Location is no substitute for food safety data

An after-effect of outbreaks of foodborne illness is the geographic segmentation of counties and countries such as, ‘my spinach doesn’t come from California so it’s safe,’ or my melons aren’t from Colorado so they’re safe.

This is a logical consumer rationalization in the absence of actual information; it’s not like people can buy food on the basis of microbiological safety.

Meatingplace.com reports that Ohio retailer Heinen’s Fine Foods has become the first retailer in the country to use third-party verification for sourcing and labeling meats. The chain partnered with Integrated Management Information, Inc. (IMI Global) to launch the WhereFoodComesFrom labeling program, designed to give customers more information about the source and origin of Heinen’s Own beef and pork products.

“The program helps us to provide our customers information about the source of our beef and pork products and lets consumers learn firsthand about where, how and by whom their food was raised,” Tom Heinen said in a press release.

The program incorporates a quick response (QR) bar code that allows consumers using a smart phone to scan the product and quickly access detailed information about the product’s origins.
“We’ve been offering verification services to farmers and ranchers for food marketing claims for 15 years and WhereFoodComesFrom is our effort to connect that program with the consumers who are looking for information about the food they buy,” said Leann Saunders, president of IMI Global.

I don’t care where food comes from, whether it’s around the corner or around the globe: I care that it is microbiologically safe.

Marketing food safety, but what does HACCP mean?

A colleague sent me these pictures of fish seasoning purchased in a San Francisco Asian supermarket. The back mentions both HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points) and ISO 9001, but doesn’t say what either mean.

In Brisbane, we bought a pint of fresh strawberries from Gowinta Farms, which bills itself as the largest strawberry farm on the sunshine coast, featuring a café, fruit shop, packhouse, transportation and a workshop.

And you can see from the plastic container, it’s all HACCP-certified.

I’m not sure what that means, or if consumers know what it means, but these are further indications of baby-steps to start promoting microbial food safety directly to consumers.
 

Australian supermarkets racing to the hormone-free gutter

Another Australian supermarket chain has gotten into the BS business by claiming the lamb on its shelves is hormone-free.

This despite hormones never being used in lamb production in Australia.

Melbourne supermarket chain Maxi Foods has signs on the meat shelves of its Blackburn and Upper Ferntree Gully stores advertizing that "All our beef, lamb and pork are Australian grown with no added hormones."

The chain is following Coles, which began advertising HGP-free beef last year.
The advertising has angered the Sheepmeat Council, which said hormones have never been used in lamb production in Australia.

President Kate Joseph said growth hormones were never used because they were not needed.

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority confirmed no hormones were registered for use in lamb production in Australia.

Australia has just as much foodborne illness as everyone else. Retailers get drunk on the profit margins for specious claims like organic/natural/local/sustainable or hormone-free, which have nothing to do with people barfing.

Market microbiologically safe food – and back it up with meaningful data.
 

Data not platitudes: market food safety but be able to back it up

I’m all for marketing microbial food safety at retail – directly to consumers – but only if the claims can be backed up with actions and data.

Schnuck Markets is expanding its so-called “Peace of Mind” initiative from pricing to quality assurance with a new website, www.peaceofmindquality.com, that emphasizes the chain’s dedication to quality and food safety.

Supermarket News cites one example on the website, a statement by Schnucks that “it intentionally applies shorter sell-by dates on meats and deli products to ensure products are fresher and last longer once purchased.”

“Through ‘Peace of Mind,’ you will have complete confidence that our foods are of the highest quality,” Schnucks writes on the website.

Quality and safety are seemingly used interchangeably on the website when they are actually two different concepts. The only evidence of food safety I saw on the website was that the company won some big-time award from the International Association for Food Protection in 2009.

I’m all for marketing food safety and providing comprehensive explanations of the food safety efforts of everyone in the farm-to-fork food safety chain, even the provision of testing data; some U.S. slaughterhouses are now doing this. Schnucks is going the right way, but it can be a lot better.

Cow farts in a can

Sometimes I feel insightful, sometimes I feel real trashy, and sometimes I wonder, what’s with Germany?

As noted by Michael K of D-listed, an $8 tin of cow farts sold by a company in Germany. Yeah, I thought Jessica Simpson already had a fragrance out, but the makers of this mess swear they’re the first to put cow farts in a can. They also say it’s the perfect product for city people who miss the smell of the country. … And due to the overwhelming demand for the culo air of cows, they also plan to package the scent of horses, pigs and manure.
 

Jim Romahn: Behind the music, Ontario egg marketing and salmonella control

The Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission is pondering a request from Svente Lind of Sweda Farms Ltd. for a full-scale inquiry into the Egg Farmers of Ontario marketing board and province’s dominant egg-grading companies.

And in the Superior Court, L.H. Gray and Son Ltd. has filed more than 200 pages of documents as it seeks to squelch whistle-blower Norman Bourdeau who has a treasure trove of electronic documents detailing the company’s activities.

Included are thousands of e-mails among senior staff, some of them revealing that company owner William Gray instructed employees to falsify grading and to hide damning evidence.

The information indicates that L.H. Gray Ltd. systematically altered automatic grading equipment with the result that cracks and dirty eggs were marketed as Grade A.

The court documents indicate that Bourdeau warned that this:
– Cheated consumers who paid Grade A prices for inferior-quality eggs. Bourdreau estimates consumers were over-charged $25 to $30 million per year for a number of years.
– Violated food safety standards through the marketing of cracks and dirty eggs instead of diverting them to processors.

The court documents also indicate that L.H. Gray Ltd. denies all of the allegations of wrong-doing and is suing Bourdeau for damaging the company’s reputation. Bourdeau is countersuing.

Gray’s application for an injunction to muzzle Bourdeau is to be heard in Superior Court here Feb. 22. Until then, the documents filed by the company are open to the public.

Sweda Farms has filed an application in Superior Court in Whitby to have the electronic files Bourdeau copied from L.H. Gray Ltd., and stashed in a safety deposit box, turned over to help it pursue lawsuits against Egg Farmers of Ontario, L.H. Gray and Son Ltd. and Burnbrae Farms Ltd. There’s an estimate that the electronic files contain more than one million documents.

Gray has 40 to 42 per cent of the Ontario market and Burnbrae, controlled by Joe Hudson and his family, has even more. Gray has 30 to 35 per cent of the Canada-wide egg market, some of it through outright and partial ownership of egg-processing plants.

The Egg Farmers of Ontario marketing board examined Svente Lind’s egg-grading operations and calculated that he had a higher percentage of cracks and dirty eggs than the provincial average. On that basis, the board claimed it was owed almost $45,000 in levies and that producers were shorted.

Sweda will now argue that the provincial averages are wrong because L.H. Gray Ltd. failed to properly report the grade of its eggs. The inference is that something similar happened at Burnbrae.

Bourdeau also alleges that Harry Pelissero, general manager of the Ontario egg board, colluded with Gray and Burnbrae to the detriment of competitors, such as Sweda, and the marketplace.

Egg board directors are also involved. The documents indicate that board chair Carolynn Griffith was paid for 8.8 per cent more Grade A eggs than her farm actually shipped to L.H. Gray and Son Ltd. Similar gaps “between actual and reported grade” were 6.8 per cent for Roger Pelissero, Harry’s brother who was recently elected a board director, Victor Slobodian, 5.88 per cent, and Murray Delouw, 4.18 per cent.

As examples, the court documents list the discrepancies for 19 producers. It’s not clear whether the producers were aware that they were being paid for more Grade A eggs than qualified.

The documents include e-mails from William Gray indicating that he kept a close watch on grading percentages, instructed staff to achieve certain percentages for Grade As and to hide evidence of the deceit involved.

One exchange between Gray and Scott Brookshaw says “I didn’t want anything in regards to the crack detector documented.”

There is an exchange of e-mails between Gray and Pelissero outlining their intentions to thwart an application for a supplementary import permit for organic eggs. Gray expresses concern that if this permit is granted, it may develop into larger-scale imports.

Pelissero’s role is to find Ontario-produced eggs to fill the permit-applicants’ needs.

This appears to be part of a pattern of collusion to thwart applications for supplementary import permits other than those sought by Gray and Burnbrae. In one case, a request for small eggs is filled with Ontario-produced medium-grade eggs falsely graded as smalls.

Sweda complained that many of the eggs from Burnbrae and Gray, supplied to thwart applications for supplementary import permits, were inferior quality. In response, Pellisero arranged to provide clean plywood to line one of Gray’s trucks and to have Gray take special care to deliver top-quality eggs to Sweda.

The documents indicate that Bourdeau alleged a conflict of interest by Mary Jean McFaul, daughter of Joe Hudson, a senior officer of Burnbrae and simultaneously a director of Egg Farmers of Ontario.

The documents include a resignation letter from board director Bryan Durst on Nov. 8, 2009, saying Pelissero has an “impulsive nature” that “makes it necessary that he be kept on a tight reign” and that board chair Griffith was quick to defend producers and supply management, but not to keep tabs on board operations.

Bourdeau has gone to the Strathroy Police, to the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission, to Egg Farmers of Canada and to the Canadian Egg and Poultry Processors Council in his attempts to end what he deems to be huge scandals that undermine the supply management system.

He declined to comment to a reporter.

The food (safety) cycle: recall, forget, repeat

Memories can be short when it comes to food recalls.

Amy Schoenfeld writes in Sunday’s New York Times that while Americans are concerned about food contamination, experts say that recalls have only a short-term effect on consumers.

When spinach was recalled in 2006, consumers took over a year to return to previous spending patterns. But after recent recalls of peanut butter, beef and eggs, customers came back in a matter of weeks.

One explanation for this is that eggs are a staple; nearly 9 in 10 Americans say they eat them. By contrast, only 5 in 10 Americans say they are spinach eaters. After the spinach recall, 10 percent of spinach eaters said they were unlikely to eat spinach again. In contrast, 3 percent of egg eaters said they would stop purchasing eggs.

Rather than waiting to sue after sickness, consumers could use their buying power to demand microbiologically safer food, if someone would start marketing at retail.

Fresh Express makes marketing missteps

That’s the headline on Greg Johnson’s column in The Packer today, criticizing the way Fresh Express’ announced its super-duper new produce wash.

I’m all for marketing food safety, but only if it can be thoroughly backed up.

Johnson complains this kind of promotion violates the generally agreed upon, though nonbinding, industry standard after the 2006 E. coli spinach outbreak that the produce industry is in food safety together. ?

Once companies say they’re safer than others, consumers can infer that some produce is less safe or worse, unsafe, and they stop buying.

Tom Stenzel, president and CEO of the United Fresh Produce Association, said, “Food safety should never be a competitive advantage. If a new product improves food safety, we should share it with the whole industry.”

Ed Loyd, director of corporate communications for Chiquita, said the company isn’t marketing its method as safer than others because it’s offering FreshRinse technology to competitors.

Several competitors say Fresh Express’ claims about its new wash are exaggerated or flat-out false, and they have not been verified by any third party.

Marketing microbial food safety at retail is the only way to provide consumer choice and hold producers accountable

I told a state-sponsored jazz radio station yesterday (NPR) and a few dozen other media outlets yesterday that as someone who shops a lot for groceries, I’d be really interested in eggs that were verified through some kind of testing to be salmonella-free. Or reduced levels. Anything but the marketing crap that currently dominates the nation’s grocery shelves.

People are clamoring for local, natural, sustainable eggs in the wake of a 500 million egg recall that has sickened about 1,000 Americans with salmonella, yet there is absolutely no evidence that other eggs have lower levels of salmonella.

Buying preferences may help some folks feel superior, but salmonella happens – and it happens a lot. So why is there not a single retailer who will demand salmonella testing and market those results at retail?

As a consumer, I’m helpless in my choices for reduced-salmonella eggs, unless I buy pasteurized eggs, and even they are not fail-safe. I spend a lot of money at the grocery store feeding the herd of children I seem to have accumulated – why can’t someone give me some microbiological data on which to make a purchasing decision? Having more government inspectors does nothing to assuage my food safety doubts.

Marketing food safety at retail has the additional benefit of enhancing a food safety culture within an organization – if we’re boasting about this stuff I guess we really better wash our hands and keep the poop out of food. Maintaining a food safety culture means that operators and staff know the risks associated with the products or meals they produce, know why managing the risks is important, and effectively manage those risks in a demonstrable way. In an organization with a good food safety culture, individuals are expected to enact practices that represent the shared value system and point out where others may fail. By using a variety of tools, consequences and incentives, businesses can demonstrate to their staff and customers that they are aware of current food safety issues, that they can learn from others’ mistakes, and that food safety is important within the organization.

In the egg fiasco, no one is stepping up and saying, we know about salmonella, this is how we go above and beyond the minimal requirements of government, and this is why you should buy my eggs.

What’s in a label? Is chicken injected with salt and water ‘all-natural’

Food is 21st century snake oil.

And shopping for food can be so confusing.

Natural, organic, local, antioxidants, welfare-friendly, whole wheat made predominantly with white flour, hormone-free, hucksterism of whatever kind.

Juliana Barbassa of Associated Press reports today that a disagreement among poultry producers about whether chicken injected with salt, water and other ingredients can be promoted as "natural" has prompted federal officials to consider changing labeling guidelines.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture had maintained that if chicken wasn’t flavored artificially or preserved with chemicals, it could carry the word "natural" on the package.

But the agency agreed to take another look at its policy after some producers, politicians and health advocates noted that about one-third of chicken sold in the U.S. was injected with additives that could represent up to 15 percent of the meat’s weight, doubling or tripling its sodium content. Some argue that could mislead or potentially harm consumers who must limit their salt intake.

The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service plans to issue new proposed rules this fall.

Perdue, the nation’s third largest poultry producer, is among those pushing for a change. The company has joined a group called the Truthful Labeling Coalition, which has hired a lobbyist and launched an advertising campaign.

The two largest chicken processors, Pilgrim’s Pride and Tyson Foods, are among those that affix "natural" labels to chicken injected with extra salt and water.

A buyer perusing the chicken counter at a San Francisco supermarket agreed.

Muembo Muanza, 30, said he read the label and considered the price but never thought to check the salt content when buying fresh chicken.

"If it says natural, I expect it to be all natural – nothing but chicken," he said.

I’d be more interested if food-types would start marketing based on microbial food safety.