This barfblogging stuff can be fairly cool (thanks, Bill).

I wrote an opinion piece about the on-going inquiry into the 2005 E. coli O157 outbreak in Wales, and how the findings to date were somewhat similar to what happened after the 1996 E. coli outbreak in Scotland.

Didn’t send it to any media outlets, but posted it on barfblog.com.

That was Feb. 27, 2008. Yesterday, the opinion piece/blog entry apparently made an appearance at the inquiry in Wales.

The Western Mail reported that the Welsh E. coli public inquiry was yesterday shown a blog entry suggesting that chairman Professor Hugh Pennington was trapped in Groundhog Day and that worrying parallels have emerged between the world’s worst E.coli O157 outbreak and the cause of the South Wales Valleys outbreak.

The Scottish outbreak was caused by meat produced by award-winning butcher John Barr, who was found to be using the same knives to handle both raw and cooked meat.

The inquiry into the South Wales outbreak has heard how butcher William Tudor relied on one vacuum-packing machine for both raw and cooked meats. The single machine, which was in use for at least nine months before the outbreak and has been repeatedly referred to as a serious risk of cross-contamination.

In 1999 Prof Pennington said,

“The prospect of another Mr Barr type situation is still quite real because everybody I talk to in meat inspection and environmental health tells me there are people who are still not doing the right thing.”

But despite the recommendations, Tudor repeatedly passed routine environmental health inspections and was awarded his butcher’s licence just over a month before the outbreak, which killed five-year-old Deri Primary School pupil Mason Jones (right), even though Bridgend Council’s inspectors were aware that he was working with only one vac-packing machine.

Asked about the Groundhog Day blog, Dr Salmon said,

“The butcher, John Barr, as far as I understand, was extremely well connected in the location of which his enforcement was taking place. It will be important to take into account how much such considerations may or may not have applied in the case of William Tudor.”