Better Tracing of E coli in Hamburger
As the United States heads into warmer months when outbreaks of E. coli O157:H7 become more prevalent, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is holding public meetings for input on strengthening the E. coli tracing system.
Of particular concern is improving record keeping at the retail grocery level concerning the origin of ground beef, the commodity most often at the center of E. coli outbreaks. The next meeting starts at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday at the USDA South Building in Washington, D.C.
Knowing quickly and exactly the origin of every pound of beef sold at checkout could help save lives whenE. colioutbreaks happen because detailed records speed vital traceback investigations conducted by public health officials.
It’s hard to believe in 2010 that many retailers don’t keep records or that the records they keep are inadequate for tracing. Tracebacks help us identify the products that are making people sick in order to bring outbreaks under control as quickly as possible.
The current safety gap caused by improper ground beef record keeping at the retail level is acknowledged by top FSIS officials. The agency has been frustrated by the lack of records kept by retailers who grind their own ground beef. It’s essential for them to document where the bulk trimmings and cuts come from in the event a package of ground beef purchased by a consumer is later found to be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7.
If investigators can quickly identify by traceback what products are making people sick, they can also trace contaminated products forward through the distribution system and issue appropriate recalls and warnings.
Orderly documentation of what beef is used in a retail chain’s grindings also will put more pressure on suppliers to eliminate contamination. A major benefit of tracing is to allow the FSIS to assess the establishment that produced the contaminated product to detect if there’s a systemic problem at the plant.
The CDC estimates that as many as 300,000 people in the U.S. are hospitalized each year from foodborne illnesses and millions become ill and don’t even realize that it is connected to tainted food. Estimates of E. coli infection are imprecise, but microbiologists guess that more than 70,000 Americans fall ill every year from Shiga toxin-producing E. coli, the largest source of which is contaminated ground beef.
Of those infected, more than 5 percent develop life-threatening HUS E. coli, or hemolytic uremic syndrome, the leading cause of kidney failure in children and the leading cause of E. coli deaths.
The harmful microbes live in the intestines of cattle and are expelled in feces. The volume of germs surges in warmer weather and the bacteria can contaminate meat during the slaughter process when intestines are nicked or when feces flake off hides. It takes very few bacteria to make a person sick and testing doesn’t catch all lots of beef that are contaminated.
Grocery retailers can help reduce the spread of E. coli O157:H7 by pinpointing the origin of the ground beef they sell with well-kept records.
Vet’s Testimony on Oversight Sheds New Light on Beef E. coli
Years of ground beef E. coli outbreaks will be put in new light today by a slaughterhouse veterinarian’s testimony that supervisors shelved citations written by front-line government safety personnel for dangerous and cruel practices.
The vet says writers of citations were threatened with transfers. It is easy to imagine in the culture he describes that inspectors might have looked the other way at ground beef E. coli risks to stay out of trouble with supervisors in order to keep their jobs.
The whistleblower is Dean Wyatt, a supervisory veterinarian at the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the agency responsible for keeping E. coli O157:H7 and other potentially deadly pathogens out of our meat supply. According to USA Today reporter Peter Eisler, who obtained an advance copy of the testimony, Wyatt is to appear before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in Washington.
Wyatt witnessed practices as an FSIS vet that would increase the risk of E. coli O157:H7 contamination. For instance, he found downed calves being dragged through pens to slaughter — a violation because contact with feces can contaminate animals.
The abuse occurred at Bushway Packing Inc. in Grand Isle, Vermont. Wyatt says he ordered suspensions in operations three times at Bushway in 2008 and early 2009 but managers overruled him and allowed the plant to keep running.
Bushway subsequently made headlines last fall when the Humane Society of the United States filmed undercover video of workers hitting and using electric prods to move calves. The plant was shut down. USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack ordered a criminal investigation.
Wyatt also says superiors dismissed violations he reported in 2007 and 2008 at a Seaboard Foods pork plant in Guymon, Oklahoma. He cited the plant for slaughtering conscious pigs, beating pigs and trampling of pigs, USA Today is reporting.
Wyatt’s experiences “illustrate a pattern that FSIS is broken and must be fixed,” Amanda Hitt of the Government Accountability Project, told USA Today. USDA spokesman Caleb Weaver told the newspaper that inaction on Wyatt’s reports occurred before the tenure of Vilsack, who is “fully committed” to enforcing safe and humane slaughtering rules.
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.
Controlling Ground Beef E coli Requires Test and Hold
Despite the chronic reoccurrence of ground beefE. colioutbreaks caused by meatpackers large and small, the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) does not mandate that meat plants hold product pending test results for pathogens.
Instead, we as a society depend on beef and poultry plants to follow the “best practice” of testing and holding product — something FSIS is stressing again in a newsletter it publishes for small meatpackers. The lead article in the current issue of “Small Plant News” is entitled “Make ‘Test and Hold’ an Integral Part of Your Operation.”
“Test and hold” is a relatively simple concept: test product for E. coli O157:H7 and other adulterants; wait for the results; then ship the product after results come back negative. But what about the small plant owner who sells product on the same day for immediate use? What about establishments that make product with a short shelf life? Or those plants with little to no space to store product while waiting for results? Is “test and hold” an option for them?
The simple answer — one supported by the American Association of Meat Processors — comes down to a matter of ability—if you can hold product, you should do so.
In its message to small plants, FSIS said there is an upward trend in pathogen-related recalls in recent years — including many ground beef E. coli recalls associated with deadly ground beef E. coli outbreaks . The trend should have more plants considering the importance of holding tested product and incorporating the practice into their testing program, FSIS said.
The article quoted Dr. Jay Wenther, executive director of the American Association of Meat Processors, as saying “test and hold” programs are like good insurance. “You’ll wish you had it when you need it,” he said.
Wenther said small meat plants shouldn’t take the issue lightly. Taking steps to hold tested product at your establishment will protect you and your consumers, he said.
