FSnet Aug. 22/08 K-STATE food safety expert says consumers can decide food irradiation issue BARFBLOG: Retailers can do more: market microbial food safety BARFBLOG: 5 deaths, 38 illnesses being investigated in Canadian listeria outbreak; sub spokesthingy says consumers are ‘hypochrondriacs’ Talking dirty — The politics of clean water and sanitation MASSACHUSETTS: Crystal Spring hosting local foodfest on Saturday NEW ZEALAND: Research on key food label elements Occurrence of lactic acid bacteria and biogenic amines in biologically aged wines The reduction of murine norovirus 1, B. fragilis HSP40 infecting phage B40-8 and E. coli after a mild thermal pasteurization process of raspberry puree Effect of combining nisin and/or lysozyme with in-package pasteurization for control of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat turkey bologna during refrigerated storage how to subscribe K-STATE food safety expert says consumers can decide food irradiation issue 22.aug.08 Kansas State University Doug Powell http://www.k-state.edu/media/mediaguide/bios/powellbio.html http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/food-safety-communication/let-consumers-decide-about-food-irradiation/index.htm MANHATTAN — Food irradiation of fresh produce is an additional tool that can help reduce the threat of foodborne illness — but it is not a magic bullet, according to Doug Powell, an associate professor of food safety at Kansas State University. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has published a final rule allowing the irradiation of fresh iceberg lettuce and fresh spinach, available at: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cfsup185.html Farmers still need to practice good agricultural practices, and the possibility of post-processing contamination still exists, Powell said, but added that irradiation is safe and should be made available at the retail level. "There's a lot of people already speaking on behalf of consumers and what they may or may not do," Powell said. "When it comes to food, consumers vote with their wallets at checkout, not on public opinion surveys. I'd really like to see someone step up and offer consumers the choice. There have been enough serious outbreaks of foodborne illness in fresh produce that the interest in irradiated spinach and lettuce should be strong." Powell can be reached at 785-317-0560 or dpowell@k-state.edu   top BARFBLOG: Retailers can do more: market microbial food safety 22.aug.08 barfblog Doug Powell http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/food-safety-communication/retailers-can-do-more-market-microbial-food-safety/ An editorial in Tuesday’s L.A. Times stated that, “Retailers have both the clout to compel high standards and better tracking in agriculture and a direct reason to worry about consumers' concerns.” In response, the Times published this letter from me: “The Wal-Marts and McDonald's of the world have been requiring enhanced food safety from their suppliers for more than a decade, and, as your editorial notes, they may be the best advocates for consumers. Making customers sick is bad business. But many of the checks and balances on supplying fresh produce, like the kind involved in this year's salmonella outbreak, are hidden and poorly validated. Any commodity is only as good as its worst grower. There are too many outbreaks and too many sick people. It's time for retailers and restaurants to market microbial food safety and compete using safety as a selling point. This would introduce a heightened level of accountability throughout the farm-to-fork food safety system and capture the imagination of a public weary of food scares. The first company that can reliably assure consumers they aren't eating poop on spinach, lettuce, tomatoes and any other fresh produce will make millions and capture markets. May the best food safety system win. Douglas Powell Manhattan, Kan. The writer is an associate professor in food safety at Kansas State University.”   top BARFBLOG: 5 deaths, 38 illnesses being investigated in Canadian listeria outbreak; sub spokesthingy says consumers are ‘hypochrondriacs’ 22.aug.08 barfblog Doug Powell http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/listeria-1/5-deaths-38-illnesses-being-investigated-in-canadian-listeria-outbreak-sub-spokesthingy-says-consumers-are-hypochrondriacs/index.html It’s been a bizarre day, answering questions about the U.S. moving ahead with approvals for irradiation on some leafy greens, and Canada moving backwards – really backwards – into political grandstanding while people suffer in an expanding listeria outbreak. http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gC9NkqspB-o1I8yAAGcJOeLk4IgA The latest news is that five deaths are now being investigated and dozens of illnesses. If you watch some of the media clips you’ll see that undeserved Canadian smugness shining through – ‘we figured this listeria thing out really fast, it took the Americans six months to figure out salmonella in jalapenos’(Maureen Taylor of CBC pokes some big holes in that theory). http://www.cbc.ca/clips/mov/taylor-lysteriosis-082008.mov My message was the same: Listeria is a dangerous bug, this is a serious outbreak, there were some serious shortcomings in informing the public and six-months pregnant Amy wouldn’t touch a cold-cut or other refrigerated ready-to-eat food whether it was inspected by government or industry or me. http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/listeria-1/1-dead-dozens-sickened-in-canadian-listeria-outbreak-some-questions/ No one was really interested in the sick people or potential risk. I did a live interview with CBC Newsworld, the 24 hour news channel that is sometimes referred to as Wallyworld. The producer called to do a pre-interview and asked, “What are your impressions of this listeria outbreak in Canada.” I said, “I’m sorry, I don’t do impressions.” When it came time to do the CBC National News interview, I was chatting with the reporter, and she said I was in Kansas City, and I said, “Manhattan. Kansas. Kansas State University.” “Oh, right.” “Not University of Kansas. Kansas State. People care about that shit down here. I’m from Ontario, I don’t’ get it, but they really care .” “And they should. Yeah. Kansas State.” On CBC National News, it said, ‘Doug Powell, University of Kansas.’ http://www.cbc.ca/clips/mov/taylor-lysteriosis-082008.mov Sigh. … This is a serious outbreak; there is going to be more dead and sick people, and it’s sorta gross that all the social actors quoted by the media seem to care about is advancing their political agendas. And kissing industry ass and providing pregnant Canadian women with lousy advice about listeria. http://www.liberal.ca/story_14286_e.aspx Most compassionate award of the day goes to Quiznos spokesman Kyle Holmes in Toronto who said, "At the end of the day, it (this recall) could happen to anybody and fortunately, it didn't happen to us. Recently, we had a tomato recall and our tomatoes were not affected at all but it was still bad publicity. People are hypochondriacs.”   top Talking dirty — The politics of clean water and sanitation 21.aug.08 New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 359:784-78, Number 8 Michele Barry, M.D., and James M. Hughes, M.D. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/8/784 The first documented attempts to treat drinking water, which may date back to 4000 B.C., were recorded in Greek and Sanskrit writings that describe the boiling and filtering of water, primarily to make it smell and taste better, although reducing visible particles and turbidity was also a goal. Hippocrates invented the cloth-bag filter (or Hippocratic sleeve) and was among the first to believe that this process also rendered water more healthful for the human body. The British scientist John Snow demonstrated that the source of a cholera epidemic centered on the odorless and seemingly clean water provided by a water pump. He proved that sand filtration and chlorination effectively prevented the spread of cholera. Despite 150 years of acceptance of the healthful effects of clean water, an estimated 1.1 billion people still lack access to it, and 2.6 billion people lack access to adequate sanitation.   top MASSACHUSETTS: Crystal Spring hosting local foodfest on Saturday 20.aug.08 Wicked Local eather McCarron/ http://www.wickedlocal.com/foxborough/news/x220426050/Crystal-Spring-hosting-local-foodfest-on-Saturday PLAINVILLE -- Even before this summer’s health scares related to contaminated tomatoes and peppers, the caretakers at Crystal Spring Earth Learning Center saw the demand for locally-produced food items starting to grow into the well-defined trend that has lately been in the news. "This year, our community supported garden was sold out by February," observed Sr. Carole Rossi, one of the three Dominican nuns who run the learning center on 40 serene acres off Everett Skinner Road, noting there were 325 shares available. The center, dedicated to giving voice to "the ecological needs of our times by creating alternative models for living in harmony with the natural world of which we are an integral part," this Saturday will continue to promote its message with the Second Annual Local Foodfest. The event, which will be held 12-3 p.m. on the Crystal Spring grounds at 76 Everett Skinner Road, will feature locally-grown fruits and vegetables and other locally-produced food products, including honey and raw milk. The price of admission is simply an offering of a dish of food to include in a potluck luncheon that will begin about 1 or 1:30 p.m. "And if it can be made with some local ingredients, that would be good," Rossi said. Rossi said the event was deemed successful on its first go last year, drawing at least 100 people. "We really had a good time last year," she said. "We’re hoping it’ll be another nice day. It’s lot of fun." Among the highlights will be tasting of heirloom tomatoes offered by Ward’s Berry Farm of Sharon. "And we’ll also have a calf from Oake Knoll Farm (in Foxborough), where they’re selling raw milk … they’ll have raw milk samples," Rossi said. The event is a celebration of sustainable, earth-conscious lifestyles, which more and more people are showing an interest in as concerns rise about global warming, use of fossil fuels, and food quality, Rossi said. She said there is no doubt people are "becoming aware of the dangers of food that we don’t really know."   top NEW ZEALAND: Research on key food label elements 20.aug.08 Food Surveillance News - Winter edition Food Standards Australia New Zealand http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/foodsurveillancenewsletter/winter2008.cfm Background Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has just published a report on how manufacturers present key information on their food labels. Label monitoring surveys have been commissioned by FSANZ since 2002 to assess how food manufacturers manage key labelling requirements such as date marking, directions for use and storage and nutrition information requirements, as set out in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code). In addition, since 2003, surveys have looked at how food manufacturers present nutrition, health and related claims on packaged food labels. Correct labelling is a key objective of the FSANZ Act 1991 to ensure consumers have adequate information to help them make informed choices. The report on food labels collected in Australia and New Zealand in 2005 was jointly written by FSANZ and quality assurance agency AsureQuality Limited, which it commissioned to conduct the survey. This survey assessed the 1399 labels collected to determine the degree of consistency with the labelling requirements of the Code for certain key label elements and, where labels were inconsistent with the Code, the nature of the inconsistency with labelling provisions for those label elements assessed. The survey also enabled the gathering of data on other label information of interest. The report presents the results from the assessment of labels collected in 2005 and, where possible, compares them with results from an earlier label collection in 2003 (labels collected by Silliker Microtech Pty Ltd and findings presented in a report dated August 2004). Key findings The survey found that for nine of the twelve label elements, consistency with the Code was 90% or greater. Excluding labels that had only minor formatting or moderate inconsistencies in the nutrition information panel (NIP) as their only area of inconsistency, 63% of labels were consistent for all label elements. Consistency with the Code was 97% or greater for the following label elements: * label legibility (99%) * product identification (98%) * mandatory warning /advisory statements (99%) * allergen labelling (97%) * altered label (new label placed over incorrect one) (99%) * product specific labelling (99%) * country of origin statements (Australia only) (99%) Consistency with the Code was 90% or greater for the following label elements: * ingredient Declaration (92%) * date marking (90%) Label elements responsible for higher proportions of inconsistencies (as a percentage of the total number of labels assessed for that particular element) were: * nutrition information panels (16% inconsistent, excluding labels that had only minor formatting or moderate inconsistencies; 85% inconsistent including labels that had minor formatting, moderate and significant inconsistencies) * directions for use and storage (14%) * percent characterising ingredients (11%) Why is FSANZ conducting ongoing label monitoring surveys? FSANZ needs to know how food manufacturers are interpreting the Code. Following an extensive review of the Australian Food Standards Code and New Zealand regulations, a joint Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code) was gazetted in December 2000 with a two year transition period to December 2002. FSANZ began a pilot label monitoring survey in mid 2002 to assess how manufacturers were implementing the new food labelling provisions in the Code. Through ongoing surveys, FSANZ can determine the effectiveness of current labelling regulatory measures and use the data to make better informed decisions about labelling laws in future. What was surveyed? This survey assessed 1399 labels on packaged food products available for retail sale in Australia and New Zealand during 2005 (746 from Australia and 653 from New Zealand). The foods represented 14 food categories (approximately 2% of the product lines available) and were sampled from a range of outlets including supermarkets and small retailers. The food categories were: * dairy products * ·edible oils and emulsions * ice cream and edible ices * fruit and vegetables * confectionery * cereal and cereal products * bread and bakery products * meat and meat products * fish and fish products * egg and egg products * sugar, honey and related products * food intended for particular dietary uses * non-alcoholic beverages * mixed foods (e.g. sauces, dressings, desserts) The survey looked at samples from as many different manufacturers as possible. It did not consider the market share of brands because the aim was to sample a wide range of label styles. What key label elements were assessed? The survey assessed a total of 12 key label elements, based on the core information required by the Code for a label on a package of food for retail sale. These 12 label elements were: [ 1. Legibility of print 2. Product identification 3. Mandatory warning /advisory statements 4. Allergen labelling 5. Ingredient declaration 6. Date marking 7. Directions for use and storage 8. Nutrition information requirements 9. Percent characterising ingredients 10. Altered label (new label placed over incorrect one) 11. Product specific labelling [2] 12. Country of Origin (Australia only) Labels were also assessed for false, misleading or deceptive representations according to the Australian Trade Practices Act and the New Zealand Fair Trading Act. What did the survey find? Overview of the consistency status of labels collected in 2005, by label element For the 1399 labels collected in 2005 in Australia and New Zealand, consistency with the Code was 90% or greater for nine of the twelve label elements assessed. It should be noted that if any one of the twelve label elements was deemed inconsistent, the label was assessed as inconsistent overall. Excluding labels that had only minor formatting or moderate inconsistencies in the nutrition information panel (NIP) as their only area of inconsistency, 63% of labels were consistent for all label elements. The consistency of labels for individual label elements is given in Figure 1. * n= total number of labels assessed for that particular element. ** Excluding labels that had only minor formatting or moderate inconsistencies in the NIP. Figure 1: Overview of the consistency status of each label element assessed All labels collected were assessed for legibility and product identification, with 99% and 98% of these assessed as consistent with the labelling provisions respectively. Failure to declare the name and address of the supplier according to the labelling provisions was the greatest cause of labels being assessed as inconsistent with the label element product identification. Three percent of all labels (42 labels) were assessed for mandatory warnings and advisory statements with only one label assessed as inconsistent with the labelling provisions. Seventy-one percent of all labels were assessed for allergen labelling with 97% of these assessed as consistent with the labelling provisions. Those labels assessed as having consistent allergen labelling were further assessed to determine the placement and prominence of the declaration. The majority (94%) declared the presence of the allergen in the ingredient list, with 25% featuring an allergen declaration elsewhere on the packet. This included using the name of the allergen in the name of the food, as well as summary statements and voluntary precautionary statements. Increased prominence of allergen declarations (i.e. bold type) was featured on 24% of the labels assessed as consistent for this label element. Gluten containing cereals were declared on 45% of labels with consistent allergen labelling, while milk was declared on 37% of these labels and soybeans on 33% of these labels. Ninety-one percent of all labels were assessed against the labelling provisions for ingredient declaration with 92% of these labels assessed as consistent. The main reason for inconsistent ingredient labelling was the additive class name being absent or incorrect. Date marking was assessed on 97% of all labels, and was assessed as consistent on 90% of these. The inconsistencies were due to three reasons: date marking absent, use of an incorrect format and illegible date marking. Directions for use and storage was also assessed on 97% of all labels, and 86% of these were assessed as consistent with the labelling provisions. The main reason for inconsistency was that directions for use and storage were not provided where required. Ninety-two percent of the labels collected were assessed as requiring or voluntarily providing a NIP. The level of severity of the NIP inconsistency was assessed; inconsistencies could be categorised as minor formatting inconsistencies, moderate inconsistencies or significant omissions and inconsistencies, according to their potential impact on consumer understanding of the NIP information. Where a NIP had more than one inconsistency, it was rated against the most severe level. Excluding labels that had only minor formatting or moderate inconsistencies, 84% of labels assessed under this element were consistent with the labelling provisions, assuming the NIP was in the prescribed format given in the Code. If minor formatting and moderate inconsistencies are included, 15% of labels assessed under this element were consistent with the labelling provisions. Nineteen percent of labels assessed as inconsistent were assessed as having significant omissions and inconsistencies, 5% of labels were assessed as having moderate inconsistencies and 76% of labels had only minor formatting inconsistencies as their most severe level of inconsistency. The majority of inconsistencies for the NIP were due to incorrect internal or external borders (51% of all NIP inconsistencies) when compared with the prescribed format in the Code. This type of inconsistency was assessed as a minor formatting inconsistency as it is less likely to impact on consumer understanding of the information presented on the label. Sixteen percent of NIP inconsistencies related to serving size information. Only a small percentage of these were due to the absence of serving size information, a significant omission. Most of the remaining inconsistencies for serving size information related to incorrect text case and alignment, these being minor formatting inconsistencies. A further sixteen percent of NIP inconsistencies related to the presentation of nutrients. The most common reason was the use of incorrect text case, a minor formatting inconsistency. Two percent of NIP inconsistencies were due to the absence of a NIP, a significant omission. Over half of the labels collected (57%) were assessed as requiring or voluntarily providing percent characterising ingredient information. Of these, 89% were assessed as consistent with the labelling provisions. All inconsistencies were due to the absence of percent characterising ingredient information for ingredients emphasised in the name of the food or in the product description. One label was assessed as inconsistent against the labelling provisions for an altered label, and another label was assessed as inconsistent against the labelling provisions for product specific labelling. Country of origin statements were assessed on all 746 labels collected in Australia only, as the Country of origin labelling provisions of the Code do not apply in New Zealand. Thirty-two percent of labels were assessed as having ‘Product of’ type statements and 44% featured ‘Made in’ type statements. Of all labels assessed for country of origin statements, nine labels were assessed as having statements that were not in agreement with the labelling provisions. More than 99% of all labels collected in Australia and New Zealand were assessed as consistent with the provisions of the trade practices legislation covering false, misleading or deceptive representations. Overview of the consistency status of labels collected in 2005, by food category Notwithstanding large differences in the total number of foods assessed in each food category (as a result of the agreed product sampling plan), the food categories with the highest proportion of consistency were foods intended for particular dietary use (30% of the total number of labels assessed in this food category), ice cream and edible ices (25%), fruit and vegetables (24%) and non-alcoholic beverages (24%). All labels collected in the food category sugars, honey and related products were inconsistent for one or more label elements. Ninety-five percent of labels in the food category edible oils and oil emulsions and 91% of labels in the food category dairy were inconsistent with at least one label element. Note that these results, as presented in Figure 2, include labels that had NIP inconsistencies at any of the three levels of severity. * n= total number of labels assessed in each particular category. Figure 2: Overview of the consistency status of each food category with the labelling provisions assessed Overview of the comparison of label assessments on labels collected in 2003 and 2005 Survey methodology differed between the 2003 and 2005 survey. Consequently, there were limitations with respect to comparing the data of these surveys. However, the following comparisons were made: * There were higher proportions of labels consistent with the provisions of the Code between 2003 and 2005 for legibility (91% and 98%, respectively); date marking (82% and 88%, respectively); and percent characterising ingredients (75% and 92%, respectively); and * The greatest proportion of inconsistencies in both 2003 and 2005 were identified on NIPs (98% and 94% of labels that were inconsistent, respectively, including labels that had NIP inconsistencies at any of the three levels of severity). What will happen now? The results of this ongoing survey will assist FSANZ assess the effectiveness of labelling regulatory measures and also provide evidence to inform future decisions on labelling laws, as part of the standards development process. Future surveys may also include an assessment of contemporary labelling provisions, such as the assessment of country of origin labelling undertaken for the first time in 2005. A further report is being prepared regarding labels collected and assessed in 2006. This report is expected to be published late 2008. It is anticipated that FSANZ will not conduct another label monitoring survey until 2010. This will allow time for the introduction of new labelling requirements (such as the Standard for Nutrition, Health and Related Claims). Future label monitoring surveys may then undertake an assessment of how food manufacturers have managed changes to these new labelling requirements. It should be noted that ongoing label monitoring surveys are not being conducted for enforcement purposes as this is the responsibility of the governments of Australia and New Zealand and the Australian States and Territories, and not FSANZ. However, FSANZ is continually working with all major stakeholders, including jurisdictions and food industry organisations, to provide manufacturers with helpful information on labelling requirements. Anecdotal evidence from the industry suggests that ongoing label monitoring surveys are one means of achieving this objective.   top Occurrence of lactic acid bacteria and biogenic amines in biologically aged wines 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 M. Victoria Moreno-Arribas, a, and M. Carmen Poloa http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract Biologically aged sherry-type wines are elaborated by the so-called ‘criadera and solera’ system, which essentially involves development of the yeast on the wine surface forming a film velum for several years. Lactic acid bacteria can also develop and contribute to sherry-type wine quality, although their presence and role in this enological process have received very little attention. In this study, lactic acid bacteria microbiota and the presence of biogenic amines were investigated throughout the manufacture and biological aging of 36 samples of sherry wines. Malolactic fermentation was found to mainly take place during the first stage of biological ageing. The incidence and populations of lactic acid bacteria in sherry wines were low. The diversity of bacterial species isolated from the wines was greater than previously reported and included species of Lactobacillus, with prevailing Lactobacillus hilgardii, Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus zeae and Leuconostoc mesenteroides. The biogenic amine-producing capacity of the isolates was also determined. Five strains were putrescine producers, while another strain was shown to produce tyramine and phenylethylamine, simultaneously. L. zeae was one of the predominant species in wines during the biological aging and seemed to be one of the main putrescine producers. The biogenic amine composition of the wines investigated was similar to that reported for other types of wines. Putrescine was the major amine, followed by cadaverine, histamine and tyramine. The amine contents detected were lower than those usually reported in red wines. aInstituto de Fermentaciones Industriales, CSIC, Juan de la Cierva 3, 28006 Madrid, Spain   top The reduction of murine norovirus 1, B. fragilis HSP40 infecting phage B40-8 and E. coli after a mild thermal pasteurization process of raspberry puree 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 L. Baerta, M. Uyttendaelea, E. Van Coillieb and J. Debeverea http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract Pasteurization processes of raspberry puree are nowadays limited to short times and rather low temperatures to maintain flavor and nutritional quality. Norovirus (NoV) outbreaks associated with raspberries highlight the need to determine the survival of NoV on this type of soft fruit. Therefore, resistance of murine norovirus 1 (MNV-1), a surrogate for human NoV, B. fragilis HSP40 infecting phage B40-8, and E. coli towards mild pasteurization was tested. Raspberry puree heat treated at 65 °C for 30 s showed a 1.86, 2.77, and 3.89 log reduction of, respectively, MNV-1, E. coli, and B40-8. Heating at 75 °C for 15 s established a 2.81 log reduction of MNV-1 while a 3.44 and 3.61 log reduction of B40-8 and E. coli was observed. No supplementary lethal effect of holding the heat-treated raspberry puree at 4 °C overnight was noticed. B40-8 failed to be useful as a tool to monitor NoV inactivation during mild pasteurization processes. Moreover, <3 log reductions of MNV-1 were observed suggesting that upon high initial contamination load, infectious NoV particles may remain on mildly pasteurized raspberry puree. aLaboratory of Food Microbiology and Food Preservation, Department of Food Safety and Food Quality, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium bInstitute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research, Technology and Food Unit, Brusselsesteenweg 370, 9090 Melle, Belgium   top Effect of combining nisin and/or lysozyme with in-package pasteurization for control of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat turkey bologna during refrigerated storage 01.oct.08 Food Microbiology Volume 25, Issue 7 Sunil Mangalassarya, Inyee Hana, James Rieckb, James Actona and Paul Dawsona http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/6800-2008-999749992-696299 Abstract This study investigated the efficacy of in-package pasteurization combined with pre-surface application of nisin and/or lysozyme to reduce and prevent the subsequent recovery and growth of Listeria monocytogenes during refrigerated storage on the surface of low-fat turkey bologna. Sterile bologna samples were treated with solutions of nisin (2 mg/ml=5000 AU/ml), lysozyme (10 mg/ml=80 AU/ml) and a mixture of nisin and lysozyme (2 mg nisin+10 mg lysozyme/ml) before in-package pasteurization at 65 °C for 32 s. In-package pasteurization resulted in an immediate 3.5–4.2 log CFU/cm2 reduction in L. monocytogenes population for all treatments. All pasteurized treatments also resulted in a significant reduction of L. monocytogenes by 12 weeks compared to un-pasteurized bologna. In-package pasteurization in combination with nisin or nisin–lysozyme treatments was effective in reducing the population below detectable levels by 2–3 weeks of storage. Results from this study could have a significant impact for the industry since a reduction in bacterial population was achieved by a relatively short pasteurization time and antimicrobials reduced populations further during refrigerated storage. aDepartment of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA bDepartment of Applied Economics and Statistics, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA   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