Going public: 10 sick with E. coli O157 linked to raw milk in California

Posted on March 8, 2016 by Douglas Powell

Apparently I wasn’t imagining when I wrote the Spongebob cone of silence – usually reserved for leafy greens, cantaloupes and sometimes tomatoes — had finally been lifted on an E. coli O157 outbreak involving raw milk in California.

Organic Pastures Dairy in Fresno County voluntarily recalled its raw milk in Jan. 2016 after internal tests found evidence of E. coli. The tainted milk caused at least 10 illnesses, with six of those victims reporting they drank Organic Pastures raw milk, said California Department of Public Health officials on Mar. 1, 2016.

The victims all had closely related strains of E. coli O157, the health department said.

Dairy owner Mark McAfee said that in early January the company voluntarily recalled the milk within 36 hours of determining the presence of E. coli.

At the time of the last announcement, CDPH types told Healthy Magician the state health department is continuing to investigate the outbreak, but will not provide specific details.

“The environmental investigation is ongoing. CDPH has collected a large number of samples including feces, water and raw milk, which are still undergoing evaluation at the department’s Food and Drug Laboratory Branch,” the CDPH spokesman said via email.

When they are available, the department will not release them until the investigation is finished, the CDPH spokesman said last Tuesday.

The department has not published any statements about the outbreak or investigation.

“CDPH does not routinely post in-process updates on its active investigations,” the department’s spokesman said via email. “If the public needs to be alerted about an adulterated food, CDPH will issue a Health Advisory warning consumers of the food that should be avoided.

“In this case, the outbreak was identified and the voluntary recall issued by the firm after the shelf-life of the product had expired. Since no product was believed to remain in the marketplace, no health alert was issued.”

However, legal eagle Bill Marler got his hands on a summary of the investigation dated March 3, 2013. The report concludes:

Evidence collected to date, indicates that cattle in the OPDC milking herd were shedding E. coli O157 that matched PFGE patterns associated with ten illnesses in January 2016. In early January 2016, Cow 149 produced milk contaminated with E. coli O157 which may have been bottled and shipped to the public. Feces, soil, and water collected from OPDC on February 8, 2016 tested positive for E. coli O157:H7, and PFGE patterns for those isolates also matched those patterns associated with the illnesses. The collection of environmental samples from OPDC on February 8, 2016 focused on feces likely deposited on February 6, 7, and 8. It is unlikely that the positive findings from February 8, 2016 represent conditions linked entirely to Co 149. The isolation of E. coli O157:H7 and non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli from cattle used to produce raw milk for human consumption is concerning and could result in additional illness to raw milk consumers in the future if not addressed at the dairy.

Going public: During a foodborne illness outbreak, fewer people barfing at bottom of CFIA’s priorities

Posted on March 2, 2016 by Douglas Powell

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has a Protocol for CFIA’s sharing of information during food safety investigations and recalls.

The document contains lots of boilerplates about how “CFIA and the food industry share a common goal of safeguarding food in Canada,” and “high profile food recall situations can create intense media scrutiny, increased expectations from stakeholders as well as heightened public interest for the desire for more information and transparency around food safety investigations and outcomes.”

Recent independent reviews and government action plans, such as the Independent Review of XL Foods Inc. Beef Recall 2012 and the 2013 Fall Report of the Auditor General of Canada have recommended improvements in communication and increased information sharing with both stakeholders and the public during food safety investigations and recalls (they seem to have forgotten the Weatherill report on the 2008 Listeria outbreak that killed 22 Canadians and highlighted abysmal communications).

There’s lots of bureau-speak and legalese, and a noseestretcher that describes the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Health Canada, Provincial and Municipal Health Authorities as “other governments.”

There’s also lots of predictions about a rosy disclosure future under the Safe Food for Canadians Act, but two key issues are vaguely disregarded.

“When a food product has been assessed as representing a risk, information relating to the nature of the problem and level of risk posed may be shared with the CFIA’s Canadian government partners.”

How is that risk assessed? Does epidemiology count? Or only a direct positive in an unopened package, which is virtually impossible in produce-related outbreaks.

The other is “CFIA’s obligation to protect confidential business information and personal information significantly limits releasing information to third parties and the public during active food safety investigations. In addition, the integrity of the food safety investigation, namely the ability to collect and analyze information, including product samples, needs to be maintained.

“For food safety investigations that are complex, have potentially broad implications or are otherwise likely to result in high profile situations, the CFIA engages with potentially affected national industry associations by sharing information that is not confidential business information or personal information for the purpose of providing advanced notice. This may occur, for example, after a public alert is issued in a foreign country, or a foodborne illness outbreak is declared in Canada and is pointing to a specific commodity.”

Government finds everything complex and high profile, so how this test is applied remains a mystery.

Going public with diarrhea burrito: Chipotle, Bowie and Buddy

Posted on January 12, 2016 by Douglas Powell

nhl

JoNel Aleccia of The Seattle Times writes that a 27-year-old Seattle man is suing Chipotle restaurants after he was infected with E. coli in July during an undisclosed outbreak tied to the fast-food chain. Three months later, Chipotle closed dozens of sites in the Northwest because of potential illness.

Timothy Kniffin, a cafe and bakery worker, said he fell ill starting July 25 after eating pork carnitas, white rice, salsa, peppers, guacamole and chips at a Chipotle restaurant at 1415 Broadway in Seattle. He was hospitalized from July 30 through Aug. 2 with an E. coli O157: H7 infection later tied to the restaurant, according to a complaint filed late last month in U.S. District Court in Western Washington.

Officials with Public Health — Seattle & King County confirmed the July E. coli outbreak, which sickened four other people and hospitalized two, including Kniffin. But health officials didn’t publicize the outbreak at the time.

“By the time we were able to make a connection to Chipotle, the outbreak was over,” James Apa, a health department spokesman, said in an email.

Not soon enough for Chipotle investors, who have seen their stock value plummet by 45%.

One investment firm says, long-term investors, noting the current volatility in Chipotle Mexican Grill stock, should try to see past CMG’s issues. The company still serves a quality product and strives to bring satisfaction to its customers. Value minded investors with a long-term mindset could be rewarded vastly; a recovery back to its 52 week high would represent a whopping 82% potential return. However, keep in mind this may take a couple of years to happen.

No, they don’t serve a quality product and are food safety morons.

But that won’t stop students or profs eating there, just like faculty meetings kept ordering Jimmy Johns despite numerous raw sprout outbreaks.

The best and the brightest.

Regardless of the E. coli outbreak, the Chipotle near the University of Florida on University Avenue is still thriving.

“I will still take the risk and eat there,” said Ana Ward, a UF plant science junior.

The 20-year-old said she is not worried about getting sick.

“I feel like the chance is really small, and you would take that risk with any restaurant,” she said.

Keith Schneider, a UF food science and human nutrition professor, said it would be rare to contract E. coli from the Chipotle near campus.

“The fact that we haven’t seen any foodborne illnesses in Florida, let alone the entire Southeast, probably would lead me to believe that there is no greater risk eating at a Chipotle in the Southeast than there is in any other fast food type restaurant,” Schneider said.

It is not unusual to find E. coli in low numbers when food is being produced organically, he said.

“The widespread nature of (Chipotle E. coli outbreaks), leads you to believe that it is some environmental source for the contamination,” Schneider said.

The contamination of Chipotle food is likely a result of improperly composted fertilizer or wild animals tracking the bacteria through the supplier’s fields, he said.

There are hundreds of different strains of E. coli, some more severe than others, Schneider said. The most common strain heard about in the news is E. coli O157:H7.

And for no particular reason, Buddy Holly’s Peggy Sue was released yesterday, in 1957.

He was an innovator.

David Bowie was OK in Zoolander

Going public – to quash rumors, Winnebago style

Posted on December 11, 2015 by Douglas Powell

The Winnebago County Health Department has put out a statement after becoming aware of rumors of a Hepatitis A outbreak at a local business, rumors which had apparently become so prevalent they felt the need to respond publicly.

“If there was an outbreak of Hepatitis A, the Winnebago County Health Department would take the appropriate actions to prevent and contain the spread of the infection and would work with our media partners to help inform the public. The Winnebago County Health Department routinely monitors for the presence of communicable diseases on a daily and weekly basis,” said Winnebago County Health Department Administrator, Dr. Sandra Martell in a statement.

Going public: Iowa paper says food-poisoning cases should result in more disclosure

Posted on November 15, 2015 by Douglas Powell

I never liked Hy-Vee in Manhattan, Kansas.

They were sorta uppity and didn’t seem to know shit about food safety.

An editorial in The Des Moines Register echoes those sentiments:

More than 50 people were sickened by cooked taco meat that was served to the staff at Des Moines’ Roosevelt High School last month.

The cooked meat was purchased from a grocery store shortly before it was served at the school as part of a staff luncheon. Subsequent testing detected a temperature-sensitive bacteria in the meat. The Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals said the food was likely tainted during preparation at the store since the bacteria wouldn’t have had enough time to grow between the time the meat was purchased and the time it was served.

The official public report from the Polk County Department of Public Health said that while a “specific point” in the preparation and handling process couldn’t be identified as the culprit, food-safety and food-handling guidelines were reviewed “with those involved.” The state inspections agency said the store had given assurances the staff was being retrained.

The trouble is, the county and the state chose not to disclose the name of that store. Fortunately, community members stepped forward and identified the business as the Hy-Vee store in Windsor Heights. Had they not done so, the identity of the food supplier might still be unknown.

A Hy-Vee spokeswoman acknowledged the store provided the food, but denied that it was responsible for the food poisoning. She then appeared to cast blame on the store’s own customers, saying, “We can’t control how food is handled after it leaves our stores.”

That statement contrasts sharply with the state’s calming reassurance that the Hy-Vee staff is being retrained, and it only serves to underscore — perhaps unintentionally — the importance of disclosing the names of food suppliers in cases like this.

But public disclosure is traditionally the road less traveled in Iowa, a state where regulations are written largely to protect business and industry — even at the expense of the public welfare.

Our state law says public health reports should be written in a manner that doesn’t identify a business that may be at fault. It goes on to say that “information disclosing the identity of the business may be released to the public when the state epidemiologist or the director of public health determines such a release of information (is) necessary for the protection of the health of the public.”

In the Roosevelt High School case, state health officials say, no public health threat was identified, as only those people who attended the school luncheon were sickened. The logic in that position is hard to fathom, especially when one considers the volume of food a store such as this is capable of dispensing on any given day.

When public health officials identify a supplier of food that is later found to have sickened 50 people, that supplier should be publicly identified. People in the community deserve to know who may have been responsible — not so they can organize a torch-bearing mob, but so they can make fully informed decisions as consumers.

Going public, risk comm 101: What we know, don’t know, what we’re doing to find out more; you’ll hear form us first

Posted on November 15, 2015 by Douglas Powell

We’ve got a paper that’s going to come out in the next few months (its been peer-reviewed, edited and approved) about going public, but I don’t want to violate my no-PR-before-publication rule.

However, others are getting on the going public bandwagon.

Seattle & King County in Washington state writes in a release that in a typical week, we receive reports of other enteric (intestinal) illnesses including campylobacteriosis, salmonellosis, shigellosis, and norovirus. At the time of this posting, we’re investigating reports of mumps, pertussis, tularemia, varicella, and suspected rabies exposures. We’re continuing to monitor returning travelers from countries impacted by Ebola and have had several returning healthcare workers evaluated for Ebola infection (none have had it). And we’re in the early phases of our annual ritual tracking the upcoming influenza season.

Why have we publicized some investigations but not others?

As the health department, our top priority is to keep the public safe and healthy, including preventing and responding to disease outbreaks. When we hear about possible outbreaks from individuals, healthcare providers, laboratories or businesses that report cases of illness to us, we investigate but we don’t divulge the ill person’s identity, even if it is a communicable disease. Not only are people’s identities protected by state and federal law, breaking confidentiality could discourage people from reporting diseases – putting us all at risk.

Similarly, if we learn from a food business or from its customers that people got sick from eating at the restaurant, we want that food business to work with us to figure out what happened, confident that we will not prematurely place blame before we have done an investigation to evaluate all possible causes, including (but not limited to) restaurant food safety practices that could have contributed, contamination of a commercial food product the restaurant may have received, and other causes unrelated to the restaurant, business or organization.

But if there’s ongoing risk we’re going to tell you about it. We will always make a public announcement (including names of implicated restaurants and commercial entities) when there is an ongoing outbreak or risk that people need to know about in order to protect their health. We’ll provide information on how to avoid illness and what to do if you’ve been exposed. We may also make a public announcement if it will help us solve an ongoing investigation. In addition, we can inspect and close restaurants immediately if we find food safety violations contributing to an outbreak. We post these closures on our website and publicize with Facebook and Twitter.

Health departments, including ours, typically don’t make public announcements about an outbreak when the outbreak is over, there is no ongoing risk to the public and there are no actions or steps for the public to take to protect their health. In addition, just as we seek to avoid stigmatizing people, we avoid public announcements that implicate businesses, organizations or restaurants when we don’t have good evidence about the source or cause of the problem or we don’t have a confirmed link to the commercial facility and there is no ongoing risk. Our public notification practices are consistent with health departments in our region and around the country.

But … we are learning that people want to know more about our outbreak investigations, above and beyond our public alerts when there’s an immediate heath risk, and we respect that interest. This is part of a larger trend toward greater openness from government, which values the public’s right to know. Conversations with local media that also value public access to information, including the Seattle Times, raised issues that helped our Health Officer, Dr. Jeff Duchin to decide in July 2015 to develop a way to routinely provide public information about outbreaks.

Information about the causes of outbreaks is occasionally straightforward, but more often is unclear and/or inconclusive. In order to provide information about the circumstances and possible causes of outbreaks responsibly, we need to provide important context and background. We don’t want readers to confuse associations, (which are relationships between two or more events or other variables that may or not indicate cause and effect), with actual causes. For example, in many investigations we are not able to identify the cause or source with certainty. This typically happens when there is simply not enough epidemiologic and/or laboratory evidence available to draw reliable conclusions.

We will need to present information in a way that would incorporate at minimum the key facts of an outbreak as well our conclusions regarding potential causes and limitations of the available information. We are going to approach this work thoughtfully and seek input from experts in both public health and communications, and hope to have this ready to roll out in January 2016.

In addition, we are currently in the process of expanding how restaurant inspection information is made available to the public – via storefront signs and improved online access. This will be an update to our current practice of posting inspections online – we were one of the very first health departments to do this way back in 2001!

Save the exclamation marks for the truly exclamatory.

Going public: Chipotle involved in 4th outbreak this year that was kept secret

Posted on November 11, 2015 by Douglas Powell

Lynne Terry of The Oregonian writes, Chipotle has had three known outbreaks this year, including the most recent one in Oregon and Washington. But there was also a fourth in Seattle that put two people in the hospital.

It was essentially kept secret. Health officials, who investigated the outbreak, did not inform the public.

“It took us a while to make the connection between the sick people and Chipotle,” James Apa, spokesman for King County Public Health, said in an email. “By the time we were able to make an association with Chipotle, the outbreak was over.”

A total of five were sickened after eating at a Chipotle restaurant at 1415 Broadway, according to Bill Marler, a Seattle food safety litigator representing one of those who got sick. He said his client only contacted him recently in wake of the latest outbreak.

Like the latest outbreak, it involved E. coli.

The five people dined at Chipotle in late July, Apa said. Health officials were never able to determine the culprit.

Restaurant inspectors found no problems at the restaurant.

Source food that is microbiologically safe.

And stop with the BS.

Germans who wrongly fingered Spanish cucumbers ordered to pay

Posted on October 25, 2015 by Ben Chapman

Many regulators see going public with information related to an outbreak as a no-win situation. As Paul Mead once said – ‘If you’re wrong, you went public too early; if you’re right, you went [public] too late.’

Best to err on the side of public health – and tell folks about the uncertainties in your data and decision-making.

In 2011, at the height of an E. coli O104 outbreak which led to 4,075 illnesses (including 908 cases of HUS) and 50 deaths in 16 countries, epidemiological information was evolving. During the investigation, German authorities, based on a sample taken out of a trash bin, fingered Spanish cucumbers as the source. It turned out to be fenugreek sprouts.

According to ThinkSpain, a Spanish cucumber firm is being compensated for being wrongfully implicated.

A German court has upheld a Málaga-based vegetable cooperative’s claim for compensation after the E.coli scare was incorrectly linked to Spanish cucumbers.

Sales director for Frunet, Richard Söpenberg, says that although the co-op had sued for €2.3 million, the case was more about clearing its name than earning back the money it had lost through the unfair finger-pointing at its produce.

“The judge in Hamburg has recognised that we did nothing wrong, and we are very proud and happy about that – above and beyond the compensation awarded, what’s most important is the restitution of the company’s good name,” Söpenberg revealed.

The cooperative’s sales manager says he ‘trusts the case will serve as a learning curve’, since it highlights the extent of harm an ‘unfounded accusation’ can cause any firm.

“Pointing the finger at a company can destroy it completely in seconds, and this is something that could happen to any firm in the world,” Söpenberg warned.

Missing from the mis-fingered cucumber story is the food safety steps that Spanish growers/shippers/distributors take to ensure microbial food safety. An outbreak like this was an opportunity to brag – if procedures are in place and there’s data to back it up. Too bad it had to come out in court proceedings over four years later.

30 sick: Church says, don’t talk about Salmonella

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Douglas Powell

At least 30 people, including some who were admitted to area hospitals, were reported sick due to a salmonella outbreak after a community meal Sunday at a Parker County church.

Church leaders are now asking members to keep details about the luncheon, as well as updates on the conditions of affected persons to themselves.

Youth Pastor Spencer Row said, “ At this time, we as church staff, believe it is in the church’s best interest to allow our conference to handle this situation. We have taken the necessary steps to provide assistance internally. We ask that you refrain from posting or sharing any further information about this situation, for the protection of our members and our church as a whole.

“Please continue to pray for everyone, and make known how much love we have for one another! It’s in times like these that the true strength of the church is revealed.”

Food safety morons.

Food poisoning sickens 80-100 child protection employees in Brantford (Canada)

Posted on September 18, 2015 by Douglas Powell

I remember Brantford, Ontario, Canada, where I grew up, but I’m not sure Brantford wants to remember me.

Wayne Gretzky, Massey-Ferguson, the telephone (my dad may be in this pic, he was head of quality control at the Brantford plant that made combines for the world, and I was always proud of that).

But that’s another discussion, and this is a food safety blog.

So it pains me to write that the good folk of Brantford, all 94,000 and where my parents still live, had more than 80 child protection employees sickened by food poisoning last week, a situation that has decimated working teams at the Brant Family and Children’s Services agency.

Executive director Andy Koster said Thursday staff at the agency has been scrambling to help cover shifts after between 80-100 workers called in sick, beginning last Friday.

“Some people have symptoms that are going on well beyond the regular time associated with food poisoning,” Koster said. “But people are working really hard to deliver our services and those who aren’t ill are doing double duty.”

Koster said staff at the agency plans a once-a-year getaway event where all staff take part. A professional speaker addressed issues of stress management and dealing with the trauma many child protection workers face. This year’s event was held at the St. George Arena and a professional caterer was hired to feed the 200-plus people at the day-long conference. Koster said egg salad wraps, chicken wraps and potato salad were all on the menu for lunch.

“On Friday morning we had people calling saying ‘we’re down four people on our unit’ and people were reporting stomach pains and diarrhea.”

Workers continued to call in sick, although Koster said some employees, knowing their colleagues were more ill, came to work.

Bad idea.

Maybe get a food safety type next year. Not me, but someone who can credibly address food safety issues (without the baggage). Chapman? He’s a Port Hope boy.

Karen Boughner, the unit’s director of health protection said the unit will not identify the caterer at this point, noting the problem may have been totally out of her hands if it was a contaminated product she purchased for the event.

Except caterers should know better, and know their suppliers.

Boughner said the situation wasn’t made public sooner because it didn’t affect the general public.

That’s just embarrassing.

barfblog

safe food from farm to fork

Tag Archives: Going Public