As the result of political and economic pressures, FDA will likely not have the resources it needs to carry out its responsibilities under the FSMA. What this means is that more responsibility will be placed on the food industry to self-govern. The various industry initiatives will need to expand to make up the difference.

Some of the things industry can do in cooperation with FDA include:

 

 

  • Expand education
  • Create transparency of food safety systems and risk assessments to the consumer level
  • Continue the research, development and application of food safety technology
  • Expand testing of products
  • Foster a Watchdog/Sentinel role
  • Outreach and assistance to the mid sized and small operations
  • Expand and apply traceability systems

Former ranking Republican Jack Kingston has called the U.S. food supply “99.99 percent” safe. He goes on to say “We challenge anyone to find a function of government that has a success rate better than 99.99% which the food supply, based on the Obama Administration’s own estimates, currently maintains,” said Kingston spokesman Chris Crawford.

In contrast, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said last month that about one in six Americans gets sick, and 3,000 die, from foodborne diseases each year.

if .01 % of the food supply is unsafe, as Mr. Crawford explains, this would mean about 1 million meals a day eaten in the US are unsafe.

The impact to public health aside, the food industry suffers anytime there is a food recall or an outbreak, and there are political and economic outcomes, as we see today in Europe.

Regardless, industry must step forward in an even greater way than currently. I believe we are up to the challenge, but we need coordination and strengthening of the scientific basis for risk assessments and a better way to measure risk-reductions.

If FDA cannot fully apply its powers, it makes sense for industry and FDA to work together in new ways. Lets spend the money that is available in ways that will have a beneficial effect. Creating more bureaucracy is not the answer. We need a leader that both industry and FDA can trust, that can forge the type of cooperative spirit needed. That person has not emerged, yet.

Third party audits of produce are relatively new phenomena. Fueled primarily by the retail sector’s demands for safe year-round supplies of fresh fruits and vegetables, there is a serious industry-led effort underway to evaluate primary production and the resulting supply chain.

While the third party audit model has some similarities with regulatory inspections, there are major differences; Third party audits are buyer driven and may contain some unscientific provisions (one insect in a package, even an intermittent mosquito or ant) fails the audit. Another automatic failure often found in third party assessments is the provision for a blood and body fluid policy. It is universally agreed that the risk of HIV transmission is zero through food, and other bloodborne risks are very remote. Yet, the failure to have a policy on bloodborne pathogens is totally unacceptable to buyers.

 

There is no sound scientific reasoning behind provisions like these, yet since it is a buyer-driven risk assessment, these “hazards” to the retailer and his “business” are very real.

 

The standards set by retailers are mostly reasonable, but are often defined in minutia. There may be numerous questions that are so closely related that details become burdensome. For example, there are often a half dozen questions or more on rodent traps alone that must be evaluated independently, such as; are they positioned correctly, numbered, secured, clean, marked as monitored, kept on a schematic, with wall markings, in sufficient number, in sound condition, etc., etc. The intention is to cover every possible threat that a rodent will enter a building without being trapped or poisoned.

 

The detailed nature of audits sometimes lasting several days, with up to 500 individual questions, and often occurring multiple times in a year can be vexing, counterproductive and exhausting to all involved. Add to this that third parties often demand scientific programs and science-based risk assessments from operators unprepared through education or experience to provide such reasoning, and you have a problematic and sometimes dysfunctional system.

 

A huge gap emerges between the food safety expert-auditor and his “bible of standards”, and those just now becoming familiar with basic food safety concepts.

 

Auditors are often the first and primary source of scientific information for produce-facility operators unfamiliar with concepts such as Free Chlorine, Oxidation-Reduction Potential, microbial sampling plans, and interpretation of microbial testing results, ATP bioluminescence technology and other sanitation assessments and controls. Auditors often find themselves as much educating the operator as evaluating their performance. The auditor on the other hand often finds the produce-production manager assigned to food safety educating him on what things really work.

 

There is a notable lack of food safety knowledge at the primary producer level but there may also be a lack of traditional agricultural knowledge on the part of the auditor. Few auditors have the wide range of experience in public health protection, food safety, environmental health, water, chemistry, vector control, and the life sciences to truly provide an expert evaluation of safety in the agricultural world. Furthermore, it takes years of experience in the field for even qualified auditors to begin to understand the wide range agricultural and facility environments they must work in.

 

While food safety experts, production managers, and business owners struggle with these issues in produce safety, we should keep in mind that the findings of audits will not necessarily always be indicative of risks, and food safety programs no matter how well intentioned will not always prove effective given the robust exposures often encountered in farming environments. We are yet to stop the harvesting of foods where migratory birds have zeroed in, controlled floods, shot every wild pig, or figured out how to keep deer from jumping 8 foot fences to get to crops.

 

In light of all the obstacles, it’s encouraging to see contamination events caught quickly, and exposures kept small. More and more the contaminated produce that comes to light is recalled and/or production is stopped before a wide-scale outbreak occurs. This speaks to the food safety efforts of industry as we try to limit the inevitable exposures through testing and intensive traceability systems. Re-call systems are developed with computerized tracking of lot code information, and they recently have proven effective at preventing grand exposures through contaminated produce common just 2 or 3 years ago.

 

The produce sector is unique perhaps in its willingness to accept strict third party oversight, government regulation, and also to adopt and embrace food safety systems. Given enough time, the safety of produce will be assured. In the meantime, many of us have a lot of work to do.

Being an avid reader and researcher of all things food safe, I cannot help but notice a trend. The pattern of reported large scale multi-state outbreaks every few weeks or months seems to be changing to a pattern of small scale but almost daily outbreaks at the local level.

Coincidentally there seems to be a shift from large scale processing and manufacturing contamination to retail and food service handling mistakes as the key factors. If you do not read Bill Marler’s blog or Doug Powell’s or stay focused on the current events you will not see this trend. But it is getting very difficult to stay current. I spend 2 hours a day reading news and analyzing new research, it’s getting tough to keep up even with Bills and Doug’s help.

As some may know, I have been offering HACCP classes at the FS/retail level for 13 years beginning when I conducted the first training for inspectors in Florida in 1998 with my Applying HACCP Principles course. Last week, I certified another 17 FS professionals and sanitarians. I am going on about 250 persons trained/certified under NEHA HACCP and about 1500 under my own International HACCP Alliance accreditation. I am at about 2000 trained in on line programs. These students represent food service, hospital, catering, retail industry professionals, small processors, and a few sanitarians. I have certified about 300 in accredited Produce HACCP, but I have not even scratched the surface of what needs to be done in the way of training in any of these more or less forgotten sectors.

Just look at the recent news and you will see that that most of the problem right now is surfacing at the local level, although the big nationwide fiascoes make most of the news (and there are all sorts of epidemiological reasons for that trend).

So where are food safety management systems at retail? Nowhere, almost.

Apathy regarding food safety is a huge problem at the food service level, and so is waiting around for the health inspector to tell you what to do. And still, the retail industry fights developing food safety management systems, even when it is required, what is wrong here?

I think I know, but I would like to hear someone else besides I address the lack of motivation on the part of 90% of the food service sector.

OK, the obligatory caveat, the national restaurant chains have a type of HACCP, and they do better, sometimes much better, but they represent about 10% of the one million food services in this country. I am tired of hearing how food safety management is too big a burden on the “average Joe” food service operator, or that they just are too backward to handle a scientific approach. This is just not so in my experience.

If a restaurateur can figure out how to make money in this economy and stay afloat, then they are not too stupid for HACCP, so ignorance is an excuse. I am also tired of the excuses that come out of CFP, and actually from FDA itself about the voluntary nature of HACCP at retail.

Listen…food safety is not voluntary; it’s an implied warranty, and should be the one and only criteria for maintaining a permit or license AND an operator should be able to prove it. Its more than just passing an unannounced inspection, its 24/7 365 food safety and its achievable.

How many people have to die from stupid mistakes, lethargy and plain negligence before operators such as the ones below take food safety seriously?

I don’t expect people to come flocking to me for HACCP training, but really people, my numbers at the retail level of HACCP training are pitiful, but I am not giving up.

Thanks as always to Doug Powell at BITES, always a fantastic resource. Please see the donation button. Each of us chipping in $25.00 a year is not too much to ask for this work and more if you can afford it.

CALIFORNIA: Documents show history of problems at Fernbridge Cafe; investigation continues, DA weighing charges
08.apr.11
Contra Costa Times
Thadeus Greenson
http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_17800792?nclick_check=1
As the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office continues to mull filing charges against the operator of the Fernbridge Café, environmental health division documents outline a long history of problems at the restaurant.
Deputy District Attorney Krista McKimmy said Thursday that her office is continuing to investigate the case, but that she expects to make a decision on charging operator Steve Sterbeck by Monday.
Sterbeck was arrested on suspicion of operating a food facility without a valid permit on March 31 due to what the DA’s Office deemed “a continued refusal to comply with the Health and Safety Code” that put the public at risk of illness. The arrest came after Sterbeck was asked to close the business temporarily on the heels of water tests showing high levels of E. coli bacteria, officials said.
According to a case file in the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services Division of Environmental Health, tests on the cafe’s water conducted on March 17 and 18 showed high levels of E. coli — bacteria found in the lower intestine of warm blooded animals — and coliform bacteria. Further, the tests showed high levels of turbidity — cloudiness — and that chlorine levels in the water were four times below the state minimum and 30 times below the recommended level for treating unfiltered surface water.

Vac-paking pizzas also not for amateurs; Indiana Pizza King cited
08.apr.11
barfblog
Doug Powell
http://www.barfblog.com/blog/147697/11/04/09/vac-paking-pizzas-also-not-amateurs-indiana-pizza-king-cited
Pizza King has been cited by the Delaware County Health Department for nine violations of sanitation requirements related to its vacuum-packed pizzas.
Two of the violations relate to the lack of a hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) food safety plan, which is required to prevent contamination that can lead to the growth of botulism and listeria bacteria in such packaging.
The violations occurred March 15 at 109 E. McGalliard Road, the only Pizza King site that ships vaccum-packed pizzas, which are partially baked and then frozen, to customers around the country and to other Pizza Kings, where they are sold as take-and-bake products.
Pizza King also was cited by the health department during an inspection nearly six months ago for the lack of a HACCP plan.
"They did in fact cite us in October (for the same violation)," said Pizza King official Jerry Riley. "They were going to, from our understanding, get back with us and show us how to do a HACCP plan, and they never did. So when we got this last one (violation), we got lined up with the federal people who inspect our commissary, and they are in the process of helping us put together the HACCP plan. So we will have it in no time at all. Keep in mind, all of the product we receive has a HACCP plan at the commissary."
Terry Troxell, food safety coordinator for the health department, said Pizza King needs a HACCP plan not only at its commissary in Anderson but also at the store in Muncie where the vacuum-packaging, also known as "reduced oxygen packaging," actually occurs.
"I told them I can help answer questions, but we are not in the business of making HACCP plans," Troxell said. "That’s not something we do. They need to do that. We are a regulatory agency. We do inspections. They never approached me with any questions or request for assistance."
http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20110409/NEWS01/104090312
http://www.pizzakingindiana.com/ship.asp

Se Bill Marler’s blog, where one of his clients in the DeFusco Bakery Salmonella crises in Rhode Island tells it like it is on TV.

http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/the-civil-justice-system-and-the-media-in-action/

Thankfully, we have a functioning tort system in the US. It stands in the gap for the decrepit and often ineffective regulation of facilities by our disconnected health authorities. While this operation had a legal obligation to control the risk of Salmonella in its foods, an obvious defect like using egg containers for storage of pastry shells should have been caught. We may learn of other factors that led to this massive outbreak.

As a public health consultant and food safety auditor, I make frequent audits of bakeries and develop HACCP systems for them. I am often shocked at the lax attitude that the authorities have in bakeries-they are obviously viewed as a low priority. Most bakers when properly educated and given the tools can and will gladly do their jobs safely, but when they do not, there are plenty of hazards that reach the public. I am often telling bakers for the first time about the risks of Salmonella from eggs, and time and temperature abuse, and inadequate cooking.

As a public health professional that spent 20 + years fighting the “system” to try to improve conditions for consumers, I say it’s high time we make both industry and our government agencies responsible for the damage that lax agency enforcement and industry ignorance causes-like in China. Although I am not in favor at this time of the firing squad, I am advocating proper funding, education, and empowerment of our inspectors so can they protect us better.

Agencies and the food industry, including the forgotten bakery segment, should be all about prevention in the interest of public health. Unfortunately, there is a mean-spirited group of legislators who are more than willing to take apart our public health agencies- to "make it easier for the industry". These are the same ones who say we should limit damages against businesses that cause injury to the consumer, when in fact, civil lawsuits are about the only means for justice the people have.

Right now, plaintiff lawyers stand in the gap for the consumer and we are glad they do. These injured people deserve their day in court. But most importantly, we need to stop these totally preventable, stupid and tragic events, and we frequently fail to do it. 

(Betcha anything the eggs carried Salmonella into this baked good, betcha anything DeCoster had something to do with the eggs)

As a  person ages, one tends to think about how their life’s work will be evaluated by future generations. Most people would want to be remembered for some accomplishment and hope that in the future, mistakes they made along the way will be forgotten.

For some, however, whatever they may have accomplished in life will be overshadowed by some spectacular moral failure. This is the unfortunate legacy of Jack DeCoster, self-made multi-billionaire farmer and US egg baron, par excellence .

By most accounts, Mr. DeCoster is the person behind the bulk of the eggs produced in this country. Through his subsidiaries and deals too entangled to entwine, Mr DeCoster and his cohorts control your egg supply, and have for many years.

Monopolies are not a good thing in any industry, but what makes this situation so incredibly bad for consumers is that the egg supply in this country is so seriously contaminated with Salmonella.

One only has to look at recent events and the history of DeCoster’s fiasco’s,  environmental, occupational, and public health to see that he is personally responsible for what has happened to the egg supply. It appears that most of the contaminated (and non contaminated) eggs in the US pass through him and his assorted businesses.

It didn’t have to be this way, but this is the way DeCoster apparently wants it.  So will he be remembered- not as the self-made successful business man- but: "The Notorious Egg Man Who Made America Ill".

For DeCoster’s latest assault on America’s public health, see:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/fdcp/?unique=1301439874140

 

 

Cantaloupes are again the vehicle for Salmonella. Such instances should be closely investigated to determine the root cause. Typical contamination sources in growing cantaloupes would include irrigation, run off, human waste, animal intrusion and infected workers.

The problem of contamination and potential growth of bacteria on melons is a difficult one. Normally, with a product that can both harbor and grow bacteria we would require that the items containing it be kept under temperature control; the FDA retail food code does require cut melons to be held at 41 degrees until service, for example.

Prior to cutting (processing), there are no current regulations for limiting growth of bacteria on melons. There are no requirements for shipping or storage temperatures for whole intact melon. Food safety efforts with melons, and most raw agricultural products is primarily a matter of contamination control. Melons may or may not be washed in the packinghouse to remove contamination before shipping to retailers. Again, no mandatory provisions exist for any type of post-harvest treatment with melons. Thus, the final processing of the product is the final opportunity for prevention and also the step with the highest risks.

The challenges for the fresh produce industry are in identifying the risks in the growing, harvesting, packing and shipping of these items, and then taking a combination of preventive measures that reduces those risks to the next user to some measurable level. The new research pointed out in Bill Marler’s blog found below, is useful, but the industry response will take some time, given the nature of the industry and what it has traditionally seen as risk.

Farmers know that wild animals are a major concern in melon operations; they consume and destroy a significant amount of crops. Deer, pigs, raccoons, as well as birds are attracted to these growing and harvesting areas. While growers may not have absolute control over access to the growing areas, harvesting methods must account for contamination found. Operations under third party standards are required to monitor for these hazards and not harvest areas with obvious signs of animal intrusion. That procedure if rigorously done limits the wide scale fecal contamination problem but does not eliminate it. Handling thereafter must be sanitary. Packers that do not wash melons can do little to remove contamination. Buyers drive this model, and many will accept raw agricultural products that have not had a washing step, leaving the consumer hard pressed to defend themselves.

However, washing in a large packinghouse is itself hazardous. During washing, if antimicrobial quality of wash water is not maintained, water becomes a vehicle to further spread contamination between lots. Diligent control of wash water quality is often a critical control in a food safety program for this reason.

We may not be able to eliminate the pathogens in melons at any one stage of the production system, thus calling for a coordinated effort between growers, handlers, shippers and end users. We need to strengthen the weak links in this chain to the extent we can, and combine that effort with effective microbiological testing, recall procedures and oversight.

The regulation of the supply chain for agricultural products in general is very weak at present, but we expect this situation to change soon. Efforts to properly guide the fresh produce industry and enforce necessary public health controls will improve as the new federal policies and procedures come into effect. An expansion of the regulatory controls and industry led efforts will eventually reduce the risk of contamination in raw agricultural products overall, but don’t expect immediate resolution of the fundamental problems of melons, and perhaps, other high risk produce items.

We thank Dr. Doug Powell and attorney Bill Marler for keeping us informed about safe handling, as the produce industry continues to make progress in reducing risks to end users.

See Marler Blog

 

Join me here as I go deep inside a food safety reporter’s home and kitchen and uncover the lurking, ever present microbes. Wendy Ryan and Tampa Bay’s Channel 9 really made this entertaining and educational, tough to do, we can take a few tips from these media/communication masters.

See a former health inspector test Wendy Ryan’s kitchen

Tips on food safety

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/money/consumer/dirty_dining/former-health-inspector-offers-tips-to-keep-your-kitchen-clean

 

The hazaelnut outbreak may spur FDA to move in its new powers.

Here we see the packinghouse that packed the hazelnuts refusing to cooperate with officials after nuts it shipped sickend several people with E coli O157:H7. (Note the very soiled hands in this picture this would not be an acceptable level of cleanliness for a harvester).