Food Safety
Key FSMA Rules Continue to Languish at OMB, Months After Deadline
Taylor says to expect rules out of OMB in the ‘not too distant future’
It’s been well over a year since the monumental Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) was signed into law and so far implementation has been riddled with speed bumps, not to mention funding woes.
Four of the most critical rules that Congress mandated the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to write and put in place — preventative controls for food facilities, preventive controls for animal feed facilities, the foreign supplier verification program, and the produce safety rule — were supposed to be out in January, so that the arduous rule making process could officially begin.
The rules are under review at the White House Office of Management of Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is a normal stepping stone for major regulations. What has stakeholders concerned is that they’ve now been there for five months, far longer than the 90-day limit.
Michael Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for Foods, told Food Safety News in late January that the rules were not stalled, but it was simply “the logistical challenge of getting this volume of rulemaking done and out the door at the same time.”
Pathogen Test Rapidly Hones in on Salmonella
Currently, bacteria are most often identified by their DNA fingerprint using a technique called PFGE, or pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. These PFGE patterns are then uploaded onto PulseNet, a national database that can be used to see if the strain matches any others in the system.
For Some Wisconsin Grocery Store Sushi Bars, It’s Business As Usual
At Grasch Foods, an upscale grocery store in Brookfield Wis., the tuna Salmonella outbreak caused a minor blip in sushi bar sales and then things went right back to normal, according to Seafood Manger, John Edgerton.
Some Salmonella Bareilly victims report eating spicy tuna sushi.
Grasch buys only fresh fish for the sushi bar and Edgerton does most of the processing himself, he said, so the store was not among those affected by the recall of tainted ground frozen tuna product, called Nakaochi Scrape, from Moon Marine USA Corp. in California.
With 14 confirmed cases of salmonellosis, Wisconsin was hit hard by the tuna sushi Salmonella outbreak, which has sickened 160 people in 20 states and the District of Columbia, according to the latest update from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The only states with more confirmed cases of Salmonella infection are New York with 30 and Massachusetts with 23. Like its neighbor Wisconsin, Illinois has 14.
Study: Feces on Nearly 50% of Supermarket Chickens
A study conducted by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) found that almost half of the chickens sold in supermarkets in the United STates are contaminated with feces.
The study looked at chickens produced by Pilgrim’s, Sanderson Farms, Perdue, and 22 other brands. The tests found that “48% of the chicken samples tested positive for fecal contamination, indicated by the presence of coliform bacteria commonly found in chicken dung.”
Furthermore, “chicken samples from every city and every grocery store chain tested positive. In Dallas, 100% of the chicken bought at the Kroger’s store tested positive for fecal matter. In Washington, D.C., 83% of the chicken bought at a Giant store and 67% of the chicken bought at a Safeway tested positive.”
The study states that on large factory farms, “chickens defecate on themselves and one another and commonly stand in feces. A typical large processing plant may slaughter more than a million birds per week. There, chickens are stunned, killed, bled, and sent through scalding tanks, which help remove feathers but also act as reservoirs that transfer feces from one carcass to another.”
The chickens are then put on a mechanical line for inspection. But those lines run at 140 birds per minute, or more than two a second, “allowing inspectors minimal time to examine each carcass for visible feces,” according to the study.
Raw Tuna Scrape: Study Says Testing of Imported Seafood Inadequate
A 2011 study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (CLF) at the Bloomberg School of Public Health found that the testing the FDA conducts on imported seafood is “inadequate for confirming its safety or identifying risks.”
The Salmonella Bareilly outbreak that has sickened at least 160 people in 20 states the the District of Columbia has brought this issue to the forefront. The raw tuna scrape that is linked to the outbreak was imported from India. And about 85% of seafood consumed in this country is imported. According to the study, only 2% of all seafood imported into this country is tested for contamination. The European Union tests 50% of its imported seafood; Japan inspects 18%, and Canada inspects 15%.
Food Poisoning Bulletin asked Dr. David Love, lead author of the CLF study, for his opinion about this outbreak and any possible link to the FDA’s testing methods.
****************************************************************************************************************
Articles of Interest
FDA Warning Letters: April 17, 2012 Update
FDA Warning Letters for Color Additive Violations
Remember the discussion about color additives that was prompted by the Starbucks decision to stop using cochineal extract, a natural red food colorant, in their products? A few times every year, the FDA has to send a warning letter to corporations who are still using banned color additives.
Artificial food colors have a long and storied history in this country. In fact, the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act was passed in part to prohibit the use of poisonous food colors that were used to conceal rot and damage. In 1960, the Color Additive Amendment classified the 200 color additives that were currently in use as provisionally listed until scientific data established that they was safe.
National Honey Board: Honey is Made from Nectar, Not Pollen
Opinion
The Beverage that is Even WORSE than High Fructose Corn Syrup Soda
April 23 2012
By Dr. Mercola
When a new beverage comes out advertising “60% less sugar—drink it to believe it”—the challenge is on. Same taste; fewer calories to your waist? Sounds good, doesn’t it?
But before you throw that Pepsi Next into your grocery cart, Fooducate.comi suggests you complete the challenge by reading the ingredient label.
There you’ll find that, indeed, the sugar content has been reduced.
But it’s still the second ingredient after water—four teaspoons of it, in fact, in the form of high fructose corn syrup. The secret to keeping this beverage sweet-tasting, however, comes further on down, in the form of aspartame, acesulfame potassium, and sucralose.
So, really, all that’s changed with this new beverage is that 6 teaspoons of sugar have been substituted with three sweeteners that are even worse. Yes, although I strongly recommend avoiding all soda, you would be far better off with the strictly high fructose corn syrup sweetened version.
Artificial Sweeteners have No Place in a Healthful Diet…
Artificial sweeteners are frequently recommended as a practical way of replacing sugar found in the modern diet. But the research on nonnutritive sweeteners such as these three shows they’re far from healthful alternatives to sugar. (A recent article on HealthyFellow.com lists a few of them as a hand referenceii .First of all, contrary to popular belief, research has shown that artificial sweeteners can:
- Stimulate your appetite
- Increase carbohydrate cravings
- Stimulate fat storage and weight gain. In fact, diet sodas, which are well-known sources of artificial sweeteners, may actually double your risk of obesity!
So much for being a dieter’s best friend… Furthermore, aspartame (rebranded AminoSweet two years ago)—best known under the names of Nutrasweet and Equal—is believed to be carcinogenic and accounts for more reports of adverse reactions than all other foods and food additives combined.
The artificial sweetener acesulfame potassium (Acesulfame-K) has been linked to kidney problems, and sucralose—best known as Splenda—has been found to wreak havoc with the healthful bacteria in your gut… All in all, I believe ALL artificial sweeteners are bad news for your health.
****************************************************************************************************************
[In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit, for research and/or educational purposes. This constitutes 'FAIR USE' of any such copyrighted material.]
