Wednesday, July 25, 2007
In the wake of E. coli outbreaks in California-grown produce that killed at least three people and sickened hundreds more, Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, has announced the creation of the Leafy Green Watch Web site, http://leafygreenwatch.blogspot.com/.
The blogspot will provide consumers and others with the opportunity to voice their opinions and to learn more about what Florez has called the dangers of a voluntary, industry-sponsored approach to food safety.
"Under the voluntary marketing agreement, consumers are certainly left in the dark about the safety of their produce,” said Florez, who chairs the Senate Select Committee on Food-Borne Illness. “This blogspot is a real attempt to bring new and important information about the lack of mandatory enforcement of food safety laws and its consequences.”
He said the industry's voluntary marketing agreement among leafy green handlers is an attempt to head off mandatory regulations and enforcement. Signatories to the marketing agreement are afforded the opportunity to affix a stamp to the paperwork they present to retailers informing them that they have signed-on to the voluntary marketing agreement, which requires they only purchase produce from growers following new safety guidelines.
However, Florez said that current plans will not give customers the opportunity to see the seal, once touted by the industry as a landmark effort to inform consumers about the safety of their produce.
He also notes that the voluntary marketing agreement lacks a functional traceback system for tainted produce and doesn't provide health officials with the power to recall potentially tainted produce from store shelves.
http://thecalifornian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070723/NEWS01/70723015/1002
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Nation had better make food safety a high priority again
CITIZEN-TIMES.com
Nation had better make food safety a high priority again
The widespread botulism scare in the news this week illustrates some basic, disturbing facts about the current state of the American food supply.
Put bluntly, it highlights the pitfalls of mass production and mass supply lines. When a problem occurs, it can take on a massive scale.
Combined with the benign neglect, if not outright dismantling, of government agencies designed to oversee food safety, the situation represents a disaster waiting to happen.
The latest food scare involves a Castleberry Food Co. plant in Georgia. Cases of botulism from people who had consumed Hog Dog Chili Sauce Original were reported in Texas and Indiana, and government testing on 16 of 17 cans at a Castleberry warehouse indicated contamination. An array of other products had been produced on the line where the chili was made, prompting a widespread recall of more than 90 products made at the plant.
The scope of the recall is massive, involving production from a plant that cranks out 10,000 cases of foodstuffs containing two dozen cans every day, products that were on shelves of thousands upon thousands of retailers. The director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition said, “You’re talking tens of millions of cans that may have been involved.’’
More and more scares
Problems with food have produced a drumbeat of headlines in recent years. Stories of pet food contamination, E. coli cases related to spinach, green onions linked to a hepatitis A outbreak, contaminated candy, peanut butter containing salmonella and drug-laced fish have all paraded across the news pages.
While many of these scares have involved domestic firms, just as many have involved the increasingly large number of imported food products. Many such products are flagged, but plenty others are undoubtedly getting through, as U.S inspectors have only enough resources to examine barely 1 percent of nearly 9 million shipments of imported food each year.
A quarter of the fruit consumed by Americans is imported, as is more than 80 percent of the seafood we eat. On the domestic side, consolidation has been the new trend. Eighty percent of beef slaughter is handled by just four firms, and two companies make 75 percent of pre-cut salads. Half the food products in the nation are made by 2 percent of the farms.
While all this has produced a stable food supply and helped keep prices down, it also represents the potential for big problems, such as with the Castleberry episode. It also without doubt presents a tempting target for terrorists.
Lack of leadership
Here’s where government can and should play a strong leadership role, but instead is going the other direction. Just last week, Congress blocked a move that would have seen the FDA close seven of its 13 field laboratories.
In response to the food scares, President Bush has established a Cabinet-level team headed by a “food czar’’ tasked to review regulations and procedures regarding food safety and issue recommendations. (We hope the food czar will not simply disappear, as did the ballyhooed “war czar.’’)
The current systems to ensure the safety of our food were created in a different age and are ill-suited to modern challenges.
In May, former FDA chief Dr. David Kessler told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, “Simply put, our food safety system is broken. We have no structure for preventing food-borne illness in this country.’’
Terror threat
This antiquated system is a catchall of 15 agencies, with responsibilities sometimes delegated seemingly at a whim, and few serious powers. (Even this week’s massive recall was a voluntary effort). The protection of our food supply needs to enter the new millennium, because of new production methods, new food sources and new methods of processing. It also needs to enter it because of the threats this millennium offers. Tommy Thompson, as he was leaving the offices of Secretary of Health and Human Services in 2004, said, “I, for the life of me, cannot understand why the terrorists have not attacked our food supply, because it is so easy to do.’’
That threat comes on top of the fact 5,000 Americans die from food-borne contamination every year, and an estimated 76 million of us fall ill from such contamination.
It is time for the administration and Congress to develop a sense of urgency about our food supply. The problems promise to become only bigger.
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770724058
Nation had better make food safety a high priority again
The widespread botulism scare in the news this week illustrates some basic, disturbing facts about the current state of the American food supply.
Put bluntly, it highlights the pitfalls of mass production and mass supply lines. When a problem occurs, it can take on a massive scale.
Combined with the benign neglect, if not outright dismantling, of government agencies designed to oversee food safety, the situation represents a disaster waiting to happen.
The latest food scare involves a Castleberry Food Co. plant in Georgia. Cases of botulism from people who had consumed Hog Dog Chili Sauce Original were reported in Texas and Indiana, and government testing on 16 of 17 cans at a Castleberry warehouse indicated contamination. An array of other products had been produced on the line where the chili was made, prompting a widespread recall of more than 90 products made at the plant.
The scope of the recall is massive, involving production from a plant that cranks out 10,000 cases of foodstuffs containing two dozen cans every day, products that were on shelves of thousands upon thousands of retailers. The director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition said, “You’re talking tens of millions of cans that may have been involved.’’
More and more scares
Problems with food have produced a drumbeat of headlines in recent years. Stories of pet food contamination, E. coli cases related to spinach, green onions linked to a hepatitis A outbreak, contaminated candy, peanut butter containing salmonella and drug-laced fish have all paraded across the news pages.
While many of these scares have involved domestic firms, just as many have involved the increasingly large number of imported food products. Many such products are flagged, but plenty others are undoubtedly getting through, as U.S inspectors have only enough resources to examine barely 1 percent of nearly 9 million shipments of imported food each year.
A quarter of the fruit consumed by Americans is imported, as is more than 80 percent of the seafood we eat. On the domestic side, consolidation has been the new trend. Eighty percent of beef slaughter is handled by just four firms, and two companies make 75 percent of pre-cut salads. Half the food products in the nation are made by 2 percent of the farms.
While all this has produced a stable food supply and helped keep prices down, it also represents the potential for big problems, such as with the Castleberry episode. It also without doubt presents a tempting target for terrorists.
Lack of leadership
Here’s where government can and should play a strong leadership role, but instead is going the other direction. Just last week, Congress blocked a move that would have seen the FDA close seven of its 13 field laboratories.
In response to the food scares, President Bush has established a Cabinet-level team headed by a “food czar’’ tasked to review regulations and procedures regarding food safety and issue recommendations. (We hope the food czar will not simply disappear, as did the ballyhooed “war czar.’’)
The current systems to ensure the safety of our food were created in a different age and are ill-suited to modern challenges.
In May, former FDA chief Dr. David Kessler told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, “Simply put, our food safety system is broken. We have no structure for preventing food-borne illness in this country.’’
Terror threat
This antiquated system is a catchall of 15 agencies, with responsibilities sometimes delegated seemingly at a whim, and few serious powers. (Even this week’s massive recall was a voluntary effort). The protection of our food supply needs to enter the new millennium, because of new production methods, new food sources and new methods of processing. It also needs to enter it because of the threats this millennium offers. Tommy Thompson, as he was leaving the offices of Secretary of Health and Human Services in 2004, said, “I, for the life of me, cannot understand why the terrorists have not attacked our food supply, because it is so easy to do.’’
That threat comes on top of the fact 5,000 Americans die from food-borne contamination every year, and an estimated 76 million of us fall ill from such contamination.
It is time for the administration and Congress to develop a sense of urgency about our food supply. The problems promise to become only bigger.
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770724058
Monday, July 23, 2007
Keeping Greens Clean
Industry-run program to improve food safety will begin tomorrow
By Diane Lindquist
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 22, 2007
When Imperial County grower Jack Vessey surveyed one of his late-winter spinach fields several months ago, he knew he'd never raise the crop the same way again.
After E. coli-tainted spinach from Northern California killed three people and sickened more than 200 last fall, the California produce industry quickly drew up tough new rules for handling leafy greens from field to fork.
Nearly all of the state's growers and processors, including those handling organic products, have signed on to the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, which officially begins tomorrow.
It's uncertain whether the agreement will prevent another E. coli outbreak, but producers say its stringent measures and inspections are the closest they can come to preventing crop contamination.
“We're going to do everything in our power to prevent anything like that happening again,” said Vessey, who helped draft the measures. “We wanted to do the fastest-possible remedy for our industry, and this was the fastest.”
Critics say a mandatory government program would be more likely to ensure food safety, but the marketing agreement helped the state's estimated $2 billion leafy greens industry forestall new legislation.
The marketing agreement covers iceberg, romaine, green leaf, red leaf, butter and baby leaf lettuces; escarole; endive; spring mix; spinach; cabbage; kale; arugula; and chard.
Because 98 percent to 99 percent of California growers and processors of leafy greens have signed the agreement, nearly all leafy greens in the U.S. food-distribution chain will be covered. Northern and Central California growers supply 90 percent of the leafy greens that Americans eat during the summer and fall, and Imperial County and western Arizona supply 90 percent of those products consumed in the winter and spring.
The economic incentives for a voluntary agreement were strong. The E. coli outbreak in September caused a $100 million loss for California's $160 million spinach crop, and sales are still off.
Vessey said he and other growers in Imperial County, which was not involved in the outbreak, took a 15 percent to 20 percent hit.
Beginning tomorrow, representatives from the state Department of Food and Agriculture will inspect fields and processing operations to make certain the new rules are being followed. If not, sanctions will be imposed. They could include other handlers refusing the violators' products.
There is a cost for this vigilance. Consumers should expect to see prices of leafy greens rise soon. Handlers and growers are being assessed 2 cents per carton to pay for the program, and they're expected to pass the costs along. Eventually, a sticker or mark on packages will indicate which products have been produced under terms of the pact.
Tim Chelling, the spokesman for the Western Growers Association, which took the lead in creating the agreement, said the pact's overall cost will run in the millions, but “you're talking about pennies for individual products.”
“The costs are not going to be invisible,” he said, “but they'll be well worth it as an investment. We want to restore confidence and trust, and you can't put a figure on that.”
Rosemari Blalock, a San Diegan shopping last week for leafy greens at the Uptown Ralphs grocery store, said she won't mind paying more. “Oh, definitely not – if more measures are being taken,” she said.
Growers say that the assessment does not cover their costs in adhering to the agreement's stricter standards.
“I'll have to pay a certain amount per acre,” Vessey said. “I'm going to have to hire somebody to run my food-safety program. I'm going to have to do things differently next season.”
Those who sign the agreement promise to follow best practices for growing and handling leafy greens, as defined in the agreement, and be subject to periodic government inspections. Among the best practices are more frequent and specific water and soil tests, and greater separation of growing areas from septic tanks.
Growers and processors also must have a trace-back system to quickly identify where any contaminated leafy greens were harvested and processed.
For the most part, health officials and food scientists still can't pinpoint how deadly microbes such as E. coli and salmonella get onto food products in individual outbreaks.
The source of September's E. coli outbreak has been traced to river water and animal feces on a small grass-fed cattle operation in the Salinas Valley that leased land to spinach grower Mission Organics. The tainted spinach was contained in Dole-brand bagged baby spinach processed by Natural Selection Foods in San Juan Bautista.
But how the spinach got contaminated remains a mystery. It might have been spread by pig or cattle feces, tainted irrigation water, birds flying overhead or poor worker sanitation.
“Possibly, maybe even probably,” Chelling said of the odds of avoiding another outbreak through the new marketing agreement. “But nobody is saying this is risk-free. No one is saying they'll get to 100 percent prevention, but this raises the standard.”
Christine Carson, another San Diegan shopping for greens last week, said she has not cut back on her consumption of the foods.
“I'm more worried about pesticides,” she said. “But I would feel a little bit safer because I'm a little paranoid.”
From the start, the marketing agreement has been under attack by consumer, labor and health groups, who want broader measures required by law.
“This doesn't inspire confidence that the industry is the one overseeing the safety measures,” said Elisa Odabashian, director of the West Coast office of Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports magazine.
“It's the fox taking care of the henhouse,” she said. “There's still room for contaminated produce to reach the marketplace.”
Odabashian also took issue with the mark that will be created to identify the products produced under the marketing pact – products that will cost consumers extra.
“All food should be safe in the marketplace,” she said. “People shouldn't have to pay more for safety.”
There also are concerns that food sold at farmers markets and roadside stalls are not part of the program and remain at risk for contamination.
A package of bills sponsored by state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, would have regulated the leafy greens industry and shifted oversight to the state government, but it never cleared committee.
“Our approach would be a more mandatory program under the government,” he said. “But the legislators wanted to see if the (industry) program works.”
Last year's spinach E. coli flare-up was the 20th U.S. food-borne outbreak in the past 10 years of contaminated leafy greens products from California. The incident, which sickened people in 26 states, raised public consciousness about food safety.
Since then, lettuce served at Taco Bell restaurants, fresh and frozen ground beef, and peanut butter have all been found to have been contaminated with either E. coli or salmonella, which can cause severe cramping, vomiting, bloody diarrhea and, in the worst cases, kidney failure.
The recent discoveries of tainted products from China, including toothpaste, dog food, juice and fish, have prompted calls for more stringent food-safety measures worldwide.
As the spotlight has lingered on food safety, backers of the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement tout it as a model for global safety practices.
“Other industries in similar situations have taken years to come up with what these guys have come up with in a matter of months,” Chelling said.
Canada will limit entry of 14 leafy greens products from California to those handled under the marketing agreement.
The program goes further than the federal Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point regulations, which focus mainly on good practices in packing, said Joe Pezzini, vice president of operations for Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville and chairman of the California Leafy Green Advisory Board.
“We believe this is an unprecedented commitment to food safety,” he said. “It created a mandatory level of standards in the industry. What it really does is raise the bar in food safety. There's never been anything like it.”
Another component of the agreement is a commitment to research. In addition to the 2-cent carton assessment, agricultural companies and the Produce Marketing Association are contributing millions to fund a food-safety research center at the University of California Davis to learn how microbes contaminate produce.
The Center for Produce Safety will be operating by this winter, said Rob Atwill, its interim director and one of the researchers who will pursue more answers about the deadly pathogens.
“It (E. coli) is a sneaky little bacteria, and it doesn't raise its head that often,” he said.
“In the next few years,” Atwill said, “we hope to close the knowledge gaps about how the pathogens enter the field of produce.”
In the meantime, lettuce and spinach consumers will rely on the measures mandated by the marketing agreement to protect them.
“We have characterized Monday as the start of a 'trust-me' program,” said Florez.
“At the end of the day, we will be watching very closely,” he said. “The industry knows that they are one outbreak away from people writing off leafy greens for a long time.”
Diane Lindquist: (619) 293-1812; diane.lindquist@uniontrib.com
Find this article at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070722-9999-1b22leafy.html
By Diane Lindquist
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 22, 2007
When Imperial County grower Jack Vessey surveyed one of his late-winter spinach fields several months ago, he knew he'd never raise the crop the same way again.
After E. coli-tainted spinach from Northern California killed three people and sickened more than 200 last fall, the California produce industry quickly drew up tough new rules for handling leafy greens from field to fork.
Nearly all of the state's growers and processors, including those handling organic products, have signed on to the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, which officially begins tomorrow.
It's uncertain whether the agreement will prevent another E. coli outbreak, but producers say its stringent measures and inspections are the closest they can come to preventing crop contamination.
“We're going to do everything in our power to prevent anything like that happening again,” said Vessey, who helped draft the measures. “We wanted to do the fastest-possible remedy for our industry, and this was the fastest.”
Critics say a mandatory government program would be more likely to ensure food safety, but the marketing agreement helped the state's estimated $2 billion leafy greens industry forestall new legislation.
The marketing agreement covers iceberg, romaine, green leaf, red leaf, butter and baby leaf lettuces; escarole; endive; spring mix; spinach; cabbage; kale; arugula; and chard.
Because 98 percent to 99 percent of California growers and processors of leafy greens have signed the agreement, nearly all leafy greens in the U.S. food-distribution chain will be covered. Northern and Central California growers supply 90 percent of the leafy greens that Americans eat during the summer and fall, and Imperial County and western Arizona supply 90 percent of those products consumed in the winter and spring.
The economic incentives for a voluntary agreement were strong. The E. coli outbreak in September caused a $100 million loss for California's $160 million spinach crop, and sales are still off.
Vessey said he and other growers in Imperial County, which was not involved in the outbreak, took a 15 percent to 20 percent hit.
Beginning tomorrow, representatives from the state Department of Food and Agriculture will inspect fields and processing operations to make certain the new rules are being followed. If not, sanctions will be imposed. They could include other handlers refusing the violators' products.
There is a cost for this vigilance. Consumers should expect to see prices of leafy greens rise soon. Handlers and growers are being assessed 2 cents per carton to pay for the program, and they're expected to pass the costs along. Eventually, a sticker or mark on packages will indicate which products have been produced under terms of the pact.
Tim Chelling, the spokesman for the Western Growers Association, which took the lead in creating the agreement, said the pact's overall cost will run in the millions, but “you're talking about pennies for individual products.”
“The costs are not going to be invisible,” he said, “but they'll be well worth it as an investment. We want to restore confidence and trust, and you can't put a figure on that.”
Rosemari Blalock, a San Diegan shopping last week for leafy greens at the Uptown Ralphs grocery store, said she won't mind paying more. “Oh, definitely not – if more measures are being taken,” she said.
Growers say that the assessment does not cover their costs in adhering to the agreement's stricter standards.
“I'll have to pay a certain amount per acre,” Vessey said. “I'm going to have to hire somebody to run my food-safety program. I'm going to have to do things differently next season.”
Those who sign the agreement promise to follow best practices for growing and handling leafy greens, as defined in the agreement, and be subject to periodic government inspections. Among the best practices are more frequent and specific water and soil tests, and greater separation of growing areas from septic tanks.
Growers and processors also must have a trace-back system to quickly identify where any contaminated leafy greens were harvested and processed.
For the most part, health officials and food scientists still can't pinpoint how deadly microbes such as E. coli and salmonella get onto food products in individual outbreaks.
The source of September's E. coli outbreak has been traced to river water and animal feces on a small grass-fed cattle operation in the Salinas Valley that leased land to spinach grower Mission Organics. The tainted spinach was contained in Dole-brand bagged baby spinach processed by Natural Selection Foods in San Juan Bautista.
But how the spinach got contaminated remains a mystery. It might have been spread by pig or cattle feces, tainted irrigation water, birds flying overhead or poor worker sanitation.
“Possibly, maybe even probably,” Chelling said of the odds of avoiding another outbreak through the new marketing agreement. “But nobody is saying this is risk-free. No one is saying they'll get to 100 percent prevention, but this raises the standard.”
Christine Carson, another San Diegan shopping for greens last week, said she has not cut back on her consumption of the foods.
“I'm more worried about pesticides,” she said. “But I would feel a little bit safer because I'm a little paranoid.”
From the start, the marketing agreement has been under attack by consumer, labor and health groups, who want broader measures required by law.
“This doesn't inspire confidence that the industry is the one overseeing the safety measures,” said Elisa Odabashian, director of the West Coast office of Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports magazine.
“It's the fox taking care of the henhouse,” she said. “There's still room for contaminated produce to reach the marketplace.”
Odabashian also took issue with the mark that will be created to identify the products produced under the marketing pact – products that will cost consumers extra.
“All food should be safe in the marketplace,” she said. “People shouldn't have to pay more for safety.”
There also are concerns that food sold at farmers markets and roadside stalls are not part of the program and remain at risk for contamination.
A package of bills sponsored by state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, would have regulated the leafy greens industry and shifted oversight to the state government, but it never cleared committee.
“Our approach would be a more mandatory program under the government,” he said. “But the legislators wanted to see if the (industry) program works.”
Last year's spinach E. coli flare-up was the 20th U.S. food-borne outbreak in the past 10 years of contaminated leafy greens products from California. The incident, which sickened people in 26 states, raised public consciousness about food safety.
Since then, lettuce served at Taco Bell restaurants, fresh and frozen ground beef, and peanut butter have all been found to have been contaminated with either E. coli or salmonella, which can cause severe cramping, vomiting, bloody diarrhea and, in the worst cases, kidney failure.
The recent discoveries of tainted products from China, including toothpaste, dog food, juice and fish, have prompted calls for more stringent food-safety measures worldwide.
As the spotlight has lingered on food safety, backers of the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement tout it as a model for global safety practices.
“Other industries in similar situations have taken years to come up with what these guys have come up with in a matter of months,” Chelling said.
Canada will limit entry of 14 leafy greens products from California to those handled under the marketing agreement.
The program goes further than the federal Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point regulations, which focus mainly on good practices in packing, said Joe Pezzini, vice president of operations for Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville and chairman of the California Leafy Green Advisory Board.
“We believe this is an unprecedented commitment to food safety,” he said. “It created a mandatory level of standards in the industry. What it really does is raise the bar in food safety. There's never been anything like it.”
Another component of the agreement is a commitment to research. In addition to the 2-cent carton assessment, agricultural companies and the Produce Marketing Association are contributing millions to fund a food-safety research center at the University of California Davis to learn how microbes contaminate produce.
The Center for Produce Safety will be operating by this winter, said Rob Atwill, its interim director and one of the researchers who will pursue more answers about the deadly pathogens.
“It (E. coli) is a sneaky little bacteria, and it doesn't raise its head that often,” he said.
“In the next few years,” Atwill said, “we hope to close the knowledge gaps about how the pathogens enter the field of produce.”
In the meantime, lettuce and spinach consumers will rely on the measures mandated by the marketing agreement to protect them.
“We have characterized Monday as the start of a 'trust-me' program,” said Florez.
“At the end of the day, we will be watching very closely,” he said. “The industry knows that they are one outbreak away from people writing off leafy greens for a long time.”
Diane Lindquist: (619) 293-1812; diane.lindquist@uniontrib.com
Find this article at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070722-9999-1b22leafy.html
Will Bagged Leafy Greens be Safe?
Marler Blog
Posted at 3:45 AM on July 22, 2007 by E. coli Lawyer
Will Bagged Leafy Greens be Safe?
I was reading San Diego Union-Tribune writer, Diane Lindquist’s article: Keeping Greens Green - Industry-run program to improve food safety will begin tomorrow, about the hopeful use of the California Marketing Agreement as a way to prevent the next E. coli O157:H7 outbreak tied to California Leafy Greens, when I also spotted the following article by Richard Gray, Science Correspondent, of the UK Telegraph:
One in 10 salads has poisonous bacteria
Food safety experts are calling for stricter production controls on ready-to-eat salads after tests revealed that many contain bacteria, which can cause potentially deadly food poisoning.
A report compiled by the government's Health Protection Agency (HPA), found that one in 10 pre-packaged salads containing meat or seafood was contaminated with the listeria bacteria. Evidence of E. coli and salmonella was found in some bags of salad.
The HPA report, which involved testing more than 2,600 ready-to-eat salads, concluded that the control of bacteria in food manufacturing and in shops was essential to minimize the potential for hazardous food contamination.
Food poisoning due to contaminated salad is still rare. The HPA has recorded two notable outbreaks in the past two years, although only the most serious cases that result in hospitalization will be reported.
David Barney, from the Fresh Prepared Salad Producers Group, which represents the industry in the UK, said that the washing and preparation procedures used by producers removed far more bacteria than consumers could in their homes.
The UK pre-packed salad market is worth more than £300 million a year.
The Salinas Californian - Leafy greens audits begin Monday
Some legislators and consumer and labor advocates say the agreement is unlikely to offer consumers greater protection, however.
“Monday is about more of the same,” said state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who has so far failed in his attempts to pass legislation regulating the leafy greens industry. “Monday is cross-your-fingers day and hope nothing goes wrong.”
If anything, Florez said, the onset of the marketing agreement should remind consumers to protect themselves, because the industry continues to use a voluntary, self-policing system.
“I think consumers should be very afraid,” he said. “I think we want to make sure consumers know … that they need to protect themselves — wash your spinach, use good handling practices.”
Marler Clark LLP,
PS6600 Columbia Center
701 Fifth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: 866-770-2032
http://www.marlerblog.com/2007/07/articles/case-news/will-bagged-leafy-greens-be-safe/
Posted at 3:45 AM on July 22, 2007 by E. coli Lawyer
Will Bagged Leafy Greens be Safe?
I was reading San Diego Union-Tribune writer, Diane Lindquist’s article: Keeping Greens Green - Industry-run program to improve food safety will begin tomorrow, about the hopeful use of the California Marketing Agreement as a way to prevent the next E. coli O157:H7 outbreak tied to California Leafy Greens, when I also spotted the following article by Richard Gray, Science Correspondent, of the UK Telegraph:
One in 10 salads has poisonous bacteria
Food safety experts are calling for stricter production controls on ready-to-eat salads after tests revealed that many contain bacteria, which can cause potentially deadly food poisoning.
A report compiled by the government's Health Protection Agency (HPA), found that one in 10 pre-packaged salads containing meat or seafood was contaminated with the listeria bacteria. Evidence of E. coli and salmonella was found in some bags of salad.
The HPA report, which involved testing more than 2,600 ready-to-eat salads, concluded that the control of bacteria in food manufacturing and in shops was essential to minimize the potential for hazardous food contamination.
Food poisoning due to contaminated salad is still rare. The HPA has recorded two notable outbreaks in the past two years, although only the most serious cases that result in hospitalization will be reported.
David Barney, from the Fresh Prepared Salad Producers Group, which represents the industry in the UK, said that the washing and preparation procedures used by producers removed far more bacteria than consumers could in their homes.
The UK pre-packed salad market is worth more than £300 million a year.
The Salinas Californian - Leafy greens audits begin Monday
Some legislators and consumer and labor advocates say the agreement is unlikely to offer consumers greater protection, however.
“Monday is about more of the same,” said state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who has so far failed in his attempts to pass legislation regulating the leafy greens industry. “Monday is cross-your-fingers day and hope nothing goes wrong.”
If anything, Florez said, the onset of the marketing agreement should remind consumers to protect themselves, because the industry continues to use a voluntary, self-policing system.
“I think consumers should be very afraid,” he said. “I think we want to make sure consumers know … that they need to protect themselves — wash your spinach, use good handling practices.”
Marler Clark LLP,
PS6600 Columbia Center
701 Fifth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: 866-770-2032
http://www.marlerblog.com/2007/07/articles/case-news/will-bagged-leafy-greens-be-safe/
Saturday, July 21, 2007
MANDATORY SAFETY RULES BEST FOR PRODUCE INDUSTRY
Date: March 15, 2007
Californians shouldn't be surprised that the federal Food and Drug Administration is essentially abdicating its responsibility to help ensure the safety of fresh produce, most of which is grown in the Central Valley.
In fact, it's hard to decide which is the worst part about the new guidelines offered Monday by the FDA: That they took seven years to develop or that they are non-binding, meaning food processors can simply choose to ignore them.
The state should complete its plans by summer to impose mandatory controls on growers. The food industry should work with the Legislature to guarantee that a set of enforceable standards is in place that will guarantee that every food handler in the business complies.
The need is obvious. E. coli outbreaks from contaminated produce have doubled over the past decade. And September's nationwide outbreak was traced back to prepackaged spinach grown at a farm in the Salinas Valley. The deadly episode did tens of millions of dollars of damage to the $1.5 billion industry. The results of an investigation into the outbreak are expected within the next 10 days, and it should offer additional insights into what actions are necessary.
The debate in Sacramento is centered on how much regulation should be left to industry -- which has a huge vested interest in stopping the outbreaks -- and when the Legislature and the state Department of Food and Agriculture need to intervene.
State Sen. Dean Florez, D-Bakersfield, has introduced three bills that would require state certification and inspection of produce farms. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he leans toward wanting the industry to police itself, as much as possible. State Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-San Luis Obispo and a Santa Maria strawberry farmer, is trying to help negotiate a compromise that will accomplish the safety goals with the least amount of government intervention. A GOP rarity in the Legislature, he was appointed by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, to head the Senate Agriculture Committee. Some form of independent inspection is essential, and the industry has enough of an interest in certifying the safety of their products that it should be willing to help pay the costs.
Meat and poultry operations have mandatory sanitation standards that should help provide a model for produce regulations. The state should ensure that its produce farms and food processors are being regularly inspected to eliminate the possibility of contamination.
California should be aggressive about guaranteeing that its farms and food-processing facilities meet the highest standards for sanitation.
Author: MERCURY NEWS EDITORIAL
Section: Editorial
Page: 12A
Paper: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Paper: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Copyright (c) 2007 San Jose Mercury News
Friday, July 20, 2007
Leafy greens audits start July 23
They ensure growers, handlers meet standards
By JAKE HENSHAW
The Salinas Californian Capitol Bureau
SACRAMENTO - After months of preparation, mandatory food-safety audits will begin July 23 for leafy greens handlers and their growers participating in a special marketing agreement. The board of the Leafy Green Products Marketing Agreement approved the start date at its meeting June 29 in Santa Maria.
"Beginning July 23, we will begin to certify to our customers that California lettuce, spinach and other leafy greens have been grown to the highest food safety standards available," said Joe Pezzini, chairman of the marketing agreement board and vice president of operations for Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville.
The board also re-opened for the rest of the year the sign-up period for membership in the marketing agreement that was created in response to the E. coli outbreak last year that was linked to spinach grown on a San Benito County ranch.
That outbreak caused at least three deaths and more than 200 illnesses among consumers nationwide.
The board oversees an industry-designed, state-supervised marketing agreement that requires all handlers who voluntarily sign up to accept spinach, lettuce and other leafy greens only from growers who follow new growing standards. Participants who violate the marketing agreement would be temporarily or permanently suspended from the program.
Inspectors from the state Department of Food and Agriculture have been visiting handlers and growers for "informational audits" both to assess how the new growing standards match field conditions and to educate participants on the rules. The new food-safety drive also calls for handlers to use a "service mark" on paperwork delivered by handlers to their grocery and restaurant customers to certify that the produce meets the new standards.
The marketing agreement board still is considering what's called a "certification mark" that could go on cartons and packages for the public to see. But for now, the board primarily is counting on grocers and restaurants to educate consumers on the new standards, marketing agreement CEO Scott Horsfall has said.
The $4.5 million-a-year program is funded by a two-cent per carton assessment, and includes an estimated 99 percent of the industry.
The program has been criticized by some legislators and consumer and labor advocates as too industry-controlled, and they have urged a greater role for state health officials. But agricultural industry officials have argued that the marketing agreement has led to state-of-the-art growing standards that will be readily updated to meet new scientific data and enforced by independent state inspectors.
Contact Jake Henshaw at jhenshaw@gannett.com.
http://www.thecalifornian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070707/NEWS01/707070327/1002
By JAKE HENSHAW
The Salinas Californian Capitol Bureau
SACRAMENTO - After months of preparation, mandatory food-safety audits will begin July 23 for leafy greens handlers and their growers participating in a special marketing agreement. The board of the Leafy Green Products Marketing Agreement approved the start date at its meeting June 29 in Santa Maria.
"Beginning July 23, we will begin to certify to our customers that California lettuce, spinach and other leafy greens have been grown to the highest food safety standards available," said Joe Pezzini, chairman of the marketing agreement board and vice president of operations for Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville.
The board also re-opened for the rest of the year the sign-up period for membership in the marketing agreement that was created in response to the E. coli outbreak last year that was linked to spinach grown on a San Benito County ranch.
That outbreak caused at least three deaths and more than 200 illnesses among consumers nationwide.
The board oversees an industry-designed, state-supervised marketing agreement that requires all handlers who voluntarily sign up to accept spinach, lettuce and other leafy greens only from growers who follow new growing standards. Participants who violate the marketing agreement would be temporarily or permanently suspended from the program.
Inspectors from the state Department of Food and Agriculture have been visiting handlers and growers for "informational audits" both to assess how the new growing standards match field conditions and to educate participants on the rules. The new food-safety drive also calls for handlers to use a "service mark" on paperwork delivered by handlers to their grocery and restaurant customers to certify that the produce meets the new standards.
The marketing agreement board still is considering what's called a "certification mark" that could go on cartons and packages for the public to see. But for now, the board primarily is counting on grocers and restaurants to educate consumers on the new standards, marketing agreement CEO Scott Horsfall has said.
The $4.5 million-a-year program is funded by a two-cent per carton assessment, and includes an estimated 99 percent of the industry.
The program has been criticized by some legislators and consumer and labor advocates as too industry-controlled, and they have urged a greater role for state health officials. But agricultural industry officials have argued that the marketing agreement has led to state-of-the-art growing standards that will be readily updated to meet new scientific data and enforced by independent state inspectors.
Contact Jake Henshaw at jhenshaw@gannett.com.
http://www.thecalifornian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070707/NEWS01/707070327/1002
Blue-ribbon diversion
baltimoresun.com
July 20, 2007
President Bush's appointment this week of a high-level panel to recommend reforms to ensure the safety of imported food and other items would be a worthy idea except for two things: Congress is already working on a package of reforms, and it's no mystery what needs to be done.
The Food and Drug Administration is woefully ill-equipped to do more than a cursory inspection of a tiny fraction of the food coming into this country. It needs to be beefed up, so to speak - in the sense that beef is one of the very few items that fall under the purview of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (along with other meats, poultry and eggs), and the USDA is much better staffed and does a much more rigorous job than the FDA.
The head of the FDA, Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, boasted to a House committee Tuesday about designating a "food safety czar." The U.S. doesn't need a czar, and it doesn't need a panel. The country got a "czar" on Iraq, and no one has heard of him since, and it got a panel, the Iraq Study Group, whose recommendations President Bush ignored. On the question of imported food, what the country needs is simply a better FDA.
One way to build a better FDA would be to combine all food safety responsibilities in one agency.
One thing not to do would be to cut the number of FDA labs from 13 to six, as Dr. von Eschenbach has proposed.
Right now, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the FDA inspects 1 percent of imported seafood, produce, animal feeds and grains. Even then, most inspections are fleeting. Food imports went from 4 million shipments in 2000 to about 10 million last year. Pet food wasn't even on the agency's radar until cats and dogs in this country started dying this year from contaminated Chinese imports.
To inspect just 10 percent of imports, the FDA would need to hire 1,600 additional inspectors. A step in that direction would be provided for in a proposal by Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin to increase the agency's budget by $48.4 million.
But imports are not the whole story, or the only problem. At least 85 people, and perhaps as many as 600, became ill from salmonella after attending a fair in Chicago this week. More than 60 people, in 19 states, have contracted salmonella since June from a snack food called Veggie Booty. This year, Peter Pan peanut butter was found to be contaminated with salmonella, and before that, California spinach carried E. coli.
Cleaner, safer food isn't beyond reach. It just requires a food safety agency that is up to the job.
www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bal-ed.fda20jul20,0,7250624.story
July 20, 2007
President Bush's appointment this week of a high-level panel to recommend reforms to ensure the safety of imported food and other items would be a worthy idea except for two things: Congress is already working on a package of reforms, and it's no mystery what needs to be done.
The Food and Drug Administration is woefully ill-equipped to do more than a cursory inspection of a tiny fraction of the food coming into this country. It needs to be beefed up, so to speak - in the sense that beef is one of the very few items that fall under the purview of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (along with other meats, poultry and eggs), and the USDA is much better staffed and does a much more rigorous job than the FDA.
The head of the FDA, Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, boasted to a House committee Tuesday about designating a "food safety czar." The U.S. doesn't need a czar, and it doesn't need a panel. The country got a "czar" on Iraq, and no one has heard of him since, and it got a panel, the Iraq Study Group, whose recommendations President Bush ignored. On the question of imported food, what the country needs is simply a better FDA.
One way to build a better FDA would be to combine all food safety responsibilities in one agency.
One thing not to do would be to cut the number of FDA labs from 13 to six, as Dr. von Eschenbach has proposed.
Right now, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the FDA inspects 1 percent of imported seafood, produce, animal feeds and grains. Even then, most inspections are fleeting. Food imports went from 4 million shipments in 2000 to about 10 million last year. Pet food wasn't even on the agency's radar until cats and dogs in this country started dying this year from contaminated Chinese imports.
To inspect just 10 percent of imports, the FDA would need to hire 1,600 additional inspectors. A step in that direction would be provided for in a proposal by Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin to increase the agency's budget by $48.4 million.
But imports are not the whole story, or the only problem. At least 85 people, and perhaps as many as 600, became ill from salmonella after attending a fair in Chicago this week. More than 60 people, in 19 states, have contracted salmonella since June from a snack food called Veggie Booty. This year, Peter Pan peanut butter was found to be contaminated with salmonella, and before that, California spinach carried E. coli.
Cleaner, safer food isn't beyond reach. It just requires a food safety agency that is up to the job.
www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bal-ed.fda20jul20,0,7250624.story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
