Food Safety Experts Want USDA to Dig Deeper When Tests Find E coli 0157:H7 in Meat
Food safety advocates have asked Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack for a policy change when routine inspections turn up positive tests in meat for E. coli O157:H7.
They are calling for a shift to deeper investigations — a reform supported by national food safety law firm Pritzker Olsen. Such a move would better safeguard consumers, especially amid a spate of beef recalls. Already since December 24, 2009, more than 1 million pounds of beef have been recalled after USDA testing in plants found beef E. coli poisoning.
When positive test results are found in connection with a beef E. coli outbreak or other foodborne disease, USDA launches a comprehensive investigation to find the root cause. Those probes are carried out with layers of assistance form Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, state health departments and sometimes the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
But an in-depth story by Chicago Tribune reporter Steve Mills questions why investigators don’t also kick out the jams when inspectors for USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) detect E. coli O157:H7 in finished meat samples at packing and processing plants. It does not appear unreasonable given the small number of positive test results.
In 2009, for instance, there were 41 positive results from more than 11,600 tests, the Tribune reported. Six of those positive tests occurred at five facilities in Illinois. Since 2001, the highest number of positive E. coli O157:H7 test results was 59.
Deeper investigations are especially needed when E. coli O157:H7 inspections are positive in ground beef. Ground beef is made from various lots of meat that are combined at a grinding facility. The lots are frequently divided and sold to a number of different grinding locations. Safety advocates told the Tribune those facts highlight the need to work backward to identify the source of contamination, so tainted meat from other facilities does not reach consumers.
“There’s ironclad evidence that contaminated product is out there, but they don’t do a full investigation,” said Felicia Nestor, a senior policy analyst at the food safety group Food & Water Watch, which also signed the letter to Vilsack. “It’s unconscionable.”
“Why are they doing these investigations if they’re not doing them to put their arms around all the product and find out what went wrong?” asked Donna Rosenbaum, executive director of Safe Tables Our Priority.
A spokesman for FSIS told the Tribune that the agency will “continue working on refining traceability methods and approaches to meat inspections.” Officials are planning a public meeting, tentatively scheduled for March, to discuss approaches to meat inspections.
USDA E. coli Beef Recall at West Missouri Beef
The third beef E. coli recall of 2010 hails from West Missouri Beef of Rockville, Missouri.
The West Missouri beef recall applies to 14,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced. It was distributed to Chicago area wholesalers in 2000-pound “combo bins”
The following products are subject to recall:
- One combo bin containing approximately 2,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef identified as “75 1-M,” produced on October 26, 2009.
- One combo bin containing approximately 2,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef identified as “90 3-D,” produced on November 25, 2009.
- One combo bin containing approximately 2,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef identified as “90 5-D,” produced on November 27, 2009.
- Combo bins containing approximately 2,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef identified as “90 2-P,” “90 2-R” or “90 2-V,” produced on December 8, 2009.
- One combo bin containing approximately 2,000 pounds of fresh boneless beef identified as “90 3-E,” produced on January 13, 2010.
The problem was discovered by FSIS during a verification review performed at the establishment. The product bears the USDA establishment number 5821. FSIS said it is not aware of illnesses associated with the recall.
In January, beef E. coli recalls were announced by Adams Farm Slaughterhouse of Massachusetts and Huntington Meat Packing Inc. of California. Total poundage for the year so far is 880,500 pounds.
CDC Connects Steak E coli Outbreak to National Steak and Poultry
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed there is an association between beef products recalled by National Steak and Poultry and at least some of the illnesses in the 16-state outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 that has sickened at least 21 people.
The investigation is ongoing and includes collaboration with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service and several state health departments.
The CDC’s first published confirmation of the outbreak said it peaked in mid-November, with onsets of illnesses ranging from October 3 through December 14. Nine people have been hopsitalized and one has suffered life-threatening hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a complication that is most likely to occur in children under 5 years old.
The E. coli recall of 248,000 pounds of boneless sirloin steak, sirloin tips, medallions, beef trim and other beef products was first announced on December 24th. At the time, National Steak and Poultry identified three restaurant chains as the primary recipients of recalled products. They were Moe’s Southwest Grill, Carino’s Italian and the KRM restaurant chain 54th Street Grill and Bar.
But just this week, Nation’s Restaurant News quoted officials from Applebee’s and Olive Garden who also admitted receiving beef products from National Steak and Poultry that were later recalled. National food safety lawyer Fred Pritzker has called on the beef processor, which operates a plant in Owasso, Oklahoma, to disclose a complete audit of which restaurants in the country received meat that was potentially contaminated with E. coli O157:H7.
More information needs to come out about this outbreak and recall. Here are the words chosen by CDC that connect the meat processor to the outbreak, which investigators have associated with steaks that were blade tenderized before further processing: ”At this time, at least some of the illnesses appear to be associated with products subject to a recent FSIS recall.”
Steak Safety: The Straight Story
E. coli in steak: What you need to know
Is it always safe to eat a steak served rare? Seems like a simple question.
But a Dec. 24 National Steak and Poultry recall of almost 250,000 pounds of blade-tenderized beef forced consumers and health officials to reevaluate the question—especially after government agencies associated the recalled beef with 21 cases of E. coli in 16 states.
Typically, ground beef comes to mind when considering meat that could be tainted with E. coli. But this outbreak involved blade-tenderized, or what health officials call “non-intact” beef, which included steaks, beef medallions and sirloin tips. “Blade-tenderized” or “non-intact” refers to meat that has been punctured with needles or blades to break down the tissue and make a tougher cut of muscle more tender. Any pathogen (like E. coli) on the surface of the beef is normally killed in the cooking process if the beef is intact. But the mechanical tenderization process drives pathogens inside the beef. If it isn’t cooked until the internal temperature reaches at least 140 degrees, the beef could still contain the pathogen.
Government officials and industry groups offer mixed advice on what consumers should do. The National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods determined in 2002 that non-intact beef can indeed harbor infective amounts of E. coli, but that following the 140-degree rule will put you in the clear. A 2002 risk assessment by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) concluded there is almost no difference in risk of illness from intact versus non-intact steaks.
And yet there have been several E. coli outbreaks since then involving mechanically tenderized meat. This has put the spotlight on the issue of labeling. If non-intact steak must be cooked a certain way to guarantee its safety, then shouldn’t consumers have the right to know whether their steak is intact so they can cook it accordingly? That was the recommendation issued in a 2005 study by the Minnesota Department of Health following a 2003 outbreak of E. coli associated with blade-tenderized frozen steaks sold by door-to-door salesmen. In light of the National Steak and Poultry outbreak, U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro called for labeling of non-intact steaks, stating “USDA has been aware of the E. coli risks associated with mechanically tenderized steaks as early as 1999, but has refused to act…consumers should be made fully aware of the products they are receiving so they can assure that they are cooked at the appropriate temperature.”
Furthermore, does this mean every time we eat at a restaurant, we should order our steak cooked to an internal temperature of 140 degrees? The National Restaurant Association in 2000 decided that restaurant patrons asking for rare- or medium-cooked steak should be informed that non-intact steaks should be cooked to at least 145 degrees to ensure safety. But when is the last time your server told you that?
E coli Ground Beef Recalled from Restaurant
Fairbury Steaks Inc. of Fairbury, Nebraska, is recalling 90 pounds of fresh ground beef that it made Monday and distributed to a restaurant in Ruskin, Nebraska. The name of the restaurant was not published.
That’s the report in a ground beef recall notice published Tuesday by USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). The agency detected E. coli O157:H7 in the meat, which was packaged in 10-pound packages of “bulk fresh ground beef.”
The recalled meet is marked with USDA establishment number EST 5726 inside the USDA mark of inspection. The ground beef E. coli recall notice from FSIS said no illnesses have been reported in connection with the recalled product.
Anyone with E. coli O157:H7 symptoms should see a physician immediately. To review your legal rights, call an E. coli lawyer at Pritzker Olsen Attorneys, 1-888-377-8900 (Toll Free) or complete one of our online contact and information forms. Our firm will provide you with a free case consultation.
