Family wins $1.9 million lawsuit after salmonella infected from chicken almost kills toddler

An Arizona federal court jury awarded a family nearly $2 million in damages after their toddler experienced a brain injury from a Foster Farms chicken tainted by salmonella.

Just days after his grandmother and cousin became sick from different strains of salmonella in late 2013, then 17-month-old Noah Craten suddenly came down with a fever, chills and diarrhea, according to the Arizona Republic. But doctors initially didn’t think the salmonella bacteria — one of the most common causes of food poisoning usually attributed to contaminated foods like eggs, poultry and meat— was the cause of his symptoms.

But just a few weeks later in October, Noah was admitted to the hospital after experiencing an extended fever, and after conducting scans, doctors found an infection in the front of his brain that had created an abscess, placing pressure on the rest of his brain.

“I lost it. I was hyperventilating and hysterical,” Noah’s mother, Amanda, told the publication. “I wanted someone to fix him and bring him back to me. I couldn’t see him like that.”

The young boy then underwent surgery to remove a portion of the abscess, and doctors soon discovered it was caused by a rare strain of multidrug-resistant salmonella known as Salmonella Heidelberg.

“When we found out the abscess was from salmonella,” she said, “I instantly lost my composure and cried my eyes out.”

At the time of the discovery, Foster Farms was experiencing an outbreak of the salmonella in its products, which led to the hospitalization of at least 241 people throughout the country. The outbreak began in March 2013, and wouldn’t be declared over by the Centers of Disease Controluntil July 2014.

Noah received antibiotic treatments for the following seven weeks to shrink the rest of the abscess, and while he eventually seemed to improve, the toddler began to show signs of developmental damage such as facial tics and a stutter.

“We were devastated,” Amanda told the newspaper. “It’s been slowly, like every six months, we have a new problem.”

After seeing the damage done to their boy, Amanda and her husband, James Craten, sued Foster Farms for negligence and liability in their part of the salmonella outbreak.

“Foster Farms had known for years that it had a problem with Salmonella in its raw chicken, both from its own internal testing and from prior outbreaks to which Foster Farms had been linked,” one of the Cratens’ lawyers, Eric Hageman, told PEOPLE in a statement. “However, it failed to take steps to mitigate or eliminate Salmonella in its chicken, primarily because the USDA does not have a zero-tolerance policy for Salmonella on raw chicken (as it does for E. coli in ground beef).”

On March 1, an Arizona federal court awarded the family $1.95 million based on epidemiological and microbiological evidence that pointed to the company’s role in Noah’s illness.

In a statement to PEOPLE, Foster Farms said that there was no evidence presented in the trial that showed the family had purchased one of their products leading up to Noah’s symptoms.

“Every consumer has the right to expect safe and wholesome food. Salmonella-related illnesses can trace to any number of causes, including chicken,” the company said. “During the course of the trial, no evidence was presented that demonstrated the Craten family had purchased Foster Farms chicken in the six months prior to Noah Craten’s illness.”

The jury valued the damage to Noah at $6.5 million, and deemed Foster Farms 30 percent responsible — coming out to $1.95 million — and the family 70 perfect responsible, as the food that infected Noah was likely not prepared correctly, as salmonella is typically killed while the food is cooked. The money will all be set aside for Noah.

It is still unclear whether Foster Farms will appeal the verdict, and the family tells the Arizona Republic that they’ll likely only be left with almost half of their award once they pay off fees.

634 sickened in national Salmonella outbreak, 2013-14, from one poultry company (Foster Farms)

In June 2012, the Oregon Health Authority and the Washington State Department of Health noted an increase in the number of Salmonella enterica serotype Heidelberg clinical isolates sharing an identical pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pattern. In 2004, this pattern had been linked to chicken from Foster Farms by the Washington State Department of Health; preliminary 2012 interviews with infected persons also indicated exposure to Foster Farms chicken.

In the end, at least 634 Americans were sickened with Salmonella Heidelberg, all linked to Foster Farms, from 2013-2014.

Here is the scientific write-up of that outbreak, or I’m completely wrong in my interpretation and will blame the painkillers.

Importance

This large outbreak of foodborne salmonellosis demonstrated the complexity of investigating outbreaks linked to poultry products. The outbreak also highlighted the importance of efforts to strengthen food safety policies related to Salmonella in the chicken parts and has implications for future changes within the poultry industry.

Objective

To investigate a large multistate outbreak of multidrug resistant Salmonella Heidelberg infections.

Design

Epidemiologic and laboratory investigations of patients infected with the outbreak strains of Salmonella  Heidelburg and traceback of possible food exposures.

Setting

United States. Outbreak period was March 1, 2013 through July 11, 2014

Patients

A case was defined as illness in a person infected with a laboratory-confirmed Salmonella Heidelburg with 1 of 7 outbreak pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) Xbal pattern with illness onset from March 1, 2013 through July 11, 2014. A total of 634 case-patients were identified through passive surveillance; 200/528 (38%) were hospitalized, none died.

Results

Interviews were conducted with 435 case-patients interviewed with a focused questionnaire, 201 (74%) reported eating chicken prepared at home. Among case-patients with available brand information, 152 (87%) of 175 patients reported consuming Company A brand chicken. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was completed on 69 clinical isolates collected from case-patients; 67% were drug resistant, including 24 isolates (35%) that were multidrug resistant. The source of Company A brand chicken consumed by case-patients was traced back to 3 California production establishments from which 6 of 7 outbreak strains were isolated.

Conclusions

Epidemiologic, laboratory, traceback, and environmental investigations conducted by local state, and federal public health and regulatory officials indicated that consumption of Company A chicken was the cause of this outbreak. The outbreak involved multiple PFGE patterns, a variety of chicken products, and 3 production establishments, suggesting a reservoir for contamination upstream from the production establishments. Sources of bacteria and genes responsible for resistance, such as farms providing birds for slaughter environmental reservoir on farms that raise chickens, might explain how multiple PFGE patterns were linked to chicken form 3 separate production establishments and many different poultry products.

National outbreak of multidrug resistant Salmonella Heidelberg infections linked to a single poultry company

PLoS ONE, 11(9), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0162369

http://forum.efeedlink.com/contents/07-05-2017/976bf575-6e5a-4067-a763-0598a663f48d-c784.html

 

‘Treat chicken like hazardous waste’ Investigation about Salmonella outbreaks linked to Foster Farms earns national award

I treat all food like hazardous waste.

Editor Mark Katches writes that Lynne Terry of The Oregonian/OregonLive began writing about the federal government’s alarming handling of Salmonella outbreaks caused by store-bought chicken that began in the Pacific Northwest.

lynne.terryShe found that over the course of a decade, the U.S. Department of Agriculture had not one, not two, not three, but four opportunities to warn the public about salmonella outbreaks involving Foster Farms chicken. Each time, the agency hemmed and hawed.

Terry was the first journalist in America to identify and write about this trend. But it didn’t come easily. She learned that reporters from Frontline, The Center for Investigative Reporting and the New York Times were circling around the story as she entered the final stages.

“It was tough,” said Terry, about the competition. “I felt this story was mine from the beginning, and I didn’t want anyone else to break it. It’s in our backyard. I had inside sources. I knew this stuff. So I did what anyone would do: I worked long hours every day for months on end to bring it home.”

Terry indeed got the scoop. Her “A Game of Chicken” project turned out to be a stunning and illuminating examination of the way the USDA operates.

And this week, the American Health Care Journalists awarded her first place in the public health category, beating out stiff competition from the Chicago Tribune and Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

In her investigation that spanned more than a year, Terry set out to determine if the USDA’s slow handling of a major salmonella outbreak in 2013-2014 was an isolated case.

It wasn’t.

She reviewed thousands of pages of previously undisclosed documents dating back to 2003. What she found was disturbing: More than 1,000 people had rushed to their doctors with bouts of food poisoning. Regulators had strong evidence pointing to the cause of the outbreaks but took virtually no steps to protect consumers from tainted chicken. Health officials in Oregon and Washington had pushed vigorously for federal action, having identified clear and convincing evidence of problems. But the USDA wouldn’t budge. Terry got a big assist from senior watchdog reporter Les Zaitz, who was serving as investigations editor at the time. And video producer Teresa Mahoney’s remarkable video helped break down complex issues in a compelling way while also warning consumers to thoroughly cook their chicken to 165 degrees.

Terry’s meticulous reporting showed that USDA officials were so fearful of being sued by the companies they regulate that the agency had set an almost impossible bar for evidence, even rejecting samples of tainted chicken that state health agencies believed would help clinch their case.

She also found out that government inspectors were under pressure to go easy on food processors. In one notable case, the USDA transferred an inspector after Foster Farms complained he wrote too many citations.

The agency rejected a wide-ranging Freedom of Information Act request. We appealed the denial and won. But months passed before the USDA finally released any records. Many of the documents were heavily redacted – often with entire pages blacked out.

“They refused records requests, and didn’t release anything for more than a year,” Terry said.

foster.farms.salmonellaShe filed more FOIA requests. And then more. The agency dribbled out partial releases, sending something every four or five months in response to our requests for updates. The federal agency’s attempts to stonewall Terry were even chronicled in a Columbia Journalism Review article lauding The Oregonian’s persistence.

Terry overcame other obstacles. Foster Farms sent two foreboding letters to The Oregonian/OregonLive before we published. After the stories appeared, the company didn’t question the accuracy of our reporting.

Despite these hurdles, Terry was able to piece together a story of bureaucratic failure that had devastating human consequences. She found victims of salmonella poisoning who were willing to share their stories. She translated complicated epidemiological information into language readers could understand. She tracked down key documents. And she built the trust of USDA inspectors, who feared losing their jobs if they spoke out.

Her work was cited by members of Congress. In Oregon, Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson, D-Gresham, referred to the investigation while she was arguing for a Senate bill that would limit antibiotic use in farm animals. Terry’s reporting also emboldened other USDA inspectors to come forward and tell their stories.

We went to extraordinary lengths to ensure “A Game of Chicken” was fair and totally accurate. Our lawyers reviewed drafts at least four times at our request.

It would have been easy to have been pushed by the swirling competition to publish as fast as possible. But that can sometimes introduce errors if reporters and editors short-hand the bullet-proofing process. Our watchdog motto is to publish when we’re ready. Or in this case, fully cooked.

Here’s a transcript of the Q&A with Oregonian/OregonLive health reporter Lynne Terry.

How long did it take to tell this story?

Longer than it should have, thanks to foot-dragging by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. I put in my first public records request in spring 2013 and filed several more through 2014. I worked on the story sporadically over a year or so but then dug into the trenches in autumn 2014 when they started responding to public records and I landed an inside contact. I worked nonstop for about eight months before we published.

What were the biggest complications?

Four initials: USDA. They refused records requests, and didn’t release anything for more than a year. They were wearing me down, frankly. Fortunately, Les Zaitz got involved. He was our investigations editor. He was a huge help in pushing the USDA. We never did get their enforcement data, however.

How did it affect you knowing that Foster Farms was sending seemingly threatening letters before we published?

At the time? It made me nervous. I don’t even like covering courts, let alone testifying. And the thought of The O being dragged into court because of my reporting was scary. But in retrospect, I think they helped us. We knew we had to have a rock solid package, and we did. We didn’t hear a peep from the USDA or Foster Farms after we published.

What impact did it have knowing that a number of other media were swirling around pieces of this story?

It was tough. I felt this story was mine from the beginning, and I didn’t want anyone else to break it. It’s in our backyard. I had inside sources. I knew this stuff. So I did what anyone would do: I worked long hours every day for months on end to bring it home.

Were you ever close to giving up on this story?

Several times. I was floundering when you came to The O. I was pretty much working on my own. I knew I had a good story but my editors were too busy with the daily churn. I was, too. Getting time to focus on it helped. Having Les to work with was crucial.

What has been the reaction?

I got quite a few emails from members of the public who said they’ve stopped eating chicken. Foster Farms has stepped up its internal controls and now says it has the safest chicken in the country. The USDA has tightened its regulations over salmonella but it has not banned the bacteria even though it sickens more than a million people a year.

Has this story changed the way you look at chicken?

Yes. I’ve not had chicken much since. There’s one quote that sticks with me. An Oregon epidemiologist said: “Treat it like hazardous waste.” That’s a bit of an appetite killer.

Foster Farms, regulators and a game of chicken

Lynne Terry of The Oregonian writes in a comprehensive feature that over the course of a decade, hundreds of people from Eugene to Baker City to Portland and Seattle were struck by bouts of food poisoning so severe they fled to their doctors or emergency rooms for treatment.

chicken.south.parkThey had no idea what made them sick. But federal regulators did.

Oregon and Washington public health officials repeatedly told the U.S. Department of Agriculture they had linked salmonella outbreaks in 2004, 2009 and 2012 to Foster Farms chicken.

State officials pushed federal regulators to act, but salmonella-tainted chicken flowed into grocery stores, first in the Northwest, then across the country. Oregon investigators became so familiar with the culprit they gave it a name: the Foster Farms strain.

The outbreaks tied by state health officials to Foster Farms first occurred in Oregon and Washington. Then in 2012, illnesses spread to almost a dozen states. The next year, a new outbreak emerged that sickened more than 600 people across the country.

Much has been written about that last 16-month ordeal and the USDA’s slow response. But the way the federal agency handled it was not an isolated case, an investigation by The Oregonian/OregonLive has found.

Time after time dating to 2004, Oregon and Washington officials alerted the USDA’s food safety agency about salmonella illnesses, but the federal government chose not to warn the public or ask Foster Farms for a recall.

Foster-Farms-Chicken-BreastWith no reason to worry, people kept eating contaminated chicken.

Foster Farms processes hundreds of thousands of birds a day, and only a small fraction of its customers ever got sick.

But from 2004 through 2014, state or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials identified nearly 1,000 infections they said were linked to Foster Farms chicken in four separate outbreaks. About 300 of those cases occurred in Oregon and Washington. The overall toll was possibly much higher. The CDC estimates that for every confirmed salmonella infection, more than 29 go unreported.

The Oregonian/OregonLive reviewed thousands of pages of government records related to Foster Farms and interviewed dozens of health officials, inspectors, food safety experts and federal managers for this story. The records and interviews reveal for the first time an agency that over a 10-year span had repeatedly failed to protect consumers when confronting one of the nation’s largest poultry processors.

During that time, the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service issued hundreds of citations at the company’s sprawling plant in Kelso, Washington. But the agency allowed the plant to operate even though people kept getting sick.

Since the last outbreak ended, no known illnesses have been tied to the company, the largest poultry processor in the West. Foster Farms says it now has one of the lowest salmonella rates in the industry, having invested tens of millions of dollars to improve its plants and procedures.

It’s a different story at the USDA.

The agency has boosted its food safety budget and has made some strides to protect consumers, including introducing stricter standards for salmonella and ordering more random tests.

But many of the same practices and cultural hurdles that contributed to the way the agency handled public health concerns during that 10-year span remain in place today.

chicken.shock.may.13USDA officials are so worried about being sued by companies that they’ve set a high bar for evidence, even rejecting samples of tainted chicken that state health agencies believed would help clinch their case, records and interviews show.

Union officials said the government inspectors they represent are pressured to go easy on food processors, citing one notable case in which the USDA transferred an inspector after Foster Farms complained he wrote too many citations. And after strong pushback from Foster Farms, the USDA retracted a reference in a public document that unequivocally linked the company to illnesses in 2004, a move that baffled state health officials who described the investigation as “rock solid.”

And there’s much more, including USDA’s unwritten rules for going public at http://www.oregonlive.com/usda-salmonella/#incart_m-rpt-1.

Portland TV investigative report details food safety issues at Foster Farms in 2014

Kyle Iboshi, Senior Investigative Reporter at KGW TV reports that USDA inspection reports that were acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request (below, exactly as shown) detail multiple violations at a Kelso, WA Foster Farms processing plant in 2014. Foster Farms’ chicken was linked to over 630 cases of salmonellosis between 2011 and 2014.

The reports, dated from March to September 2014, show 40 separate violations of food safety rules at the Kelso plant during the six month period.foster-farms

“There were multiple times when food safety problems were identified and then not addressed,” said Christopher Waldrop, director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America in Washington D.C.

Reports show on July 9, 2014 an inspector found fecal material on a raw chicken.

“The fecal material was found on the inside left hip/thigh area consisting of dark green creamy material,” wrote the government inspector.

“You shouldn’t have fecal matter on chickens,” said Waldrop. “That presents a risk to consumers because they could get sick if they consume that chicken or other chickens that were processed at the same time.”

“Foster Farms is committed to the highest levels of food safety and regrets any illness that may have previously been associated with any of its products,” wrote the company in a statement to KGW. The company declined requests for an on-camera interview.

“We really need to know what is happening in these plants,” said Waldrop.

Foster Farms Inspection Reports

Foster Farms won’t come clean

I’m not a fan of antibiotic resistance stories, I’m not a fan of NRDC, but I am a fan of food that doesn’t make people barf, and companies who are accountable, rather than the just-cook-it approach.

Family guy barfIf Foster Farms wants to regain consumer confidence, market microbial food safety at retail.

After the NPR puff-piece on Foster Farms and its Salmonella-laden chicken which has sickened at least more than 600 people, the Los Angeles Times reports that after reopening its main plant in Central California after a cockroach infestation, federal inspectors were already writing-up new violations at the sprawling poultry-processing facility.

U.S. Department of Agricultural inspectors would cite the Livingston, Calif., plant more than 40 times over the next two months for violations such as mold, rust on equipment and several instances of fecal contamination.

The new details were released by the Natural Resources Defense Council, a New York environmental advocacy group that is campaigning to reduce antibiotic use in livestock over concerns that it is contributing to drug-resistant superbugs.

The issue has become so prominent in the industry that Perdue Farms announced last week that it was the first major poultry brand to eliminate antibiotic use in its hatcheries.

Using the Freedom of Information Act, the NRDC received months’ worth of documented violations at Foster Farms from the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service.

food.that.doesn't.make.you.barf.09The goal? To lift the veil at a company linked to an outbreak of salmonella that sickened at least 634 people from March 2013 to July. The outbreak was notable for its higher rates of hospitalizations and the presence of antibiotic-resistant strains of salmonella.

“Throughout the salmonella crisis, Foster Farms repeatedly told us it was committed to leadership in food safety. But the reports show that when you look behind the curtain, it’s a company that can’t comply with its own food safety plan,” said Jonathan Kaplan, the council’s food and agriculture program director.

Thomas E. Elam, president of farming consulting company FarmEcon in Carmel, Ind., said the number of violations was unusually high, though he did not have comparative data for poultry firms of a similar size.

“Some of the issues are very minor, but there is a pattern of lack of employee training and sanitation issues with the plant infrastructure that are not so minor,” said Elam, who reviewed a copy of the violations. “I’m frankly surprised by the number of bird handling and contamination issues from improperly operating equipment…. These data are not going to put Foster in a positive light.”

The Food Safety and Inspection Service did not respond to a request to explain whether Foster Farms was receiving violations at higher rates than similarly sized competitors.

Foster Farms, forget the soundbites and PR; market food safety at retail so consumers can choose

According to state-sponsored jazz, Foster Farms, California’s biggest chicken producer, has been accused of poisoning people with salmonella bacteria. After an outbreak last fall, the U.S. Department of Agriculture threatened to shut down three of the company’s plants.

foster.farms.salmonelleaSince then, though, the company has reduced its rates of salmonella contamination dramatically. Some food safety experts are now saying that the whole poultry industry should now follow this company’s example

Last summer, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found evidence that chicken from Foster Farms had caused a wave of Salmonella infections. More than 600 people had gotten sick.

Inspectors from the USDA arrived at Foster Farms plants, and this time, they went much further than the standard safety test. Instead of just testing whole chicken carcasses, they took samples of what most consumers actually buy: the cut-up parts, such as breasts, thighs and wings.

What they found is now shaking up the whole poultry industry. Their tests showed salmonella on about 25 percent of those cut-up chicken parts.

David Acheson, a former associate commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration, says this pattern has been discovered at other poultry companies, too. Whole carcasses are largely free of salmonella, but then the bacteria appear on nearly a quarter of the chicken parts.

It’s a mystery that the poultry industry is now trying to resolve.

“What happened?” says Acheson. “Did this bug come in from the environment? Did something contaminate it during the process – the equipment, the workers, something weird like that? Or were we missing it the first time?”

Probably, we were missing it, Acheson says.

Others, like Seattle attorney Bill Marler, who makes his living suing companies when their food makes people sick, say it’s not good enough. “The standard is, it’s still OK to have a pathogen on your product that can sicken and kill your customers. And as long as that’s the way it is, we’re always going to limp from outbreak to outbreak to outbreak,” he says.

Marler believes that the FDA should take the same stand against salmonella that it did against another dangerous microbe: disease-causing E. coli.

When the FDA declared these E. coli bacteria illegal adulturants in food, the meat industry complained, but it also found new ways to prevent them from poisoning people. “It used to be 90 percent of my law firm’s revenue, and now it’s nearly zero. It’s a success story,” says Marler.

Eliminating salmonella altogether would be difficult — it’s much more common in the environment than disease-causing E. coli.

So for now, the FDA is asking companies to reduce salmonella contamination, but it’s not requiring chicken meat to be completely salmonella-free.

Foster Farms: keys to the city after sickening 621

Until Foster Farms goes public, with data and risk responsibility, with 621 sick, puff pieces like getting the keys to the city should be scorned.

Foster-Farms-Chicken-BreastAccording to the Modesto Bee, without Livingston, there is no Foster Farms, and without Foster Farms, there is no Livingston.

Those were the words of Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra as he explained the company’s impact on the city. Samra joined Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza and Councilman Arturo Sicairos in presenting Foster Farms CEO Ron Foster with a commemorative key to the city Tuesday night.

The company was recognized for its 75th anniversary during a special meeting at the City Council chamber.

Foster said he’s grateful for the support of the Livingston community, especially amid a salmonella outbreak and cockroach infestation that shut down the plant for days sending nearly 3,000 employees home without pay.

“I think when things like what’s happened in the last eight months occur it impacts not only the employees, but also the community,” Foster said. “Once this happened, we took a multihurdle approach to controlling salmonella. We now believe we are the best in class with salmonella control.”

Foster also credited the Livingston plant’s employees for their hard work and loyalty. Many of them come from families that have worked multiple generations for the company.

Is Foster Farms a food safety pioneer or a persistent offender?

Dan Charles of NPR reports that Foster Farms, a chicken producer in California, just can’t seem to stop bleeding bad news.

Foster-Farms-Chicken-BreastAn outbreak of Salmonella linked to Foster Farms poultry has sickened at least 621 people in 29 states and Puerto Rico since 2013, shows no signs of stopping.

But Foster Farms may now be one of the country’s cleanest, safest sources of chicken products. That’s according to the USDA, which has been testing chicken parts that are processed at Foster Farms plants.

After the USDA threatened to shut down the plants in October, the company called in food safety experts and set up new to eliminate salmonella contamination. It’s made a difference, the government says. At Foster Farms plants, fewer than 5 per cent of chicken parts test positive for salmonella. At other companies, it’s typically about 20 per cent.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California called on other chicken companies to follow Foster Farms’ example. David Acheson, former chief medical officer of the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service and a former associate commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration, praised the company for being “willing to devote the time and resources to becoming a world leader in food safety.”

If Foster Farms or any other company wants to be a real food safety leader, testing data will be publicly available and microbial food safety will be marketed at retail so consumers can choose – and not just choice amongst soundbites.

Market food safety at retail; Foster Farms finally recalls some chicken 16 months after first Salmonella outbreak

Two weeks ago, Foster Farms poultry producers announced they’d dramatically lowered levels of salmonella in chicken parts — and invested $75 million to do it.

chicken.south.parkNow, Foster Farms of Fresno, Calif., is recalling an undetermined amount of chicken products that may be contaminated with a particular strain of Salmonella Heidelberg.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) requested Foster Farms conduct this recall because this product is known to be associated with a specific illness.

FSIS was notified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of a Salmonella Heidelberg illness on June 23, 2014, associated with the consumption of a boneless skinless chicken breast product. Working in conjunction with CDC, FSIS determined that there is a link between boneless skinless chicken breast products from Foster Farms and this illness after recovering the leftover boneless chicken breast for testing. Lab tests confirmed a molecular match between the Salmonella on the cut-up poultry and strains infecting the patient.

39-gun-to-headThis illness is part of an ongoing outbreak being monitored and investigated by FSIS and CDC. Until this point, there had been no direct evidence that linked the illnesses associated with this outbreak to a specific product or production lot. Evidence that is required for a recall includes obtaining case-patient product that tests positive for the same particular strain of Salmonella that caused the illness, packaging on product that clearly links the product to a specific facility and a specific production date, and records documenting the shipment and distribution of the product from purchase point of the case-patient to the originating facility.

It’s a sad day for epidemiology, with Foster Farms fingered in at least 575 cases of Salmonella Heidelberg since March 2013.

The newly recalled products subject to recall bear the establishment number “P6137,” P6137A” or “P7632” inside the USDA mark of inspection. The chicken products were produced on March 8, 10 and 11, 2014. These products were shipped to Costco, Foodmaxx, Kroger, Safeway and other retail stores and distribution centers in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada and Utah.