Tag Archives: Media

When the mango bites back

Posted on by
Reply

As a large-scale outbreak of Salmonella Braenderup appears to be forming in Canada and the U.S. from Mexican mangoes, New York Times reporter Gardiner Harris, who has written plenty about food safety over the years, has his own crappy experience with mangoes in India.

Harris writes he accepted a just picked mango from a stranger in New Delhi and that putting it directly into my mouth — skin and all — was stupid.

“But why did my first horrible case of traveler’s diarrhea in India have to result from a mango? I love mangoes, and India’s vast array of deliciously different mango varieties has been one of the great delights of moving here.

“You didn’t even wash it?” Dr. Paul Offit, chief of infectious diseases at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, asked me later.

“No.

“Even by your standards, that was really stupid,” Dr. Offit said.

“Indeed, my wife joined me for the first week of my stay here before returning temporarily to the United States, and within four days she became terribly ill. I freely dispensed what turned out to be terrible advice, suggesting in the early hours of her illness that she avoid taking one of the antibiotic pills that we had brought for just such an eventuality.

“My advice sprang from the mistaken belief that the good bacteria in her gut had a fighting chance against the bad bacteria. “Honey, taking an antibiotic is like carpet-bombing a battlefield,” I told her in confident tones. “You kill off all the good guys as well as the bad guys. Let’s see if the good guys rally first.

“They did not. As it turns out, the fight against toxic bacteria is largely waged by the body’s immune system, not the sweet-tempered millions found in a spoonful of yogurt.”

At least he admitted he was dumb. But how much dumb – or slanted – advice was spewed out in the pages of the N.Y. Times over the years?

Throw It Out the Window: China’s endless food safety scares

Posted on by
Reply

Calum MacLeod of USA Today reports China’s authoritarian government struggles to reassure citizens than it can deliver the safe food they rank as a top priority.

In the city of Guangzhou, whose Cantonese cuisine is celebrated worldwide, more than 46% of residents are dissatisfied with food safety, and over 37% said they had suffered recent food safety problems, according to a survey released this month by the Guangzhou Public Opinion Research Center.

"There are two Chinas on the tip of the tongue," says Shanghai student Wu Heng, a fan of the series. "There’s the China shown on TV, with its traditional food culture and long history. Then there’s another China shown on my website, the current environment in which black-hearted enterprises make black-hearted foodstuffs and have a large market."

Wu, 26, became active in the food safety cause because of his favorite dish of braised beef and rice. Startled by a news report on fake beef, he was inspired to create an online food safety database that allows visitors to add the latest problems nationwide, often involving the illegal use of additives.

With his website, "Throw It Out the Window," Wu hopes more public awareness and pressure will produce bold steps to tackle China’s food safety crisis. His site’s popularity is soaring at a million-plus views a day, Wu says.

Food safety has already taken a turn for the better, says Wu Yongning, chief food safety scientist at the Ministry of Health in Beijing, who insists there are less serious incidents today than four or five years ago.

"There is greater media supervision now which exposes problems and makes the government play the role it should," he says.

German science type: E. coli O104 in sprouts exaggerated by media interviewing ‘third-grade’ local scientists

Posted on by
Reply

Blame the media is a routine strategy for politicians and scientists (no difference when speaking on the public stage) but one that is rarely valid.

Except most media these days opts for puppy-eyed compliance rather than critical questions.

Dr. Rainer Wessel, director of the CI3 excellence cluster of the German Rhein-Mainz region, managed to keep a straight face as he told an audience in Berlin last week that the death toll in the E. coli O104 outbreak in sprouts last year that killed 53 was “minimal” and paled in comparison to the daily death toll of car accidents.

Risk comparisons are risky.

Because only 53 people died, Wessel viewed the reaction of the public health surveillance system as a success, adding, “Biological threats are complicated. The machine was working pretty well, even if some reactions were slow.” But this can be improved, it depends how much society wants to invest in it.

Maybe something was lost in translation.

According to the Future Challenges website, Wessel argued the media played a big role in frightening the population and creating a unnecessary outburst in society.

“The media are also enterprises, they have to sell too.”

Wessel didn’t mention that during two weeks the public received contradictory information, which wasn’t invented by journalists, but given by government officials.

On the 22th of May 2011, German health authorities said: “Clearly, we are faced with an unusual situation“ and didn’t deliver further information on the origin of the outbreak.

On the 25th, the Health Minister of Hamburg Cornelia Storck declared that the disease was carried by Spanish cucumbers. The German federal government withdrew them from the market causing €51 million in losses to Spanish agriculture, according to the Spanish environment minister. After some tests, the cucumbers were invalidated as the source of the epidemic.

On the 4th of June, German officials alleged that a restaurant in Lübeck, North Germany, was the starting point of the outbreak.

On the 5th, officials pointed to a farm in Lower Saxony being the source of the epidemic, an information that was invalidated and then finally confirmed again on the 10th of the same month.

Wessel maintains that the press should be better informed, which is always good. In case of risk, the Robert-Koch-Institut, the German official health surveillance agency, should receive funding for a small press room in order to give correct information and respond to the questions of journalists, “to avoid that a second or third grade scientist gets interviewed on a local level.”

China says more media coverage of dodgy suppliers would enhance food safety – China?

Posted on by
Reply

The furious reaction of the market and consumers has dealt a heavy blow to those who are dishonest or even violate the law in food production.

This is in China, reports Global Times.

Without well-educated citizens or ethical strength, China "can’t be a respectable economy or a power in the real sense," Premier Wen Jiabao warned last week, making him the highest official to have made such blunt remarks toward food scandals. Food safety has been raised to the level of national strategy.

One effective way to mobilize consumer enthusiasm is to give more media coverage to the disclosure of fake food producers.

Food scandals have become a public enemy that demands public involvement to eradicate the problem.

Some shoppers told Xinhua News Agency they prefer shopping at big supermarkets, where they believe food safety standards are higher.

Another Beijing shopper said, “I often buy food and other products that are popular and have a good reputation."
 

Study finds media may be overhyping benefits of organic food, agriculture

Posted on by
Reply

News accounts of organic agriculture and organic food are more likely to be positive than negative and inaccurately claim organic food is safer, according to Kansas State University’s Doug Powell.

Powell, an associate professor of food safety, is the co-author of "Coverage of organic agriculture in North American newspapers: Media — linking food safety, the environment, human health and organic agriculture," just published in the British Food Journal.

The paper is based on a study Powell conducted from 1999-2004 with two colleagues at the University of Guelph in Canada, Stacey Cahill and Katija Morley. Cahill was one of Powell’s students at the time.

The team explored how topics of organic food and agriculture were discussed in five North American newspapers. Using the content analysis technique, the 618 articles collected were analyzed for topic, tone and theme regarding food safety, environmental concerns and human health.

The prominent topics of the articles were genetic engineering, pesticides and organic farming, Powell said.

The analysis found 41.4 percent of the articles had a neutral tone toward organic agriculture and food, 36.9 percent had a positive tone, 15.5 percent were mixed and 6.1 percent were negative, Powell said.

"We concluded that articles about organic production in the selected time period were seldom negative," he said. "Organic agriculture was often portrayed in the media as an alternative to allegedly unsafe and environmentally damaging modern agriculture practices. That means organic was being defined by what it isn’t, rather than what it is."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has repeatedly stated that the organic standard is a verification of production methods and not a food safety claim, Powell said.

"Food safety was the least important in the media discussion of organic agriculture," Powell said. "The finding that 50 percent of food safety-themed statements in news articles were positive with respect to organic agriculture, while 81 percent of health-themed statements and 90 percent of environment-themed statements were positive toward organic food, indicates an uncritical press."
Analysis of articles over time, among media outlets and by topic, allows for understanding of media reporting on the subject and provides insight into the way the public is influenced by news coverage of organic food and agriculture, Powell said.

The article is available at:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1871116&show=abstract.

The fawning media coverage of organic food

Posted on by
1

In the early part of the 2000s, media outlets seemed to be co-opted by the fantastical claims of the organic food sector. Organic was portrayed as safer, healthier and better for the environment.

There wasn’t a lot of data.

There was a lot of food porn.

I had a student review and code 618 newspaper stories – it seems so quaint now, there were newspapers back then — reporting on or referencing organic food and organic agriculture from five North American media outlets from 1999-2004.

The paper was published in the British Food Journal yesterday.

Stacey found that of the 618 stories, 41.1 per cent were coded as being neutral, 36.9 per cent positive, 15.5 per cent mixed and 6.1 per cent negative.

From the discussion:

“It was determined that organic agriculture was often portrayed in the media as an alternative to allegedly unsafe and environmentally damaging modern agriculture practices — organic was defined by what it isn’t, rather than what it is. The National Post, for instance, published an article in 2002 about a report by Environmental Defence Canada, which had interpreted food safety data from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and found that many products such as maple syrup and eggs did not meet safety standards. The article stated that, “to avoid health problems, Mary McGrath, the group’s director of research, suggested consumers consider purchasing organic or ecologically grown produce” (Sokoloff, 2002). Such unsubstantiated comments have become endemic in media coverage of all things organic.

“The stories examined in this analysis frequently suggested organic production was void of many of the challenges faced by large-scale, modern agriculture, including pesticide residue, mad cow disease and genetic engineering.

Of the themes health, safety and environment, food safety was the least important in the discussion of organic agriculture in the media. … The finding that 50 per cent of food safety-themed statements in news articles were positive with respect to organic agriculture, while 81 per cent of health-themed statements and 90 per cent of environment-themed statements were positive towards organic food, indicates an uncritical press. USDA has repeatedly stated that the organic standard is a verification of production methods and not a food safety claim: ‘National standards for organic food will be released soon, and they will make clear that such products aren’t safer or more nutritious than conventional products, Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman says’ (Brasher, 2000).”

The abstract is below.

Coverage of organic agriculture in North American newspapers: Media: linking food safety, the environment, human health and organic agriculture19.jul.10British Food Journal, Vol. 112 Iss: 7, pp.710 – 722
Stacey Cahill, Katija Morley, Douglas A. Powell
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1871116&show=abstract
Abstract
Purpose – The project explored the ways in which the topics of organic food and agriculture are discussed in representative North American media outlets in reference to food safety, environmental concerns, and human health.
Design/methodology/approach – Articles from five newspapers were collected and coded using the content analysis technique and analyzed for topic, tone, and theme.
Findings – For a six-year time period, 618 articles on organic food and organic agriculture are analyzed and the prominent topics are found to be genetic engineering, pesticides, and organic farming. Articles with a neutral tone with respect to organic agriculture and food accounted for 41.4 percent of the articles, while positively toned articles garnered 36.9 percent. The themes human health, food safety, and environmental concerns were discussed with positive reference to organic food and agriculture in 81, 50, and 90 percent, respectively, of comments pulled from the articles.
Practical implications – Analysis of these articles over time, between media outlets and by topic allows for understanding of media reporting on the subject and provides insight into the way the public is influenced by news coverage of organic food and agriculture.
Originality/value – Research that analyzes media coverage for how it portrays the topic of organic food and organic agriculture with respect to health, food safety, and environmental concern, and concludes that articles about organic production in the selected time period are seldom negative.

Food tube: Coverage of food safety issues through video

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of ag journalism types from Nebraska and Ohio State have the right idea — although I’m not sure it’s completely executed — in a new paper examining the role of YouTube videos in food safety.

Emily Rhoades and Jason D. Ellis write in the Journal of Food Safety that food safety in restaurants is an increasing concern among consumers. A primary population segment working in foodservice is receiving food safety information through new media channels such as video social network websites. This research used content analysis to examine the purpose and messages of food safety-related videos posted to YouTube. A usable sample of 76 videos was identified using “food safety” in the YouTube search function. Results indicate that videos must be artfully developed to attract YouTube users while conveying a credible and educational message. Communicators must also monitor new media for competing messages being viewed by target audiences and devise strategies to counter such messages. This one-time snapshot of how food safety was portrayed on YouTube suggests that the intended purpose of videos, whether educational or entertainment, is not as relevant as the perceived purpose and the message being received by viewers.

I have no idea what this means. There’s a lot of BS in the paper about where foodborne illness happens and how consumers are motivated and the authors seem hopelessly stuck in the educational framework. But at least they are looking at different media. Too bad the message sucks.

Marshall McLuhan had it right when he said that those who try to distinguish between entertainment and education don’t know the first thing about either.

How modern science and old-fashioned detective work cracked the salmonella case

Posted on by
Reply

Amy and I are back in Manhattan. We missed a hailstorm, the first tornado in 42 years, but we didn’t miss Salmonella in tomatoes.

We left Quebec City at 9 a.m. last Friday. National Public Radio Science Friday wanted me as a guest, and so did CNN. By 3:30 pm, we were in nowhere southwestern Ontario and I had to call the NPR studio — and they insisted on a landline.

So, after several pay phones didn’t work out, we found a lakeside motel. I hastily pleaded with the innkeeper for her phone. She said, "What’s it worth to you?"

I gave her $20.

That’s me doing my live interview on NPR (above, not exactly as shown; left, exactly as shown).

A couple of hours later we arrived at a TV studio in Toronto for a CNN interview. They said I was too late for Friday’s show, but they wanted the footage anyway and maybe they’d use it Monday.

They didn’t.

I’ve done dozens of radio interviews, and find myself defending public health types — why is it taking so long to find the source of Salmonella in tomatoes? What tomatoes should be avoided? I explain, but even through radio, can sense the listeners eyes glazing over. Public health has always been a largely thankless job  — whether local, state or federal.

So a big thank you to Elizabeth Weise of USA Today, whose story in this morning’s paper is an outstanding exposé of how the Salmonella in tomato case was cracked. It has become required reading in any of my courses.

To all the armchair quarterbacks that fill talk radio and Internet blogs, stop bitching and start producing. And move out of your parents’ basement.

F.D.A. reports progress in tracing Salmonella in tomatoes; some Florida counties cleared

Posted on by
3

Julie Zawisza, a spokeswoman for the Food and Drug Administration, told The New York Times late Tuesday,

"We are getting closer to identifying the source or sources."

Dr. Patricia Griffin, the chief of the disease centers’ enteric disease epidemiology branch, was cited as saying no one knows whether food has gotten more dangerous or whether the growing number of outbreaks results from better surveillance, and that both may be true.

The disease control agency has confirmed 167 salmonella cases in the current outbreak. But Dr. Griffin said the agency estimated that only 1 in 38 cases were ever reported to the authorities, so the problem was likely to be greater.

Keith Warriner of the University of Guelph told New Scientist.com that pathogens like Salmonella have probably evolved to cope with life outside our intestines. Escherichia coli O157:H7 strain thrives on leafy greens such as spinach and lettuce, while Salmonella tends to do best on fleshier fruits and vegetables.

The bacteria probably come from groundwater contaminated with animal faeces, he says. Once Salmonella gets on and into a tomato, the fruit acts like an incubator. Bacteria divide even in the cool temperatures of packing houses. "If you get a few samples into the internal tissue, then they will grow for sure," Warriner adds.

Meanwhile, I’ve been to Toronto and back to Quebec City, with a flurry of media activity along the way. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s The National caught up with me in Toronto and aired the story on the national news last night (upper, right). Unfortunately, my Kansas State hockey T-shirt logo was not included in the camera shot.

Last night, from 1-2 a.m. EST, I was the guest on Coast to Coast with George Noory which is broadcast on some 500 AM radio stations across the U.S.. Besides the government and alien conspiracy explanations of how Salmonela gets in tomatoes, it was a lot of fun, and we covered a lot of the issues. If anyone out there heard the show, please pass on your constructive comments.

This morning it was off to the CBC studios in Quebec City for an appearance on Newsworld. I proudly wore my barfblog T-shirt.

And if you’re a French professor or graduate student from Kansas and you’re in Quebec, you have to  partake of the local food culture; that means poutine.