Open letter to the FSA on the publication of Campylobacter survey results

Richard Lloyd of Which? a UK consumer organization, writes to the UK Food Standards Agency to say:

chicken.thermI am writing to express our grave concern about the proposal being put to the FSA Board to withhold information about the levels of the deadly food poisoning bacteria Campylobacter in supermarket chickens. Campylobacter is a major public health issue. 72,000 people were reported to have suffered Campylobacter food poisoning last year and it kills an estimated 100 people every year.

As you know, the main source for the bacteria is in raw chicken which is why the FSA decided to undertake testing across supermarkets, butchers and convenience stores and publish the results on a quarterly basis with information by retailer and processor.

The publication of the performance of each retailer is in the public interest. The FSA should not sit on this survey data which it initially intended to publish in full.

The FSA was set up because of concerns about commercial and political interference in decisions about food safety. It is with great regret that it has become necessary to remind you of your role to put consumers first, be independent and operate transparently.

At your board meeting today, I urge you to reject the proposal to withhold this information and instead to publish the results in full on a quarterly basis in order to provide consumers with this important information and help to drive up standards.

Salmonella Stanley outbreaks – a prompt to reevaluate existing food regulations

To the editor: In a recent Eurosurveillance issue, Kinross et al. [1] describe a cross-border outbreak of Salmonella Stanley in the European Union, which could be traced back to a contamination in the turkey production chain. The aetiological clone is mono-resistant to nalidixic acid and characterised by a novel pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) type. We agree with Kinross et al. that the exchange of molecular data has to be improved to speed up outbreak investigations. However, although control measures were adequate to contain the multistate outbreak, they were not sufficient to eradicate the new clone, seeing as two outbreaks that occurred in Germany 12 months and Austria 16 months later [2] were caused by kebab contaminated with the newly described Salmonella Stanley outbreak clone. Rather, there is a considerable risk that the clone will become endemic in the turkey or poultry production chain in Europe.

IOLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAn an editorial on this outbreak report, Hugas and Beloeil from the European Food Safety Agency conclude: If sufficient information becomes available to reliably identify particular strains of public health significance, the inclusion of such strains as part of the EU-wide targets should be considered [3]. In Austria we are already observing rising infection rates with Salmonella Stanley, with nine documented human infections in 2010 versus 101 documented infections in 2013. Moreover, the problem of antibiotic resistance inherent to the Salmonella Stanley outbreak clone was not addressed in this editorial. During the recent outbreak in Austria, we isolated three strains from infected humans that had developed resistance even against third generation cephalosporins and gentamicin. All strains harboured a CTX-M-15 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, rendering standard therapy regimens ineffective. To prevent further evolution and spread of Salmonella Stanley, countries must undertake every effort to eradicate this outbreak clone in the poultry production chain in Europe now.

Although European regulations have contributed substantially to reducing Salmonella infections, the recent Salmonella Stanley outbreaks should be seen as an opportunity to re-evaluate existing regulations in view of efficient risk management and consistency. According to Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 [4], food shall not be placed on the market if it is unsafe. Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 [5] further specifies that Salmonella has to be absent in minced meat and meat preparations made from poultry meat. However, in 2011, Regulation 1086/2011 [6] set a food safety criterion for fresh poultry meat that unfortunately only covers Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium, leaving food inspectors in the difficult situation that safety criteria for meat preparations differ from those for raw meat. Further, in our opinion, Regulation 1086/2011 weakened the stricter standards originally intended by part E of Annex II to Regulation No 2160/2003 [7] specifying that fresh poultry meat may not be placed on the market for human consumption when contaminated with Salmonella.

Along with harmonisation and refinement of food safety criteria, inclusion of Salmonella Stanley in the community targets for the reduction of the prevalence of zoonoses and zoonotic agents should be implemented to efficiently support control measures. 

Eurosurvellance

B Springer, F Allerberger, C. Kornschober

http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=20818

Rob Mancini: new US standards for Campylobacter on poultry

Campylobacter spp. commonly infect a broad range of livestock species, pets and wild animals. In poultry they multiply in large numbers in the hindgut, principally in the caecae. A significant cause of enteritis in hymans is caused by Campylobacters and infected poultry are a potential reservoir of this zoonosis.1 It is generally assumed that Campylobacters contaminate poultry meat during processing, surviving throughout the food chain supply to constitute a risk to human health.

FunkyChickenHiThe reduction of C. jejuni in the food chain, particularly from chicken products, is a major strategy in controlling the disease caused by campylobacter spp. One approach to this goal is to prevent C. jejuni colonization of broiler chickens.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has, according to The Poultry Site, announced it will draft new safety standards for Campylobacter in poultry, in addition to the previously-announced timeline on Salmonella. These standards are expected to be ready by the end of September.

The Department took this step in response to an April letter from Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-California), Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) that expressed concern over food safety standards and urged the Department of Agriculture to develop better standards that would significantly reduce the levels of Salmonella and Campylobacter in poultry.

Senator Feinstein commented: “Simply put, the levels of Salmonella and Campylobacter in chicken are too high. Secretary Vilsack made the right decision to accelerate the creation of strong standards for both pathogens.

Senator Durbin said: “I am pleased to hear that the USDA is taking proactive steps to address the risk of foodborne illness by establishing strong performance standards for poultry products, including poultry parts.

Commenting on the announcement, Senator Gillibrand added: “The U.S. has made little progress in reducing the rate of foodborne illnesses from Salmonella and Campylobacter over the past 10 years, and it is time to turn that track record around. I will continue to work with Secretary Vilsack and my colleagues in the Senate to improve food safety for American families.”

1. McMullin, P. A (2004) Pocket Guide to Poultry health and Disease. 5M Publishing, Sheffield.

2. Newell, D.G. and Fearnley, C. (2003) Sources of Campylobacter Colonization in Broiler Chickens.  Appl. Environ. Microbiol. August vol. 69 no. 8 4343-4351

Rob Mancini, a MS graduate of Kansas State University, is a health inspector with the Manitoba Department of Health.

Poultry as a reservoir for foodborne disease

Frieda Jorgensen and Caroline Willis, writing for the UK Society for Applied Microbiology, say that poultry and poultry products are recognized as the most significant source of human Campylobacter and Salmonella infections in the developed world, including the UK. Outbreak investigations and chickencase-control studies investigating risk-factors and transmission routes have identified poultry meat and eggs as major sources of infection. However, non-foodborne routes such as animal contact, and occupational or recreational exposure, are also important.

Poultry meat, and chicken liver or duck liver products were implicated as the source in 62 of 103 Campylobacter outbreaks reported to the Health Protection Agency (HPA) between 2000 and 2012. Eggs and poultry meat were implicated in 52 and 43 Salmonella outbreaks (of 382 in total reported to the HPA), respectively, over the same time period. In the EU, eggs and egg products were one of the main food vehicles associated with foodborne outbreaks, while broiler meat was the fifth most frequent cause of foodborne Salmonella outbreaks in 2008 (EFSA, 2010a). Moreover, data from the European Commission’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (2008) indicated that reports of microbiological contamination in poultry chicken.thermmeat were more common than for any other food type. In an EU survey from 2008, raw chicken meat was frequently contaminated with campylobacters (approximately 80% of samples) but less so with salmonellas (approximately 16%) (EFSA, 2010b).

The extent to which different infection risk factors are associated with different sources can be inferred by combining case-control studies with source attribution studies (i.e., studies that determine the predisposition of specific genotypes to infect particular animals). Such studies have provided further evidence that poultry is the major source of campylobacteriosis.

Canada’s chicken farmers ban injections that trigger resistance

Canadian chicken farmers are putting an end to controversial egg injections, which provided the world with a “textbook” example of the perils of mass medication.

By injecting eggs at hatcheries with ceftiofur, a medically important antibiotic, the farmers triggered the rise of resistant microbes that showed up in both chickens and in Canadians creating a “major” public health concern.

double-facepalm1The case  – documented by federal and provincial sleuths who track microbes at farms, slaughterhouses and retail meat counters – is held up as powerful evidence of resistant superbugs moving from farm to fork.

“It is going to be in medical textbooks for as long as there are textbooks around,” says John Prescott, a professor with the Ontario Veterinary College at the University of Guelph.

On May 15 injecting eggs with ceftiofur will be banned as part of a new antibiotics policy adopted by Chicken Farmers of Canada, representing the 2,700 poultry farmers across the country.

“The industry has gone ahead and done this voluntarily, but it is not a voluntary program,” says Steve Leech, the association’s national programs manager.  He says the ban is mandatory with penalties and fines for violators.

While the ban is better late than never, Prescott says government should have stopped the injections years ago.

Microbe trackers working with the Public Health Agency of Canada first reported in 2003 that they were picking up higher rates of ceftiofur resistance in Quebec.  In 2004, they reported resistance was just as high in Ontario “in both humans and chicken.”

A strain of bacteria called Salmonella Heidelberg, that can cause food poisoning, had armed itself with the biochemical machinery needed to resist ceftiofur. Ceftiofur belongs to a class of antibiotics known as cephalosporins, which are often used on hard-to-cure infections in people.

FunkyChickenHiThe scientists soon linked the rise of the resistant Salmonella to chicken hatcheries that were injecting  ceftiofur into eggs prophylactically to try prevent infections in chicks.

The way Canadian hatcheries were allowed to keep using ceftiofur highlights the “inability” of  Canadian health officials to stop inappropriate use of  antibiotics, says Prescott.

“There was clear evidence of an adverse effect on public health,” he says, but dealing with the issue fell between the “gaps” in federal and provincial regulations.

Ceftiofur was never approved by Health Canada for use in chickens or eggs but hatcheries used it “extra-label,” which falls under the provincial jurisdiction.

UK man fined £4.6k for operating illegal poultry cutting plant

A Lutton man has been fined £4,650 for operating an illegal poultry cutting plant.

Shahbaz Khan, 36, of 157 Dallow Road, Luton, was prosecuted during a hearing at Luton Magistrates’ Court on Monday (January 6).

chix-caleb1-WEBHe also paid a victim surcharge of £47 and council costs of £866.

In July 2012 Luton council food safety officers were alerted by a member of the public who noticed crates of chicken meat piled up beside a garage behind shops in Riddy Lane in July 2012.

When officers visited, chicken meat was being processed without approval in unhygienic conditions. Food safety officers immediately closed the business.

Chicken was being processed in a garage with no running water and a splintered wooden pallet covered in greasy cardboard was used as a cutting surface for the meat.

The garage wall was covered with a tarpaulin sheet stained with blood and dried-on chicken flesh and the fridge door handle was dirty with dried-on chicken flesh and feathers.

Flies were crawling over a wooden cutting block.

Butchers were wearing dirty aprons stained with grease and blood, and there was a bag of filthy butchers aprons encrusted with scraps of chicken flesh.

Outside the garage, 38 crates of chicken waste including skin, bones and feathers were piled up and covered in blue-bottle flies with blood dripping from the crates and running over the pathway.

When Mr Khan failed to attend court in September 2013, a warrant was issued for his arrest.

He was finally brought before the magistrates this week and pleaded guilty to ten food hygiene offences. 

Culture and food safety; Salmonellosis and meat purchased at live-bird and animal-slaughter markets, United States, 2007–2012

Since 2007, state and local health departments and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have investigated multiple salmonellosis outbreaks linked to meat purchased at live-bird markets (LBMs) and live-animal markets (LAMs), where poultry and livestock are sold for onsite slaughter. These markets typically operate in large cities and serve populations of diverse ethnic backgrounds.

In 2007, an outbreak involving 62 case-patients infected with 1 of 3 S. enterica serotype Schwarzengrund strains was investigated in Massachusetts; 61% were children <5 years of age, including 14 (23%) live.chicken.marketinfants <1 year of age, and 96% were Asian. Exposure to poultry purchased at LBMs was reported, and environmental sampling at an implicated LBM identified 6 S. enterica serotypes, including 1 outbreak strain.

Three subsequent investigations of S. enterica serotype Schwarzengrund infections were conducted: a 2009 outbreak of 50 cases in New York, New York; a 2010–2011 multistate outbreak of cases predominantly in New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts; and a 2012 multistate outbreak of cases mostly in Illinois and Michigan. Most case-patients in these outbreaks were of Asian race or Hispanic ethnicity, but 3/5 case-patients in Michigan reported Arab ethnicity; >50% were infants or children <5 years of age.

Among case-patients with available information, exposure to poultry from LBMs was reported by 88% of case-patients in the 2009 New York investigation, 35% in the 2010–2011 multistate investigation, and 50% in the 2012 multistate investigation. In Michigan, the outbreak strain was isolated from chicken purchased at an LBM and collected from households of 2 case-patients.

During 2011–2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention investigated a nationwide increase in S. enterica I,4,[5],12:i- infections (pulsed-field gel electrophoresis XbaI restriction enzyme pattern JPXX01.1314). Although no single vehicle was implicated, clusters linked to LAMs were identified. In Minnesota, 14 illnesses were linked to meat from 3 neighboring LAMs. Environmental sampling identified the outbreak strain from an animal-holding pen at 1 of the markets. Seven case-patients were infants <1 year of age, and 10 reported Hmong ethnicity. In California, 10 illnesses likely associated with pork, lamb, and beef purchased at 3 LAMs were identified; case-patients reported Ethiopian and Hmong ethnicity. The outbreak strain was isolated from a pork leg collected from the freezer of a case-patient.

LBMs and LAMs appear to be preferred by certain populations for cultural, culinary, or religious reasons. Exposure to meat from these markets is being increasingly recognized as a potential source of salmonellosis. The cause is uncertain, but one factor may be an increased number of markets: in New York, New York, the number of LBMs nearly doubled from 44 to >80 during 1994–2002 (4). Most case-patients in these outbreaks had minimal direct contact with poultry or livestock at these markets; many case-patients were infants or young children who had not visited the markets or consumed meat. Therefore, one risk factor appears to be living in a household where the meat purchased from these markets is handled or consumed.

Several factors could make meats from these markets more risky for acquiring salmonellosis. Although LBMs and LAMs must meet sanitation requirements and prevent product adulteration (5–7), most are exempt from Food Safety and Inspection Service pathogen reduction performance standards (8,9) and probably do not require suppliers to use pathogen control measures on the farm or during slaughter. Regulatory oversight by state agencies varies. Investigation findings, including environmental sampling, indicate that these markets could be heavily contaminated with S. enterica.

Preliminary results of a Massachusetts study found that fresh-killed chickens from LBMs had higher Salmonella and Campylobacter spp. contamination rates than those for chickens purchased at grocery stores (10; T. Stiles, unpub. data). High-risk cultural preferences identified in these outbreaks included consuming raw or undercooked meat and cooking parts (e.g., feet, intestines) that are more likely to harbor Salmonella spp. Further processing (e.g., de-feathering, butchering) conducted inside homes could lead to cross-contamination in the household environment. Because of language and cultural barriers, existing food safety messages may not have been effective.

The number and type of LBMs and LAMs, the populations these markets serve, and regulatory authority vary considerably by state, and many case-patients and market owners have been reluctant to speak with public health authorities. Therefore, illness prevention requires a local, targeted approach. To strengthen regulations, some states have created guidelines and begun regular inspection of these markets. Educational outreach has included distribution of posters, flyers, and magnets with safe food handling messages in multiple languages; collaboration with community groups; and education of market owners and workers. Given the various communities who use LBMs and LAMs, multifaceted interventions, including collaboration between human and animal health agencies, are needed to reduce disease risk among market patrons and their families.

See me smell me taste me; faith-based food safety in Malaysia

In the wake of four Salmonella deaths and multiple illnesses at a wedding, 36 sick kids at one school from canteen food and 25 at another, a prominent physician told Malaysia’s New Straits Times consumers could protect themselves against food poisoning by sight, smell and taste.

Malaysian Public Health Physicians’ Association (PPPKAM) vice-president Dr Othman Warijo said the three steps were part of a imagescampaign by the Health Ministry and were crucial to avoid food poisoning.

“Despite appearing simple, the steps are worth doing to avoid food poisoning, which can result in death,” he said on Friday.

He said victims of food poisoning often blamed food handlers when they themselves ignored safety procedures before eating.

“Look at the physical appearance of the food to find out if the gravy has become sticky. Sniff the food to determine if it is rotten. Taste the food. If one is confident that the food is edible, then one can proceed. Otherwise, leave it.”

He added food handlers must ensure adequate storage and cooking facilities to ensure that raw materials were not contaminated and have basic knowledge in food preparation, be properly attired with their head and mouth covered, use aprons and gloves, and undergo compulsory typhoid injections.

In the Salmonella deaths, Kedah Health Department director Dr Ismail Abu Taat confirmed that the chicken used for the ‘ayam masak merah’ dish was delivered to the host in Kampung Huma a day before the wedding reception was held. “The chicken stock was sent to the house on Friday evening but the meat was only cooked at 4pm the next day, which allowed to bacteria to breed,” he said.

Follow the bug, collect the evidence: washing poultry not worth it

The food safety family’s curmudgeonly uncle, Pete Snyder (who really isn’t) would be happy that the don’t-wash-poultry crowd is gaining some traction.

Medical Daily writes that everyone should stop rinsing raw chicken under the faucet. Rather than reducing foodborne bacteria, rinsing poultry spreads pathogens to other surfaces in your kitchen via Dan Aykroyd Plays Julia Childwater splatter, exacerbating contamination rather than preventing it. Now, a new campaign urges the public to drop the habit, as it increases the risk of serious foodborne illnesses like those caused by Salmonella and Campylobacter bacteria. 

“There’s no reason, from a scientific point of view, to think you’re making it any safer, and in fact, you’re making it less safe,” said researcher Jennifer Quinlan, speaking to NPR. Quinlan is a food safety researcher at Drexel University in Philadelphia, and a spokesperson for “Don’t Wash Your Chicken” –– a university-backed public health campaign educating informing home cooks with video simulations and “photonovellas.”

“You should assume that if you have chicken, you have either Salmonella or Campylobacter bacteria on it, if not both,” said Quinlan. “If you wash it, you’re more likely to spray bacteria all over the kitchen and yourself.”

Concomitant focus-group studies funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) indicate that 90 per cent of the population washes their poultry before cooking it. After all, washing usually makes things both cleaner and safer. 

If you, like the majority of Americans, have been washing your chicken until now, campaign officials urge you to peruse the new reports, as well as the educational photonovellas. 

In addition, their “Germ-Vision” animation helps visualize the disconcerting spread of pathogens in your kitchen. 

Can diapers really control Salmonella in lap chickens?

With 271 sick in 37 states from urban poultry, a Denver woman named Mary has launched a business selling chicken diapers to somehow contain the Salmonella.

Faith-based safety

They’re just really, really tame, and they want to be near humans,” said Mary, petting her two chickens, Henny and Penny. “I wouldn’t have them borat.chickenin the house all the time, but once in a while it’s nice to let them in.”

According to Centers for Disease Control investigators, some of those sick people were reportedly “kissing or cuddling with” the birds, and poultry that appears healthy and clean can still be shedding germs that make people sick, and chickens should not be allowed inside people’s homes.

Candice Burns Hoffman, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases with the CDC, said an email to 7NEWS: “Just like you wouldn’t walk around your house and touch surfaces with raw, uncooked chicken, you also shouldn’t allow your live poultry to have contact with surfaces in your home.”

In 2012 alone, public health officials uncovered eight outbreaks in which people got sick with germs spread from contact with poultry in backyard flocks.  These outbreaks caused at least 517 illnesses, 93 hospitalizations and fours deaths, according to the CDC. 

Health officials said that for every case of Salmonella illness reported to the CDC, there are about 30 more that don’t get reported. 

“I never had a problem, and I don’t think most people would,” said Mary.