Food Safety News

McCormick & Company, Inc. of Hunt Valley, MD, is recalling French’s Original Crispy Fried Onions in various sizes because of the potential growth of Staphylococcus aureus.

According to the recall posted online by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the recall was initiated on March 18, 2024, and is ongoing.

The recalled products were distributed in Arizona and Illinois.

Recalled products:

FRENCH S CRISPY FRIED ONIONS ORIG 16/6 OZ, Case Pack – 16/6 OZ,

• Product Quantity: 6.0 ounce – 3,456 Units
• UPC: 041500220208

FRENCH S CRISPY FRIED ONIONS ORIG 240/26.5 OZ PDM

• Product Quantity: 26.5 ounce – 720 Pouches
• UPC: 041500959030

Consumers should not use this product. Recalled products should be thrown out or returned to their place of purchase.

About Staphylococcus aureus
Staphylococcus aureus is a bacterium that usually causes rapid food poisoning symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, retching, abdominal cramping, and prostration. In more severe cases, headache, muscle cramping and transient changes in blood pressure and pulse may occur. Recovery generally takes two days, and everyone is susceptible. While it is rare, some people have died from such infections, particularly the elderly, infants, and those who were severely debilitated.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Maybe these aren’t mysteries but food science problems that will be quickly solved like all the others.

Or not.

The Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) is a highly contagious disease and often deadly in poultry and now other animals.  

It is all leaving behind the feeling of mystery.

In the recent week, it has brought dead cats and mammal-to-mammal transmissions along with reports of the danger of raw milk consumption.

For example, Michigan public health officials have warned the public that unpasteurized, raw milk can harbor the virus. And, the New York Department of Agriculture told consumers that raw milk does not have the protection pasteurized milk has. 

The pasteurization process involves heating milk to a specific temperature for a specific time. This process kills the bacteria responsible for diseases like campylobacter, listeriosis (listeria), salmonellosis (salmonella), typhoid fever, tuberculosis, diphtheria, brucellosis, and more. 

Pasteurization is an internationally recognized means of preventing food-borne illness outbreaks.

More troubling is the recent journal Emerging Infectious Diseases. Reports from  Iowa, Texas, and Kansas found that the cats had H5N1 in their lungs, brains, hearts, and eyes. 

The findings are similar to those of cats experimentally infected with H5N1, aka highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAI). But, on the Texas dairy farm, they present an ominous warning of the potential for transmission of this dangerous and evolving virus.

Thomas Gremillion of the Consumer Federation of America nailed the fear Thursday, writing for Food Safety News this way: “Epidemiologists have long raised concerns that a ‘bird flu’ variant may adapt to infect humans and cause another pandemic.”

All of these factors caused the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to go public in May, warning people drinking raw, unpasteurized milk are at risk for potentially contracting bird flu, 

The warning contains three elements.

• People drinking raw milk are at risk of contracting avian influenza
• Testing has found high viral loads in the milk of sick dairy cows
• Experts think the bird flu is passing between cows through their milk

FDA’s Formal Warning
The FDA is announcing additional results from our national commercial milk sampling study in coordination with USDA. 

The study includes 297 total retail dairy samples. New preliminary results of egg inoculation tests on a second set of 201 quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-positive retail dairy samples, including cottage cheese sour cream and fluid milk, show that pasteurization effectively inactivates HPAI.

This additional preliminary testing did not detect any live, infectious virus. In addition to preliminary results released late last week on an initial set of 96 retail milk samples, these results reaffirm the assessment that the commercial, pasteurized milk supply is safe.

To ensure the safety of milk-derived products for our youngest populations, the FDA also tested samples of retail powdered infant formula and powdered milk products marketed as toddler formula. All qPCR results of formula testing were negative, indicating no detection of HPAI viral fragments or virus in powdered formula products so no further testing was required for these samples. 

The FDA is continuing to identify additional products that may be tested. The FDA also continues to test samples of pooled raw milk routed to pasteurization and processing for commercial use. This will be used to characterize potential virus levels that pasteurization may encounter and inform studies to validate pasteurization further. 

As this situation evolves, the FDA will continue to consider all ongoing scientific research related to the effectiveness of pasteurization for HPAI in bovine milk. The agency will also continue surveillance of milk production, processing and pasteurization to help ensure the safety of the milk supply. State partners are integral to this process, and the FDA continually works with them.

The FDA continues to advise strongly against the consumption of raw milk and recommends that the industry does not sell raw milk or raw milk products.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

After more than a decade of discussion, the Food and Drug Administration has published a final rule for certain agricultural water used in the production of produce.

The new rule was mandated by the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act.

The FDA says the new rule reflects science and information gleaned from several produce-related outbreaks. The rule specifically addresses potential impacts on water from adjacent and nearby land, which includes the presence of animal feedlots. Such feedlots have been implicated in outbreaks from fresh produce. However, the FDA does not have the authority to go into feedlots during investigations of foodborne illness outbreaks.

The produce industry has had ample time and opportunity to provide input into the final rule, which has been years in the making.

Although it is called the final rule on agricultural water, the rule does not address water used for harvest and post-harvest water, such as that used to wash produce before it is shipped. Such water is used heavily in the production of leafy greens, especially those that are pre-cut and used in packaged salads.

The rule only covers pre-harvest water such as that used to irrigate crops. It does not cover water used in the production of sprouts, which is covered by a separate rule in the Food Safety Modernization Act.

“(The final rule) represents an important step toward enhancing the safety of produce. The revised requirements are intended to enhance public health by improving the safety of water used in produce cultivation. The revisions are also designed to be practical across various agricultural water systems, uses, and practices, while remaining adaptable to future advancements in agricultural water quality science,” according to FDA’s announcement of the final rule.

The final rule replaces certain pre-harvest agricultural water requirements for covered produce, other than sprouts, in the 2015 produce safety rule with requirements for systems-based agricultural water assessments to determine and guide appropriate measures to minimize potential risks associated with pre-harvest agricultural water. Specifically, this rule:

• Establishes requirements for agricultural water assessments that evaluate a variety of factors that are key determinants of contamination risks associated with pre-harvest agricultural water. This includes an evaluation of the water system, water use practices, crop characteristics, environmental conditions, potential impacts on water from adjacent and nearby land, and other relevant factors.
• Includes testing pre-harvest agricultural water as part of an assessment in certain circumstances.
• Requires farms to implement effective mitigation measures within specific timeframes based on findings from their assessments. Hazards related to certain activities associated with adjacent and nearby land uses are subject to expedited mitigation.
• Adds new options for mitigation measures, providing farms with additional flexibility in responding to findings from their pre-harvest agricultural water assessments.

Under the new rule, farms are required to conduct assessments of their pre-harvest agricultural water once a year, and whenever a significant change occurs, to identify any conditions likely to introduce known or reasonably foreseeable hazards into or onto covered produce or food contact surfaces.

Farming operations have a long time to implement changes necessary to meet the requirements of the new rule. Compliance dates for the rule are as follows:

• For very small farms: 2 years, 9 months after the effective date of the final rule;
• For small farms: 1 year, 9 months after the effective date of the final rule; and
• For all other farms: 9 months after the effective date of the final rule

Even though industry has been provided with the opportunity to give input into the writing of the rule, the FDA says it is “committed to taking an ‘educate before and while we regulate’ approach to supporting compliance.”

Along with the rule, the FDA also released a number of fact sheets, including one that provides an overview of agriculture water assessments and mitigation measures, and another that offers more details on factors for conducting these assessments.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

According to the country’s food agency, allergens in food were the main reason for recalls in New Zealand in 2023.

Of 70 consumer-level recalls in 2023, 26 were due to allergens. Milk caused the most with 12, said New Zealand Food Safety.

Microbiological contamination led to 23 recalls, and 14 were due to physical contamination, such as glass, metal, and plastic.

Ten recalls were because of Salmonella Montevideo, and four because of Salmonella Livingstone. A dairy product was recalled because of the non-pathogenic Listeria seeligeri. One recall was because of the possible presence of Hepatitis A. Between June 2022 and July 2023, 39 cases of Hepatitis A were reported. The source of the outbreak was imported frozen berries.

Salmonella tahini incident
Mixed foods, such as meals, pies, pizzas, and snacks, were named in 18 recalls, meat and meat products in 12 recalls, and fruit and vegetables in 11 recalls.

The number of recalls is up from 2022, when 60 notices were published. In Australia, 87 recalls were issued in 2023.

New Zealand Food Safety supported businesses to conduct consumer-level recalls. In total, 48 recalls were for domestically produced foods and 22 for imported foods in 2023.

Salmonella in imported sesame seed-based products was the most significant food safety event of 2023, resulting in 14 recalls affecting 65 products. Recalls were initiated after Salmonella was detected during routine testing by a New Zealand business making tahini products.

“A complex investigation by our food compliance services team – involving product testing and tracing of ingredients through the domestic market – found the contamination was from tahini imported from a Turkish manufacturer,” said Vincent Arbuckle, New Zealand Food Safety deputy director-general.

“The team dug deeper, and subsequent online surveillance and scanning of international food safety issues also identified concerns about products from a manufacturer in Jordan. By the time all the sesame seed-based products were tracked down and removed from sale, we had supported 14 recalls affecting 65 products. And, most importantly, we had no confirmed reports of related illness.”

Raw milk example
Arbuckle said recalls are a sign that the food safety system is working to protect consumers.

“New Zealand’s food safety system has a strong track record of keeping people safe and – given the volumes of food being produced, manufactured, and imported – incidences of related illness remain rare,” he said.

“However, there are occasions when food safety issues occur, and that’s when we work quickly with food businesses to recall the affected product, removing it from the food supply chain and promoting public awareness. It’s important to note that the number of recalls is not an accurate indicator of the level of risk to consumers. Numbers depend on many factors, including regulatory changes, business and public awareness of food-related problems, and reporting of those problems.”

Another highlight from 2023 was the possible presence of Listeria and Campylobacter in raw milk, which led to three recalls. While there were no associated reports of Listeriosis, there were three related cases of Campylobacter infection.

Of the 70 recalls, 43 were due to businesses notifying New Zealand Food Safety of required recall action, and 16 were initiated as part of the agency’s surveillance work, existing investigations, or notifications from overseas government authorities.

In 2023, New Zealand sent 57 communications via the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) or to the INFOSAN Secretariat on 23 events or food safety issues. Thirteen of these were linked to biological hazards.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

While nothing compares to attending the Food Safety Summit in person next week at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, IL, you can still share the experience remotely. Enjoy the chance to watch select sessions streamed live from the Summit at no cost.

On Tuesday, May 7 from 12:30 – 2:30 pm CT a panel of government and industry experts will share their insights during a two-hour workshop on Traceability—Best Practice Sharing.   Traceability programs are an important component of food safety and quality programs. The design and management of these programs has represented challenges and opportunities for companies across the supply chain. FDA’s Final Food Traceability Rule, released in November 2022, introduces regulatory traceability requirements for a range of food products. As the implementation date of January 2026 approaches, companies are identifying needed modifications to their traceability programs, in addition to questions on compliance to the rule. The panelists will share their insights into the implementation of the rule, discuss challenges companies are facing as they prepare for the rule, and review actionable solutions. The session is being sponsored by SafetyChain.  Click here to register for the live streaming. 

Speakers include Tim Jackson, Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor, FDA;  Kathleen O’Donnell, Chief Scientist, Wegmans Food Markets; Rosalind Zils, Vice President and Head of Global Quality Nutrition, Reckitt; Andy Kennedy, Co-Founder, New Era Partners (formerly FDA); Christopher Waldrop, M.P.H., Senior Health Scientist, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA; Michael Lookup, Traceability Lead, Wegmans Food Markets; Patrick Guzzle, Vice President of Food Science and Industry, National Restaurant Association; and Drew McDonald, Vice President of Quality and Food Safety, Taylor Farms

On Thursday, May 9 from 8:00 am – 9:00 am CT Alvin Lee, Ph.D., Director, Center for Processing Innovation, Institute for Food Safety and Health, Illinois Institute of Technology; Purnendu Vasavada, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls; and Brendan Niemira, Ph.D., Research Leader, Agricultural Research Service, USDA will present New Era, Old Problems: Emerging and Re-Emerging Pathogens.

Reported incidence of emerging, re-emerging, less recognized and opportunistic pathogens linked to outbreaks of food and waterborne illness in Europe and the U.S. have been increasing due to changes in etiological agents, hosts and the environment. It is increasingly recognized that many otherwise commensal organisms can become pathogens under right conditions, in a right host and, if consumed in sufficient quantities. Opportunistic pathogens such as Legionella and Mycobacterium that are resistant to disinfection have been link to drinking water outbreaks while Aeromonas spp. have been linked to seafoods. Emerging pathogens such as Streptococcus spp. have posed human risk infection via milk and cattle while over the last decade, foodborne illness due to Noroviruses, Hepatitis A and E viruses, Rotaviruses and Astroviruses have been reported. Positive Hepatitis E RNA detection have been found in many RTE foods, processed meat products, milk and shellfish. With our food increasingly being made from ingredients sourced globally and year-round availability of certain seasonal fresh produce, fruits and vegetables, the RTE and minimally processed foods have allowed the emergence of some of these pathogens with opportunistic tendency to come to the forefront of food safety. More troubling is the incidence of these pathogens in novel food sources.

Speakers will cover how genomics and molecular factors affect microbial pathogenesis, methods for rapid detection, and how microbial evolution and exposure to environmental stressors and interaction of microorganisms within biofilm can potentially change the microbial characteristics and behavior. Learn about their food safety implications and impact on risk management and food safety plans.  The session is being sponsored by Hardy Diagnostics.  Click here to register for the live streaming.

On Thursday, May 9 from 4:15 pm – 5:30 pm CT the FDA and the Alliance to Stop Foodborne Illness will close out their webinar series Food Safety Culture: The Journey Continues Presented by FDA and Stop Foodborne Illness. Celebrate the journey so far and adventures on the horizon! Leaders in the field will discuss the value of ongoing commitment to food safety culture. Prior panelists and new voices will answer questions and examine resources to help drive positive change, inspire food safety champions, and adapt to new challenges.  Speakers include Lone Jesperson, Ph.D., Principal and Founder, Cultivate SA; Vanessa Coffman, Ph.D., Director, Alliance to Stop Foodborne Illness; Conrad Choiniere, Ph.D., Deputy Director for Regulatory Affairs (acting), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA; Megan Kenjora, Senior Manager, Food Safety Culture, The Hershey Company; Ola Afolayan, Director, Global Food Safety and Regulatory, Kellanova; Karen McCarty, Senior Director of Commercial Quality Assurance, Agropur; and Jorge Hernandez, Vice President, Quality Assurance, The Wendy’s Company.  Click here to register for the live streaming.

The Food Safety Summit will take place May 6-9 at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, IL.  To register for the on-site event visit www.foodsafetysummit.com

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is issuing a public health alert because a consumer has reported foreign material in a raw pork chorizo product.

The FSIS is issuing the public health alert to ensure that consumers are aware that this product should not be consumed. A recall was not requested because the product is no longer available for purchase.

The FSIS is concerned that some product may be in consumers’ refrigerators or freezers. Consumers who have purchased this product are urged not to consume them. This product should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase.

The raw pork chorizo items were produced on Feb. 12, but have a best-by date of May 12. The following product is subject to the public health alert:

• 12- ounce vacuum-sealed packages containing “LEAN apco BRAND MEATS ALL NATURAL PREMIUM CHORIZO” with the best-by date of 5/12/24.

The product bears the establishment number “EST. 602” printed inside the USDA mark of inspection on the label. The product was distributed to H-E-B grocery stores in Texas.

The problem was discovered after the firm notified FSIS that it had received a consumer complaint reporting that pieces of hard plastic and metal were found in the raw pork chorizo product.

There have been no confirmed reports of injury or illness due to consumption of this product. Anyone concerned about an injury or illness should contact a healthcare provider.

Consumers with questions about the public health alert can contact David Roe, operations manager, San Antonio Packing Company at 210-224-5441 or Operations@realchorizo.com.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Cargill Meat Solutions of Hazleton, PA, is recalling approximately 16,243 pounds of raw ground beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA FSIS).

The establishment reported the issue to FSIS after they identified that previously segregated product had been inadvertently utilized in the production of ground beef.

These items were shipped to Walmart retail locations nationwide. FSIS is concerned that some product may be in consumers’ refrigerators or freezers.

The raw ground beef items were produced on April 26-27, 2024.

Recalled products:

• 2.25-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing “93% LEAN 7% FAT ALL NATURAL LEAN GROUND BEEF” with lot code 117 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.
• 1.33-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing four “PRIME RIB BEEF STEAK BURGERS PATTIES” with lot code 118 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.
• 2.25-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing “85% LEAN 15% FAT ALL NATURAL ANGUS PREMIUM GROUND BEEF” with lot code 117 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.
• 2.25-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing “80% LEAN 20% FAT ALL NATURAL GROUND BEEF CHUCK” with lot code 118 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.
• 1.33-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing four “80% LEAN 20% FAT ALL NATURAL GROUND BEEF CHUCK PATTIES” with lot code 118 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.
• 1.33-lbs. plastic-wrapped trays containing four “90% LEAN 10% FAT ALL NATURAL GROUND BEEF SIRLOIN PATTIES” with lot code 118 and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the label.

Product photos can be viewed here.

The products subject to recall all bear the USDA mark of inspection on the front of the product label, and establishment number “EST. 86P” printed on the back of the product label.

As of the posting of this recall, there have been no confirmed reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products. Anyone concerned about an illness should contact a healthcare provider.

Consumers who have purchased these products are urged not to consume them. These products should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase.

About E. coli infections
Anyone who has eaten any of the recalled product and developed symptoms of E. coli infection should seek medical attention and tell their doctor about their possible exposure to the bacteria. Specific tests are required to diagnose the infections, which can mimic other illnesses.

The symptoms of E. coli infections vary for each person but often include severe stomach cramps and diarrhea, which is often bloody. Some patients may also have a fever. Most patients recover within five to seven days. Others can develop severe or life-threatening symptoms and complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

About 5 to 10 percent of those diagnosed with E. coli infections develop a potentially life-threatening kidney failure complication, known as a hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Symptoms of HUS include fever, abdominal pain, feeling very tired, decreased frequency of urination, small unexplained bruises or bleeding, and pallor. 

Many people with HUS recover within a few weeks, but some suffer permanent injuries or death. This condition can occur among people of any age but is most common in children younger than five years old because of their immature immune systems, older adults because of deteriorating immune systems, and people with compromised immune systems such as cancer patients. 

People who experience HUS symptoms should immediately seek emergency medical care. People with HUS will likely be hospitalized because the condition can cause other serious and ongoing problems such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, brain damage, and neurologic problems.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

— OPINION —

The spread of bird flu to dairy cows, along with the discovery of viral fragments in 20 percent of retail milk samples, has turned an outbreak that long vexed poultry farmers into a source of stress for consumers. The situation is fraught with uncertainty as researchers’ understanding of the virus evolves, along with the virus itself. On one point, however, the evidence is in: the U.S. needs better surveillance of pathogens on large livestock farms. 

As of this writing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported confirmed cases of the highly pathogenic avian influenza virus A(H5N1) in domestic livestock in nine states. The virus is “highly pathogenic” to birds, and to many other animals, including seals, but for now, CDC says the risk of infection to the general public “remains low.”

Epidemiologists have long raised concerns that a “bird flu” variant may adapt to infect humans and cause another pandemic. When an H5N1 bird flu virus was first detected in 1996, it went on to infect nearly a thousand people with over a 50 percent death rate. In 2009, an avian influenza virus that jumped to pigs—swine flu—caused an estimated 12,469 deaths in the United States. The A(H5N1) virus has yet to result in a confirmed human death or serious illness. However, its lethality in wild life populations, and its widespread transmission between many species of mammals, including dairy cows, have raised concerns. 

Exposure to infected dairy cows presumably caused the most recently confirmed case of human illness, reported by Texas officials on April 1. An earlier 2022 case, in Colorado,  involved exposure to infected poultry. Both of those cases were reportedly mild.  But influenza viruses are notorious for shapeshifting. The risk of A(H5N1) morphing into a pathogen that spreads easily between humans, with more serious health consequences, justifies a vigorous surveillance program to track where the virus is cropping up, how it is changing, and under what conditions it is spreading. 

Unfortunately, we are missing a critical component of that surveillance — on the farm. Authorities with USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) have issued an order requiring mandatory testing of A(H5N1) in dairy cattle that cross state lines. But we need a broader sampling program. In addition to insights into all of the cows that stay in their home states, federal authorities should be pulling samples from other species, particularly pigs, which many experts see as a critical bridge between flu viruses that kill birds and people.  

USDA has authority to require testing, at least for animal diseases. Federal statutes give the agency the power to “carry out operations and measures to detect, control, or eradicate any pest or disease of livestock (including the drawing of blood and diagnostic testing of animals), including animals at a slaughterhouse, stockyard, or other point of concentration.” 7 U.S.C.A. § 8308. Concentrated hog and other concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), i.e. the source of the vast majority of all animal livestock and animal products consumed in the United States, presumably fall under “other points of concentration.” So USDA would seem to be on firm legal footing were it to implement an A(H5N1) testing requirement for hog farms. The law requires USDA to compensate farmers for testing costs, but if costs are preventing USDA from conducting critical surveillance to prevent the next pandemic, it should ask Congress for more money. 

The pork industry may protest that A(H5N1) is not a disease that affects hogs, and that testing hogs for the virus would really amount to a public health surveillance program. To the extent this characterization is correct, it poses a problem, because the federal government lacks authority to require, or itself conduct, on-farm public health surveillance. Why are federal officials empowered to go on-farm to detect animal diseases, but not human diseases? Congress needs to address this absurd discrepancy. 

Bird flu aside, public health officials’ lack of authority to conduct basic epidemiological surveillance on farms affects food safety.  Recent investigations in which the animal livestock industry refused to cooperate with federal requests for microbiological sampling include a Salmonella outbreak linked to pork, and an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 infections linked to romaine lettuce suspected to be contaminated with manure from an adjacent feedlot that hosted over 100,000 cattle. Whole genome sequencing of samples from the hog and cattle operations implicated in these outbreaks, and countless others, may have yielded important clues about the outbreaks’ origins, and how to avoid similar food safety breakdowns. But under the current oversight regime, livestock producers simply do not have an incentive to submit to sampling requests. 

Fortunately, there are efforts underway to fix this problem. My organization, Consumer Federation of America, has joined other consumer advocates in supporting the Expanded Food Safety Investigation Act. The bill, now endorsed by 10 members of Congress across both houses, would give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the authority to conduct microbiological sampling on CAFOs for the purposes of investigating a foodborne illness outbreak or any other public health need. 

So far, the industry has not had to grapple seriously with requests to explain its opposition to seemingly common-sense measures like the Act. But as new pathogens like the A(H5N1) virus emerge, demand for reform will grow. Rather than reflexively obstructing efforts to increase transparency, livestock industry leaders should join in the conversation and help guide the development of effective pathogen surveillance protocols on-farm.

In the meantime, consumers can protect themselves from the A(H5N1) virus in food by avoiding raw milk, and practicing the “four core” food safety handling practices for meat and poultry, including eggs. For workers, CDC has issued guidelines on the use of PPE.

With luck, the A(H5N1) virus will remain innocuous to humans and soon leave the public eye. However, we should not wait for a crisis to begin establishing critical public health infrastructure. That infrastructure includes policies to effectively conduct on-farm surveillance of human illness causing pathogens.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Sometimes a bill about planting potatoes is simply about planting potatoes.

In Colorado, where the Legislature ends on May 8, a bill concerning the planting of uncertified potatoes is already on the governor’s desk.

Colorado potato growers plant more than 52,000 acres annually to produce more than 1 million tons of potatoes. The crop contributes more than $335 million to the state economy.

The emergence of the Potato Virus Y is now a threat to the Colorado potato crop. Testing the seed stock of uncertified potatoes before they are planted would protect the crop and limit the spread of the virus.

Limiting the spread of Potato Virus Y and other potato diseases is necessary to protect Colorado’s potato growers, agriculture industry and economy.

The bill requires uncertified potato seed stock to be tested and approved before planting. It increases state workload and potentially state revenue on an ongoing basis.

Summary
The bill amends the Colorado Potato Seed Act to require potato growers to submit any uncertified potato seed stock to the certifying authority, the Department of Agriculture (CDA), for testing before planting. The CDA must then approve the uncertified potato seed stock if it meets standards established by the Commissioner of Agriculture.

State revenue
Violations of the Colorado Seed Potato Act are subject to fines collected by the CDA when civil penalties are issued. This may increase revenue for the department, but any revenue increase is expected to be minimal. 

State expenditures
The bill minimally increases the workload in the CDA, in conjunction with Colorado State University, to test uncertified potato seeds. Workload may also increase to address any violations of the act. This increase is absorbable within existing appropriations. The bill takes effect 90 days following adjournment of the General Assembly sine die, assuming no referendum petition is filed.

The bill itself states that:

(I) The potatoes were grown and stored as part of that grower’s farming operations and the requirements of subsection (2)(b) of this section have been met; or

(II) The uncertified potatoes are no more than one generation from certified parent potatoes or qualified parent potatoes, and the potato grower submits the uncertified potato seed stock to the certifying authority of colorado for testing.

(b) (I) A potato grower who plants intends to plant uncertified potatoes according to paragraph (a) of this subsection (2) may plant progeny from that seed in additional years if, in each additional year, the grower submits the must submit the uncertified potato seed stock to the certifying authority of Colorado for testing and before planting.

(II) The certifying authority of Colorado shall approve the uncertified potato seed stock for planting. The certifying authority of Colorado shall approve the seed stock if it meets the standards for such stock as established by the commissioner by rule.

(The) Act subject to petition – effective date. This act takes effect at 12:01 a.m. on the day following the expiration of the 90 days after the final adjournment of the general assembly, except that if a referendum petition is filed under section 1 (3) of Article V of the state constitution against this act or an item, section, or part of this act within such period, then the act, item, section, or part will not take effect unless approved by the people at the general election to be held in. November 2024 and, in such case, will take effect on the date of the governor’s official declaration of the vote thereon.

The potato virus did unite lawmakers. More than two dozen bipartisan members signing on as sponsors 

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The European Commission has opened a comment period as part of plans to change the current set-up and establish EU reference laboratories (EURLs) in public health.

The call for applications covers three EURLs. The first is an EURL for food and waterborne bacteria; the second is for food, water, and vector-borne helminths and protozoa; and the third is for food and waterborne viruses.

EURLs will support national reference laboratories and promote good practice and alignment by member states on diagnostics, testing methods, and the use of specific tests for the surveillance, notification, and reporting diseases. Other duties include external quality assessments, scientific advice, technical assistance, and training.

Three labs in revised set-up
The network of EURLs for public health will be coordinated by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).

The foodborne and waterborne bacteria EURL will support members of the laboratory sub-network of ECDC’s European Food- and Waterborne Diseases and Zoonoses Network (FWD-Net). Salmonella, Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter, Shigella, Vibrio, and Yersinia are pathogens covered.

The food, water, vector-borne helminths, and protozoa EURL include Echinococcus, Toxoplasma gondii, Trichinella, and Plasmodium. Input on other parasites, such as Cryptosporidium, Giardia lamblia, and Taenia solium, may also be requested. In the case of a multi-country outbreak, the EURL will be asked to provide information, guidance, and support to ECDC on microbiology-related matters.

For the food and waterborne viruses, EURL, hepatitis A, and hepatitis E are the two main agents. If there is an EU-level need with public health relevance, this EURL may be asked for advice.

Labs in EU member states and European Economic Area (EEA) countries have until Aug. 14 to apply. Results will be announced in September. A webinar for interested labs will be held in mid-May.

Current situation
The current EURL for Salmonella is the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM); for Campylobacter, it is the Swedish Veterinary Agency, and the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES) holds the role for Listeria.

The Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) in Italy is the EURL for parasites and E. coli. Livsmedelsverket (the Swedish Food Agency) is EURL for foodborne viruses. 

EURLs in six areas of public health, including antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in bacteria and high-risk, emerging, and zoonotic bacterial pathogens, have already been chosen after a call in 2023.

Statens Serum Institut (SSI) in Denmark will lead the EURL for public health on AMR in bacteria, however work will not include Salmonella and Campylobacter, and Germany’s Robert Koch-Institut (RKI) heads-up the consortium on bacterial pathogens, such as anthrax, brucellosis, leptospirosis, Q fever, rickettsiosis, and tularaemia. The EURLs apply until March 26, 2031.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Health officials in a Belgian city have identified the source of pork tapeworm infections at a school.

Department Zorg said that after an extensive search, the person behind the infections was found at Het Molentje primary school.

Around 10 cases have been discovered in primary school children in the past year.

Investigations revealed this person has not been contagious since the summer of 2022 and contracted the tapeworm abroad. The pork tapeworm, also called Taenia solium, is very rare in Belgium and Europe, and cases of it are often linked to eating contaminated food in other countries.

No further risks
MRI screening was organized for students in the grades of infected children to detect undiscovered cases. MRI screening will also be offered to students from other years. This allows pupils to see if they have been infected in the past.

Joris Moonens, a spokesperson for Departement Zorg, said: “We were almost certain that there were no longer any infectious people present at the school and that the infections discovered last year must have happened in the past. We have now also been able to identify which person involved with the school was a carrier of a pork tapeworm and could have infected other people. Therefore, we can fully reassure the parents and the school that there are no longer any contamination risks.”

Previous advice to parents was to see a doctor if their child had unexplained and prolonged headaches, vision problems, vomiting, or epilepsy.

A tapeworm can develop in the small intestine when people eat contaminated and undercooked pork. Cysticercosis can occur when Taenia solium tapeworm eggs are ingested. People with poor hygiene who have taeniasis will shed tapeworm eggs in their feces, which might contaminate their environment. Cysticercosis occurs after a person swallows tapeworm eggs. The larvae get into tissues such as muscle and brain and form cysts.

The main way to prevent cysticercosis is to wash hands with soap and warm water after using the toilet and before handling food. One way to prevent taeniasis is to cook meat to a safe temperature of 145 degrees F for whole cuts, except poultry, and 160 degrees F for ground meat.

Role of lightly cooked bacon discussed in the case report

Meanwhile, poor handwashing and a lifelong preference for soft bacon were linked to a man’s illness in the United States.

The study highlighted the case of a 52-year-old man with a medical history of chronic migraines and no recent travel or farm exposures, who suffered from neurocysticercosis from undercooked bacon that presented as a change in his usual migraine headaches.

Neurocysticercosis is caused by Taenia solium when cysts embed within the nervous system. Cysticercosis is prevalent in developing countries, but developed countries are seeing more cases due to increased travel and immigration, according to the American Journal of Case Reports study.

Scientists speculated cysticercosis was transmitted via autoinfection due to improper handwashing after the man had contracted taeniasis from his eating habits.

The patient was treated with antiparasitic and anti-inflammatory medications, which led to regression of lesions and improvement of headaches.

“This case illustrates that neurocysticercosis should be considered when an existing neuropathological condition displays a change in presentation or requires a change in therapeutic management, even without obvious risk factors,” said researchers.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Centennial General Partner Inc. is recalling Centennial Food Service brand Ground Pork because of pieces of metal in the product.

According to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), recalled products were sold in Alberta, British Columbia and Northwest Territories in Canada.

Recalled product:

BrandProductSizeCodesUPCCentennial Food ServiceGround Pork5 kg54655
Production Date:
2023 NO 06
2023 NO 08None

Hotels, restaurants, institutions and consumers should not use, sell, serve or distribute the affected product.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The 56th Arizona Legislature adjourned Sine Die, which is about a bill that failed to pass.

House Bill 2244 would have added meat labeling to Arizona’s Pure Food Control Act. It would have prohibited a person from misleading food.

 Arizona Rep. Quang Nguyen, R-Prescott Valley, introduced HB 2244 to impose stricter labeling regulations.

His bill sought to stop “misrepresenting” food items not derived from traditional livestock or poultry as meat or animal products. 

This legislation would have applied to lab-grown meat created from the cells of animals as well as plant-based meats or synthetic alternatives derived from insects or other sources.

“I’m not banning anything,” Nguyen said. “I’m just saying, ‘Hey, I want to be able to walk in the grocery store as a consumer and see this is lab-grown, this is bugs, this is plant-based.’ That’s all.”

Nguyen said the issue is a matter of transparency. Though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has established labeling standards, Nguyen sees them as insufficient in informing consumers about the source of lab-grown meat.

As amended, the food code would read: “Products not derived from livestock or poultry; misrepresenting or misbranding as meat or poultry; prohibition; violation; civil penalty; definitions:

“A person who places a label on a food product may not intentionally misbrand or misrepresent a product that is not derived from livestock or poultry as meat, a meat food product, poultry or a poultry product through any activity, including misbranding or misrepresenting by doing any of the following:

1. Affixing a false or misleading label on meat, a meat food product, poultry or a poultry product.

2. Using a term that is the same as or deceptively similar to a term that has been used or defined historically about a specific meat food product or poultry product.

3. Representing a product as meat, a meat food product, poultry or a poultry product if the product is a cell-cultured food product.

4. Representing a product as meat, a meat food product, poultry or a poultry product if the product is a synthetic product derived from a plant, insect or other source.”

.HB 2244 did pass the House, 35 to 20.  At that point, the bill was sent over. to the Senate. But just a day later, the vote failed because of a 15 to 15 vote.

It did not appear to win votes on reconsideration to become law, although it was alive very late in the session.

It means the Arizona battle may not be over. It has already brought Drake Jamali, a Good Food Institute lobbyist, to the state.

He warned against using “patties” or “nuggets,” even when packaging indicates the product’s nature.

But 2244 was not the most harsh measure this year. HJB 2121, introduced by Rep. David Marshall, R-Snowflake, sought to ban the sale or production of lab-grown meat altogether, but the bill did not survive the Senate.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

A Salmonella outbreak in Denmark has now affected 40 people with ground meat suspected as the source.

In less than a month, at least 40 people have been infected with the same type of Salmonella, said the Statens Serum Institut (SSI). It was previously reported that 12 people were sick in the Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak.

Patients are 24 men and 16 women aged between less than 1 year old and 83 years old, with a median age of 36.

The SSI, Danish Veterinary and Food Administration (Fødevarestyrelsen), and DTU Food Institute continue investigating the outbreak.

Suspicion falls on meat sold at retail
Officials said the fact that patients live in different regions suggests the source is food sold in supermarkets across the country.

“Although we do not yet know what has made people sick with Salmonella, we want consumers to pay extra attention to good kitchen hygiene. It is important to cook ground (minced) meat thoroughly, keep ready-to-eat items separate from the raw meat, and not to taste raw meat,” said Annette Perge from the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration.

Investigations so far show that patients have not been traveling before illness, have not eaten at the same restaurants and have not taken part in any joint events.

SSI is performing whole genome sequencing of patients’ Salmonella isolates and interviewing patients or their relatives to help identify the source of infection.

Whole genome sequencing of bacteria isolated from patients revealed samples were closely related, and all belonged to sequence type 19.

In 2022, 899 Salmonella cases were recorded in Denmark, which was up from 2021 and 2020 but down from 2019. Salmonella caused 11 outbreaks in 2022, with three of them part of international incidents. 

About Salmonella
Food contaminated with Salmonella bacteria does not usually look, smell, or taste spoiled. Anyone can become sick with a Salmonella infection. Infants, children, seniors, and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk of serious illness because their immune systems are fragile, according to the CDC.

Anyone who has developed symptoms of Salmonella food poisoning should seek medical attention. Sick people should tell their doctors about the possible exposure to Salmonella bacteria because special tests are necessary to diagnose salmonellosis. Salmonella infection symptoms can mimic other illnesses, frequently leading to misdiagnosis.

Symptoms of Salmonella infection can include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever within 12 to 72 hours after eating contaminated food. Otherwise, healthy adults are usually sick for four to seven days. In some cases, however, diarrhea may be so severe that patients require hospitalization.

Older adults, children, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems, such as cancer patients, are more likely to develop severe illness and serious, sometimes life-threatening conditions. Some people get infected without getting sick or showing any symptoms. However, they may still spread the infections to others.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

According to a study, food allergen information given online can be lacking or provided in different formats.

Researchers evaluated the accuracy and compliance of information and labeling of substances or products causing allergies or intolerances in food and drink imported from Asia and purchased online in the United Kingdom.

Food allergen issues are a major cause of product recalls worldwide, according to a study funded by Campden BRI and published in Food Control.

The study included 768 randomly selected prepacked products that were put into 16 categories, representing items from 12 Asian countries, sourced from eight UK retailers, including six stores specializing in Asian products and two major supermarkets.

Of these products, 173 had precautionary allergen labeling (PAL), with 24 phrasings identified. PAL is voluntary and intended to communicate the risk of unavoidable, unintentional allergen presence. Example statements included “May contain X”, “May also contain traces of X”, “Made in factory processing X”, and “Produced on a line handling X”.

PALs online contained non-EU and UK allergens such as mango, tomato, and beef.  Of the 16 product categories, cereals and cereal products had the highest incidence of unintended food allergen presence declared as PAL.

Providing allergen information online
Of the 768 products, 256 emphasized or listed in bold type foods causing allergies or intolerances, and 58 emboldened or emphasized more than one but not all such foods in online ingredients lists. No foods causing allergies or intolerances were emphasized in the online ingredients list of 325 products.

Non-EU and UK food allergens were emboldened in online product information in two cases, for tomatoes and candlenuts.

Sampled products were produced by 271 manufacturers and introduced by 56 importers.

One hundred products, covering all included retailers, were purchased for verification between online product information and on-pack product labels during 2022 and 2023. 

After comparing food allergen information on the pack and online, 36 products transferred inconsistencies on the pack to online pages, and 15 were mismatched. Nine did not have any food allergens emphasized online but did on the pack, four had differing allergen information online and on the pack, and three provided PAL in online information but not on the pack.

Laboratory analysis was performed to detect milk and peanut allergens in 77 products. A total of 24 contained unintended allergens, with levels ranging from 0.2 to 6,780 mg/kg. 

“Our findings further support the need for food businesses to adopt and implement robust and effective food allergen management and food safety culture practices,” said researchers.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

 Sources, Characteristics and Identification

E. coli is an archetypal commensal bacterial species that lives in mammalian intestines. E. coli O157:H7 is one of thousands of serotypes Escherichia coli.[1] The combination of letters and numbers in the name of the E. coli O157:H7 refers to the specific antigens (proteins which provoke an antibody response) found on the body and tail or flagellum[2] respectively and distinguish it from other types of E. coli.[3] Most serotypes of E. coli are harmless and live as normal flora in the intestines of healthy humans and animals.[4] The E. coli bacterium is among the most extensively studied microorganism.[5] The testing done to distinguish E. coli O157:H7 from its other E. coli counterparts is called serotyping.[6] Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE),[7] sometimes also referred to as genetic fingerprinting, is used to compare E. coli O157:H7 isolates to determine if the strains are distinguishable.[8] A technique called multilocus variable number of tandem repeats analysis (MLVA) is used to determine precise classification when it is difficult to differentiate between isolates with indistinguishable or very similar PFGE patterns.[9]

E. coli O157:H7 was first recognized as a pathogen in 1982 during an investigation into an outbreak of hemorrhagic colitis[10] associated with consumption of hamburgers from a fast food chain restaurant.[11] Retrospective examination of more than three thousand E. coli cultures obtained between 1973 and 1982 found only one (1) isolationwith serotype O157:H7, and that was a case in 1975.[12] In the 10 years that followed there were approximately thirty (30) outbreaks recorded in the United States.[13] This number is likely misleading, however, because E. coli O157:H7 infections did not become a reportable disease in any state until 1987 when Washington became the first state to mandate its reporting to public health authorities.[14] As a result, only the most geographically concentrated outbreak would have garnered enough notice to prompt further investigation.[15]

The E. coli O157:H7 Bacteria

E. coli O157:H7’s ability to induce injury in humans is a result of its ability to produce numerous virulence factors, most notably Shiga-like toxins.[16] Shiga toxin (Stx) has multiple variants (e.g. Stx1, Stx2, Stx2c), and acts like the plant toxin ricin by inhibiting protein synthesis in endothelial and other cells.[17] Shiga toxin is one of the most potent toxins known.[18] In addition to Shiga toxins, E. coli O157:H7 produces numerous other putative virulence factors including proteins, which aid in the attachment and colonization of the bacteria in the intestinal wall and which can lyse red blood cells and liberate iron to help support E. coli metabolism.[19]

E. coli O157:H7 evolved from enteropathogenic E. coli serotype O55:H7, a cause of non-bloody diarrhea, through the sequential acquisition of phage-encoded Stx2, a large virulence plasmid, and additional chromosomal mutations.[20]The rate of genetic mutation of E. coli O157:H7 indicates that the common ancestor of current E. coli O157:H7 clades[21] likely existed some 20,000 years ago.[22] E. coli O157:H7 is a relentlessly evolving organism,[23] constantly mutating and acquiring new characteristics, including virulence factors that make the emergence of more dangerous variants a constant threat.[24] The CDC has emphasized the prospect of emerging pathogens as a significant public health threat for some time.[25]

Although foods of a bovine origin are the most common cause of both outbreaks and sporadic cases of E. coli O157:H7 infections[26], outbreak of illnesses have been linked to a wide variety of food items. For example, produce has, since at least 1991, been the source of substantial numbers of outbreak-related E. coli O157:H7 infections.[27] Other unusual vehicles for E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks have included unpasteurized juices, yogurt, dried salami, mayonnaise, raw milk, game meats, sprouts, and raw cookie dough.[28]

According to a recent study, an estimated 93,094 illnesses are due to domestically acquired E. coli O157:H7 each year in the United States.[29] Estimates of foodborne acquired O157:H7 cases result in 2,138 hospitalizations and 20 deaths annually.[30] The colitis caused by E. coli O157:H7 is characterized by severe abdominal cramps, diarrhea that typically turns bloody within 24 hours, and sometimes fevers.[31] The incubation period — which is to say the time from exposure to the onset of symptoms — in outbreaks is usually reported as three to four days, but may be as short as one day or as long as 10 days.[32] Infection can occur in people of all ages but is most common in children.[33] The duration of an uncomplicated illness can range from one to 12 days.[34] In reported outbreaks, the rate of death is 0-2 percent, with rates running as high as 16-35 percent in outbreaks involving the elderly, like those have occurred at nursing homes.[35]

What makes E. coli O157:H7 remarkably dangerous is its very low infectious dose,[36] and how relatively difficult it is to kill these bacteria.[37] Unlike Salmonella, for example, which usually requires something approximating an “egregious food handling error, E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef that is only slightly undercooked can result in infection,”[38] as few as twenty (20) organisms may be sufficient to infect a person and, as a result, possibly kill them.[39] And unlike generic E. coli, the O157:H7 serotype multiplies at temperatures up to 44 degrees F, survives freezing and thawing, is heat resistant, grows at temperatures up to 111 degrees F, resists drying, and can survive exposure to acidic environments.[40]

And, finally, to make it even more of a threat, E. coli O157:H7 bacteria are easily transmitted by person-to-person contact.[41] There is also the serious risk of cross-contamination between raw meat and other food items intended to be eaten without cooking. Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. It is for this precise reason that the USDA has repeatedly rejected calls from the meat industry to hold consumers primarily responsible for E. coli O157:H7 infections caused, in part, by mistakes in food handling or cooking.[43]

Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS)

E. coli O157:H7 infections can lead to a severe, life-threatening complication called hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).[44] HUS accounts for the majority of the acute deaths and chronic injuries caused by the bacteria.[45] HUS occurs in 2-7 percent of victims, primarily children, with onset five to 10 days after diarrhea begins.[46] It is the most common cause of renal failure in children.[47] Approximately half of the children who suffer HUS require dialysis, and at least 5 percent of those who survive have long term renal impairment.[48] The same number suffers severe brain damage.[49] While somewhat rare, serious injury to the pancreas, resulting in death or the development of diabetes, can also occur.[50] There is no cure or effective treatment for HUS.[51]

HUS is believed to develop when the toxin from the bacteria, known as Shiga-like toxin (SLT), enters the circulation through the inflamed bowel wall.[52] SLT, and most likely other chemical mediators, attach to receptors on the inside surface of blood vessel cells (endothelial cells) and initiate a chemical cascade that results in the formation of tiny thrombi (blood clots) within these vessels.[53] Some organs seem more susceptible, perhaps due to the presence of increased numbers of receptors, and include the kidney, pancreas, and brain.[54]  By definition, when fully expressed, HUS presents with the triad of hemolytic anemia (destruction of red blood cells), thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), and renal failure (loss of kidney function).[55] As already noted, there is no known therapy to halt the progression of HUS. HUS is a frightening complication that even in the best American centers has a notable mortality rate.[56] Among survivors, at least 5 percent will suffer end stage renal disease (ESRD) with the resultant need for dialysis or transplantation.[57] But, “[b]ecause renal failure can progress slowly over decades, the eventual incidence of ESRD cannot yet be determined.”[58] Other long-term problems include the risk for hypertension, proteinuria (abnormal amounts of protein in the urine that can portend a decline in renal function), and reduced kidney filtration rate.[59] Since the longest available follow-up studies of HUS victims are 25 years, an accurate lifetime prognosis is not readily available and remains controversial.[60] All that can be said for certain is that HUS causes permanent injury, including loss of kidney function, and it requires a lifetime of close medical-monitoring.

Other Medical Complications

Reactive Arthritis

The term reactive arthritis refers to an inflammation of one or more joints, following an infection localized at another site distant from the affected joints. The predominant site of the infection is the gastrointestinal tract. Several bacteria, including E. coli, induce septic arthritis.[61] The resulting joint pain and inflammation can resolve completely over time or permanent joint damage can occur.[62]

The reactive arthritis associated with Reiter syndrome may develop after a person eats food that has been tainted with bacteria. In a small number of persons, the joint inflammation is accompanied by conjunctivitis (inflammation of the eyes), and urethritis (painful urination). Id. This triad of symptoms is called Reiter syndrome.[63] Reiter syndrome, a form of reactive arthritis, is an uncommon but debilitating syndrome caused by gastrointestinal or genitourinary infections. The most common gastrointestinal bacteria involved are Salmonella, Campylobacter, Yersinia, and Shigella. Reiter syndrome is characterized by a triad of arthritis, conjunctivitis, and urethritis, although not all three symptoms occur in all affected individuals.[64]

Although the initial infection may not be recognized, reactive arthritis can still occur. Reactive arthritis typically involves inflammation of one joint (monoarthritis) or four or fewer joints (oligoarthritis), preferentially affecting those of the lower extremities; the pattern of joint involvement is usually asymmetric. Inflammation is common at entheses – i.e., the places where ligaments and tendons attach to bone, especially the knee and the ankle.

Salmonella has been the most frequently studied bacteria associated with reactive arthritis. Overall, studies have found rates of Salmonella-associated reactive arthritis to vary between 6 and 30 percent.[65] The frequency of postinfectious Reiter syndrome, however, has not been well described. In a Washington State study, while 29 percent developed arthritis, only 3 percent developed the triad of symptoms associated with Reiter syndrome.[66] In addition, individuals of Caucasian descent may be more likely those of Asian descent to develop reactive arthritis,[67] and children may be less susceptible than adults to reactive arthritis following infection with Salmonella.[68]

A clear association has been made between reactive arthritis and a genetic factor called the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) B27 genotype. HLA is the major histocompatibility complex in humans; these are proteins present on the surface of all body cells that contain a nucleus and are in especially high concentrations in white blood cells (leukocytes). It is thought that HLA-B27 may affect the elimination of the infecting bacteria or an individual’s immune response.[69]HLA-B27 has been shown to be a predisposing factor in one-half to over two-thirds of individuals with reactive arthritis.[70] While HLA-B27 does not appear to predispose to the initial infection itself, it increases the risk of developing arthritis that is more likely to be severe and prolonged. This risk may be slightly greater for Salmonella and Yersinia-associated arthritis than with Campylobacter, but more research is required to clarify this.[71]

Irritable Bowel Syndrome

A recently published study surveyed the extant scientific literature and noted that post-infectious irritable bowel syndrome (PI-IBS) is a common clinical phenomenon first-described over five decades ago.[72] The Walkerton Health Study further notes that:

Between 5 percent and 30 percent of patients who suffer an acute episode of infectious gastroenteritis develop chronic gastrointestinal symptoms despite clearance of the inciting pathogens.[73]

In terms of its own data, the “study confirm[ed] a strong and significant relationship between acute enteric infection and subsequent IBS symptoms.”[74] The WHS also identified risk-factors for subsequent IBS, including younger age; female sex; and four features of the acute enteric illness – diarrhea for more than 7days, presence of blood in stools, abdominal cramps, and weight loss of at least ten pounds.[75]

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic disorder characterized by alternating bouts of constipation and diarrhea, both of which are generally accompanied by abdominal cramping and pain.[76] In one recent study, over one-third of IBS sufferers had had IBS for more than 10 years, with their symptoms remaining constant over time.[77] IBS sufferers typically experienced symptoms for an average of 8.1 days per month.[78]

As would be expected from a chronic disorder with symptoms of such persistence, IBS sufferers required more time off work, spent more days in bed, and more often cut down on usual activities, when compared with non-IBS sufferers.[79] And even when able to work, a significant majority (67 percent), felt less productive at work because of their symptoms.[80] IBS symptoms also have a significantly deleterious impact on social well-being and daily social activities, such as undertaking a long drive, going to a restaurant, or taking a vacation.[81] Finally, although a patient’s psychological state may influence the way in which he or she copes with illness and responds to treatment, there is no evidence that supports the theory that psychological disturbances in fact cause IBS or its symptoms.[82]

[1]           E. coli bacteria were discovered in the human colon in 1885 by German bacteriologist Theodor Escherich. Feng, Peter, Stephen D. Weagant, Michael A. Grant, Enumeration of Escherichia coli and the Coliform Bacteria, in BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYTICAL MANUAL (8th Ed. 2002), http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ebam/bam-4.html. Dr. Escherich also showed that certain strains of the bacteria were responsible for infant diarrhea and gastroenteritis, an important public health discovery. Id. Although the bacteria were initially called Bacterium coli, the name was later changed to Escherichia coli to honor its discoverer. Id.

[2]           Not all E. coli are motile. For example, E. coli O157:H7 which lack flagella are thus E. coli O157:NM for non-motile.

[3]           CDC, Escherichia coli O157:H7, General Information, Frequently Asked Questions: What is Escherichia coli O157:H7?, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/escherichiacoli_g.htm.

[4]           Marion Nestle, Safe Food:  Bacteria, Biotechnology, and Bioterrorism, 40-41 (1st Pub. Ed. 2004).

[5]           James M. Jay, MODERN FOOD MICROBIOLOGY at 21 (6th ed. 2000). (“This is clearly the most widely studied genus of all bacteria.”)

[6]           Beth B. Bell, MD, MPH, et al. A Multistate Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7-Associated Bloody Diarrhea and Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome from Hamburgers:  The Washington Experience, 272 JAMA (No. 17) 1349, 1350 (Nov. 2, 1994) (describing the multiple step testing process used to confirm, during a 1993 outbreak, that the implicated bacteria were E. coli O157:H7).

[7]           Jay, supra note 5, at 220-21 (describing in brief the PFGE testing process).

[8]           Id. Through PFGE testing, isolates obtained from the stool cultures of probable outbreak cases can be compared to the genetic fingerprint of the outbreak strain, confirming that the person was in fact part of the outbreak. Bell, supra note 6, at 1351-52. Because PFGE testing soon proved to be such a powerful outbreak investigation tool, PulseNet, a national database of PFGE test results was created. Bala Swaminathan, et al. PulseNet:  The Molecular Subtyping Network for Foodborne Bacterial Disease Surveillance, United States, 7 Emerging Infect. Dis. (No. 3) 382, 382-89 (May-June 2001) (recounting the history of PulseNet and its effectiveness in outbreak investigation).

[9]           Konno T. et al. Application of a multilocus variable number of tandem repeats analysis to regional outbreak surveillance of Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 infections. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2011 Jan; 64(1): 63-5.

[10]         “[A] type of gastroenteritis in which certain strains of the bacterium Escherichia coli (E. coli) infect the large intestine and produce a toxin that causes bloody diarrhea and other serious complications.”  The Merck Manual of Medical Information, 2nd Home Ed. Online, http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec09/ch122/ch122b.html.

[11]         L. Riley, et al. Hemorrhagic Colitis Associated with a Rare Escherichia coli Serotype, 308 New. Eng. J. Med. 681, 684-85 (1983) (describing investigation of two outbreaks affecting at least 47 people in Oregon and Michigan both linked to apparently undercooked ground beef). Chinyu Su, MD & Lawrence J. Brandt, MD, Escherichia coli O157:H7 Infection in Humans, 123 Annals Intern. Med. (Issue 9), 698-707 (describing the epidemiology of the bacteria, including an account of its initial discovery).

[12]         Riley, supra note 11 at 684. See also Patricia M. Griffin & Robert V. Tauxe, The Epidemiology of Infections Caused by Escherichia coliO157:H7, Other Enterohemorrhagic E. coli, and the Associated Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, 13 Epidemiologic Reviews 60, 73 (1991).

[13]         Peter Feng, Escherichia coli Serotype O157:H7:  Novel Vehicles of Infection and Emergence of Phenotypic Variants, 1 Emerging Infect. Dis. (No. 2), 47, 47 (April-June 1995) (noting that, despite these earlier outbreaks, the bacteria did not receive any considerable attention until ten years later when an outbreak occurred 1993 that involved four deaths and over 700 persons infected).

[14]         William E. Keene, et al. A Swimming-Associated Outbreak of Hemorrhagic Colitis Caused by Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Shigella Sonnei, 331 New Eng. J. Med. 579 (Sept. 1, 1994). See also Stephen M. Ostroff, MD, John M. Kobayashi, MD, MPH, and Jay H. Lewis, Infections with Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Washington State:  The First Year of Statewide Disease Surveillance, 262 JAMA (No. 3) 355, 355 (July 21, 1989). (“It was anticipated the reporting requirement would stimulate practitioners and laboratories to screen for the organism.”)

[15]         See Keene, supra note 14 at 583. (“With cases scattered over four counties, the outbreak would probably have gone unnoticed had the cases not been routinely reported to public health agencies and investigated by them.”)  With improved surveillance, mandatory reporting in 48 states, and the broad recognition by public health officials that E. coli O157:H7 was an important and threatening pathogen, there were a total of 350 reported outbreaks from 1982-2002. Josef M. Rangel, et al. Epidemiology of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Outbreaks, United States, 1982-2002, 11 Emerging Infect. Dis. (No. 4) 603, 604 (April 2005).

[16]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 61-62 (noting that the nomenclature came about because of the resemblance to toxins produced by Shigella dysenteries).

[17]         Sanding K, Pathways followed by ricin and Shiga toxin into cells, Histochemistry and Cell Biology, vol. 117, no. 2:131-141 (2002). Endothelial cells line the interior surface of blood vessels. They are known to be extremely sensitive to E. coli O157:H7, which is cytotoxigenic to these cells making them a primary target during STEC infections.

[18]         Johannes L, Shiga toxins—from cell biology to biomedical applications. Nat Rev Microbiol 8, 105-116 (February 2010). Suh JK, et al.Shiga Toxin Attacks Bacterial Ribosomes as Effectively as Eucaryotic Ribosomes, Biochemistry, 37 (26); 9394–9398 (1998).

[19]         Welinder-Olsson C, Kaijser B. Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC). Scand J. Infect Dis. 37(6-7): 405-16 (2005). See alsoUSDA Food Safety Research Information Office E. coli O157:H7 Technical Fact Sheet:  Role of 60-Megadalton Plasmid (p0157) and Potential Virulence Factors, http://fsrio.nal.usda.gov/document_fsheet.php?product_id=225.

[20]         Kaper JB and Karmali MA. The Continuing Evolution of a Bacterial Pathogen. PNAS vol. 105 no. 12 4535-4536 (March 2008). Wick LM, et al. Evolution of genomic content in the stepwise emergence of Escherichia coli O157:H7. J Bacteriol 187:1783–1791(2005).

[21]         A group of biological taxa (as species) that includes all descendants of one common ancestor.

[22]         Zhang W, et al. Probing genomic diversity and evolution of Escherichia coli O157 by single nucleotide polymorphisms. Genome Res 16:757–767 (2006).

[23]         Robins-Browne RM. The relentless evolution of pathogenic Escherichia coli. Clin Infec Dis. 41:793–794 (2005).

[24]         Manning SD, et al. Variation in virulence among clades of Escherichia coli O157:H7 associated with disease outbreaks. PNAS vol. 105 no. 12 4868-4873 (2008). (“These results support the hypothesis that the clade 8 lineage has recently acquired novel factors that contribute to enhanced virulence. Evolutionary changes in the clade 8 subpopulation could explain its emergence in several recent foodborne outbreaks; however, it is not clear why this virulent subpopulation is increasing in prevalence.”)

[25]         Robert A. Tauxe, Emerging Foodborne Diseases: An Evolving Public Health Challenge, 3 Emerging Infect. Dis. (No. 4) 425, 427 (Oct.-Dec. 1997). (“After 15 years of research, we know a great deal about infections with E. coli O157:H7, but we still do not know how best to treat the infection, nor how the cattle (the principal source of infection for humans) themselves become infected.”)

[26]         CDC, Multistate Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Infections Associated with Eating Ground Beef—United States, June-July 2002, 51 MMWR 637, 638 (2002) reprinted in 288 JAMA (No. 6) 690 (Aug. 14, 2002).

[27]         Rangel, supra note 15, at 605.

[28]         Feng, supra note 13, at 49. See also USDA Bad Bug Book, Escherichia coli O157:H7, http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodborneillness/foodborneillnessfoodbornepathogensnaturaltoxins/badbugbook/ucm071284.htm.

[29]         Scallan E, et al. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States –major pathogens, Emerging Infect. Dis. Jan. (2011), http://www.cdc.gov/EID/content/17/1/7.htm.

[30]         Id., Table 3.

[31]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 63.

[32]         Centers for Disease Control, Division of Foodborne, Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, Escherichia coli general information, http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/dfbmd/disease_listing/stec_gi.html. See also PROCEDURES TO INVESTIGATE FOODBORNE ILLNESS, 107 (IAFP 5th Ed. 1999) (identifying incubation period for E. coli O157:H7 as “1 to 10 days, typically 2 to 5”).

[33]         Su & Brandt, supra note 11 (“the young are most often affected”).

[34]         Tauxe, supra note 25, at 1152.

[35]         Id.

[36]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 72. (“The general patterns of transmission in these outbreaks suggest that the infectious dose is low.”)

[37]         V.K. Juneja, O.P. Snyder, A.C. Williams, and B.S. Marmer, Thermal Destruction of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Hamburger, 60 J. Food Prot. (vol. 10). 1163-1166 (1997) (demonstrating that, if hamburger does not get to 130°F, there is no bacterial destruction, and at 140°F, there is only a 2-log reduction of E. coli present).

[38]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 72 (noting that, as a result, “fewer bacteria are needed to cause illness that for outbreaks of salmonellosis”). Nestle, supra note 4, at 41. (“Foods containing E. coli O17:H7 must be at temperatures high enough to kill all of them.”) (italics in original)

[39]         Patricia M. Griffin, et al.  Large Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Infections in the Western United States:  The Big Picture, in RECENT ADVANCES IN VEROCYTOTOXIN-PRODUCING ESCHERICHIA COLI INFECTIONS, at 7 (M.A. Karmali & A. G. Goglio eds. 1994). (“The most probable number of E. coli O157:H7 was less than 20 organisms per gram.”)  There is some inconsistency with regard to the reported infectious dose. Compare Chryssa V. Deliganis, Death by Apple Juice:  The Problem of Foodborne Illness, the Regulatory Response, and Further Suggestions for Reform, 53 Food Drug L.J. 681, 683 (1998) (“as few as ten”) with Nestle, supra note 4, at 41 (“less than 50”). Regardless of these inconsistencies, everyone agrees that the infectious dose is, as Dr. Nestle has put it, “a miniscule number in bacterial terms.”  Id.

[40]         Nestle, supra note 4, at 41.

[41]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 72. The apparent “ease of person-to-person transmission…is reminiscent of Shigella, an organism that can be transmitted by exposure to extremely few organisms.”  Id. As a result, outbreaks in places like daycare centers have proven relatively common. Rangel, supra note 15, at 605-06 (finding that 80% of the 50 reported person-to-person outbreak from 1982-2002 occurred in daycare centers).

[42]         See, e.g. National Academy of Science, Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Ground Beef: Review of a Draft Risk Assessment, Executive Summary, at 7 (noting that the lack of data concerning the impact of cross-contamination of E. coli O157:H7 during food preparation was a flaw in the Agency’s risk-assessment), http://www.nap.edu/books/0309086272/html/.

[43]         Kriefall v. Excel, 265 Wis.2d 476, 506, 665 N.W.2d 417, 433 (2003). (“Given the realities of what it saw as consumers’ food-handling patterns, the [USDA] bored in on the only effective way to reduce or eliminate food-borne illness”—i.e., making sure that “the pathogen had not been present on the raw product in the first place.”)  (citing Pathogen Reduction, 61 Fed. Reg. at 38966).

[44]         Griffin & Tauxe, supra note 12, at 65-68. See also Josefa M. Rangel, et al. Epidemiology of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Outbreaks, United States, 1982-2002, 11 Emerging Infect. Dis. (No. 4) 603 (April 2005) (noting that HUS is characterized by the diagnostic triad of hemolytic anemia—destruction of red blood cells, thrombocytopenia—low platelet count, and renal injury—destruction of nephrons often leading to kidney failure).

[45]         Richard L. Siegler, MD, The Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, 42 Ped. Nephrology, 1505 (Dec. 1995) (noting that the diagnostic triad of hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and acute renal failure was first described in 1955). (“[HUS] is now recognized as the most frequent cause of acute renal failure in infants and young children.”)  See also Beth P. Bell, MD, MPH, et al. Predictors of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome in Children During a Large Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Infections, 100 Pediatrics 1, 1 (July 1, 1997), at http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/100/1/e12.

[46]         Tauxe, supra note 25, at 1152. See also Nasia Safdar, MD, et al. Risk of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome After Treatment of Escherichia coliO157:H7 Enteritis: A Meta-analysis, 288 JAMA (No. 8) 996, 996 (Aug. 28, 2002). (“E. coli serotype O157:H7 infection has been recognized as the most common cause of HUS in the United States, with 6% of patients developing HUS within 2 to 14 days of onset of diarrhea.”). Amit X. Garg, MD, MA, et al. Long-term Renal Prognosis of Diarrhea-Associated Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-regression, 290 JAMA (No. 10) 1360, 1360 (Sept. 10, 2003). (“Ninety percent of childhood cases of HUS are…due to Shiga-toxin producing Escherichia coli.”)

[47]         Su & Brandt, supra note 11.

[48]         Safdar, supra note 46, at 996 (going on to conclude that administration of antibiotics to children with E. coli O157:H7 appeared to put them at higher risk for developing HUS).

[49]         Richard L. Siegler, MD, Postdiarrheal Shiga Toxin-Mediated Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, 290 JAMA (No. 10) 1379, 1379 (Sept. 10, 2003).

[50]         Pierre Robitaille, et al., Pancreatic Injury in the Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, 11 Pediatric Nephrology 631, 632 (1997) (“although mild pancreas involvement in the acute phase of HUS can be frequent”).

[51]         Safdar, supra note 46, at 996. See also Siegler, supra note 49, at 1379. (“There are no treatments of proven value, and care during the acute phase of the illness, which is merely supportive, has not changed substantially during the past 30 years.”)

[52]         Garg, supra note 46, at 1360.

[53]         Id. Siegler, supra note 45, at 1509-11 (describing what Dr. Siegler refers to as the “pathogenic cascade” that results in the progression from colitis to HUS).

[54]         Garg, supra note 46, at 1360. See also Su & Brandt, supra note 11, at 700.

[55]         Garg, supra note 46, at 1360. See also Su & Brandt, supra note 11, at 700.

[56]         Siegler, supra note 45, at 1519 (noting that in a “20-year Utah-based population study, 5% dies, and an equal number of survivors were left with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or chronic brain damage.”)

[57]         Garg, supra note 46, at 1366-67.

[58]         Siegler, supra note 45, at 1519.

[59]         Id. at 1519-20. See also Garg, supra note 46, at 1366-67.

[60]         Garg, supra note 46, at 1368.

[61]         See J. Lindsey, “Chronic Sequellae of Foodborne Disease,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 3, No. 4, Oct-Dec, 1997.

[62]         Id.

[63]         Id. See also Dworkin, et al., “Reactive Arthritis and Reiter’s Syndrome following an outbreak of gastroenteritis caused by Salmonella enteritidis,” Clin. Infect. Dis., 2001 Oct. 1;33(7): 1010-14; Barth, W. and Segal, K., “Reactive Arthritis (Reiter’s Syndrome),” American Family Physician, Aug. 1999, online at www.aafp.org/afp/990800ap/ 499.html.

[64]         Hill Gaston JS, Lillicrap MS. (2003). Arthritis associated with enteric infection. Best Practices & Research Clinical Rheumatology. 17(2):219-39.

[65]         Id.

[66]         Dworkin MS, Shoemaker PC, Goldoft MJ, Kobayashi JM, “Reactive arthritis and Reiter’s syndrome following an outbreak of gastroenteritis caused by Salmonella enteritidis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 33(7):1010-14. 

[67]         McColl GJ, Diviney MB, Holdsworth RF, McNair PD, Carnie J, Hart W, McCluskey J, “HLA-B27 expression and reactive arthritis susceptibility in two patient cohorts infected with Salmonella Typhimurium,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine 30(1):28-32 (2001).

[68]         Rudwaleit M, Richter S, Braun J, Sieper J, “Low incidence of reactive arthritis in children following a Salmonella outbreak,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 60(11):1055-57 (2001).

[69]         Hill Gaston and Lillicrap, supra Note 7.

[70]         Id.; Barth WF, Segal K., “Reactive arthritis (Reiter’s syndrome),” American Family Physician, 60(2):499-503, 507 (1999).

[71]         Hill Gaston and Lillicrap, supra Note 7.

[72]         J. Marshall, et al., Incidence and Epidemiology of Irritable Bowel Syndrome After a Large Waterborne Outbreak of Bacterial Dysentery, Gastro., 2006; 131; 445-50 (hereinafter “Walkerton Health Study” or “WHS”). The WHS followed one of the largest E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks in the history of North America. Contaminated drinking water caused over 2,300 people to be infected with E. coli O157:H7, resulting in 27 recognized cases of HUS, and 7 deaths. Id. at 445. The WHS followed 2,069 eligible study participants. Id. For Salmonella specific references, seeSmith, J.L., Bayles, D.O., Post-Infectious Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Long-Term Consequence of Bacterial Gastroenteritis, Journal of Food Protection. 2007:70(7);1762-69.

[73]         Id. at 445 (citing multiple sources).

[74]         WHS, supra note 34, at 449.

[75]         Id. at 447.

[76]         A.P.S. Hungin, et al., Irritable Bowel Syndrome in the United States: Prevalence, Symptom Patterns and Impact, Aliment Pharmacol. Ther. 2005:21 (11); 1365-75.

[77]         Id.at 1367.

[78]         Id.

[79]         Id. at 1368.

[80]         Id.

[81]         Id.

[82]         Amy Foxx-Orenstein, DO, FACG, FACP, IBS—Review and What’s New, General Medicine 2006:8(3) (Medscape 2006) (collecting and citing studies). Indeed, PI-IBS has been found to be characterized by more diarrhea but less psychiatric illness with regard to its pathogenesis. SeeNicholas J. Talley, MD, PhD, Irritable Bowel Syndrome: From Epidemiology to Treatment, from American College of Gastroenterology 68th Annual Scientific Meeting and Postgraduate Course (Medscape 2003).

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Gibson Farms Inc. has recalled organic light halves and pieces of shelled walnuts because they have been linked to an outbreak of E. coli infections. 

The organic walnuts were distributed in natural food stores and co-ops in the following states: Alaska, Arkansas Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. 

As of today there are 12 confirmed patients in the outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 infections. Seven of the patients have been hospitalized and two of those have acute kidney failure. Of 10 patients interviewed so far, all 10 reported eating walnuts before becoming ill.

Consumers who have the recalled walnuts on hand are urged to throw them away. If it is not clear what company distributed the organic walnuts they should be thrown away. The FDA is working to determine what specific stores received the walnuts. Some stores may have repackaged the bulk walnut halves and pieces into plastic clamshells or bags.

The recalled walnuts were sold in bulk boxes in 25-pound quantities and can be identified by lot 3325-043 and 3341-501 with expiration dates 5/21/25 and 6/7/25.

A full investigation is currently under way to determine the potential source of the contamination.

Gibson Farms requests consignees to hold and discontinue selling their existing stock of lot 3325-043 and lot 3341-501 and return any remaining inventory of the recalled products to its warehouse at 1190 Buena Vista Road, Hollister, CA, 95023. 

Retailers that received shelled walnuts from a distributor but do not know the brand or lot code information, should hold product, sanitize bins, and contact their supplier.

Consumers with questions may contact the company representative, Veronica Cheatham, at 831-637-3512 or email foodsafety@gibsonfarmsinc.com.

About E. coli infections
Anyone who has eaten any of the recalled walnuts and developed symptoms of E. coli infection should seek medical attention and tell their doctor about their possible exposure to the bacteria. Specific tests are required to diagnose the infections, which can mimic other illnesses.

The symptoms of E. coli infections vary for each person but often include severe stomach cramps and diarrhea, which is often bloody. Some patients may also have a fever. Most patients recover within five to seven days. Others can develop severe or life-threatening symptoms and complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

About 5 to 10 percent of those diagnosed with E. coli infections develop a potentially life-threatening kidney failure complication, known as a hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Symptoms of HUS include fever, abdominal pain, feeling very tired, decreased frequency of urination, small unexplained bruises or bleeding, and pallor. 

Many people with HUS recover within a few weeks, but some suffer permanent injuries or death. This condition can occur among people of any age but is most common in children younger than five years old because of their immature immune systems, older adults because of deteriorating immune systems, and people with compromised immune systems such as cancer patients. 

People who experience HUS symptoms should immediately seek emergency medical care. People with HUS will likely be hospitalized because the condition can cause other serious and ongoing problems such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, brain damage, and neurologic problems.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

A new E. coli O157:H7 outbreak is under investigation and has been traced to organic walnuts. More than half of the infected people have been admitted to hospitals.

The Food and Drug Administration announced the outbreak this afternoon along with a recall of organic walnut halves and pieces from Gibson Farms Inc. of Hollister, CA. The walnuts were distributed to various natural food stores and co-ops in 19 states. The walnuts were sold in bulk bins.

Consumers who have the recalled walnuts on hand are urged to throw them away. If it is not clear what company distributed the organic walnuts they should be thrown away. The FDA is working to determine what specific stores received the walnuts.

As of today there are 12 confirmed patients in California and Washington. Seven of the patients have been so sick that they required hospitalization and two patients have acute kidney failure. Of 10 patients interviewed, all 10 reported eating walnuts, and almost all reported buying organic walnuts from bulk bins in food co-ops or natural food stores. Some stores may have repackaged the bulk walnut halves and pieces into plastic clamshells or bags.

There are likely more patients that have not yet been identified because of the time it takes for illnesses to be reported to local state and federal officials. Also, some patients may not seek medical attention, or, specific tests to determine E. coli infection may not be conducted. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that for every confirmed E. coli O157:H7 infection there are 26 that go unreported. 

The FDA’s traceback investigation identified Gibson Farms Inc. as the common supplier of walnuts in this outbreak. Gibson Farms has initiated a recall and contacted their distributing customers. Distributors and retailers that may have received recalled bulk organic walnuts are being asked to contact their customers. 

The FDA is working with the firm and its distributors to determine the source of contamination and whether additional products or states are affected.

The recalled walnuts were distributed to stores and co-ops in the following states: Alaska, Arkansas Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. 

About E. coli infections
Anyone who has eaten any of the recalled walnuts and developed symptoms of E. coli infection should seek medical attention and tell their doctor about their possible exposure to the bacteria. Specific tests are required to diagnose the infections, which can mimic other illnesses.

The symptoms of E. coli infections vary for each person but often include severe stomach cramps and diarrhea, which is often bloody. Some patients may also have a fever. Most patients recover within five to seven days. Others can develop severe or life-threatening symptoms and complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

About 5 to 10 percent of those diagnosed with E. coli infections develop a potentially life-threatening kidney failure complication, known as a hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Symptoms of HUS include fever, abdominal pain, feeling very tired, decreased frequency of urination, small unexplained bruises or bleeding, and pallor. 

Many people with HUS recover within a few weeks, but some suffer permanent injuries or death. This condition can occur among people of any age but is most common in children younger than five years old because of their immature immune systems, older adults because of deteriorating immune systems, and people with compromised immune systems such as cancer patients. 

People who experience HUS symptoms should immediately seek emergency medical care. People with HUS will likely be hospitalized because the condition can cause other serious and ongoing problems such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, brain damage, and neurologic problems.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

H-E-B is recalling 12-count packages of 3-ounce cups of Creamy Creations ice cream in select flavors because of potential metal in the product.

The affected products were distributed to all H-E-B stores in Texas and Mexico and Central Market, Joe V’s Smart Shop and Mi Tienda stores.

Recalled product:

Product NameUPCCode Date3-ounce H-E-B Creamy CreationsChocolate Ice Cream – 12 pack41220629489/6/20249/7/20249/8/20249/9/20249/10/20249/11/20249/13/20249/14/20243-ounce H-E-B Creamy CreationsIce Cream Lime/Orange Combo– 12 pack41220819308/31/20249/1/20249/2/20249/3/20243-ounce H-E-B Creamy CreationsIce CreamHomemade/Chocolate Combo -12 pack41220819319/11/20249/12/20249/13/20249/14/20249/15/20249/16/20249/17/20249/18/20249/19/20249/20/20249/21/2024

The UPC and code dates can be found on the back of the product’s outer bag, not the individual cups.

All product related to this recall has been removed from store shelves. H-E-B is working to have the products back on shelves as soon as possible. 

As of the posting of this recall, there have been no injuries related to this recall.

Customers who purchased the products should not consume the items and can return them to the store for a full refund.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

USDA finalizes policy to protect consumers from Salmonella  in raw breaded stuffed chicken products 

— OPINION —

Food Safety, like politics, is the art of the possible. 

Sure, it would be great if, like Shiga-toxic E. coli in beef are considered adulterants, Salmonellas (at least the 30 plus known to cause human illness) were considered adulterants as well in ALL meat products. But, we are not there yet. 

Thanks to President Biden, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, Jose Emilio Esteban, USDA Undersecretary for Food Safety, and Sandra Eskin, Deputy Under Secretary, stepping up and doing what can be done in a product well known for causing human disease.

My hope is that setting standards for one chicken product will show that limiting Salmonella is possible in that product and that what is learned can be utilized across other chicken products as well.

I hope the poultry industry sees this move by FSIS as a positive.

In 1994 when Administrator of the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service Mike Taylor deemed E. coli O157:H7 an adulterant the beef industry “had a cow.” However, no one can argue that Taylor’s work in 1994 and USDA’s Under Secretary for Food Safety Elisabeth Hagen’s work on deeming other Shiga-toxic E. coli adulterants have save lives and saved the beef industry millions of dollars. And, credit also goes to the beef industry for cleaning up the mess. 

Hopefully, our friends in poultry will see a positive lesson from the past.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)