Fw: [BITES-L] bites Aug. 9/10
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Doug Powell <dpowell@KSU.EDU>
Sender: Bites <BITES-L@LISTSERV.KSU.EDU>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 15:22:01 -0500
To: BITES-L@LISTSERV.KSU.EDU<BITES-L@LISTSERV.KSU.EDU>
ReplyTo: Doug Powell <dpowell@KSU.EDU>
Subject: [BITES-L] bites Aug. 9/10
bites Aug. 9/10
CDC: Feeding your pets in the kitchen (and washing their bowls) can lead to salmonellosis
Restaurant Don'ts
CALIFORNIA: Inspectors give failing grade to 17 restaurants in last 12 months
SCOTLAND: Farmers hold clue to vaccine against E coli
US: USDA plans to require ID for interstate livestock
Salmonella recalls: when to test?
UK: Salmonella testing regulations clarified
Clean restrooms: how important are they to restaurant consumers?
Nestlé SINGAPORE wins Gold Award for Food Safety Excellence
Modelling migration from paper into a food simulant
Validation of control measures in a food chain using the FSO concept
CONNECTICUT: July restaurant inspection reports
how to subscribe
CDC: Feeding your pets in the kitchen (and washing their bowls) can lead to salmonellosis
09.aug.10
barfblog
Ben Chapman
http://barfblog.com/blog/143584/10/08/09/cdc-feeding-your-pets-kitchen-and-washing-their-bowls-can-lead-salmonellosis
Pet food/feeding just wont go away. Following last week's frozen pet food linked outbreak, researchers led by CDC have released a report detailing salmonellosis associated with dry pet kibble from 2006-2008 linked to 79 illnesses in 21 states.
According to AP and USA Today:
Dry pet foods are an under-recognized source of salmonella infections in humans, and it's likely other illnesses since then were unknowingly caused by tainted pet food, said Casey Barton Behravesh, the report's lead author and a researcher at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
While young children were most often affected, there's no evidence that they got sick by eating pet food, Behravesh said. They probably became infected by touching affected animals or dirty pet food dishes, and then putting their hands in their mouths, she said.
In her study, sick children were no more likely to have played with or eaten pet food than other children. Instead, people were at risk for salmonella simply because they fed their pets in the kitchen, Behravesh says. People who became ill may have spread the bacteria around the kitchen because they failed to wash their hands after pouring dog chow into a bowl or handing the cat a treat.
With an almost-two-year old inquisitive boy in our house, I know how appealing pet food, pet food bowls, feeding pets and playing/laying on pet beds can be to a child. What's most interesting to me is the reportedly 4-times higher rate of infection from feeding pets in the kitchen – as is the spread from washing pet food bowls as a factors. How this translates to general household dishwashing (especially after use with potentially contaminated raw foods such as meat) is worth looking at further and modeling.
Doug and Randy Phebus created the below video at the time of the pet food-linked outbreak. They've both aged a bit but the info remains current.
Restaurant Don'ts
07.aug.10
barfblog
Sol Erdozain
http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/blog/143583/10/08/07/restaurant-dont%e2%80%99s
Raw chicken is probably the first thing that most people think of when thinking of foodborne illness. You would think chefs would know to use a thermometer to prevent undercooked chicken from ending up on the table.
However, tonight I witnessed a chef on 24 Hour Restaurant Battle (on the Food Network) serve some raw chicken to his diners. Not just to any person at that, but Marcus Samuelsson and Scott Conant, who were judges on the show. At least they got it right, immediately recognizing the risks and spitting it out.
Every person in the vicinity turned around when Samuelsson pointed out: "That is dangerous; that is not undercooked, it's raw."
If your restaurant makes people barf, it's not going to fare so well. Mr. Blumenthal learned that the hard way last year when his restaurant was shut down due to norovirus.
The chef on the show also learned the hard way; the raw chicken cost him the $10, 000 prize.
CALIFORNIA: Inspectors give failing grade to 17 restaurants in last 12 months
07.aug.10
Napa Valley Register
Jillian Jones
http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/article_e801f012-a2a3-11df-89f4-001cc4c002e0.html
Seventeen of Napa Valley's more than 800 eateries failed their health inspections during the last 12 months, ranging from casual spots to some of the valley's most upscale hot spots.
Mexican eateries were the most common offenders, with a number of local markets failing to make the grade, as well, health inspection data show. Napa favorite Buttercream Bakery racked up only 67 points out of 100 on its last inspection.
In Yountville, restaurants Bistro Don Giovanni and Hotel Luca's Cantinetta Piero made surprise appearances on the F-list. Celebrity chef Michael Chiarello's Bottega also failed an inspection.
"The walk-in (refrigerator) was broken when they came, but it was being fixed while the inspector was there. It was just one of those 'perfect storm' situations," said Bottega General Manager Joel Hoachuck, noting that the restaurant scored a 99 on its last inspection on July 7.
Nearly all the failing restaurants were able to address the health hazards immediately and in the presence of a health inspector, allowing them to continue operation without ever having to shut their doors, Napa County Director of Environmental Management Steve Lederer said. Those facilities that did not fix the problems immediately corrected them and were back up and running within a few days, he said.
No restaurant that fails a health inspection is allowed to continue operating until the health hazards are fixed, Lederer said.
And while no Napa Valley restaurant has been shut down permanently because of a health inspection in the last five years, Lederer said that county officials do not take failing grades lightly.
SCOTLAND: Farmers hold clue to vaccine against E coli
08.aug.10
Scotsman.com News
Lyndsay Moss
http://news.scotsman.com/health/Farmers-hold-clue-to-vaccine.6463083.jp
The secret of how to beat a deadly food poisoning bug may lie in Scotland's farmyards. Scientists have found that up to a fifth of Scottish farmers are immune to infection with E coli.
Researchers conducting tests on farmers in the Grampian region found that one in five showed signs of immunity to the naturally-occurring organism, which is spread mainly through cattle dung.
The findings suggest that repeated exposure to the bug has given farmers protection and may help in the search for a vaccine against the condition. More than 20 people died in Scotland in the world's worst outbreak of fatal E coli 0157 in 1996, when a batch of meat sold by a butcher in Lanarkshire was contaminated.
Researchers hope that a vaccine will protect at-risk groups, such as food industry workers and those working with children. The elderly and young children - whose natural immune systems are not as strong - are most susceptible to the disease.
In the study, conducted by scientists from Bangor University in Wales, around 200 farmers in Grampian and North Wales have so far been tested.
Researcher Dr Prysor Williams said: "We are taking small samples of blood and saliva and looking for antibodies in the samples. That will tell us if that individual has been exposed to 0157. If antibodies are present it shows that that individual has a degree of immunity because all the volunteers are not patients."
In a previous study of farmers in England and Wales, the researchers found that around three per cent had immunity to E coli 0157."
US: USDA plans to require ID for interstate livestock
08.aug.10
USA Today
Associated Press
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-08-08-livestock-usda-regulations_N.htm?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomWashington-TopStories+%28News+-+Washington+-+Top+Stories%29
HELENA, Mont. -- Federal officials looking to head off livestock disease outbreaks are drafting regulations that would require farmers to identify animals that move across state lines.
The aim is to reduce illness and deaths by making it easier for officials to trace brucellosis, tuberculosis and other diseases to a particular group of animals, location and time.
The regulations are being drafted six months after the U.S. Department of Agriculture dropped an unpopular voluntary program meant to trace livestock movement, and they are expected to be implemented in 2013.
"A voluntary system has not worked so far, and that's why the USDA has gone back to the drawing board and created a system that relies much more strongly on compulsory or mandatory identification instead of voluntary," said Marty Zaluski, the Montana state veterinarian and a member of the USDA working group drafting the new rule.
Last year, more than 19 million of the nation's 30 million beef cows and 9 million dairy cows crossed state lines.
Data from 2006 and 2007 show that only 28% of the nation's adult cattle had any form of official identification that would allow them to be tracked, said David Morris of the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
States will have authority to decide how to track livestock moving within their own borders, but they will be accountable to the federal government for the system they choose.
Salmonella recalls: when to test?
08.aug.10
Worms & Germs Blog
Scott Weese
http://www.wormsandgermsblog.com/2010/08/articles/animals/cats/salmonella-recalls-when-to-test/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WormsAndGermsBlog+%28Worms+and+Germs+Blog%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
The recent run of Salmonella recalls in dry foods, raw foods and supplements has resulted in a lot of questions about when animals should be tested for Salmonella. In general, testing is only indicated in animals that have disease suggestive of salmonellosis. Diarrhea's the main issue, but other problems such as fever, decreased appetite and bloodstream infections can also occur. Clearly, any animal with signs such as those need to be tested for Salmonella. However, there is no indication to test healthy dogs and cats that have been exposed to recalled products.
Why? An important concept of medicine is that you should always have a plan about how to handle diagnostic testing results, and the result should have an impact on something that you do. When you think about what would happen with a negative versus a positive test, it shows why testing is not useful.
What would I tell you about a negative result?
* I'd say that probably means the animal is negative, but it could be a false negative because of intermittent shedding of Salmonella in stool or a false negative lab result.
* I'd also say that even if there was no Salmonella, every animal is shedding multiple potentially harmful pathogens.
* So, I'd emphasize that if the animal became sick, Salmonella still needs to be considered and that good hygiene measures should be used around the animal (particularly its stool).
What would I say about a positive result?
* I'd say that means the animal was shedding Salmonella at the time the sample was collected, but that doesn't tell us if the animal is still shedding or how long it will do so.
* There's no indication to treat the animal. There is no evidence that treatment of dogs and cats that are shedding Salmonella is needed. There's also no evidence that it's effective. In fact, there are concerns that giving antibiotics could prolong shedding of Salmonella and that it could increase antibiotic resistance.
* Salmonella is certainly a public health concern, but there's not much specific to be done.
* So, I'd emphasize that if the animal became sick, that Salmonella still needs to be considered and that good hygiene measures should be used around the animal (particularly its stool).
Since my recommendations for a positive result and a negative result from a healthy animal would be the same, why test?
UK: Salmonella testing regulations clarified
08.aug.10
farminguk.com
http://www.farminguk.com/news/Salmonella-testing-regulations-clarified_18705.html
Animal Health has clarified the rules covering salmonella testing after one BFREPA member contacted the association to say that some producers were still not entirely sure about the deadlines imposed under the regulations
We reported in the March edition of the Ranger that egg producers could face fines and the designation of their eggs as class B if they were only slightly late with one of their National Control Programme salmonella tests. Some producers have already discovered that being just a day or two late with their 15-week tests can result in heavy penalties.
Although the tests have to be carried out at 15-week intervals, the intervals are being calculated in days. The BFREPA member who contacted the association wanted to know the exact length of the intervals in days. He also wanted to know from what point an interval was calculated – from the date the sample was posted from the farm or from the date of arrival at the lab?
We contacted Animal Health and a spokesman issued the following statement:
"Each new flock must be sampled between 22 and 26 weeks (154 -182 days). Thereafter, the sample must be taken at least every 15 weeks (105 days). The timing is from the date when the last sample was taken.
"For example, if the first sample (22 – 26 week) was taken on 1 April, when the birds were 25 weeks (175 days) old, the next test would need to be taken 105 days later on 15 July.
"For information, the sample must be 'submitted' within 48 hours (in practical terms this means posted). Operators must keep records of all testing (including the negative test certificate from the Defra approved laboratory) for a minimum of two years."
Missing a deadline could result in a £200 fine for the producer, but other consequences are far more serious. All the eggs sold since the expiry of the last salmonella test would be designated class B. Officials would immediately instigate their own tests and the producer would be responsible for all the associated costs. All eggs would continue as class B until production was verified clear. It is also possible that a producer could face extra costs as a result of eggs being recalled from the packhouse.
Clean restrooms: how important are they to restaurant consumers?
06.oct.09
Journal of Foodservice
Nelson Barber1 , Joseph M. Scarcelli
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-0159.2009.00155.x/abstract
Abstract
There are many choices to make in restaurant dining, and for experienced consumers, the expectation of safe, quality food has increased. The foodservice industry is in a challenging and competitive environment. Determining what factors of customer satisfaction are important to maintain or increase market share is critical to success. For consumers, there are few opportunities to evaluate food handling, safety and cleanliness practices of a restaurant. Research has shown that consumers are concerned with restroom cleanliness, with a functioning restroom having a positive influence on customers' perception of the restaurant; and has also been shown to impact the choice of where to eat or whether to return to a restaurant. This study tested these assumptions by using a data set from the southwestern US, finding that consumers are concerned with restaurant cleanliness and food safety, with restrooms an important factor to consumers when assessing the cleanliness of an eating establishment.
Nestlé SINGAPORE wins Gold Award for Food Safety Excellence
30.jul.10
Nestle
http://www.nestle.com/MediaCenter/NewsandFeatures/AllNewsFeatures/Nestle-Singapore-wins-Gold-award-for-Food-Safety-Excellence.htm
Nestlé was among those companies given the country's Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) Food Safety Gold Excellence Award, the first time the honour has been awarded.
The Gold Award recognizes 15 consecutive years of 'A' Grades in food safety.
Ms Tan Poh Hong, AVA's chief executive officer, said: "This year's Gold Award is especially significant, as it is the first time that we are giving the "Food Safety Excellence Gold Award".
The Food Safety Excellence Award was established in 1997 to encourage food manufacturers to maintain a consistently high standard of hygiene.
The awards have been good for Singapore as an exporter of food products. Ms Tan added that the primary food safety evaluation criteria included factory sanitation, housekeeping, production line automation, personal hygiene, product quality management programmes as well as factory structural design.
Mr Suresh Narayan, Nestlé Singapore managing director commented that, "Over the years, Nestlé has always been determined to adhere to food safety as well as maintaining product quality. This has become part of the company's culture. Now that we have seen the success, our staff and retired employees should all be very proud of this award."
Mr Richard Hui, Nestlé Singapore's Factory Manager, said that one of their key management philosophies for food safety is the Nestlé Quality Management System, which has been established according to the international standards, ISO 9001:2000 as well as ISO 22000:2005. The strict implementation of such a system has enabled Nestlé to always strive for the best product quality, building a solid foundation of confidence in the customers' minds.
"Nestlé constantly reviews and improves the production process and system, pooling a variety of ideas to find out the best plan to satisfy our customer demand. For example, we have set First Time Quality and Zero Food Safety Complaint as our production targets. At Nestlé, employees are our assets, thus we should constantly equip them," Mr Hui added.
All members of staff understand the importance of food safety as an integral part of Nestlé. Regular training is given so employees are updated and have a better understanding of food safety requirements and processes.
Modelling migration from paper into a food simulant
07.aug.10
Food Control
Maria de Fátima Poças, Jorge C. Oliveira, Joel R. Pereira, Rainer Brandsch, and Timothy Hogg
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T6S-50PVFX2-2&_user=10&_coverDate=08%2F06%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=44700517661ccc4114f4889480e9e9ad
Abstract
The migration of components from paper into Tenax® was studied to determine the influence of molecular size and chemical character of the migrant and the influence of paper characteristics in the migration process. The Weibull model was applied because Fick's 2nd law of diffusion gave poor fits in some cases. The migration pattern depended on the migrants molecular size and was independent of temperature in the studied range. The migration rate decreased with the migrant molecular size. The influence of the migrants character (polarity and vapour pressure) on the migration behaviour was also studied: non polar migrants with high vapour pressure presented low relative migration values and polar migrants presented high values of relative migration. Results indicated that the apparent partition coefficient between paper and the simulant Tenax® increased with the migrant vapour pressure and with both the paper grammage and the recycled pulp content.
Validation of control measures in a food chain using the FSO concept
07.aug.10
Food Control
M.H. Zwietering, C.M. Stewart and R.C. Whiting
Abstract
For the validation of control measures in a food chain, the FSO concept can be used, to structurally combine the initial level, reduction and increase of contaminants. The impact of taking into consideration both the level and the variability of these factors on the proportion of product meeting the FSO has been investigated. In this manner it can be examined where in the process the main factors are found to control the proportion of product meeting the FSO. Furthermore equivalence in performance, either by reducing the level or the variability in a level, is investigated. Both experimental and statistical aspects are described that can together be combined to support the confidence that a process can conform to a set FSO.
CONNECTICUT: July restaurant inspection reports
09.aug.10
Valley Independent Sentinel
http://valley.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/july_restaurant_inspection_reports/
NOTE: The Valley Naugatuck Health District provided the Valley Indy with a summary of its food service inspection report for the month of July.
Anything below 80 is categorized as failing. A restaurant may also fail if it receives a single, serious violation.
ANSONIA
Establishment name: Aden Mini Mart Address: 147 No. Main St. Score: 95
Eastern Bistro 669-D Main Street 96
Hilltop Health Care 126 Ford Street 93
Julia Day Nursery & Kindergarten 76 Central Street 99
MTK Mini Market 58 Main St. 100
Polish Falcons of America Nest 36 108 Central Street 92
Slovak National Eagle Club 109 ½ Wakelee Ave. 96
Taco Bell 205 Division Street 100
DERBY
A & M Club 30 Hawthorne Ave. 98
Adams Super Food Stores 656 New Haven Avenue 89
All Star Petro Mart 25 New Haven Ave. 100
Bella's Pizza 9 Minerva St. 94
Brickhouse Restaurant & Cafe 90 Pershing Dr. 91
Burger King 540 New Haven Ave. 93
Crossroads Cafe 12 Main St. 96
Derby Elks Lodge 73 Elizabeth Street 100
Dunkin Donuts 530 New Haven Ave. 88
Dunkin Donuts 25 New Haven Ave. 92
Fortune Pavilion 656 New Haven Road 85
Heavenly Donuts 658 New Haven Avenue 73
Italian Pavilion 78 Pershing Drive 87
Lucarelli's Italian Cuisine 656 New Haven Avenue 93
McDonald's Restaurant 44 Division St. Derby 92
McDonald's Restaurant 652 New Haven Ave. 94
Mr. D's Market 78 Hawkins Street 100
Nichols Dog House – Itinerant J19893 Roosevelt Dr. 100
River's Edge Bar & Grill 300 Roosevelt Drive 92
Shell Quick Stop 265 Roosevelt Drive 100
Shop Rite of Derby 49 Pershing Drive 91
Shop Rite Supermarket – Sushi Bar 49 Pershing Dr. 100
Subway at BJ's 20 A Division St. 98
Wal-Mart 656 New Haven Ave. 100
Wendy's Old Fashioned Hamburgers 709 New Haven Avenue 89
Yolanda's Bakery 17 Hawthorne Avenue 87
SEYMOUR
Alberto's Restaurant Tri-Town Plaza 91
Cheong Hing Kitchen 225 West Street 91
Dragon Kitchen 5 First St. 92
Dunkin Donuts 33 New Haven Road 93
Dunkin' Donuts 354-356 Roosevelt Dr. 98
Family Mobil 54 New Haven Rd. 90
First Street Pizza 21 First St. 88
Grace & Tony's 225 West St. 91
Guerra's Sandwich Shop 132 New Haven Road 97
Haroula's Coffee Shop 29 Bank Street 98
Hot Grill-N-Pizza 59 New Haven Rd. 93
Hot Tamale Mexican Grill & Bar 39 New Haven Rd. 90
Hunan Wok 59 New Haven Rd. 86
In and Out Market 385 Roosevelt Dr. 90
Inn at Villa Bianca 312 Roosevelt Drive 93
Jimmie's Place 133 Main Street 98
Lake House Bar & Grill 337 Roosevelt Drive 84
Meeting Place Restaurant,The 716 Derby Avenue 94
Ozzie's Pizza and Family Restaurant 145 Main St. 88
Pier 34 Cafe 377 Roosevelt Drive 99
Riverview BBQ 177 Roosevelt Dr. 91
Seymour Alumni Athletic Club 169 Main Street 100
Shady Knoll Health Care Center Inc. 41 Skokorat Street 99
Smithfield Gardens Assisted Living 26 Smith St. 97
Strand Theater 165 Main Street 100
Whittemore Ice Cream 114 So. Main St. 98
Zois Pizza Palace 48 Main Street 97
SHELTON
American Legion 16 295 Bridgeport Avenue 96
Amici's Restaurant 500C Howe Avenue 87
Aribella Ristorante 66 Huntington St. 93
Artan's Deli 19 Kneen Street 82
Asian Bistro 702 Bridgeport Ave. 98
Asian Bistro 702 Bridgeport Ave. 93 Bertucci's Brick Oven Pizzeria 768 Bridgeport Avenue 90
Bridgeport Ave. Shell 99 Bridgeport Ave. 100
Brownson Country Club 15 Soundview Avenue 82
Brownson Country Club Snack Bar 15 Soundview Ave. 94
Bruegger's Bagels 811 Bridgeport Ave. 94
Carmine's Ristorante Italiano 376 River Rd. 97
Casa Nova Restaurant 833 River Road 86
Chili's Grill & Bar 828 Bridgeport Ave. 100
Donut Stop, The 368 Howe Avenue 85
Draft House 350 Bridgeport Ave. 94
Duchess Of Shelton 883 Bridgeport Avenue 90
Gourmet Express – Bic One Research Drive 88
Granato Caterers 70 Wooster St. 93
Highland Golf Club Restaurant Wooster Street 95
Huntington St. Cafe 90 Huntington St. 90
Il Palio 5 Corporate Drive 90
Joy Lee Restaurant 438 Howe Avenue 73 Kinder Care Learning Center 1 Trap Falls Rd. 96
Kobis Japanese Steak House 514 Bridgeport Ave. 86
Lia's Pizza 425 River Rd. 92
Longhorn Steakhouse of Shelton 838 Bridgeport Ave. 100
MBI, Inc. 15 Forest Parkway 100
Outback Steakhouse 698 Bridgeport Ave. 95
Panchero's Mexican Grill 704 Bridgeport Ave. 96
Planet Pizza 350 Bridgeport Ave. 92
Plaza Diner 737 Bridgeport Avenue 87
Roma Importing Huntington Village Ctr. 92
Royal Bakery 34 Huntington St. 94
Ruby Tuesday 811 Bridgeport Avenue 98
Scooter's Deli Mart 484 Bridgeport Avenue 95
Shelton Senior Center 81 Wheeler St. 98
Starbucks 504 Bridgeport Ave. 100
Subway 815 River Rd. 97
Subway 462 Howe Ave. 100
Subway 494 Bridgeport Ave. #105 98
Super Stop & Shop 898 Bridgeport Ave. 100
Suzann Smeraglino Cafe & Catering 100 Beard Saw Mill Rd. 96
Suzann Smeraglino Cafe & Catering 2 2 Enterprise Drive 98
Villa Pizza Restaurant 894 Bridgeport Avenue 87
Vincent's Italian Restaurant 526 Shelton Avenue 85
Wellington's Restaurant 51 Huntington Plaza 94
bites is produced by Dr. Douglas Powell and food safety friends at Kansas State University. For further information, please contact dpowell@ksu.edu or check out bites.ksu.edu.
TO SUBSCRIBE to the listserv version of bites, send mail to:
(subscription is free)
listserv@listserv.ksu.edu
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
subscribe bites-L firstname lastname
i.e. subscribe bites-L Doug Powell
TO UNSUBSCRIBE from the listserv version of bites, send mail to:
listserv@listserv.ksu.edu
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type: signoff bites-L
archived at http://archives.foodsafety.ksu.edu/fsnet-archives.htm and bites.ksu.edu
posted by Tom Karst @ 4:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home