Ottawa

  • Posted: December 9th, 2011 - 4:38am by Doug Powell

    Public Heath found seven “critical” food-safety deficiencies at the Ottawa General Hospital this year, three of them in the last week.

    On both Monday and Wednesday this week, inspectors found the hospital failed to “separate raw foods from ready-to-eat foods during storage and handling.”

    The hospital also earned a critical deficiency for not having paper towels in a dispenser at a hand basin in the food-preparation area on Monday this week and on Aug. 19 of this year. On April 15, the citation was for having no soap in the dispenser at the washing station.

    Frances Furmankiewicz, director of nutrition for the hospital, said the latest problems were due to “employee error.” Though all the employees are trained and certified to handle food, they were given more training as a result of the inspections.

    A number of people at the hospital Thursday said they were concerned when they learned about the poor inspection results and said they would no longer eat there, including Cindy Gilman, who was at the hospital to pick up her daughter.

    “I thought the hospital would have been great at following regulations — it’s a hospital,” she said.

    Your rating: None (3 votes)
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: September 18th, 2010 - 3:03am by Doug Powell

    The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Nestlé Canada Inc. are advising the public that some cans of powdered infant formula found in the Nepean, Ontario area have been tampered with.

    Three cans of Nestlé Good Start Iron Fortified Infant Formula, 900g size,
    UPC: 0 65000 36614 3, have been found to contain a powder which
    appears to be flour. These cans were found at the following retail locations: Your Independent Grocer on Strandherd Drive and Sobeys on Greenbank Drive in Nepean, Ontario.

    There has been one reported illness associated with the consumption of this product.

    Consumers using powdered infant formula products should look under the plastic lid of the cans and ensure the metal/foil top is sealed properly. The CFIA is conducting an investigation and the case has been referred to the police.
     

    Your rating: None (1 vote)
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: February 20th, 2010 - 2:55pm by Doug Powell

    Mark Tijssen, a major in the Canadian Forces, belongs to a group of churchgoers who butcher their own meat to, as they say, ensure its safety.

    Apparently, Tijssen's house had been under surveillance for several days last November before officers from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Ottawa police stopped a car leaving the property and confiscated 18 kilograms of pork. Tijssen and a friend had jointly bought a pig and slaughtered it.

    Now, Tijssen will appear in court next month to face charges of running an unlicensed slaughterhouse, failing to have an animal inspected both before and after slaughter, and distributing meat. If found guilty, Tijssen could face up to $100,000 in fines.

    In the Canadian province of Ontario, it is permissible to butcher an animal if the food is for the person's own family and none of the meat leaves the property where it was butchered. This allows farmers to raise their own food. It is against the law, however, to distribute the meat to anyone else.

    Ron Doering, an Ottawa lawyer and former president of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, told the Ottawa Citizen Ontario's rules on butchering and distribution of meat for personal use go far beyond those of other provinces. Saskatchewan, for example, has no provincial regulation and Newfoundland and Labrador has few regulations, while Quebec and British Columbia more closely resemble Ontario's inspection regime.

    Tijssen said he has butchered his own meat for years and cuts food costs by occasionally buying and butchering animals with a group of friends from his church. The members also have little faith in the safety of commercial meat products.

    Brent Ross, a spokesman for the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, said the ministry moderates its enforcement of meat handling rules for religious or ethnic reasons, for example, when Muslims slaughter animals for religious reasons.

    Tijssen and his friends from Faith Anglican Church say religion plays no part in their butchering practices. They just want economical and safe meat.
     

    Your rating: None (1 vote)
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: February 8th, 2010 - 6:57am by Doug Powell

    People like to eat. People like to eat out. People are interested in how their favorite eateries stack up against others.

    It’s a standard story that is being repeated in countries across North America: what restaurants in a region get lousy (and occasionally disgusting) inspections, and what is the best way to make those results available to the public?

    The Ottawa Citizen chipped in with a three-part series that wraps up Monday and found 44 per cent of area restaurants and take-out places were cited for a failure to comply with health regulations in the past year.

    Since April, Ottawa has made its food inspections available online through a searchable database called EatSafe. Users can type in the name or location of the restaurant to see inspection results (ottawa.ca/eatsafe).

    Mike Ziola, president of the Ontario Restaurant Hotel and Motel Association ‘s Ottawa chapter said Ottawa doesn’t need the colour-coded food safety system used in Toronto, where restaurants are required to post a green, yellow or red warning sign based on their most recent inspection, stating,

    “Essentially, a yellow is a red. I don’t know why they even have a yellow.”

    Oh. Oh. I do. When Toronto introduced it’s system the restaurant association made the same argument and the city hired me to write a report for the pending court case – which never went to court. Yes, a yellow is like a red, but it allows the restaurant to stay open. And no one wants a yellow, so the percentage of greens has increased dramatically.

    Same thing in New York. The Times quotes Geoff Kravitz, a spokesman for the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce, as telling the first public hearing Friday considering the city’s proposal to rate restaurant cleanliness with posted letter grades, as saying,

    “Letter grades are nothing more than a scarlet letter that will keep people from eating out.”

    Any evidence to support that opinion? Have letter grades in Los Angeles kept people from eating out?

    The New York State Restaurant Association maintains that letter ratings would encourage bribery and corruption – since the highly public placards would dramatically raise cleanliness ratings’ significance to restaurateurs.

    Always a risk, but the best restaurants will embrace the disclosure system and promote their excellent results.

    The Times story notes that in Los Angeles, the letter system has been in effect for more than a decade. According to a 2007 study by the county’s health department, 91 percent of the populace likes the letter-grading plan. But one speaker, Robin Werteheimer, said that restaurateurs in New York “are not Los Angeles,” adding that “most of their buildings are not 200 years old, and most of them are not next to empty lots with hundreds of rats. It would be nice if the city would clean up those lots.”

    Cleveland has new on-line access to restaurant inspection reports, but some are already demanding information on the door.

    The New Brunswick Health Department makes all restaurant inspection report cards available to the public on the provincial government website. They can be found at www.gnb.ca under Food Premises Inspection Results.

    The province started posting inspection reports on its website in 2007, mainly as a way for restaurant customers to keep an eye on food service establishments.

    In Wisconsin, Nancy Eggleston, Wood County environmental health and communicable disease supervisor, said the state will begin the switch from paper to paperless forms of restaurant inspection records, and counties will have the option of placing the inspections on a Web site to make them easily available to the public.

    And that’s just one weekend worth of stories. People like this stuff. No politician wants to say, “you, citizen, can’t have this information.” The challenge is to provide the disclosure results in a fair and meaningful manner.
     

    Your rating: None (2 votes)
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: September 12th, 2008 - 3:48pm by Doug Powell

    I’m in Kansas now, and while the InterTubes are sometimes broken, we’ve generally progressed beyond the stagecoach. UPS is a frequent guest at our mini-mansion on the hill.

    I’ve taken to describing the delay in public advisories and test results in the Canadian listeria outbreak as being due to the time it takes to send samples by stagecoach to the national lab in Winnipeg. Unfortunately, a story in the K-W Record confirms this.

    Dr. Don Low, medical director of Ontario's provincial lab in Toronto, has finally joined me in calling the delay in test results when listeria emerged in mid-July, “inexcusable.”

    "It is inexcusable to wait that number of days in order to get an answer back. The (Ontario) public health lab should be doing it. That has to change."

    Meat samples travelled first from Toronto to a Health Canada lab in Ottawa, arriving on July 24, where they were tested for listeriosis.

    It took until Aug. 5 -- 12 days -- for results to come back positive.

    The samples were then shipped to Winnipeg's national lab for "genetic fingerprinting" to determine whether the same strain of listeriosis in the meat matched blood samples from the victims.

    Those test results, essential for tracking the source of the outbreak, took another 10 days to reach Toronto Public Health, says Dr. Vinita Dubey, the city's associate medical officer of health.

    When a salmonella outbreak hit the Southern U.S. only a month before Canada's meat outbreak, testing was completed and public warnings were issued in a few days.

    Meanwhile, Canadian politicians and bureaucrats were congratulating themselves on how well the system worked. What an embarrassment.

    But don’t expect to hear any such criticism from the meat inspectors union. Instead, they launched a website and some public campaign during the Canadian election to hire 1,000 more meat inspectors who apparently will have listeria vision goggles which will allow them to better manage microbial risks. They have a bunch of other political points, all about securing jobs for inspectors, but not once did they mention, hey, people are dead and dying here. There’s too many sick people and we’re interested in having fewer sick people. Nope. Both the political and union leaders protect their own constituencies for political gain.

    As Dr. Low says, it’s inexcusable.
     

    Your rating: None
    Bookmark and Share
    Listeria  |  1 Comment
    Ottawa, Sample, Testing, Winnipeg