Health officials are working to contain outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in both Bulgaria and South Korea this week.
The World Organization for Animal Health reported that one cow, eight pigs, 14 sheep and 12 goats tested positive for the disease in the Burgas region in Bulgaria. According to Meatingplace, the European Union went into protective mode after a wild boar near the Turkish border tested positive for the disease, which only in extremely rare cases can pose a risk to humans, but is highly contagious and catastrophic for livestock.
“A ban on livestock movement and restrictions on the trade in meat in and from these areas is now in force,” Meatingplace reported. ”None of these regions are major players in livestock or meat trade, but if the EU cannot convince its overseas customers that the infection has been confined to a region there is the risk that the EU’s meat export trade could be affected by import bans.”
In South Korea, agriculture officials are struggling to contain an ongoing outbreak that has forced the country to cull around 12 percent of its swine population and significant numbers of cattle.
“The outbreak is the most serious in Korea’s history,” Kim Jae-hong, a veterinary science professor at Seoul National University, told The Wall Street Journal Tuesday. “It is hard to predict when we can contain the spread of the disease, but the most important thing right now is to control movement in and out of the farmhouses that are affected, and thoroughly disinfect the cars around the area.”
South Korea is also actively monitoring the spread of avian flu among chicken farms–avian flu does pose a risk to humans. Two weeks ago officials confirmed an outbreak of the H5N1 influenza virus at two farms. Officials culled 200,000 birds to stop the spread of disease.
All Food Safety (ServSafe, NRFSP, NEHA and Super SafeMark) and Responsible Alcohol Vendor (TIPS & ServSafe Alcohol) Classes have been rescheduled due to the winter weather warning and road closures by the Alabama & Georgia Department of Transportation.
Responsible Alcohol Vendor Class (TIPS) - Birmingham, Alabama – Monday, January 10th class rescheduled to Monday, January 17, 2011.
Food Safety Training Classes – Birmingham, Alabama – Tuesday, January 11th classes rescheduled date is Monday, January 31, 2011.
Food Safety Training Classes – Atlanta, Georgia – Wednesday, January 12th classes rescheduled date is Wednesday, February 2, 2011.
All registrations will be moved to these class dates. All study guides with passwords will be valid for February Classes. If you have any questions feel free to contact us via email or telephone.
HRBAudit
email@hrbaudit.net – email
205.924.3399 – Alabama Office
404.507.2418 – Georgia Office
Customer complaints about discolored hamburger with an off odor prompted a recall of about 226,400 pounds of ground beef, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced late Monday.
Frozen products from One Great Burger, an Elizabeth, NJ-based company, are subject to the Class II, Low Health Risk recall.
The beef was distributed to institutions in Oregon and California. No illnesses have been linked to the spoiled meat.
The FSIS investigation of the customer complaints uncovered evidence that the establishment repackaged and recoded returned products and sent them out for further distribution to institutional customers, the FDA said in a news release.
FSIS said it must consider the products to be adulterated and has acted to remove the products from commerce. FSIS is continuing to investigate.
The products being recalled are 20 lbs. boxes of “ONE GREAT HAMBURGERS” with “ITEM #02044″ labeled on the front as well as “KEEP FROZEN.”
Each box bears establishment number “EST. 34575″ within the USDA mark of inspection.
The products were produced between January 2010 and May 2010 and contain “PACKED ON” dates ranging from July 2010 to November 2010.
FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer available to consumers.
A California company has recalled three kinds of snack foods because they may be contaminated with Salmonella.
La Placita Botanas Mexicanas, Inc. of South El Monte, California announced it was recalling its Wheat Snacks with Chile, Potato Chips with Chile, and Corn Churritos with Chile after samples of bulk ingredients revealed evidence of contamination.
The problem was discovered during an inspection of the manufacturing plant by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. No illnesses have been reported to date.
The snacks, which were distributed primarily in Southern California through retail stores, are packaged in clear plastic bags with a label sticker containing the product names and UPC code:
– “Doraditas con chile – UPC: 7-90274 00011-9″
– “Chinacos con chile – UPC: 7-90274 00121-5″
– ”Chicharrines duranguenses con chile – UPC: 7-90274 00261-8″
– “Palitos tapatios con chile – UPC: 7-90274 00251-9″
– ”Anillos michoacanos con chile – UPC: 7-90274 00351-6″
None of the snack packages carry production codes, best-by-dates, or use-by-dates.
In a news release, the company said it is is working closely with the FDA and its suppliers to identify the cause of the problem. It also said that in the future, its products will carry production codes.
Consumers who have the snacks can to return them to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact La Placita at 626-452-0883, Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m..
Any time something big happens, there are ramifications. With the President’s signature this week, the biggest shake up in food safety in 70 years became reality.
But that reality includes the fact that the country’s debt just went over the $14 trillion mark and the trajectory continues skyward. Food safety will be just so many words on paper without a plan to implement and fund it.
It was no surprise to see another Republican stepping into a new leadership position in the House question the $1.4 billion the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) might need to implement the new law.
A woman I worked for during my public affairs career taught me that you have to stop thinking that you will ever get elected officials all on the same page, but rather that you should deal with them like they are in a parade. It’s like every time you see one of them, it’s the first time.
So when we hear Jack Kingston, the smooth-talking son of Savannah who will be chairing the House subcommittee charged with FDA’s budget, say 99.99 percent of our food is safe … well, that’s just the way it goes on the parade route.
Any one who wants to see the federal food safety plan implemented from this day forward must accept and even make use of the fact that Kingston is playing his role in the House, just as Tom Coburn did in the Senate.
For example, the food safety bill Coburn offered made much about cooperative planning and the organizational structure of FDA and USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service.
That’s why even though Coburn’s ideas are not in the new food safety law, implementing it should include some ideas outside the bill. One smart thing to do would be to end the dual jurisdiction maze, a suggestion made in Food Safety News this week by Dr. Richard Raymond, who served as USDA’s Under Secretary for Food Safety during the Bush Administration.
The way jurisdiction between USDA and FDA has evolved is not only confusing, it makes the federal government look silly. A chicken sandwich with two slices of bread falls under FDA jurisdiction, but FSIS must provide daily inspection for an open-faced chicken sandwich.
FDA and FSIS should be able to agree on some rational alignment of duties, and then do some trading. Anything that requires legislative authority could be added to the next Farm Bill.
Raymond recommended that anything needing continuous inspection should stay with FSIS. He adds all seafood–the last Farm Bill added catfish–so USDA’s responsibilities would include all animals and animals products including eggs, cheese and milk. FDA would take over everything else, including all those products that have meat or cheese as ingredients. Those Canadian bacon or pepperoni pizzas and chicken noodle and vegetable beef soups would all fall under FDA jurisdiction.
Raymond argues persuasively that if FSIS has inspected the beef “on the hoof,” why must it be again inspected just because it is being used as an ingredient in a product that is being cooked to a temperature that kills bacteria.
Taking care of dual jurisdiction is politically possible. A single food safety agency for the U.S. is probably a bridge too far, especially coming anytime soon after the food safety bill that just passed.
But the planning and cooperation Coburn wants to see would be achieved in a big way with a pact to end dual jurisdiction.
Finally, the funding issue is the elephant in this room, just as it is in every room in Washington, D.C. As a number of experts have now told me, the industry, consumers, and employee unions all oppose going to a privately funded or fee-based food safety inspection program.
The meat industry does not want to have to add those costs to what it charges consumers, even if it would only be a penny or two a pound.
Consumers do not want to pay the bill and union members doing the inspections do not want to feel as if they are working for the business that is paying the costs of inspection.
The food business, depending upon what is included in production and processing, is about a $1 trillion industry.
It seems like it should be possible to slice off a little of that $1 trillion to fund the inspection scheme, for the sake of consumer confidence if for nothing else.
All the interest groups that supported the food safety bill should be thinking about how food safety is funded. Somehow it just does not seem right that the cost of inspecting the food we eat today should be paid by our grandchildren when they become taxpayers.
But that’s just me.
After acquiring worldwide rights to the promising E. coli O157:H7 vaccine, Pfizer Animal Health is putting its considerable marketing clout behind the only product known for reducing E. coli O157 shedding and prevalence at the source, inside the cattle.
Madison, NJ-based Pfizer Animal Health acquired global rights for the vaccine in 2010 from Epitopix LLC and early 2011 finds its pushing the product as “an exciting new opportunity for the beef industry,” according to Drovers news source.
Already the subject of large-scale trials by beef giant Cargill, the vaccine is now being marketed and distributed by Pfizer. The product is currently available under conditional license, restricted to use only by veterinarians.
“The beef industry has made significant strides in reducing foodborne pathogens, such as E. coli O157, but it continues to be a significant concern among consumers,” said Dale Grotelueschen, managing veterinarian for Pfizer Animal Health Veterinary Operations. E. coli O157 doesn’t make cattle sick but they are carriers, so the vaccine is seen as a way to help address E. coli O157 at the source, in the animals themselves.
The patented technology in the conditionally licensed E. Coli Bacterial Extract vaccine uses the iron-gathering mechanism common to all E. coli strains to control the prevalence of the bacteria in vaccinated cattle by harnessing the animals’ immune system, Dr. Grotelueschen explained.
Some estimates suggest that the beef industry spends more than $350 million annually on improving beef safety, with much of that effort going toward trying to prevent E. coli. The pathogen is an economically devastating problem to the greater food industry as well, resulting in billions of dollars in lost demand and costs associated with recalls.
Still, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that about 70,000 people are infected with E. coli O157 each year, with many more cases of illness going unreported.
Data from a recently published study indicated that vaccination at the feedlot reduced E. coli O157 contamination among cattle by 85 percent. Of those cattle still positive for E. coli O157, there was a 98 percent reduction in total remaining pathogen load.
Because the vaccine reduces the number of animals with E. coli in their manure, if combined with basic safety practices such as sanitizing hides and carcasses after slaughter, it could go a long way to reduce the risk of E. coli contamination in the food supply. But it remains to be seen whether producers will see the vaccine can be a viable option, because they may not see a direct economic benefit to the added expense of vaccinating their cattle.
E. Coli Bacterial Extract vaccine with SRP® technology continues to be manufactured by Epitopix LLC in Willmar, MN.
