Tag Archives: Risk

FDA says, keep lilies away from your cats

Posted on by
Reply

The white, trumpet-shaped Easter lily symbolizes Easter and spring for many people, and is a popular decoration in homes at this time of year.

If you have cats, however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wants to remind you that these particular flowers, as well as Tiger, Asiatic, Day, and Japanese Show lilies, are a safety threat to your feline friends.

easter.lilyEating small amounts of plants or grass may be normal for cats. But the entire lily plant (leaf, pollen, and flower) is poisonous to them, according to Melanie McLean, a veterinarian at FDA. Even if they just eat a couple of leaves or lick a few pollen grains off their fur, cats can suffer acute kidney failure within a very short period of time.

McLean says that if your cat has eaten part of a lily, the first thing you’ll see is vomiting soon afterwards. That may gradually lessen over two to four hours. Within 12 to 24 hours, the cat may start to urinate frequently. Then, if kidney failure sets in, the cat will stop urinating because the kidneys stop being able to produce urine. Untreated, she says, a cat will die within four to seven days of eating a lily.

Does food safety risk analysis have a public hope? How politics make us stupid

Posted on by
1

I have no time for scientists who bitch behind closed doors about how they’re misunderstood by the public.

As Thomas Jefferson famously stated, which I always use to introduce my risk analysis course, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education.”

communicationI’m not a fan of education, but I am a fan of compelling, current, credible information.

Ezra Klein writes about the More Information Hypothesis: the belief that many of our most bitter political battles are mere misunderstandings. The cause of these misunderstandings? Too little information — be it about climate change, or taxes, or Iraq, or the budget deficit. If only the citizenry were more informed, theb thinking goes, then there wouldn’t be all this fighting.

But the More Information Hypothesis isn’t just wrong. It’s backwards. Cutting-edge research shows that the more information partisans get, the deeper their disagreements become.

This isn’t cutting-edge. This has been known for at least 50 years.

I heard the same thing about genetically engineered foods in the early 1990s (I’m old) and tried to tell the corporations, facts are not your answer: it’s compassion, stories.

That worked out well (that’s sarcasm).

Klein writes that in April and May of 2013, Yale Law professor Dan Kahan — working with co-authors Ellen Peters, Erica Cantrell Dawson, and Paul Slovic — set out to test a question that continuously puzzles scientists: why isn’t good evidence more effective in resolving political debates? For instance, why doesn’t the mounting proof that climate change is a real threat persuade more skeptics?

The leading theory, Kahan and his coauthors wrote, is the Science Comprehension Thesis, which says the problem is that the public doesn’t know enough about science to judge the debate. It’s a version of the More Information Hypothesis: a smarter, better educated citizenry wouldn’t have all these problems reading the science and accepting its clear conclusion on climate change.

That’s a new-fangled version of the needle theory – a willing public waiting to ingest science.

Doesn’t work like that.

Kahan goes on to say that the science community has a crappy communications team. Actually, scratch that: Kahan doesn’t think they have any communications team at all.”

Easy to throw darts from the outside. My team can tell you what you need to know about food safety science communication.

 

 

Raw milk sickened scores despite inspections

Posted on by
1

The majority of those sickened in raw milk outbreaks is children under 10-years-old. And there’s good immunological reasons for that. If adults want to take the risk with raw milk, they will, just like with cigarettes and alcohol. But parents generally don’t have a scotch and smoke with their 4-year-olds.

That’s what I told Karen Rowan of My Health News Daily in her report about a report appearing in Clinical Infectious Diseases, summarizing a Jan. 2012 campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk that sickened 148 people in four states.

The dairy that sold the milk had a permit for selling unpasteurized milk, and had passed all inspections. The farm was among the largest sellers of unpasteurized colbert.raw.milkmilk in the state.

The dairy also tested its own milk for E. coli bacteria more often than was required. The vast majority of the sick people drank the milk before its “best by” date.

The only deficiencies that investigators found were that a mechanical milk bottle capper was broken, so employees had capped the bottles by hand, and that the water used to clean equipment was cooler than recommended (110 to 120 degrees Fahrenheit, instead of 160 to 170 degrees F).

But these issues were “minimal,” and this campylobacter outbreak demonstrates “the ongoing hazards of unpasteurized dairy products.”

Douglas Powell, a professor of food safety at Kansas State University advises that raw milk not be given to children. “As adults, you’re free to choose. But don’t give it to your kids.”

The people sickened in the outbreak ranged in age from 2 to 74, the report said. Typically, campylobacter infections cause diarrhea, abdominal pain and fever that last about a week, and most people get better on their own. In the outbreak, 10 people were hospitalized.

The dairy immediately suspended unpasteurized milk sales when it was informed of the outbreak.

The researchers recommended that state officials consider more regulation of unpasteurized milk, such as monthly pathogen testing.

Petting zoos, chicks continue to sicken

Posted on by
1

As a Vermont infant was confirmed as the latest salmonellosis victim after coming in contact with baby poultry, others are paying more attention to the risk of zoonotic disease – human contact with animals of all sorts – and vice-versa.

America Now reports that rodeos, petting zoos and fairgrounds with OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAanimal exhibits are the prime places where people contract E. coli.

This is what happened to 5-year-old Hannah Roberts and she spent several weeks recuperating at Carolinas Medical Center in Charlotte, North Carolina.

She and 60 other people got very ill after coming in contact with E. coli bacteria at a county fair in Shelby, North Carolina.

Nearly two dozen of the victims were children like Hannah who visited the petting zoo area.

Tracy Roberts says it was extremely hard seeing her daughter suffer.

“Probably the first night in ICU is the very lowest [moment] I had,” Roberts recalls. “The next day, though, we got the first dialysis treatment, and then that evening, she started perking up.”

Sadly, this is what happened to Josh and Jessica Lefevers’ 2-year-old son, Gage.

He got very sick after visiting the same petting zoo where Hannah visited. Doctors say Gage likely came in contact with E. coli and he died a few days later.

“He was awesome. I could have the worst day in the world and as soon as I came home, he’d make me laugh no matter what,” Josh
Lefevers said of his son.

To a child, little compares to the thrill of coming face-to-face with farm animals.

Dr. Stephen Keener is the medical director in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. He says these exhibits can be dangerous breeding courtlynn.petting.zoogrounds for E. coli contamination because the bacteria lives in the guts of some farm animals and their waste.

In the Vermont case, the Vermont Health Department said the child’s illness was caused by the same strain of salmonella discovered in the chicks that were recently purchased from a local feed store.

The Vermont Health Department offers these tips to preventing Salmonella infection:

• Wash your hands thoroughly with soap and water right after touching live baby poultry or anything in the area where they live and roam. Use hand sanitizer if soap and water are not readily available. Supervise hand washing for young children.

• Don’t let younger children, especially those younger than 5 years, handle or touch chicks, ducklings, or other live poultry.

• Don’t snuggle or kiss the birds, touch your mouth, or eat or drink around live baby poultry.

• Don’t let live baby poultry inside the house, in bathrooms, or especially in areas such as kitchens or outdoor patios where food or drink is prepared, served, or stored. Keep live poultry outside.

• Don’t eat or drink in the area where the birds live or roam.

• Don’t clean any equipment or materials associated with raising or caring for live poultry, such as cages or feed or water containers, inside the house.

• Don’t give live baby poultry as gifts to young children.

CSPI, Ramsey race to the gutter of food gimmicks

Posted on by
Reply

Hunter S. Thompson wannabe and celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain sorta got it right when he told a recent interviewer that “I, personally, think there is a real danger of taking food too seriously. Food should allen-spermbe part of the bigger picture. I think the Italian’s have the right balance.”

I cook a lot of Italian.

The U.S. Center for Science in the Public Interest, or CSPI, released a report today that was essentially a top-10 list of risky meats.

Top-10 lists are great entertainment, but lousy public policy.

I was shown an advance copy of the report, and told Rachael Rettner of My Health News Daily (who had no trouble tracking me down, even though my geographic location always changes) the report was a gimmick. Probably designed by some PR hack.

“Douglas Powell, a professor of food safety at Kansas State University, called the rankings a “gimmick” that distracts people from the big picture that all foods come with risks.

“To my mind, all food is risky and should be treated with care,” Powell said. It’s important, he said, “to treat all foods, not just meat, but produce — everything — as a potential sources of dangerous microorganisms.

“Over the last decade, the biggest source of foodborne illness has been produce, which consumers often eat raw, he added.

“Consumers should use a thermometer to tell when their food has reached the proper internal temperature, Powell said. They should thoroughly wash all produce and discard vegetable peels.”

(I compost mine.)

To the boring details, CSPI says between 1998 and 2010, chicken products, including roasted, grilled and ground chicken, were definitively linked to 452 outbreaks of foodborne illness and 6,896 cases of illness in the U.S.

Ground beef came in second.

Meanwhile over at Hell’s Kitchen, a show I never watch, a pregnant woman was apparently fed raw chicken.

I understand the economics behind these cooking shows, amazing celebrity.chefstrips, and real housewives of wherever.

They are cheap to produce and broadcast.

We wrote a peer-reviewed paper about dumb celebrity chefs 10 years ago; nothing has changed; the gutter can be more interesting but only  with an open mind. This is nothing but hackdom.

The safety of roadkill is a risk/benefit question

Posted on by
Reply

Food safety is all about risk/benefit tradeoffs and trust. I base my consumption choices on lots of factors with risk level, source and production practices amongst them (mixed in with price and taste).

I don’t eat raw sprouts because they’ve been linked to lots of outbreaks; seed stock can be contaminated and there seems to be an inconsistent implementation of best practices.  And no one has peeled back the curtain on day-to-day management and marketed food safety by sharing real-time data on irrigation effluent sampling, product sampling or proof of implementation which would increase my trust. The risks don’t outweigh the benefits, to me. The information just isn’t there.

Eating roadkill is another risk/benefit decision. I’ve never had any (that I know of) but it’s not a strictly bad practice/good practice situation. While illegal to harvest side-of-the-road dead animals in some jurisdictions, others, like Montana, are investigating relaxed rules.

The risk/benefit decision is often murky. Food safety is important, but so is actually having food. New friend Andrea Anater of RTI and I shared a guest lecture this week around coping strategies for individuals and families with very low food security and- meaning they often do not have enough to eat and food safety is not as high of a priority as calories. And sometimes people eat roadkill.roadkill-1

Liz Neporant of ABC news reports,

By passing a bill last week that allows motorists to eat their roadkill, the Montana House of Representatives may be on their way to legalizing the ultimate drive-through experience.
State Rep. Steve Lavin originally introduced the bill into Montana’s House to allow “game animals, fur-bearing animals, migratory game birds and upland game birds” who have been killed by a car to be harvested for food.

“This includes deer, elk, moose and antelope, the animals with the most meat,” said Lavin.

“The risk is relative depending on the condition of the animal and how it was killed,” said Benjamin Chapman, a food safety specialist with North Carolina State University. “In roadkill if you happen upon the animal, you don’t know its condition, which makes it riskier than eating regulated food or an animal you’ve hunted.”

Should you decide that flattened moose is what’s for dinner, Chapman advised using a meat thermometer and cooking large game to a temperature of at least 160 degrees Fahrenheit. When dressing the carcass, keep it away from other foods, scrub work surfaces with bleach afterward, and wash hands thoroughly.

Being hungry and sick from foodborne illness (or another zoonoses) isn’t a good thing.  The conditions under which the animal died might not be known (like whether it sick when hit) or how long it has been sitting at the side of the road (with pathogens potentially growing and creating toxins). Those are the things I worry about, but I’m fortunate enough to have ready access to food.

Magical food safety app launched, sort of

Posted on by
1

My favorite food safety-related app is Poop the World — it’s a bit like playing Tony Hawk Pro Skater with, uh, poops. The opening screen says, “Get started! Track your bowel movements in real-time, share with friends, and strive for recognition in a fun and civilized manner!” They had me at bowel movements. Achievement levels like The Daily Quad (4 poops in a day) and Sir Deuce-a-lot (20 poops in a week) are available.

KRQE Albuquerque provides a teaser of a yet-to-be-released iPhone app from a New Mexico-based company, Food Sentry, that is supposed to help shoppers make decisions about food risks. When a specific food is entered, the soon-to-be-released app draws from the company’s double-secret food probation risk database and ranks the relative risk associated with food’s country of origin.

“A lot of things will show up at grocery store that are less than rigorously produced or regulated,” says John Cousins, CEO of Food Sentry.

Subscribers pay $19 a year for access to import and recall alerts, along with a food rating system.

“We have about twelve language skills on staff with our analysis team, and they can search every day to find out what food may be of risk coming into the country and we do the same analysis domestically too,” Cousins says.

Apparently this app is supposed to help a shopper make decisions. I don’t see the utility, especially without knowing how Food Sentry creates their ratings. I want to buy food that has been grown/processed/handled in the safest way – what country it originates in doesn’t matter nearly as much as whether the company who handled it knows what to do and actually does it. And has data to back it up.

High school math word problems often include the phrase, show your work. At least the teacher is able to judge whether the concept is understood, even if the final answer is wrong,

The answer is important – but how someone gets there really matters.

Same with food safety.

Food Sentry doesn’t show their work.

Soup producers mad California regulators didn’t tell them how to manage risks

Posted on by
1

Being public is double-edged: great benefits by electronically and almost instantly connecting with individuals and food safety types around the world, with the risk of being a bigger target for every food-related (or other) grievance.

We encourage food types take to McLuhan’s mediums, and to fight back if wrongfully implicated.

But have some data.

The most common myths that permeate public conversations are food is automatically safe if:

• the bathroom’s clean;
• it’s local, organic, sustainable, natural;
• it’s government inspected; and,
• because we’ve always done things this way and never had a problem.

In 2011, a 29-year-old man was hospitalized after five days of progressive dizziness, blurred vision, dysphagia, and difficulty breathing. The patient required mechanical ventilation and botulism antitoxin. He remained in the hospital for 57 days and then spent some time in a rehabilitation facility. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, he had tasted some potato soup that included botulinum toxin.

In 1977, 59 patrons of a Detroit Mexican restaurant became ill with botulism after consuming improperly canned peppers. As a result of rumors of a pending shortage of fresh peppers, the restaurant staff decided to stick lightly-cooked peppers and some water in jars and seal them.

Putting low acid foods in a jar and sealing them without either acidifying (with vinegar/fermentation) or processing using pressure is a bad idea.

Earlier this week, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) urged people to avoid and dispose of One Gun Ranch and Organic Soup Kitchen soups sold at farmers markets in California because they potentially contained botulinum toxin. The vendors involved are saying they didn’t know the rules (or the risks). And it’s apparently the regulators fault for not letting them know.

According to Squid Ink, although none of One Gun Ranch and Organic Soup Kitchen products tested positive for the toxin (fortunately), the process/procedure to limit the germination of Clostridium botulinum and toxin outgrowth wasn’t validated by anyone. And the companies are crying fowl.

The companies targeted by CDPH are reeling from the state’s actions against their products.

"We have fed over 50,000 people in three years without incident," says Anthony Carroccio, founder and director of the Organic Soup Kitchen, which feeds homeless and low-income people in Santa Barbara.

Carroccio told us that there is nothing wrong with his soups and said that the company passed its most recent county health department inspection two weeks ago. He said the company has never had a recall of any of its products: "We do everything by the letter of the law."

Asked why the state health department is suddenly taking this action against the Organic Soup Kitchen, Carroccio responded: "That’s what I wish somebody would tell me."

Malibu-based One Gun Ranch emailed a statement to Squid Ink, saying: "The mandatory recall of our products is a result of further licensing requirements by the local health department in order to comply with state regulations. It was not a result of contaminated food or improper preparation of our jarred food products. In addition, the commercial kitchens used to prepare One Gun food products adhere to the highest standards of operation and regulations required by the CDPH."

One Gun Ranch CEO Jennifer Hozer told us in a phone interview, "Our understanding is it’s a paperwork issue. … Even though we’re doing everything, there’s a process you have to go through that we weren’t aware of, that they didn’t make us aware of, where they basically observe how you do it. Once that happens, we’ll be fine. Our practices are in place. In all honesty, the way we do it is above and beyond what they require. It’s just a matter of them seeing it."

Hozer added: "We want to protect our customers as well. We understand why they had to do what they did, as far as issuing the recall. It’s just unfortunate that it had to be with a scare tactic, causing fear of the product. We’ve all eaten the food, [and] nobody’s ever gotten sick."

Double points for two we’ve-never-made-anyone-ill comments in the same story. A better answer would have been to talk about the exact processes they use to limit the potential for botulinum toxin formation and how those processes have been validated. In the absence of that info, a lack of illnesses or issues is usually luck.

The idea of prevention is to prevent – before people get sick.

Risk-reward for Jimmy John’s founder a case study in fluff

Posted on by
3

Restaurants are about making money. So is everything involved with food. It’s nice if that food is healthy – however that is defined at the time – and abundant and whatever other marketing spins are out there, but follow the money.

That’s why business publications still exist, to provide puff pieces about titans of commerce who, especially in the U.S., reimagine their histories into storylines.

It’s about the money.

Jimmy-I-decided-to-pull-raw-sprouts-from-my-menus-after-5-outbreaks Liautaud said as part of a National Restaurant Association Show panel in Chicago last week that in 2003 he was unhappy with his potato chip supplier; they didn’t treat him very well, "So I figured out how to make potato chips myself. I designed the bag and everything. And my bags have 2½ times the chips that were in the other chip bags. What’s better is I’m making a lot more money with the Jimmy Chips than I did before."

Great. Maybe you can figure out what to do about sprouts rather than continue to sicken unsuspecting customers.

For the ambulance chasers, the story notes Jimmy John’s Gourmet Sandwiches is a 1,300-plus-unit chain that pulled in $895 million in 2011, according to Technomic.

Liautaud described his relationship with franchisees as one full of "tough love." A corporate team is in each restaurant every 30 days to make sure things are running smoothly.

"It works for us. I call it proactive discipline," he said. "Especially if you’re a new franchisor, it’s important to be in the store to make sure it’s successful."

Success in the world of Jimmy John’s apparently does not include serving safe food.

Withdrawal sucks: Oregon City man lied to consumer hotline about contaminated water his mom drank, blames opiates

Posted on by
Reply

An Oregon City man who told a government hotline last summer his mother had been harmed by bottled water has pleaded guilty to making a false report of consumer product tampering, a federal crime that carries a potential five-year prison term.

He may have been stoned.

The Oregonian reports Curtis A. Purdy, 34 (right, exactly as shown), acknowledged in court papers that he lied last summer to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Consumer Complaint Line about how his mother came to be injured after drinking a bottle of Crystal Geyser water.

Purdy reported to the FDA hotline on Sept. 1 that the water, purchased from an Albertson’s grocery, had caused burns to his mom’s mouth, throat and stomach and that she had vomited and suffered diarrhea, according to a criminal complaint affidavit.

He later told investigators that he had put in the bottle some rubbing alcohol, which he kept around to clean his marijuana pipes. His memory of the incident was hazy, according to the complaint, because he was undergoing opiate withdrawal.