Food Poisoning, Foodborne Illness Information and Research : International Food Safety Network : BarfBlog

I shop at Dillons in Manhattan (Kansas), owned by Kroger. I’ve gotten to know the staff, we talk food safety stuff, and I’ve really enjoyed the few times I’ve chatted with Gale Prince, who used to be head of food safety at Kroger.

But I don’t understand the press release Kroger sent out today about its new line of salads which includes new technology on the packaging that enables customers to learn where the produce was grown as part of Kroger's "Quality You Can Trace" program.

I don’t really care where it was grown. I do care if it was grown in cow shit.

The Kroger's Fresh Selections are the only salads with HarvestMark technology sold in the U.S. today. Each bag carries a 16-digit code shoppers can enter at HarvestMark.com to learn more about the salad's origin, packing location, ingredients, date and time the product was packed.  Customers can also offer their feedback on the product.

The PR BS goes on to say,

"Kroger continues to be a leader in offering customers innovative food safety tools and resources," said Joe Grieshaber, group vice president of Kroger's meat, seafood, deli and produce departments.  …  Food safety is a top priority at Kroger.  Our partnership with HarvestMark makes it easy for customers who are interested to learn more about the food they purchase for themselves and their families. 

This has nothing to do with food safety. A food safety program for leafy greens would provide at retail – or at least through a url – practices on irrigation water testing, soli amendments and human hygiene programs for the workers. Market food safety directly and stop dancing.

Left, is a bag of Dole spring mix, purchased at Dillons. Included on the package is a salad guide that says taste, 4, on the mild to bold scale, and texture is 2 on the tender to crunchy guide.

The label also says the spring mix pairs well with balsamic vinaigrette, crumbled goat cheese, julienne sliced sun-dried tomatoes and a pinch of Mediterranean herbs. It’s thoroughly washed, preservative free and all natural. And Kosher certified and has a recipe for Balsamic vinaigrette.

I want to know if it has E. coli and is going to make me barf. Don't eat poop. And if you do, cook it.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

“If only” is often how statements begin by food safety wannabes who are sure they have stumbled upon a vast conspiracy meant to subjugate society.

If only Monsanto didn’t genetically-engineer seeds …

If only products like milk were served raw and natural …

If only cattle were fed grass, there would be no E. coli O157:H7.

When someone makes such proclamations, or says they speak fact, usually with an air of authority, I immediately think that person is full of it. People who say “trust me” are immediately untrustworthy.

Megan Jacob, Todd Callaway, and T.G. Nagaraja of Kansas State University write about the dietary interactions and interventions affecting Escherichia coli O157 colonization and shedding in cattle in an upcoming issue of Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. It’s not a movie, not a blog, not a pulp fiction, so they sorta have to get it right. And they do, when they write:

“The specific mechanisms responsible for increased or decreased E. coli O157 shedding or survival are not known … results of studies are conflicting or not repeatable, which speaks to the complexity of the hindgut ecosystem, variation in animal feed utilization, and variation within feed products.”

The complete abstract is below.

Escherichia coli O157 is an important foodborne pathogen affecting human health and the beef cattle industry. Contamination of carcasses at slaughter is correlated to the prevalence of E. coli O157 in cattle feces. Many associations have been made between dietary factors and E. coli O157 prevalence in cattle feces. Preharvest interventions, such as diet management, could reduce the fecal prevalence and diminish the impact of this adulterant. Dietary influences, including grain type and processing method, forage quality, and distillers grains have all been associated with E. coli O157 prevalence. In addition, several plant compounds, including phenolic acids and essential oils, have been proposed as in-feed intervention strategies. The specific mechanisms responsible for increased or decreased E. coli O157 shedding or survival are not known but are often attributed to changes in hindgut ecology induced by diet types. Some interventions may have a direct bacterial effect. Frequently, results of studies are conflicting or not repeatable, which speaks to the complexity of the hindgut ecosystem, variation in animal feed utilization, and variation within feed products. Still, understanding specific mechanisms, driven by diet influences, responsible for E. coli O157 shedding will aid in the development and implementation of better and practical preharvest intervention strategies.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Chuck Dodd, a veterinarian in the U.S. Army, currently disguised as a graduate student in Food Science at Kansas State University who spends a lot of time collecting poop (right below, exactly as shown), writes that researchers have now concluded that some cows present a greater risk for beef contamination by shedding higher concentrations of Escherichia coli O157 in their feces.

Some food safety researchers, including me, have begun to label these cows as super-shedders. But that may be a witch hunt, or in this case, a super-shedder hunt.

Escherichia coli O157 remains a significant cause of foodborne illness in the United States. From 1982 to 2002, there were 350 reported outbreaks of E. coli O157 in which 8,598 people became ill. Almost 1,500 were hospitalized and 40 died. During this period, 41 percent of food-related E. coli O157 outbreaks were associated with the consumption of contaminated ground beef. Ground beef that came from cattle. Cattle that may have been shedding very high levels of E. coli O157 in their feces.

Cattle do not get sick if they carry E. coli O157 in their feces. A cow with E. coli O157 looks just like any other cow. In order to discriminate, the feces must be tested. Test methods have improved and now the organisms can be detected at lower concentrations in the feces. The numbers of organisms can also be estimated; hence, food safety researchers are able to separate the super-shedders from the low-shedders. Cattle can also be identified that are not carrying E. coli O157.

Studies have shown that E. coli O157 in cattle feces or on cattle hides is correlated with the detectable presence of E. coli O157 on the carcass. Carcass contamination likely occurs during the hide removal and evisceration process; this leads to the contamination of individual beef products sold at retail. In order to mitigate the risk of E. coli O157 contamination in ground beef, the beef industry employs pre- and post-harvest interventions. Yet some bacteria still make it through the harvest process.

Researchers are now scrutinizing cattle because their feces may have a super-sized dose of E. coli O157. Their theory: if the beef industry can detect and mitigate super-shedders, they can mitigate contamination of beef.

But is super-shedding super-bad? Maybe not.

Cattle with higher concentrations of E. coli O157 in their feces probably pose a higher risk for the eventual contamination of beef; however, the fecal shedding of these organisms comes and goes. Fecal shedding may depend upon host immunity and the environment (neither of which are the cow’s fault). What if a super-shedder on Saturday becomes a low-shedder on Sunday? What if a super-shedder is simply having a bad E. coli day? Does a high fecal concentration of E. coli O157 overwhelm the interventions that exist from farm-to-fork?

Researchers have asked whether the variation in fecal shedding “arises from the inherent stochasticity in transmission dynamics or is a signature of underlying heterogeneities in the cattle population.” Translation: are the differences in fecal shedding simply random or is it because cattle are simply different? Apparently, the fecal shedding of E. coli O157 varies by animal and by day.

Admittedly, due to the transience of E. coli O157 in cattle, a steer may shed a lot on the day of harvest. Nevertheless, if transience is real, then some days cattle may pose a high risk, low risk, or negligible risk.

The new super-shedder hunt may lengthen the path in preventing foodborne illness due to E. coli O157. Some cattle carry E. coli O157 and some don’t. There may be some benefit in knowing which cattle are shedding more than 100,000 E. coli O157 per gram in their feces on a given day, but will this knowledge prevent beef contamination? Perhaps, if it is the day of harvest.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks