| The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says its inspectors are continuing their investigation at the Sunland Inc. production facility in Portales, NM. That facility, with the capacity to produce six tons of peanut butter per hour, is associated with the current multistate outbreak of Salmonella Bredeney. Sunland expanded its recall to include about 100 brands, including peanut butter and other products made with nuts and seeds. Sunland announced and expanded its recall on Sept. 24 after meetings with personnel from both FDA and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). A complete Sunland recall list is available here, including the brand it makes for Trader Joe's that was originally recalled Sept. 22. The rare serotype of Salmonella has been found in 30 people across 19 states. Salmonella Bredeney is a serious threat to children, the elderly and those with serious infections. Four of the confirmed cases are known to have required hospitalization. No deaths have been reported. © Food Safety News More Headlines from Food Recalls » |
9.26.2012
Sunland's Expanded Recall List Includes About 100 Products
FSIS: Canadian Beef Recalled for E. coli Was Used for U.S. Raw Ground Beef
|
The agency said it made the discovery while conducting standard recall effectiveness checks of all U.S. establishments that received the recalled beef from XL Foods, Inc. (also known as Canadian Establishment 38). "FSIS has reason to believe, based on information provided by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), that beef from cattle slaughtered during the period associated with the recall was produced under insanitary conditions that resulted in a high event period (a period when the trim from carcasses exhibited an unusually high frequency of positive findings for the possible presence of E. coli O157:H7)," said the agency, in a release sent out early Wednesday morning. "Therefore, all products that are non-intact, such as trim and ground beef subject to the recall, as well as all cuts of beef that will be processed into non-intact product, are considered adulterated." FSIS has still not posted a recall on its website, but has instead chosen to use public health alerts to warn the public, a decision that has frustrated some consumer advocates. Here's the basic timeline of the recall, according to FSIS: "FSIS testing of raw boneless beef trim product from Canadian Establishment 038, XL Foods, Inc., confirmed positive for E. coli O157:H7 on September 3, 2012. After alerting the CFIA of the positive results, the agencies launched an investigation including additional testing, and CFIA announced a recall by XL Foods, Inc. of a variety of ground beef products on Sept. 16. FSIS also issued a Public Health Alert (PHA) on September 20, 2012, provided updated information on September 21, 2012, conducted effectiveness checks this week, and notified the public once more through today's PHA. The CFIA has expanded the scope of the recall to now include the production dates of Aug. 24, Aug. 27, Aug. 28 and Aug. 29, 2012 and FSIS has determined that a slaughter date of August 23, 2012 is common to all four production dates." And an explanation of why there has been no recall: "FSIS issues Public Health Alerts to make the public aware of a public health hazard. FSIS is not announcing a recall at this time because the goal of such an action is to have the establishment most directly associated with producing adulterated product remove the product from commerce. In this case, the establishment was XL Foods, Inc., a Canadian firm, and that recall has been initiated in Canada. CFIA is overseeing the effectiveness of the recall in Canada and FSIS is overseeing the effectiveness in the United States. FSIS continues to verify U.S. establishments' use of primal and non-primal cuts associated with the XL Foods recall and will take appropriate action if prohibited activity is found." Retail locations: "While the investigation continues, FSIS will provide information as it becomes available. The products subject to the Canadian recall were distributed to U.S. establishments in the following states: California, Michigan, Nebraska, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin." FSIS will continue to update the retail distribution list posted on FSIS' website here. E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and in the most severe cases, kidney failure. The very young, seniors and persons with weak immune systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness." © Food Safety News More Headlines from Government Agencies » |
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service is alerting the public that whole muscle cuts related to a large, ongoing Canadian E. coli O157:H7 beef recall were used to produce raw ground beef products.9.25.2012
Add to Recalls: SunRidge Farms Nuggets, Chews and Mix
| Energy Nuggets, Peanut Butter Power Chews and Treasure Trove Mix in 10- and 20-pound cases are being recalled by SunrRidge Farms of Royal Oaks, CA because they may contain contaminated peanut butter as an ingredient. Portales, NM-based Sunland Inc. supplied peanut butter contained in the recalled bulk items. After Trader Joe's recalled peanut butter on Sept. 22 supplied by Sunland because health officials linked it to a multistate outbreak of a rare Salmonella strain, Sunland followed with a recall of a long list of its own peanut butter brands. Now companies like SunRidge that used Sunland peanut or almond butters manufactured between May 1, 2012 and Sept. 24, 2012 are doing their own recalls. The SunRidge Farms recall is for 852 ten-pound cases of Energy Nuggets, 1,846 ten-pound cases of peanut butter power chews and 50 cases of 20-pound Treasure Trove Mix. For a complete list of the product codes, item descriptions and other specifics, see the recall announcement. SunRidge Farms is associated with the Falcon Trading Company. © Food Safety News More Headlines from Food Recalls » |
Rebellion in the Heartland Over School Lunch Calorie Reductions
| For the first time since it subjected conscientious objectors to severe calorie restrictions during World War II, the federal government is again experimenting with diet restrictions for schoolchildren. Changes in school lunch programs to get more fruits and vegetables on the menu - and cut the fat and salt - have gained much attention in the last couple of years. But lately, some kids in those lunch lines have been calling attention to another aspect to all the top-down tampering in the school kitchen. Calorie restrictions that limit high school students to about 850 calories are being blamed for growling stomachs and student athletes without the energy to compete. There are indeed signs that students are rising up against these dictates from the National School Lunch program. Kansas, especially Wallace County High School in Sharon Springs, has emerged as ground zero for the movement. Students there have produced "We Are Hungry," a YouTube video that takes on the calorie restrictions head on. Calorie restrictions never seem to go very well for Uncle Sam. The World War II experiment was bust even through the conscientious objectors were willing subjects in the program. The plan was to see how the American men would do on a restricted calorie diet of potatoes, turnips, rutabagas, dark bread, macaroni, milk, chicken toast and jam. This was the kind of food available in war-torn Europe. Psychology Today magazine in a review of the war program last year said that on 1,600 calories a day, men suffered from lethargy, irritability and anxiety. They lost their sex drive and could not concentrate. The magazine said the outcomes were "horrible." The unintended consequences experienced by those conscientious objectors during the war sound very similar to those being reported by students today about the school lunch rationing. "There's just not enough," said Callahan Grund, a 16-year-old football player at Wallace County High School. He told the Wichita Eagle that the food restrictions at school have left him without enough energy to do chores in the morning and participate in football practice in the afternoon. Calorie maximums under the new federal dictates are 650 calories for elementary children, 700 for middle schoolers and 850 for high school students. Many parents are concerned about high school athletes, who can burn 3,000 calories a day. At least one bill has been introduced in Congress to lift the calorie restrictions, which are imposed under the "Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010." It was the same law that dictated changes in the menu mix for school lunches. Until calorie restrictions were written into the school lunch program, American experience with actual caloric reduction regimes has been rare. Food rationing during World War II focused on distribution of scare stocks--like sugar, not calories. General Eisenhower did impose severe calorie restrictions on occupied Germany during the winter after World War II in favor of feeding France, England, and displaced persons who were victims of the Nazis. Many Germans viewed calorie restrictions as punishment for the war, but they were lifted with the post war recovery of agriculture around the world. The new school lunch restrictions are mostly taking the form of portion size. A major purpose of the 2010 act is fighting obesity. Many of the students now objecting to being put on rations say they don't mind the healthier fare; they just can't make it on 850 calories. Reports are also coming in that many students are dropping out of the school lunch program for what ever they can find at the nearest convenience or grocery store. A Wisconsin school district has seen its number of school lunches cut in half by boycotting students. School dietitians say the idea behind the reductions was to spread out calorie intake throughout the day, meaning several small meals at school and home instead of just one big school lunch. © Food Safety News More Headlines from Nutrition & Public Health » |
No Single Source of E coli at XL Foods Inc., CFIA Says
| XL Foods Inc. did not have documentation showing it regularly reviewed or made necessary updates to its beef processing facility in Edmonton, Alberta, according to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. XL is at the center of an ever-expanding beef recall in the U.S. and Canada over possible E. coli O157:H7 contamination that has so far involved more than 250 pounds.  Although critics say the U.S. government has been slow to respond to the E coli threat, it's been Job One for Canadian health officials since the incident began. CFIA said it has not identified any single factor as a source of the E. coli contamination during its recent review of XL operations. It said the combination of several deficiencies could have played a role. "By themselves, each of these findings would not typically signal an immediate concern during the course of normal inspection activities," the CFIA report said. CFIA's review focused on XL's preventive control plan. "The detection of E. coli in slaughter facilities is not uncommon, and plants are expected to have adequate measures in place to monitor higher than normal detection rates and modify control measures accordingly," it said. "This trend analysis was not always conducted consistently at the facility." In addition, deviations were noted from the company's documented E. coli O157:H7 control measures and sampling and testing procedures. The company was unable to demonstrate through its documentation that it regularly reviewed or made necessary updates to its control plan for the facility. XL Foods Inc. has developed a response plan. The CFIA has accepted the company's plan and will monitor corrective actions to verify that they have been implemented effectively. CFIA has issued seven alerts identifying products that are affected by this recall. CFIA continues to collect information from suppliers, distributors and retailers, so there is a possibility that additional products could be identified and further expansions could be issued. The agency is working with its provincial and federal public health counterparts. To date, health authorities have not established a link between this recall and any illnesses. CFIA is working to identify additional products affected by this recall and conduct effectiveness checks to verify that affected product has been removed from the marketplace. The in-depth review focused on the plant's preventative control measures, food safety policies and procedures, laboratory methodology and equipment and quality systems. © Food Safety News More Headlines from World » |
Salmonella in Sunland Peanut Butter - Again
| Having lived in Brisbane for a year, I can testify to the range of fantastical insects and rodent-like creatures there. Beginning in April 1996, some 500 people across Australia were stricken with Salmonella that made its way into peanut butter. At first, investigators focused on chicken; that chickens carry Salmonella has been worn into the public's food safety conscious for decades. But as cases of Salmonella increased across the country and after questioning the sick and the vomiting, an unlikely food source emerged: peanut butter. In the 1996 Australia outbreak, researchers first found the same genetic stain of Salmonella in peanut butter from the homes of some of the sick (unlike fresh produce, the long shelf life of peanut butter provides an advantage for disease detectives). Because the manufacturer retained samples for shelf-life tests, the peanut butter was found to contain the same strain of Salmonella, as did the roasted peanuts from a single supplier. After six months of investigation, Australian researchers came up with a theory: the roasting company had moved and separated the roasted peanuts with an auger, a drill-like machine with a spiraling blade that could lift piles of peanuts, that had been contaminated with mouse feces. Peter Wood, senior lecturer in microbiology at Queensland, University of Technology, Brisbane, was quoted as telling the American Society of Microbiology in 1999 that, "The auger was only used four times because it proved not to be as time-saving as first thought," and the machine had been kept in the company tool yard. During that time, eastern Australia was in the throes of a plague of mice. The rodents nested everywhere, including the tool yard, where their droppings contaminated the auger. When the auger was brought into the plant, it was washed down, but Wood said it was not sanitized before it was used on Jan 10. 1996. Salmonella from the auger was mixed with the peanuts, and contaminated the system. Salmonella is commonly associated with the feces of birds and animals, has been found to survive in soil in almond orchards, and could be introduced at a multitude of stages in the peanut butter-making process. Although processing normally eliminates contamination, several studies following the 1996 Australian outbreak have revealed that the high fat content of peanut butter can actually protect individual bacteria during the heating process. Similarly, in 2006, Cadbury in the U.K. recalled one million candy bars after they were tentatively linked to Salmonella cases stretching over six months. A leaky pipe in the production facility may have been the cause. Maintenance and sanitation, two departments integral in food safety system success, appear to have failed in both outbreaks. Additional outbreaks involving ConAgra (2007) and Peanut Corporation of America (2009) further demonstrated the vulnerability of an invulnerable foodstuff.  Now, 30 persons infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Bredeney have been reported to PulseNet from 19 states linked to Trader Joe's Valencia Creamy Salted Peanut Butter and potentially to other brands of peanut and almond butters made by Sunland, Inc. The Sunland products were manufactured between May 1, 2012 and September 24, 2012. What's worse is that at the same time, CBS reports food manufacturers in Georgia may be dodging a first-of-its-kind law requiring that they inform state food inspectors when their products test positive for contamination, according to an audit of the state's food inspection service.
Guess they never heard of that in New Mexico, where Sunland is based, and brags about a bunch of audits resulting in a big thumbs up. Anyone can talk a good food safety game; and since most food safety is faith-based, the pronouncements from on high are treated with reverence by the consuming public. But the data just isn't there. And if it is, companies and growers need to start making it public until this whole food safety thing goes off into some sort of golden plates religion. Keep the faith. This article originally appeared on Barfblog September 25, 2012. © Food Safety News More Headlines from Opinion & Contributed Articles » |
Rep. Slaughter Calls for Greater FDA Focus on Preserving Antibiotics
| Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) -- the only microbiologist in Congress and a longtime advocate of reining in the use of antibiotics in agriculture -- is again calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to do more to combat the growing problem of antibiotic resistance. The congresswoman released a statement Tuesday after the FDA announced a new internal task force to support the development of new antibacterial drugs, which the agency considers "a critical public health care goal and a priority" because new drugs are not being developed fast enough to outpace the loss of effectiveness among older drugs. Slaughter said that while she thinks the task force is "an important step," she believes the initiative falls short by not focusing on the "need to prevent the emergence of antibiotic-resistant superbugs by preserving antibiotics for human health." "The overuse of antibiotics in livestock production continues to be overlooked by the FDA," said Slaughter. "By failing to address the root cause of antibiotic resistance, the FDA is ensuring that any innovation will be short-lived in the face of an evolving threat to public health. I have introduced legislation that accomplishes this goal and I will continue to fight for its passage in the House." Slaughter's bill, the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA), has more than 100 cosponsors in the House, but has not gained the traction needed to advance in Congress. The legislation would phase in a ban on medically important antibiotics from being used on healthy food-producing animals, while containing to allow their use on the treatment of sick animals. The FDA said its new task force is made up of 19 scientists and clinicians from the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). The group is planning to work with those in academia, industry, professional societies, patient advocacy groups and government agencies to help spur antibacterial drug development. "By establishing this task force, FDA can help make real progress and change the paradigm," said Rachel Sherman, M.D., associate director for Medical Policy in CDER, director of CDER's Office of Medical Policy and co-chair of the task force. "Our hope is that this effort will result in important new breakthroughs in the field of antibacterial drug development and help in the fight against antibiotic resistance." Nowhere in the announcement does FDA mention agriculture as a contributor to antibiotic resistance, but the agency emphasizes that the problem has been brewing for decades. "Research and development for new antibacterial drugs has been in decline in recent decades, and the number of new FDA-approved antibacterial drugs has been falling steadily since the 1980s," explains FDA. "During this time, the persistent and sometimes indiscriminate use of existing antibacterial drugs worldwide has resulted in a decrease in the effectiveness of these drugs. This phenomenon, known as antibacterial drug resistance or antibiotic resistance, has become a serious issue of global concern." © Food Safety News More Headlines from Government Agencies » |