated food. This public resistance is why food trade associations have been plotting to eliminate all requirements for labeling irradiated food. Irradiation is not the only option for providing clean and sustainable food. Cleaning up filthy slaughter houses, slowing down processing lines, increasing the number of federal meat inspectors, and encouraging local and organic agriculture instead of factory farming are just a few proposals that can lead to long-term food safety solutions without the risks of irradiation.   top BLOG: FDA is allowing radiation to be used to kill deadly bacteria on spinach and iceburg lettuce Praise and criticism flows. 21.aug.08 Seatle Pi Andrew Schneider http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/secretingredients/archives/146806.asp Let's get one thing straight up front. Just because the government has ruled that spinach and lettuce can now be zapped with radiation to kill E. coli, salmonella and other nasty bugs, it doesn't mean that the produce will be radioactive, warm to the touch or even pre-cooked. The decision by the Food and Drug Administration has been long awaited since the Grocery Manufacturers Association petitioned the agency in 2000 to allow producers to irradiate a wide variety of fruits and vegetables and prepared foods. The equipment is costly, but well worth it to producers because the process also can control insects and parasites, reduce spoilage, and extend shelf-life. However, Thursday's action by the federal food protectors limits the use of zoomies only to spinach and iceberg lettuce. "I wish it could be used on all greens, all types of lettuce, and herbs like basil and parsley and cilantro," said Dr. Christine Bruhn, a researcher from the University of California, Davis Center for Consumer Research. Bruhn, who says she has been working on irradiation since the early 1980s, said FDA's action is a "much needed and important safety step." Studies have repeatedly shown that the most careful and thorough washing of produce by the producer and the consumer will remove only 90 percent of anything harmful. While that sounds quite effective, Bruhn reminded me that just 10 individual organisms of E. coli can put a person in the hospital, so removing 90 percent isn't enough. Working at its usual snail's pace, FDA was still mulling over the grocers' petition when, in 2007, a major E. coli outbreak was linked to California spinach. The outbreak killed three and sickened scores more. Relatively small amounts of beef, poultry and other meats have been legally irradiated in this country for years, but it's being sold in very few markets and is thought to have limited consumer appeal. Bruhn said research in her center shows public acceptance may now be there. "About 10 percent of the public believes that irradiation is a wonderful idea and they want to buy it at their grocery store now. Another 10 percent wouldn't touch it with a very long stick. They want the untreated, unprocessed produce as it comes from the field," Bruhn told me this afternoon. "And about everyone else doesn't have a strong opinion either way." At a Seattle conference on food safety earlier this year, irradiation was being hashed over on one of the breaks. One of the participants noted that so much radiation would be needed to kill the dangerous pathogens that it would leave the vegetables so limp that the final safety wash would have to be in Viagra. Actually, researchers say that it will take different levels of radiation exposure to kill different pathogens. For example, E. coli can be killed with a relatively low dose while the much hardier salmonella would take a far larger jolt. "There is a tradeoff between the strength of the radiation delivered and the percent of bacteria killed," said Chuck Benbrook, chief scientist of the Organic Center, which issued a lengthy report on the issue in 2007. "For the radiation to be a true kill step, which is a 99.99 percent reduction in pathogens, the literature shows there will be a significant loss in produce crispness and quality," Benbrook told me this afternoon. "There's a lot of work yet to develop the most effective treatment that has the least adverse impact on quality." The radiation symbol – a magenta propeller on a yellow background – has for decades been an instant rallying point for activists no matter where it's found. The international symbol for irradiated food - the Radura - is usually a green, broken circle with a stylized plant in its center. FDA has mandated its use since 1986. So far the Radura hasn't engendered the visceral reaction to the more common purple propeller, but we'll see what time brings. There have been no indications in countless studies that irradiation presents any risk to those who eat food processed with the technique. If there is a risk, it would be to those who mishandle the highly radioactive isotopes which produce the gamma radiation used to irradiate the food and those around them. Let's hope that the FDA has been talking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission about security issues accompanying the new process. Nevertheless, some food safety activists weighed in quickly with their criticism of the FDA action. "Instead of beefing up its capacity to inspect food facilities or test food for contamination, all the FDA has to offer consumers is an impractical, ineffective and very expensive gimmick like irradiation," said Wenonah Hauter, Food & Water Watch Executive Director, a national food safety group. She called irradiation "a Band-aid, not a cure." "Allowing spinach and lettuce to be irradiated would simply mask unsafe production practices, while supplying lower quality, less nutritious and potentially hazardous food." "Treating lettuce or spinach with the equivalent of tens of millions of chest X-rays can ruin its flavor, odor, texture, color, and nutritional value," she said in a statement. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 76 million Americans get sick and 5,000 die from foodborne hazards each year in the United States.   top NEW MEXICO: 3 more salmonella cases linked to Santa Fe café 22.aug.08 Las Cruces Sun-News The Associated Press http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_10274320 SANTA FE, N.M. -- The state Department of Health says three more people have been diagnosed with salmonella bacteria infections traced to a Santa Fe restaurant. Department spokeswoman Deborah Busemeyer said Thursday there are now 12 salmonella cases linked to Diego's Cafe. She says the patients—10 from Santa Fe County and two from San Miguel County—ate at the restaurant in late July and early August. The patients range in age from 1 month to 62 years. Busemeyer says the 1-month-old nursing infant apparently contracted the infection through breast milk from the baby's mother, who had eaten at the restaurant.   top CANADA: Researchers have E. coli disease in sights 22.aug.08 Business Edge Laura Severs http://www.businessedge.ca/article.cfm/newsID/18437.cfm Research projects underway in Ontario and Alberta aim to deal a devastating blow to E. coli O157:H7, a disease that produces powerful toxins capable of causing severe illness in humans. "Comparatively speaking, there have not been too many beef recalls in Canada but, obviously, (food) safety is something that we can't take for granted," says Rob McNabb, general manager of operations for the Calgary-based Canadian Cattleman's Association (CCA), which represents nearly 90,000 cattle ranchers across the country. "Any measures that can help reduce the risk we're interested in exploring." In Ontario, work is progressing on what is being described as the world's first vaccine to be used as an on-farm intervention to reduce the amount of E. coli O157:H7 shed by cattle. Work is progressing on an E. coli vaccine that would also reduce the amount of bacteria released from cattle manure into the environment. If successful, the company behind the vaccine - Belleville, Ont.-based Bioniche Life Sciences Inc. - says Canadian cattle producers could market a premium product that could generate an additional $400-$500 million in export sales once all Canadian cows are vaccinated. In Alberta, new research is setting its sights on re-introducing "good" bacteria into beef during the meat-processing process to help further control against E. coli O157:H7. At the University of Alberta in Edmonton, researchers are looking at work that may end up spurring beef sales, as hamburger lovers would be able to cook their burgers to something less than the current well-done levels - as required now to ensure that they're E. coli free. Even though the Canadian beef industry has dedicated itself to providing the safest beef in the world and current production methods have vastly reduced the chance of any contamination from E. coli O157:H7 - which does not cause disease in cattle - the possibility of contamination remains particularly in ground beef if it's not properly cooked. Both the CCA and the Willowdale, Ont.-based Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers (CFIG), furthering the interests of its 3,800 independent and franchised grocers members, welcome the new research. "We welcome any advances that enhance the safety of any product, whether it's ground beef or tomatoes," says CFIG vice-president Gary Sands, referring to past E.coli beef recalls and a recent salmonella scare with U.S. tomatoes. The Bioniche vaccine was developed by a strategic alliance formed in 2000 between the University of British Columbia, the Alberta Research Council, the University of Saskatchewan's Vaccine & Infectious Disease Organization (VIDO), and Bioniche, which holds the rights for worldwide commercialization of the vaccine. The vaccine prevents the E. coli O157:H7 bacteria from attaching to the intestines of vaccinated cattle, thereby reducing their reproduction within the animal, and reducing the amount of bacteria that can be released through cattle manure in the environment. More than 30,000 cattle have been involved in clinical testing of the vaccine over the past five years. However, the CCA says based on the research trials conducted so far, it's not ready to come out and endorse the Bioniche vaccine. "We're encouraged by the work to date, but we don't feel it's ready for full implementation by the industry," says McNabb. "If there's additional research results they're compiling, we'll take a look at that." The CCA is also concerned about the three inoculations needed per cow. It says from its understanding, the third dose would come somewhere between 40 days to 60 days before the animal is sent to the packing plant. This is a critical time in cattle production, where producers do not want to risk bruising or injuring the animal by confining in order to inject the vaccine. Instead, the CCA would prefer a one-dose version. "It's a political issue," says Bioniche president and CEO Graeme McRae. "It comes down to who pays for the vaccine. The farmers are saying, 'Don't look at us.' The beef industry is saying we don't believe vaccination is going to have any impact and we don't want to pay for it. Our beef industry in Canada is trying to do the things the old way and is not moving forward."   top NORTHERN IRELAND: 500 reasons to celebrate the Eat Safe award 22.aug.08 Food Standards Agency Northern Ireland http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2008/aug/eatsafeaward The ‘Eat Safe’ award scheme is celebrating success in Northern Ireland, with the number of eateries awarded the Eat Safe logo reaching a landmark 500. From hotels to residential homes and primary schools to pizzerias there are a growing number of diverse kitchens entitled to display the logo. The prestigious award, which promotes excellence in food hygiene, is given to catering businesses that go above and beyond legal requirements. So, consumers can be confident when they see an Eat Safe logo, that their food has been prepared with the utmost care. ‘I am delighted that Northern Ireland now has 500 food premises displaying the Eat Safe logo’, said Kathryn Baker from Food Standards Agency Northern Ireland (FSANI), ‘It is great news that we now have a large number of caterers taking every precaution to prevent food poisoning. It goes to show the goals of Eat Safe and its simple format are a winning combination for the local catering trade, food hygiene enforcers and ultimately the consumer. And businesses are reaping great benefits from having this award which has accelerated its popularity.’ The scheme was introduced in Northern Ireland in 2003, to act as an incentive to caterers to strive for high food hygiene and food safety management standards, and each Eat Safe recipient is awarded with a recognisable sign of excellence. The award is administered by the environmental health departments of local councils in conjunction with FSANI. For more information about Eat Safe premises in your area, please go to the website. For more information on FSANI, please contact Alison Gowdy, Food Standards Agency Northern Ireland on 028 9041 7715 or 07919 013349.   top KENTUCKY firm recalls frozen stuffed pepperoni pizza sandwich products that may contain foreign materials 21.aug.08 USDA Food Safety and Inspection Services Peggy Riek http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_033_2008_Release/index.asp WASHINGTON -- Nestlé Prepared Foods Company, a Mt. Sterling, Ky., establishment, is recalling approximately 215,660 pounds of frozen stuffed pepperoni pizza sandwich products that may contain foreign materials, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service announced today. The following products are subject to recall: [View Labels] *54-ounce, 12-pack cartons of "HOT POCKETS PEPPERONI PIZZA" brand stuffed sandwiches. Printed on the side of each carton is "8157544614D," "EST 7721A," and "BEST BEFORE JAN2010." Each carton bears the USDA mark of inspection. The products were produced on June 5 and distributed to retail establishments nationwide. The problem was discovered after the company received consumer complaints. FSIS has not received any consumer complaints or reports of injury at this time. Anyone concerned about an injury from consumption of the products should contact a physician. Media with questions about the recall should contact Company Marketing Communications Manager Roz O'Hearn at (440) 264-5170. Consumers with questions about the recall should contact Nestlé Consumer Services Center at (800) 350-5016.   top NEW YORK: Wal-Mart VP urges retailers to join global food safety initiative 22.aug.08 Supermarket News Michael Garry http://supermarketnews.com/news/food_safety_0822/ NEW YORK -- Frank Yiannas, vice president of food safety for Wal-Mart Stores, encouraged other food retailers to join Wal-Mart and several other major global retailers in embracing the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), an effort to create and adopt uniform food safety standards. Yiannas addressed food safety yesterday in a webinar, “The Future of a Safe Global Food Supply,” hosted by SN and sponsored by NSF International, Ann Arbor, Mich. “The hope is that more retailers and foodservice organizations are going to join us in this effort,” he said. “[GSFI] is our greatest opportunity to create a universal standard of safe food, and advance food safety and the quality of life for consumers around the world.” Wal-Mart, Bentonville, Ark., has set a “due date” of December 2008 by which the “bulk of our private-label suppliers” are expected to acquire a factory certification showing compliance with one of the GFSI standards. The rest of its private-label and fresh-food suppliers will have until July 2009.   top Optimised quantification of the antiyeast activity of different barley malts towards a lager brewing yeast strain 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 Sandra N.E. van Nieropa, b, Barry C. Axcella, c, Ian C. Cantrella and Marina Rautenbachb http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract The brewing of beer involves two major biological systems, namely malted barley (malt) and yeast. Both malt and yeast show natural variation and assessing the impact of differing malts on yeast performance is important in the optimisation of the brewing process. Currently, the brewing industry uses well-established tests to assess malt quality, but these frequently fail to predict malt-associated problem fermentations, such as incomplete fermentations, premature yeast flocculation (PYF) and gushing of the final beer product. Antimicrobial compounds, and in particular antiyeast compounds in malt, may be one of the unknown and unmeasured malt factors leading to problem fermentations. In this study, the adaptation of antimicrobial assays for the determination of antiyeast activity in malt is described. Our adapted assay was able to detect differing antiyeast activities in nine malt samples. For this sample set, malts associated with PYF during fermentation and gushing activity in beer showed high antiyeast activity. Both PYF and gushing are malt quality issues associated with fungal infection of barley in the field which may result in elevated antimicrobial activity in the barley grain. Also, two more malts that passed the normal quality control tests were also observed to have high antiyeast activity and such malts must be considered as suspect. Based on our results, this assay is a useful measure of malt quality as it quantifies the antiyeast activity in malt which may adversely impact on brewery fermentation. aGroup Brewing Research, SABMiller plc, PO Box 782178, Sandton 2146, South Africa bDepartment of Biochemistry, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa cDepartment of Microbiology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa   top Effect of poultry decontaminants concentration on growth kinetics for pathogenic and spoilage bacteria 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 Elena del Ríoa, Beatriz González de Casoa, Miguel Prietoa, Carlos Alonso-Callejaa and Rosa Capita http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract Various chemical compounds are currently under review for final approval as poultry decontaminants in the European Union (EU). Concentration is among the factors considered by the EU authorities in the evaluation of these treatments. The aim of this research was to compare the growth parameters for pathogenic and spoilage bacteria in presence of high and low concentrations of poultry decontaminants to assess whether such treatments could involve a potential sanitary risk for consumers. Growth curves for Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis, Listeria monocytogenes, Pseudomonas fluorescens and Brochothrix thermosphacta were obtained at different levels of trisodium phosphate (TSP; 1.74%; 0.58%), acidified sodium chlorite (ASC; 210 ppm; 70 ppm) and citric acid (CA; 0.27%; 0.09%). The modified Gompertz equation was used as primary model to fit observed data. ASC and TSP were the most effective compounds in increasing lag phase (L) and reducing maximum growth rate (μ) in Gram-negative bacteria. Gram-positive bacteria were more influenced by CA. At high TSP levels, μ for Salmonella decreased. Low TSP levels increased μ for Salmonella and Listeria relative to control samples. In presence of 0.27% CA, Brochothrix showed the highest L and the lowest μ among strains tested. These results suggest that low TSP and high CA concentrations could favour the outgrowth of pathogenic bacteria (e.g. Salmonella) relative to spoilage bacteria, rending these treatments potentially dangerous for consumers. The findings of this study may be useful to the EU authorities and meat processors in their efforts to select adequate treatments for control of bacteria on poultry. aDepartment of Food Hygiene and Food Technology, School of Agrarian Engineering, University of León, Avenida de Astorga, s/n, 24400 Ponferrada, Spain   top Inactivation kinetics of inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella Poona on whole cantaloupe by chlorine dioxide gasstar, open 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 B.S.M. Mahmouda, N.A. Vaidyaa, C.M. Corvalana and R.H. Linton http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract The objectives of this study were to examine inactivation kinetics of inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella Poona inoculated onto whole cantaloupe and treated with ClO2 gas at different concentrations (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 3.0 and 5.0 mg l-1) for different times (0, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 8.0 and 10.0 min). The effect of ClO2 gas on the quality and shelf life of whole cantaloupe was also evaluated during storage at 22 °C for 12 days. A 100 μl inoculation of each targeted organism was spotted onto the surface (5 cm2) of cantaloupe rind (approximately 8–9 log CFU 5 cm-2) separately, air dried (60 min), and then treated with ClO2 gas at 22 °C and 90–95% relative humidity for 10 min. Surviving bacterial populations on cantaloupe surfaces were determined using a membrane transferring method with a non-selective medium followed by a selective medium. The inactivation kinetics of E. coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes and S. Poona were determined using nonlinear kinetics (Weibull model). A 3 log CFU reduction of E. coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes and S. Poona were achieved with 5.0 mg l-1 ClO2 gas for 5.5, 4.2 and 1.5 min, respectively. A 5 log CFU reduction of S. Poona was achieved with 5.0 and 3.0 mg l-1 ClO2 gas for 6 and 8 min, respectively. A 4.6 and 4.3 log reduction was achieved after treatment with 5.0 mg l-1 ClO2 gas at 10 min for E. coli O157:H7 and L. monocytogenes, respectively. Treatment with 5.0 mg l-1 ClO2 gas significantly (p<0.05) reduced the initial microflora (mesophilic bacteria, psychrotrophic bacteria, and yeasts and molds) on cantaloupe by more than 2 log CFU cm-2 and kept them significantly (p<0.05) lower than the untreated control during storage at 22 °C for 12 days. Treatment with ClO2 gas did not significantly (p>0.05) affect the color of whole cantaloupe and extended the shelf life to 9 days compared to 3 days for the untreated control, when stored at ambient temperature (22 °C). aDepartment of Food Science, Purdue University, 745 Agriculture Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2009, USA   top Culture-independent methods for identifying microbial communities in cheese 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 Jean-Luc Jany, a, Georges Barbiera http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract This review focuses on the culture-independent methods available for the description of both bacterial and fungal communities in cheese. Important steps of the culture-independent strategy, which relies on bulk DNA extraction from cheese and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of selected sequences, are discussed. We critically evaluate the identification techniques already used for monitoring microbial communities in cheese, including PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE), PCR-temporal temperature gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-TTGE) or single-strand conformation polymorphism-PCR (SSCP-PCR) as well as some other techniques that remain to be adapted to the study of cheese communities. Further, our analysis draws attention to the lack of data available on suitable DNA sequences for identifying fungal communities in cheese and proposes some potential DNA targets. aLaboratoire Universitaire de Biodiversité et Ecologie Microbienne, Université Européenne de Bretagne-ESMISAB, Parvis Blaise Pascal, Technopôle de Brest Iroise, Plouzané, France   top 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