Defending Food Safety : Food Safety Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Gass Weber Mullins Law Firm : National Food Product Defense Counsel : Defending Food Safety Blog

In the continuing battle to prevent naturally occurring microorganisms like E. coli O157:H7 from growing in cattle, researchers have discovered some promising new tools.

Although E. coli O157:H7 can cause illness in humans, the bacteria often exists as part of the gastrointestinal flora in healthy cattle. In turn, microbiologists at the University of Texas (“UT”), Southwestern Medical Center, working with the USDA, uncovered a mechanism which actually prevents E. coli O157:H7 from surviving in grain-fed cattle.

E. coli O157:H7 harbors a gene called sdiA, which makes the SdiA protein. When traveling within a cattle’s body, the SdiA protein senses a chemical made by microbes in the animal's rumen, the first of a cow's four stomachs, which serves as a large fermentation chamber.

Only after detecting this signal will the bacteria pass through the rumen and colonize in the recto-anal junction. By interfering with the SdiA protein (or, the genetic sensor), however, researchers were able to stop the bacteria from ever reaching the required colonization site. Notably, rather than colonizing, the bacteria simply died off, preventing any potential for future shedding or contamination.

"We're diminishing colonization by not letting pathogen go where it needs to go," said Dr. Vanessa Sperandio, associate professor of microbiology and biochemistry at UT Southwestern and senior author of the study. "If we can find a way to prevent these bacteria from ever colonizing in cattle, it's possible that we can have a real impact on human disease.” Notably, “[t]his could be something as simple as including some sort of antagonist in cattle feed, which would result in less shedding of the bacteria and less contamination down the road."

The findings, of course, are important because an estimated 70 percent to 80 percent of cattle herds can carry these pathogens. According to Dr. Sperandio, the finding “serves as a proof-of-principle that we might be able to target this system and help prevent food contamination."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Walmart and Sam’s Club have announced that they will impose enhanced food safety measures on their beef suppliers.

According to the company, the new mandates are designed to reduce to the greatest extent possible the risk of potential contamination by pathogens such as E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella. Click on the the following link to view Walmart’s Beef Safety Press Release.

Under the new standards, beef processing (grinding) facilities which supply the company will be required to provide validated evidence within the next year that their process controls can achieve a 2-log reduction of pathogenic microorganisms. By June 2011, slaughter facilities supplying the company will be required to demonstrate a 3-log reduction. In turn, Walmart has also mandated that, by June 2012, slaughter facilities must go even further and validate a cumulative 5-log reduction.

Dr. James Marsden, a food safety scientist, stated that “Walmart has taken steps to provide its customers with the safest possible beef products. Consumers across the United States will benefit greatly from this timely food safety initiative.” Given the breadth of Walmart’s influence, Dr. Marsden’s comment cannot be underscored enough. More than 200 million people shop at the 4,300 Walmart stores throughout the nation.

Walmart’s imposition of more stringent standards does not mean, however, that most manufacturers are not already doing virtually everything they can to produce safe and wholesome food. Tyson, a major Walmart beef supplier, believes that its food safety measures are already in line with the new protocol. Thus, for many suppliers, meeting Walmart’s expectations will likely only entail producing microbiological testing data to verify that those interventions already in place are effective. With that said, however, most also agree that any new requirements set by the retail giant can only push those manufacturers not already reaching a very high standard to strive even harder.

Of note, Walmart excluded irradiation as an approved intervention for its beef. Although irradiation can safely destroy pathogens in ground beef, some types can slightly affect beef quality and many consumers are still leery of the concept. Nevertheless, as we reported previously, the technology is improving and hopefully someday, with additional research and consumer education, it will be a viable alternative for all foods.

In any event, while researches and industry continue to seek new interventions that may someday effectively eliminate pathogens in ground beef, Walmart’s new requirements appear to be yet another step in the right direction as we all strive to make the food we eat as safe as possible.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed last July by the vegan advocacy group Cancer Project asserting that hot dogs cause cancer.

The Cancer Project originally filed claims against several hot dog manufacturers on behalf of three New Jersey residents who alleged they were exposed to carcinogens by eating hot dogs — even though none of the plaintiffs had actually developed cancer.

In addition to money damages, the lawsuit also sought an order requiring hot dogs to bear the following label: “Warning: Consuming hot dogs and other processed meats increases the risk of cancer.”

Although a few studies have attempted to link processed meats with an increased risk of cancer by focusing on the potential health effects of nitrites used as preservatives, the fact remains that nitrates occur naturally in fruits and have actually been proven to improve health in many ways. In turn, numerous additional scientific studies, including one from Harvard University in 2004, have found no link between meat consumption and an increased cancer risk.

Concerned about the potentially frivolous nature of the claims, and citing the lack of scientific support for the allegations, the hot dog manufacturers promptly filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. On March 18, 2010, Judge Jose Linares, of the United States Federal District Court for the District of New Jersey, granted the motion and dismissed the case in its entirety.

"We are pleased that the court moved quickly and dismissed this lawsuit," said J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute. As explained by Boyle, Meat products are regulated and inspected by the USDA and bear the federal government's seal of inspection, showing they are wholesome and nutritious.”

And, Boyle is not the only authority on the matter. According to the U.S. Dietary Guidelines, processed meat and poultry products — including hot dogs — can be, and often are, a healthy part of a balanced (and, frankly, tasty) diet.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Hawaii ranks among the top states for food-borne illness surveillance, investigation and reporting. Other leading states include Maine, Kansas, Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska and North Dakota. Minnesota and Oregon are also regarded as having strong surveillance systems as well.

While many states ranked very high, however, some problems do remain.

According to CSPI, “some states may not have enough investigators or the money to train and equip their staff, which can lead to lower-quality investigations.” In addition to affecting the quality of such investigations, these and other limitations can also lead to mistaken conclusions regarding the source or cause of an outbreak.

CSPI also reports, however, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, which passed in the House of Representatives and is now pending in the Senate, will likely help improve national surveillance capabilities. If passed, the Act would require FDA to improve coordination between federal, state and local surveillance systems; develop a national network of laboratories; and improve epidemiological tools available to the states. The bill would also integrate food-borne illness surveillance with other bio-surveillance capabilities

Thus, as we strive to improve the safety of our food, as well as the ability of our food safety system to accurately detect and resolve emerging problems, we send our congratulations to the hard-working professionals in Hawaii and other states who are leading the way.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Travelling throughout the United States and Internationally this week to speak at various food safety conferences (and mingling endlessly with numerous regulators and industry professionals), I continue to hear a common theme.

When it comes to the safety of our food here at home, it is intellectually healthier, if you will, to stand behind the teachings of science, than to be force-fed the frenzied rhetoric of cynics to whom things like perspective and reason are but tasteless, bland and easily ignored concepts.

Each year, American families eat somewhere in the neighborhood of 328.5 Billion safe meals – and countless more safe snacks. While any illness or death linked to the consumption of food is one too many, the fact remains that (at three meals a day) you and I are 20 times more likely to die this year from pneumonia or drowning than from a food-borne illness. Although not perfect, the statistics are quite impressive.

Mostly, the risk of eating is low because the hard-working people who actually grow, raise, manufacture, transport, process, prepare and serve our food – despite what you might be told by the media – are actually well-intentioned human beings. With incredible assistance and cooperation from numerous federal, state and local agencies, these hard-working individuals help make our food supply one of the safest in the world.

Included, of course, in this cast of thousands, are dedicated professions who work for numerous federal, state and local agencies such as the CDC, the FDA, the USDA, the FSIS, 50 individual State health departments, and countless local health departments. These individuals, in many instances volunteer extended hours at wages far below their true worth, working tirelessly to ensure that the food sustaining our nation is as plentiful and safe as it can be.

Yet, despite these incredible human efforts, both the food industry and government workers that oversee and track the safety of our food remain under continuous attack. As consumers, we are inundated by media “fear-mongering,” and made to believe that with each meal consumed, we draw closer to the precipice of some fathomless tragedy. We are also taught to be suspicious and wary of the people who have dedicated their lives to ensuring that our families are fed, and that our food is wholesome.

We are told of the ineffectiveness of federal, state and local regulators, alleged problems in food processing plants, restaurants and grocery stores, and how industry workers simply don’t care about the food they make. In order to believe this, however, we must ignore a fundamental truth: the food that our fellow Americans work so hard to produce is the same food they proudly feed to their families.

You see, food safety is a complicated and dynamic issue. It is easy to be a cynic. It is easy to attack others with the benefit of extended hindsight. It is easy to simplify things to a level that a third grader would find devoid in both substance and fact. The real challenge, however, lies in embracing a reasoned and proactive approach that not only recognizes the limits of technology and science, but, at the same time, within these limits, best reduces the risks most likely to occur to the greatest extent possible.

And, we must recognize, as well, that there are many sources of food-borne illness other than food products. More common than problems which occur at the highly regulated production level, are those which occur at the consumer level.

• How many offending foods, for instance, were perfectly safe until rendered unsafe by improper storage or handling?

• How many offending meals were perfectly safe until contaminated by ill food handlers?

• How many buffets at restaurants, churches, family gatherings or weddings were completely safe until contaminated by sick guests?

When we probe deeper, and actually balance the real and multiple causes of food-borne illness (most of which occur long after production), the safety of the food produced by industry is astonishing. And, frankly, until we recognize that each one of us shares responsibility for basic food safety in our homes, and until every food-handler, homemaker and guest can be rendered “sterile,” we also need to ensure that the laws regulating our food supply are driven by (and based upon) reality and science, not merely inflammatory rhetoric.

Nevertheless, many will continue to indiscriminately criticize our entire food system and, by extension, the countless people working to find solutions to the challenges we do face. And, although the same critics will also argue that consumers bear little responsibility for their own safety, please understand this is a dangerous and flawed philosophy which serves no one but those who profit from the sensationalism and mistrust they create.

In any event, for those who continue to ignore science and reason, who contend that food safety is the responsibility of food producers alone, and who wrongly proclaim that food safety is only as simple as “not eating poop,” I say this: given the statistics, what goes into one mouth is often far less harmful than what comes out of another.

*And, if you have any questions related to proper food handling, please feel free to peruse our site for safe handling instructions and tips; and, please encourage others to do the same.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The battle for food safety continues to be waged on multiple fronts.

In addition to testing and developing new technologies (beyond cooking) to reduce naturally occurring pathogens in food, researchers are now looking for ways to defeat pathogens in our bodies.

As we reported previously, continuing NASA research might soon lead to a Salmonella vaccine. And now, we have learned, the United States military has joined the fight. According to the Washington Post, a new scientific breakthrough recently announced by the Naval Medical Research Center suggests that a Campylobacter vaccine may be on the way as well.

Campylobacter is well known as a leading cause of food-borne illness. According to some studies, the pathogen may be responsible for as many as two million cases in the United States each year, and cause several hundred million more worldwide. The infection can also (in some instances) be difficult to treat because of widespread antibiotic resistance.

Nevertheless, after a quarter century of research, Navy scientist Patricia Guerry may have discovered the path to a vaccine which will inhibit the bacteria’s ability to attach to our intestinal lining and cause illness. Indeed, as explained by the Washington Post:

Guerry, a molecular microbiologist, began her work in the 1980s and over time created new research tools that allowed her to identify the pathogen's unique genetic, biochemical and structural features. This led to the development of a vaccine that neutralizes the bacteria's ability to attach to the intestinal lining.

The vaccine candidate against the pathogen Campylobacter jejuni, developed by Guerry, her colleagues at the U.S. Naval Medical Research Center in Silver Spring and Canadian scientist Mario Monteiro, successfully protected against infection in monkeys during testing last year and is slated for human clinical trials.

If true, this may be the first known (and, promising) food-borne illness vaccine actively tested on humans. And, although Guerry has been conducting her research as part of an ongoing effort to better protect U.S. soldiers oversees, her research, of course, may very well have a profound impact on the rest of the nation – and world. Click on the following link to read the Full Story.

In any event, this is great news for industry and consumers alike. We proudly salute Guerry and, of course, the rest of her team.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Like many people, I enjoy an occasional, cold, high-quality beer. Whether it’s imported or domestic, a lager, ale, pilsner or stout, few things beat sipping from a cold mug on Sunday.

There is a one pub/restaurant in particular that I frequent, not just for their excellent selection of beer, but also for the wonderful hamburgers they serve. I’ve heard them called the best in the city. They have butter buns and are grilled in such a way that even when cooked medium well, they stay juicy and flavorful.

Well, I stopped in the other day around two p.m. Given that it was mid-afternoon, and a Sunday, the place was nearly deserted. So, I grabbed the seat near the window, which is almost always taken, and ordered a Smithwick's Irish Ale. When I looked up, I realized that I had a clear view right into the kitchen. This, I knew, could be a good or a bad thing. I loved the food here, and knowing what goes on in the kitchen could quickly ruin what has become one of my favorite destinations.

Naturally, my curiosity got the best of me. Much to my delight, I had no complaints. The cook, I soon found out, was named Ron. He kept the kitchen spotless. He washed his hands multiple times while preparing my meal . Nothing which needed to be refrigerated stayed out for more than a minute or two, and all surfaces were sanitized immediately after being used.

After finishing my hamburger, which was amazing, Ron came out of the kitchen. He was off work. I called him over and after complimenting his culinary skill I commented on how impressed I was by the cleanliness he demonstrated.

He looked at me with an almost shocked expression on his face and said,

“Well of course my kitchen is clean. How would I feel if someone got sick on my watch?” He paused and then and said, “My wife and children eat here.”

I was, naturally, very impressed. I offered to buy him a beer. He declined politely, telling me he didn’t much like beer. Well, I thought to myself, nobody’s perfect.

In any case, Ron is our newest Food Safety Hero. If you see him this weekend, or someone like him, please take a moment to say "thanks."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BY Guest Blogger James Marsden

About a year after the 1993 Jack-in-the-Box E. coli O157:H7 outbreak, I moved from the AMI Foundation in Washington, DC to KSU in Manhattan, Kansas to join their beef safety research group. Some of the first people I met in Kansas were Lee Borck, Kenny Knight and Andrew Murphy, three beef producers and co-founders of The Beef Marketing Group (BMG), www.beefmarketinggroup.com.

We had discussions then about pre-harvest food safety and its importance in an integrated food safety system for control of E. coli O157:H7. At a time when very little was being done in this segment, BMG initiated a comprehensive program called “Progressive Beef” that included HACCP at beef feedlots, quality systems, domestic source verification and a plan to address animal handling and welfare. They also implemented a Natural Beef program in which hormones and antibiotics are never administered, no animal byproducts are used in feed and cattle are sourced and age verified from birth.

Recently, I visited one the BMG feedlots near Great Bend, KS and reviewed the food safety and animal welfare programs that had been put in place over the past several years. HACCP is strictly voluntary for beef producers, but BMG’s HACCP system is as well designed and comprehensive as if were a regulatory requirement. There are also extensive animal handling systems and training for BMG employees and drivers who transport cattle. The animal identification and traceability systems are amongst the best in the industry.

All of this was impressive, but what I found to be most notable, was that all of the work and capital that were required to achieve these remarkable results happened because of BMG’s vision and commitment to food safety, sustainability and animal welfare. None of it was required by federal regulations.

At the time BMG made these commitments, considerable investments were required and there was no assurance that they would ever be recovered. As it turned out, there are plenty of customers who like the safety and quality elements of the BMG systems, including Natural Beef and are willing to pay a premium to get them.

For years, the beef industry has had to operate in a world in which the retail value of beef products didn’t allow for profitability between all sectors. The BMG systems add value to beef and that added value supports profitability for beef producers, packers and retailers.

The founders of the Beef Marketing Group decided to produce products that meet consumer expectations. The result is one of the most successful beef production companies in the world.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

It never occurred to me to ask if responsibility has a border. Neither, apparently, has it occurred to the flight crews of Delta Airlines. While flying from Milwaukee to an undisclosed location today, I experienced Southern Hospitality in an entirely new way. The flight attendant’s name was Mandy, and she is based out of Atlanta. Midway into our flight, she handed me the Coke I ordered - along with a plastic cup.  Because I like to drink my soda from the can, I promptly attempted to return the plastic. She, of course, refused.

“No offense honey, but I’ve no idea where your hands have been. I know where mine were! I don’t know where yours have been . . .”

The statement may look rude on paper, but it was expertly delivered, and with a genuine smile. Mandy was distinctly friendly and, because of her, my next flight will be on Delta. Individuals like Mandy exemplify the care and consideration that most food (or, in this case, drink) vending Americans should strive to emulate. She wasn’t concerned about her own well-being. She could have (and did) wash her hands before and after doing the drink service. She didn’t touch my cup because she understood that by doing so, she could potentially put other passengers at risk (my own hands are very clean, by the way).

In any event, I don’t know how the personnel at Delta are trained. What I do know is that one person can always make a difference. Today, I witnessed exactly that. As a result, I had one of the most positive flying experiences in my life

Keep up the good work, all.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The USA Today tells readers across the country what many food safety professionals already know:

“When it comes to food-borne illness investigation, ‘Minnesota is leap years ahead of . . . most of the rest of the nation,’ says James Phillips, head of infectious diseases for the Arkansas Department of Health.”

[Read the Full Article]

One of Minnesota’s advantages is the resources devoted to “Team Diarrhea,” a group of seven to nine graduate students who work the phones interviewing and taking detailed exposure histories from every person who tests positive for Salmonella or E. coli O157:H7. Victims may be interviewed twice as further exposure evidence is gathered from other consumers. With this attention to detail, more outbreaks can be identified.

“Minnesota ‘has a lot of best practices . . . to get to people quickly to find out what they ate, the CDC’s [Ali]Kahn says.”

So congrats to the hard-working professionals in Minnesota.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I affectionately call him Buck Magnum.  You may know him by some other name.    Whatever his true identity, I would like to thank him for a job well-done.  

Buck’s story begins over one hundred years ago.  At the turn of the Century, we began shipping more and more food products between states.  Due to the emergence of rapid transportation, improved preservation techniques and the ability of media to reach additional consumers, food became more plentiful, affordable and accessible.  For the first time, food processors could viably ship perishable products anywhere in the nation.

While interstate shipments grew, however, food safety regulations became inadequate.  Industrial advances quickly outpaced limited state and local regulations.  In the meat industry, laws defining what constituted “adulteration” or “misbranding” were determined, if at all, by each individual state. Moreover, what was forbidden in one state was lawful in another.  This hodgepodge of inconsistent laws soon made it apparent that, without a national approach to food safety, a single set of rules, and a single agency to enforce them (enter Buck Magnum), American citizens could have no confidence in the origins or safety of their food. 

The federal approach to food safety was solidified in 1906, when Congress passed the Wholesome Meat Act and the Pure Food and Drugs Act.  These Acts (along with their successors) formed the framework for the national food safety policy that continues this day. The 1906 Wholesome Meat Act (now known as the Federal Meat Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. § 601, et seq.) requires continuous federal inspection in meat packing plants, often times by multiple inspectors, to ensure that meat products are safe and wholesome, not adulterated and marked with the federal legend of inspection verifying the same.  

Today, the federal statutory and regulatory scheme is enforced by the Food Safety Inspection Service (a sub-agency of the USDA), via inspectors such as Buck.  In turn, I have watched quietly over the years as this picture has become, in some sense, legendary.  I have seen the photograph countless times on the internet, and have referenced it in publications, speeches and Powerpoints.  I even have a copy sitting next to the plant on my desk. 

Thus, if you know the true identity of this food safety icon, and can privately express our thanks, we'd be grateful.  Alternatively, if you could land me an autograph, you’d make my day.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link