Sofitel

  • Posted: December 16th, 2009 - 7:08am by Doug Powell

    Food is 21st century snake oil. In an era of unprecedented affluence, consumers now choose among a cacophony of low fat, enhanced nutrient staples reflecting a range of political statements and perceived lifestyle preferences, far beyond dolphin free tuna.

    In fall 2000, I contacted Procter & Gamble to ask for the data substantiating the claim that Fit would eliminate 99.9 per cent of bacteria on fresh produce,

    After a bunch of calls to various PR types I got hooked up with some scientists at P&G in Cincinnati, who verbally told me that sample cucumbers, tomatoes and the like were grown on the same farm in California, sprayed with chemicals that would be used in conventional production, and then harvested immediately and washed with Fit or water. The Fit removed 99.9 per cent more, or so the company claimed, because no data was ever forthcoming.??????

    One problem. Many of the chemicals used have harvest after dates, such as the one tomato chemical that must be applied at least 20 days before harvest. Residue data on produce in Canadian stores reveals extremely low levels, in the parts per million or billion. So that 99.9% reduction is really buying consumers an extra couple of zeros in the residue quantity, all well below health limits.

    The Wall Street Journal picks up on this theme today
    , stating that everything from hand-sanitizing liquids to products like computer keyboards, shopping carts and tissues tout that they kill 99.9%, or 99.99%, of common bacteria and fungi.

    But some of these numbers look like the test scores in a class with a very generous grading curve. They often don't include all pesky germs, and are based on laboratory tests that don't represent the imperfections of real-world use.

    Human subjects, or countertops, in labs are cleaned first, then covered on the surface with a target bug. That is a far cry from a typical kitchen or a pair of grimy hands.

    "The 99.99% message is more powerful among consumers than 'antibacterial' or 'germ kill' alone," Maria Lovera, senior brand manager of skin care for Playtex Products Inc., maker of Wet Ones antibacterial wipes, wrote in an email.
    In a study soon to be published, University of New Mexico biochemist Laurence Cole found that in two of three brands' home-pregnancy tests, fewer than two-thirds of pregnancies among women who had missed their periods were detected.

    To cite a 99.9% fatality rate, manufacturers don't have to kill 99.9% of all known bugs. Regulations don't require them to disclose which bugs they exterminate, just that the products are effective against a representative sample of microbes. For instance, many products can't kill Clostridium difficile, a gastrointestinal scourge, or the hepatitis A virus, which inflames the liver. Yet by killing other, more common bugs, they can claim 99.9% effectivene
    ss.
     

    Your rating: None (1 vote)
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: September 5th, 2009 - 1:00pm by Doug Powell

    I’ve already posted on some of the dubious marketing and safety claims that accompanied the original Fit produce wash before it was abandoned by Procter & Gamble in 2001.

    On Monday, the Los Angeles Times takes a look at produce washes out there – such as Veggie Wash, Fit Fruit and Vegetable Wash, Bi-O-Kleen Produce Wash, Earth Friendly Products Fruit & Vegetable Wash and Eat Cleaner All Natural Food Wash and Wipes -- and concludes water is just fine.

    Sandra McCurdy, extension food safety specialist in the School of Family and Consumer Sciences at the University of Idaho in Moscow, Idaho, says that most produce is pathogen-free because it's been washed during processing and because handlers take steps to avoid contaminating the fruits and vegetables they stock in the produce aisle. But if it is not, a thorough rinse under water is usually all that's needed to remove most pathogens.

    Michael Doyle (left), professor and director of the Center for Food Safety at the University of Georgia in Griffin, Ga. (Doyle developed an antimicrobial technology that was licensed earlier this year by the makers of Fit produce wash.) said,

    "If the bacteria get into the tissue during processing, it's too late, it's trapped in the tissue.”

    As for pesticides, there's little scientific evidence to support claims that washes do a better job than water when it comes to removing them, says Anne Riederer, a professor of environmental and occupational health at Emory University in Atlanta, Ga.
     

    Your rating: None
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: August 21st, 2009 - 2:29pm by Doug Powell

    Food is 21st century snake oil. In an era of unprecedented affluence, consumers now choose among a cacophony of low fat, enhanced nutrient staples reflecting a range of political statements and perceived lifestyle preferences, far beyond dolphin free tuna.

    On May 17, 2001, Procter & Gamble announced that it was discontinuing its Fit Fruit & Vegetable Wash in the United States, Canada and Mexico effective September 28, 2001. The company said the market was too small for continued investment.

    But FIT is still out there. And someone e-mailed me about it the other day.

    I’m not up on the current version of Fit being marketed, but in fall 2000, I contacted P&G to ask for the data substantiating the claim that Fit would eliminate 99.9 per cent of bacteria on fresh produce,

    After a bunch of calls to various PR types I got hooked up with some scientists at P&G in Cincinnati, who verbally told me that sample cucumbers, tomatoes and the like were grown on the same farm in California, sprayed with chemicals that would be used in conventional production, and then harvested immediately and washed with Fit or water. The Fit removed 99.9 per cent more, or so the company claimed, because no data was ever forthcoming.

    One problem. Many of the chemicals used have harvest after dates, such as the one tomato chemical that must be applied at least 20 days before harvest. Residue data on produce in Canadian stores reveals extremely low levels, in the parts per million or billion. So that 99.9% reduction is really buying consumers an extra couple of zeros in the residue quantity, all well below health limits.

    No idea what the new Fit is promoting. But pathogens and chemicals in fresh produce need to be controlled on the farm, and in transportation and distribution. 
     

    Your rating: None
    Bookmark and Share
  • Posted: February 1st, 2008 - 4:47pm by Doug Powell

    San Mateo County Director of Environmental Health Dean Peterson said that laboratory tests revealed Thursday that 62 of about 200 people attending a Redwood City-San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce event at Hotel Sofitel on Jan. 24 were infected with norovirus.

    The Examiner reports that health officials had pinpointed either the salmon or chicken, which was served as the evening’s main courses, and that nobody who chose the vegetarian entrée fell sick. Contaminated workers could have been the source.

    Inspectors found evidence that the Sofitel’s staff was re-using dirty towels to wipe down tables, food being kept too hot or too cold and a dishwasher who was touching clean dishes directly after touching dirty dishes. Hotel management immediately corrected the violations.
    Your rating: None
    Bookmark and Share
    Norovirus  |  0 Comments
    California, Sofitel
  • Posted: January 30th, 2008 - 4:31am by Doug Powell

    The Daily Journal in California reports that 45 of 200 guests at a Redwood City-San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce gathering at the Hotel Sofitel last week may have contracted the highly communicable norovirus.

    The chamber was holding its annual dinner and awards recognition banquet, according to the group’s Web site.

    Sofitel spokeswoman Janice Maragakis was cited as saying none of the hotel’s other guests or employees came down ill, but that General Manager Didier de La Ferrier belongs to the chamber and also came down ill. He thought it was simply the flu until the first calls came in.

    The story notes that the Hotel Sofitel has no prior violations or health complaints on record.
    Your rating: None
    Bookmark and Share
    Norovirus  |  0 Comments
    Sofitel