It took about five weeks for my body to adjust from my Pacific Northwest diet of seafood, granola and vegetables to one consisting almost entirely of these items. After four months living in Rome, I have decided that Italians love carbohydrates even more than Americans do.

This is interesting when one considers the fact that there are virtually zero obese Italians. Not only do they know how to make carbs unbelievably tasty, they know how to eat them right.  Maybe it’s because they don’t serve butter with their bread, maybe it’s because their pasta portions are the size of something off an American kids’ menu and maybe it’s because they walk everywhere.  Whatever the reason, Italians have food figured out.

When it comes to food safety they also fare quite well.  Italy suffers far fewer foodborne illness outbreaks per capita than the United States.  There have been only a handful in the past decade. Most have been at hotel and resort restaurants, and none have affected more than 60 people.

There are no food safety law firms in Italy for a reason.  When I asked my neighborhood shopkeeper about this he suggested that the food he sells is safe because the EU became hyper-vigilant after the Mad Cow disease outbreak in 2001.  He’s right; the EU has some very stringent laws protecting European consumers.

In addition to all this, I found one of the biggest differences between safety practices here and at home is found in they way Italian’s ‘do’ food. Their attitude toward its production, sale and consumption is much different than in America.

In Italy food is simplistic.  It’s local, seasonal, small in quantity and easy to obtain.  Most Italian refrigerators are the size American parents buy for their kids when they send them off to college.  When it comes to shopping, Italians buy one to two items each day, rarely leaving a grocery store with more than one plastic bag. They buy only what they will need for the next 48 hours.  They don’t do leftovers.

The products available are much different than in America.  This is evidenced by the fact that there are entire websites for Americans abroad dedicated to helping them find Thanksgiving ingredients in Italy.  It turns out that a search for processed food in Rome is a true challenge.  The frozen food sections are the size of a single bathroom stall because Italian customers aren’t interested.  Peanut butter, cake mix, marshmallows and Mac ‘n Cheese are offered only in the American section at certain international specialty food stores.

But the difference in options doesn’t end with processed foods.  I have searched far and wide for an avocado in winter.  It is nearly impossible to find asparagus in September.  Most restaurants have two menus, one for each half of the year.  You know what will be offered at your market by looking at your calendar.

When it comes to fresh produce, Italians are vigilant about safety.  It is considered a grave indecency at a store or market to touch fresh fruit or vegetables without first donning sterilized plastic gloves. These are provided next to each and every produce section.

One of the products I find most interesting is milk.  First, there are no gallon containers; the largest available size is 24 ounces.  Secondly, it’s impossible to find milk that will not expire within three to four days.  It just doesn’t exist.  Initially this was both baffling and frustrating.  However, I have come to understand it and dread going back to the invincible milk I drink at home.  Italians’ milk doesn’t last as long because the producers don’t use the same preservatives Americans do.

I was able to talk with my local shopkeepers about the various differences.  I felt comfortable attempting to communicate, even in my awful, broken Italian, because I saw the same elderly man nearly every other day and he was always friendly.  Many American supermarkets invoke messages of “neighborhood” and “community” into their advertizing campaigns even though the majority of Americans buy their groceries in sterilized, cold, uniform megastores with 20-or-so checkout stands. By Italian standards, this is far from neighborly.

While Americans use the word “supermarket,” Italians just say “market.”  Their stores are the size of gas stations.  They keep things simple.  Their food system doesn’t possess the mega-mentality that grips American food from farm to fork. They don’t have super-sized slaughterhouses, processing facilities, supermarkets or refrigerators.  Even in Rome, the capital of Italy, the biggest store is equivalent to a two-story Texaco and has only two checkout lines.

Despite the benefits of this attitude, Italy does not have everything figured out.  On more than one occasion I purchased a product that was already past its expiration date. American supermarkets are extra vigilant about removing these items in order to avoid making their customers sick.  Italian stores are not as careful.  When I asked my shopkeeper about this, he told me that if I buy an expired product and get sick it is my fault for being stupid.  Needless to say, I now check the expiration dates on everything I buy in Italy.

My Italian classmates told me that Romans laugh at American students walking down the street laden with shopping bags. They say there are two ways to spot Americans –by their flip-flop sandals and their excessive grocery shopping. When I heard this I tried to phase out my sandals and adjust my shopping style. I obviously did not want to be that American.  But it was a true challenge to change my attitude towards shopping.  After a few weeks of guiltily throwing away expired items that didn’t even fit in my fridge, I experienced a mental shift.  One day I realized that going to the store didn’t have to be an exhausting errand or chore.  It didn’t have to be scheduled into my week.  I didn’t even need to make a list.  Stopping by for five minutes on my walk home to grab a few essentials could be woven into the fabric of my daily life.  The size of my kitchen encouraged me to slim down my list and buy only what I knew I could use in the next 36 hours.

You may be thinking, “what does that have to do with food safety?”  The truth is, there is no direct link between the number of shopping bags you fill and the safety of the food inside them.  Instead, the shopping habits of Italian consumers are part of a general attitude emphasizing a simplified food system. This simplification is seen at all levels of the food system. It includes the sale, purchase and consumption of product.

As I said before, the debate returns to quality versus quantity.  If Americans continue to demand milk that will last two weeks so that they don’t have to schedule a second journey to the supermarket, than the scientists of agribusiness will come up with a way to make our food last longer.  If we demand that stores provide hundreds of different cereals, they will provide us with enormous superstores.  If we demand that food be cheap, they will produce it cheaply.  They will cut corners to please us, and this may continue to make us sick.

That’s one of the encouraging trends revealed in a recent American Dietetic Association survey, which found that nearly 73 percent of children sit down with their families for dinner on school nights today, compared with 52 percent six years ago.

The survey also found that family visits to fast food restaurants have decreased over the past six years.

And since 2003 there has been a 93 percent increase in the number of children who are physically active with their parents three or more days a week, (although the rate of activity is still much lower than national recommendations). 

All are signs, according to the ADA Foundation, that there may be some progress toward resolving the childhood obesity epidemic.

Numerous studies published throughout the past decade have hailed the benefits of routine family contact and home-cooked meals, which include lower obesity rates, higher grades and increased confidence.

There are negative consequences for children who don’t take part in regular family meals.  A study conducted by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, for example, found that teens who have infrequent family dinners are much more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol in the future. 

But the biggest advantage to sharing a meal at home may be that the food is likely to be more nutritious.  Families who dine together generally consume fewer trans fats, less fried food, soda and other less nutritious foods, but are more likely to eat vegetables and fruit, according to an article published on WebMD.

Is it enough?  

“Families are making progress towards improving the quality of their diets, but there is still much work to be done to ensure that children and families are getting the adequate amounts of the right foods and nutrients. For instance, children know what not to eat, but less than 25 percent of children and parents could name the foods they should eat the most,” said registered dietitian Dr. Katie Brown, the national education director for the ADA Foundation in a news release.

The ADA Foundation survey also found that:

— Less than 25 percent of parents and their children correctly identified grains as the food group from which the most servings should be consumed daily. The most common answer was vegetables.

— When asked from which food group a person should eat the fewest servings daily, the majority correctly identified the fats, oils and sweets group.

— 56 percent of Caucasian, 75 percent of African-American and 65 percent of Hispanic children eat from the school lunch line. Children from low-income homes have the highest rate of consuming school lunch (82 to 89 percent).

The American Dietetic Association Foundation’s  2010 Family Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey was fielded in February of 2010 by the independent custom survey research company Knowledge Networks, which surveyed 1,193 children, ages 8 to 17, and their parents.

Survey results were released by the ADA Foundation this month; more information can be found at www.eatright.org.

After its first year of operation, the Rapid Recall Exchange, an online service that aims to speed up notice of recalls and the withdrawal of recalled food and products from store shelves, has signed up 500 members.

The end of September marked the first anniversary for the 24-hour communication network, which connects product suppliers and distributors.  The service was commissioned by the Associate Member Advisory Board of the Food Marketing Institute and developed by GS1 US.

The program’s goal was to streamline the older Product Recall Portal system, which employed strategies such as email, phone messages and faxes.  The new system involves 24-hour, 2-way messaging between producers and retailers.  Recall notices include barcodes and product images for easy identification, plus universal notification for Class 1 recalls and targeted notification for specific customers.

The subscription service is supported by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and the National Grocers Association.

Companies that have signed on as initiators to use the service include Coca Cola, ConAgra Foods Inc., Dole Packaged Foods, LLC., General Mills, Kellogg Co., Kraft Foods, Inc., and Procter & Gamble.

Companies that have subscribed to receive recall alerts include Costco, Disneyland, Giant Eagle, Safeway, Wallgreens, Kroger, Whole Foods Market and Target.

Food Safety News reported in April that Kroger’s and other major food retailers had asked their suppliers to subscribe to the system by July 1. 

In reporting on its first year, the recall service also announced that it is a finalist for the 2010 Chicago Innovation Awards, which recognize significant new products and services.

“We all have the same goal – to prevent the need for any recalls. But when a recall is necessary, retailers want to receive accurate and timely information so we can expedite the removal of product as quickly as possible,” Jill Hollingsworth, the vice president of Food Safety at the Food Marketing Institute explained to Food Safety News in an email.

The authors say that, contrary to common knowledge, even gloves used properly in food preparation can’t by themselves adequately protect against food contamination.  And gloves may actually pose a number of unforeseen risks because the confidence they provide may encourage risky behavior.

The authors suggest that even the best gloves are no substitute for regular, thorough hand washing.

They explain that the warm, moist environment inside every glove is an ideal place for microbial proliferation.  Glove brands differ in quality and material–vinyl gloves are more susceptible to rips than Latex gloves, for example–and bacteria can travel though the tiniest holes or tears.  Long fingernails or rings greatly increase the likelihood of glove puncture, a double threat because nails and jewelry tend to harbor higher concentrations of harmful bacteria than bare hands.

The longer gloves are worn, the more likely their effectiveness as a barrier will be breached. Numerous studies recommend that food preparers should ideally put on a new pair of gloves every two hours to guard against possible unseen punctures.

But while such “loss of integrity” in gloves can lead to contamination of foods and food-preparation surfaces, the study says that in the food-service industry the improper use of gloves is more likely to cause problems than glove leakage.

The authors note that studies in the United Kingdom have concluded that compared to bare hands, gloved hands can contribute as much if not more bacteria to foods and food-preparation surfaces, so gloves can be a cause of cross-contamination.  Gloves should be changed or sanitized when cooks move from working with raw meats to preparing vegetables and other foods.  The study suggests one disinfecting method to guard against cross-contamination, but it involves a time-consuming, five-step process:

1. Immerse the gloved hands in a 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solution

2. Remove gloves by turning them inside out and soak them in the same solution for 10 minutes

3. Wash gloves by hand, inside and out, in soapy water

4. Rinse thoroughly

5. Air test for leaks by inflating the hand and holding under water, look for bubbles and dispose if any appear

Even with this method, the authors of the study declare that “decontamination of gloves, however, can never be absolute.”  They highly recommend changing into a new pair of gloves when switching between foods.

According to the study authors, along with wearing intact gloves, the most important food safety precaution may be proper hand washing and drying.  That means washing hands with hot water and soap, followed by drying with a clean towel before putting gloves on and after taking them off.

“Washing should be performed before handling clothing from a high-risk area, changing into clothing for work in a high-risk area, entering a food handling area, and handling ready-to-eat food and after using a toilet, handling raw food, handling food waste, carrying out cleaning duties, touching non-food contact surfaces (e.g., machines, power switches, buttons and cell phones), blowing noses, and touching body parts.”

Once again, however, even this precaution is not foolproof.  “The hands of healthy individuals may be colonized with microorganisms with the potential to cause foodborne illness even after washing,” the study states.  But the authors emphasize that consistent hand washing tends to produce much better results than random and sporadic washing.

Gloves are but one of many barriers recommended by the authors to prevent foodborne illness.  Other barriers include hair nets, clean utensils, deli papers, food shields and appropriate clothing.

Gloves, however, tend to be one of the easiest food-safety methods to regulate, the study acknowledges.   Employers can easily check to see how many gloves have been used, as well as their condition.  “Glove use is easily observed to verify hygiene compliance, unlike assessing hand washing frequency and thoroughness,” the study concludes.

The study also notes that most glove studies have focused on transfer of bacteria, but the ability of gloves to prevent infection from enteric viruses, such as norovirus, has not been well studied.

Editor’s Note:  A copy of the Journal of Food Protection series on glove use is available online.  

Yevgeniy Khorishko, press secretary at the Russian embassy in Washington D.C., said the pork imports have been barred temporarily since Sept. 8 because of   “excessive presence of antibiotics.”  The two plants’ export licenses will be officially revoked on Sept. 28, however, any product shipped prior to that date will be accepted into Russia.  After the 28th,  pork from both plants as well as meat from 12 facilities in Europe will be barred from Russia.  The ban affects facilities in Germany, Spain, Holland and France, among other nations.

One of the affected U.S. facilities, located in Tar Heel, North Carolina, is by volume the world’s largest pork plant. The second American plant is in Clinton, New York.

 Neil Gaffney, a spokesman for the U.S. Food Safety and Inspection Service, confirmed that there have been “drug residue issues” with meat from the two American facilities.

“Once FSIS receives additional information from Russia, FSIS will work with industry to investigate the findings,” he told Meatingplace in an email.

The bans come after a year of controversy between the United States and Russia over poultry exports.  Earlier this summer, Food Safety News reported on Russian President Dimitry Medvedev’s agreement to lift an all-out ban on U.S. poultry imports that had been in effect over Russia’s concerns about the use of chlorine in processing chicken meat.

Russia now is re-evaluating U.S. poultry facilities and renewing export licenses.  The Salmonella egg outbreak in the United States earlier this summer further  complicated relations between the two countries.  The Russian government released a statement explaining that the egg recall increased its concerns about the safety standards of chicken products produced in the U.S.

Chicken is are not the only food the Russians have expressed concerns about, and this is not the first time they have halted shipments of pork.  Last year they declined pork  from a number of different U.S. facilities because of excessive antibiotics in the meat.  Those restrictions were eased in March.

Licensing issues, combined with the earlier import ban, resulted in a 64 percent decrease in pork exports from the U.S. to Russia during the first six months of this year, compared with the same period of 2009.  Russia had been the United State’s fourth-largest pork export market.  It dropped to sixth-largest this year.

Japanese import regulations toward U.S. beef tightened after the 2003 mad cow disease scare, when a single Washington cow tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Prior to that, Japan had been the largest export market for American beef.

The import restrictions eased somewhat in 2006, when Japan began allowing in American beef from cows younger than 21 months.  Mad cow disease has not been detected in younger cows but, even so, some Japanese consumers were reluctant to buy the imported beef.  One Japanese newspaper reported that two-thirds of people responding to a survey said they would not eat beef imported from the U.S.

The American beef industry, however, has been eager to restore its lost economic opportunity in Japan, and has been been pushing for talks about normalizing beef exports to resume.

But convincing Japan to relent on its policies was apparently not at the top of the agenda last week.  Instead, the discussions focused on food safety practices and policies.

“The purpose of these working-level discussions was to clarify technical issues and address questions.  This was not a negotiating session,” a U.S. Trade Representative spokeswoman told meatingplace.com.

Before the meeting, Japanese Farm Minister Masahiko Yamada also explained that the talks were not intended to change current policy, but to discuss technology and practice related to BSE.

“Our stance is unchanged,” the Minister was quoted as saying to reporters. “We would like to hold talks based on scientific knowledge as we consider food safety as a very important issue.”

Nevertheless, last week’s meeting was the first such talk between the two countries on the subject of beef since a failed 2007 attempt.  Excitement within the beef community had been building since the talks were announced this summer.  Food Safety News reported on the announcement in mid July, citing the high hopes some Japanese restaurant owners held for the possibility that more American beef would be allowed into the nation.

The bilateral talks came amidst reports that South Korea may boost its U.S. beef imports by 24 percent next year.  South Korea tends to follow Japanese import policies, but that nation may increase its U.S. beef imports from 110,000 metric tons this year to 299.8 million pounds in 2011, according to the USDA.

Although the Japan-American talks did not lead to normalization of trade rules between the two countries, they appear to have gone well for both nations.  A statement issued jointly by USDA and the U.S. Trade Representative’s office said the two sides “covered a wide array of technical topics related to [bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)].”

Those topics included current Japanese regulations and regulatory processes, Japan’s risk-assessment process for beef and the country’s import inspection and border measures.  Tokyo sought clarification on U.S. progress on BSE surveillance measures, among other things.

Officials from the two countries agreed to meet again soon, though no specific dates have been set.

For the National Restaurant Foundation, this year’s theme is”High-Risk Customers: Serve Your Fare with Extra Care.”  The Foundation, which was established in 1919,  is focusing this year on identifying at-risk customers and learning how to properly protect them.

Traditionally, this month has been a time for those in the food industry to participate in workshops and tutorials designed to renew safety practices. Politicians and other public figures often see September as a chance to highlight what steps they’ve taken  to combat foodborne illness. Last week Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm proclaimed September as  Food Safety Education Month in her state. Her office outlined the precautions the Michigan Department of Agriculture is takingto protect consumers.

“By working collectively with our local partners, we continue to work hard to maintain food safety standards and protect Michigan consumers from deadly foodborne illnesses,” said Don Koivisto, Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA) director.   “National Food Safety Education month is an opportunity to remind everyone to take a proactive role in keeping our food secure since food safety is a team effort.  Simple things like hand washing, cooking to a proper internal temperature, and separating foods significantly reduce the risk of foodborne illness to you and your family.”

The Michigan MDA oversees the safety of feed and food products in its state through a sampling and inspection program that regulates  more than 1,200 manufacturers.  Michigan  has launched an initiative, called the Consumer Information Text or Email Food Recall Alert Service, which provides updates on recalls and other food issues.  You can subscribe to the service here.

Last year, Food Safety News interviewed the executive director of the Partnership for Food Safety Education, a prominent group in Food Safety Month education efforts.  She said she sees a sharp increase in downloads of the group’s free safety educational materials each September.Many groups offer free tutorials and other food-safety resources  aimed at reaching both consumers and educators–everyone from food industry professionals to elementary school students.

Information on Food Safety Education Month, developed by the National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation can be found here.  

Since its inception, National Food Safety Month has helped food safety professionals and consumers compare the current strength of food safety initiatives with previous years. Consumer advocacy groups and food safety professionals say they hope that with each Food Safety Month observance  the food on tables and in supermarkets is  safer than ever before.

Between 200 and 300 gallons of ammonia, a component of refrigeration systems, were reportedly released from the leaking tank. Witnesses described a huge plume of white gas billowing from the building.

The incident was reported to the fire department at 9:26 a.m. but the local evacuation alarm didn’t sound until 10:20 a.m.  Warning messages later broadcast by local TV and radio stations directed people within a one-mile radius to stay inside with the air conditioning turned off until the early afternoon.

A nearby elementary school had to keep students indoors without air conditioning to protect them from the harmful gas.  Some people sickened by the release were workers at one of BP’s oil spill cleanup sites.

The poultry plant, Millard Refrigeration Services,  handles up to 2.5 million pounds of chicken each day.  Millard is the second largest refrigeration and distribution company in the United States with more than 30 sites.

The company exports poultry to Russia and a number of former Soviet states.  According to its Website, the company shipped more than 750 million frozen chicken leg quarters from the $60 million Alabama facility in 2007.

Two ships were reportedly docked at the plant at the time of the incident.  Chicken stored on loading docks was exposed to the ammonia and eventually discarded.  Other chicken inside the plant during the evacuation registered at temperatures too high.  Officials ordered the destruction of both batches.

An Alabama newspaper reported that officials were not immediately able to determine how much meat was contaminated because they could not access the three-story cooler where the leak occurred until the high concentration of ammonia dissipated.  Investigators were able to examine poultry in four other coolers and found it to be safe and ready for export.

Those sickened by the ammonia were sent to an impromptu aid tent at a nearby Shell gas station.  The 130 individuals afflicted with the worst symptoms were sent on to hospital emergency rooms.

Ammonia poisoning is extremely serious and can be contracted through air, touch and consumption of contaminated products (such as chicken).  Symptoms include itching and burning of eyes, nose and throat; chest pain; difficulty breathing; lip swelling; a rapid, weak pulse; fever; an altered mental state; severe stomach pain; vomiting; and a bluish color to lips and finger nails.

An Alabama news site reported that the U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration fined the Millard Refrigerated Services’s Theodore facility $9,675 following a failed 2007 inspection. The site’s violations included lack of control of hazardous chemicals and failure to secure machinery.  OSHA decreased the fine to $5,100 after the company petitioned for a reduction through OSHA’s informal settlement process.

Records show that other Millard facilities have been cited for safety violations 19 times in the last 10 years.  At least four of those instances included what OSHA said were violations of hazardous chemicals or hazardous waste handling.  

Investigators from OHSA have yet to determine the cause of the leak.  Officials said the company will probably face fines from both OSHA and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Some trade experts fear this leak may further complicate poultry export relations with Russia, a trade relationship that has been under increased pressure in the last few months, in part because of the U.S. practice of treating chicken with chlorine as an anti-microbial.
 
It is unclear whether the ships docked at the time of the leak were bound for Russian ports.

The National newspaper reported that Sultan Ali al Tahir, the acting head of the Product Control section, said 239 inspections were conducted at the beginning of Ramadan.

“We issued 161 fines and 78 warnings. In the assessment, 57 establishments got ‘very good’ and 171 ‘good’,” he told the newspaper.

“Only eight establishments earned a rating of ‘average’ and ‘weak’, which is 4 percent of the establishments visited during the campaign.”

Inspectors also visited 91 warehouses where food is stored before proceeding onto the supermarkets and co-ops. Thirty-five of them were fined and 56 were issued warning notices. A total of 6 percent of the warehouses were not compliant with hygiene rules and were rated average, while 94 percent received ratings of good and very good.

Sultan Ali a Tahi said the most significant violations in warehouses were lack of general cleanliness, improper storage, and poor ventilation.  In addition, some workers in did not have health cards.

Zawya News reported that the Animal Products Control Section of the Food Control Department prepared for the campaign before the holy month began by forming a working group. This group met with the food establishments and launched its campaign two weeks before Ramadan and continued for two weeks during the holy month.

A broad coalition of organizations encouraging new FDA regulatory guidelines collected and delivered the letters. The groups include the Center for Food Safety; Center for Science in the Public Interest; CREDO Action; FamilyFarmed.org; Farm Aid; Food & Water Watch; Food Democracy Now!; The Humane Society of the United States; Organic Consumers Association; and Union of Concerned Scientists.  A press release from the Center for Food Safety describes these organizations as “committed to saving antibiotics as pillars of public health in the United States.”

Many consumer advocates and health professionals agree that the widespread use of antibiotics in animals intended for human consumption may have contributed to a spike in human antibiotic resistance.  In mid July, Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, Deputy Commissioner of the FDA, testified before Congress on the issue of antimicrobial resistance.

“FDA concludes that the overall weight of evidence available to date supports the conclusion that using medically important antimicrobial drugs for production purposes is not in the interest of protecting and promoting the public health,” he explained. “Developing strategies for reducing antimicrobial resistance is critically important for protecting both public and animal health.”

Though Sharfstein’s testimony expressed a hard-line approach to the issue on behalf of the FDA, the coalition of concerned organizations believes that the Administration may be on the brink of taking a big step backward in regards to antimicrobial resistance. The comment period requested by the FDA regards two recently proposed actions. The first is the agency’s intention to alter the Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) guidelines, which govern the role of veterinarians in prescribing antibiotics for animal use.  The second possible action is a measure that asks the animal agricultural industry to voluntarily decrease antibiotic use.

“Reflecting the view of leading scientific and health experts, the citizen comments express concern that the planned revisions to VFD guidelines could weaken veterinary oversight and controls on antibiotic use on industrial farms and that the FDA guidance on non-judicious use does not sufficiently curtail the misuse and overuse of antibiotics in animals that are not sick,” the groups explained in a press release.  The groups want mandatory, rather than voluntary,  federal guidelines to ensure that antibiotics can only be used under veterinary supervision to treat sick animals.

The organizations shared parts of some of the 180,000 letters sent to the FDA by concerned Americans:

–  “My healthy and gorgeous dream boy of a son, Simon, died within 16 hours of his first symptoms.  The cause: antibiotic resistance.  Simon contracted an antibiotic resistant bacterium, MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus).  His infection could
 have been prevented years ago when bacteria actually succumbed to antibiotics.”

–  “Take this opportunity to protect our food supply, our population, and the future of medicine with a meaningful regulation that helps to solve a dangerous current situation.”

–  “Antibiotics in agriculture should be used under direct supervision of a veterinarian on individual animals.”

–  “I am an infectious disease specialist, and well aware of the progressively increasing problem of resistant bacteria, now not only a problem in hospitalized patients, but in many individuals acquiring hard to treat infections in the community. Scientific research has established that the widespread non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in the raising of food animals has contributed greatly to this problem. I strongly support new regulations to ban the use of antibiotics in feed, and restriction of antibiotics to treatment for infection, carried out by licensed veterinarians.”

These letters will be joined by others expressing opposing viewpoints.  Hoosier Ag Today, a radio and Internet based Indiana news service, reported that the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has also submitted comments to the FDA about its proposed actions. The Institute is a public policy think-tank advocating free markets and limited government.  The group warns that a ban “could unintentionally increase the threat of foodborne illness in the United States.”

“Whether you’re talking about human or animal use, banning beneficial uses today can have negative impacts on human and animal health just as surely as a lack of long-term drug efficacy can,” said Gregory Conko, CEI’s Director of Food and Drug Policy. “Instead, we need to balance the current benefits of antimicrobial use against the inevitable development of resistance, and this can include using antibiotics for livestock growth promotion purposes.”

The widespread debate around this issue is further complicated when analyzing the results of bans on antibiotics in animal feed in other nations such as Canada, North Korea, and the European Union. Some reports claim that these bans did nothing to improve human health. Other studies show that the bans may have done a lot to improve human health.  Denmark passed some of the first such bans back in 1997, and CBS news reported on the country’s results.

“According to one study, when different countries introduced certain antibiotics on farms, a surge occurred in people contracting antibiotic-resistant intestinal infections one to two years later. One infection, Campylobacter, increased 20 percent in Denmark and 70 percent in Spain,” reported CBS news. “After the ban, a Danish study confirmed that removing antibiotics from farms drastically reduced antibiotic-resistant bacteria in animals and food.”

A bill introduced by Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) is called the “Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act” (PAMPTA).  Slaughter’s Website explains that the measure would: “phase out the non-therapeutic use in livestock of medically important antibiotics; Require this same tough standard of new applications for approval of animal antibiotics; Does not restrict use of antibiotics to treat sick animals or to treat pets and other animals not used for food.”  The bill was introduced in 2009 and has been referred to committee.

Though there is debate about what will solve the problem, farmers, health experts, congressmen and FDA officials agree that the current situation in the United States is unacceptable.

In Sharfstein’s July testimony before Congress he explained, “Resistant pathogens lead to higher health care costs because they often require more expensive drugs and extended hospital stays.  The problem is not limited to hospitals.  Clinicians practicing in every field of medicine, including my own field of pediatrics, encounter resistant infections frequently.  So, too,
do veterinarians.”

The Infectious Diseases Society of America noted in a 2004 report that, “About two million people acquire bacterial infections in U.S. hospitals each year, and 90,000 die as a result.  About 70 percent of those infections are resistant to at least one drug.

Scientists agree that there are a number of places in your home that hold significantly more bacteria than others, and these places deserve extra attention. Though many bacteria are necessary and good, these places may indeed benefit from an antibacterial wipe down every now and then.

The top ten most germy places in the average home include:

1. TV Remotes. Many of us are guilty of grabbing an after-work snack and flipping on our DVR. Bacteria from many different sets of hands and the remnants of couch-potato snacking has probably accumulated into a ceste pool of germs.

2. Bathtub and Shower. The Center for Hygiene and Health in Home and Community conducted an in-home study that revealed many bathtubs contain up to 100 times the amount of bacteria found in a trash can. Experts recommend disinfecting bathtubs and showers at least once every two weeks.

3. Pet Food Dish. These food and water bowls need a good scrubbing every now and then. Dogs and cats can contract illnesses from bacteria just like humans.

4. Kitchen Sponges and Cloths. These pieces designed to clean other things may in fact be some of the most germ-infested parts of the home.  The recommendation is to run sponges through the dishwasher regularly and dish cloths through the washing machine. A recent study conducted by the Hygiene council showed that over 70 percent of kitchen sponges in U.S. homes failed a hygiene test.  WebMD reported that Cleaning cloths were the most contaminated items sampled by the Hygiene council. Thirty-one percent of cloths were contaminated with E. coli and 21 percent with Staphylococcus aureus.

5. Microwave Touch Screen. This is a place even the most germ-conscious parents often forget to wipe down. Make sure to be especially vigilant about this screen when preparing raw meat.

6. Light Switches. These are places we often touch every day, and normally forget to sanitize. If a member of your household is sick it is especially important to wipe them down.

7. Vacuum Cleaner. These marvelous contraptions are designed to clean the home, but they can also be a central source of bacteria. “We looked at 30 vacuum brushes. Fifty percent contained coliform fecal bacteria and 13 percent E. coli,” a scientist told WebMD. “There’s not much you can do about the brush,” he says. “Vacuum the cleanest areas first and the dirtiest last,” he suggests. That way, you’ll be less likely to spread around as much bacteria.

8. Kitchen and bathroom Faucets. WebMD reported that Faucets and sponges in kitchens harbor more germs than bathroom surfaces. In the Hygiene Council survey, kitchen faucet handles carried more than 13,000 bacteria per square inch and bathroom faucet handles had more than 6,000 bugs per square inch. This is higher than most other spots in the home. WebMD recommends using a disinfectant spray cleaner every night after cleaning up.

9. Shower Curtain. Does your shower curtain get a funny color after a few years use? The crud and soap scum that collects on it over time is probably Sphingomonas and Methylobacterium bacteria. These bacteria can cause problems for people with compromised immune systems, such as children and the elderly.

10. Wet Laundry. How can there be bacteria in the machine designed to clean our clothing? When clothes go into the washing machine, bacteria from one piece of clothing can easily transfer to another. Dangerous viruses like hepatitis A are also especially transferable. Using the hot cycle in a dryer has been found to kill off a lot of the remaining bacteria and is a good precaution. Bleach has been found to kill 100 percent of bacteria on clothing when paired with a hot drying cycle.

So, should we run around our homes sanitizing each and every surface? Probably not. Many germs in our homes are not dangerous. Consumers today are bombarded with cleaning products from every direction that encourage sterilizing the house and preventing illness, but in reality many of these germs are natural and good for our bodies. Children especially need to be exposed to many different types of bacteria from a young age in order to develop a strong immune system.

However, some studies show that up to 65 percent of common colds are picked up from bacteria transferred through household items. When anyone with a cold or other illness has entered the house, it may be a good idea to sanitize these ten household items in order to prevent spread of the cold or disease.

The Hygiene Council is an international body of experts that conduct a yearly study on a variety of different countries to compare and contrast hygienic practices.  According to its research, “Americans’ kitchen hygiene actually got worse in 2009, compared to 2008. Despite claims of Americans that they clean kitchen sink faucets at least once a week, 60 percent of the faucets swabbed failed the scientific group’s hygiene test, compared to only 25 percent in 2008,” WebMD reported. The UK, Germany, and Saudi Arabia all have cleaner kitchen sink faucets than the United States.

One interesting finding that the Council unearthed in the eight countries they tested, is that 19 percent of households were found to clean in order to present the image of cleanliness rather than to actually clean germs.

Pete Goicoechea, the Republican minority leader in the Nevada Assembly, has suggested voters subject themselves to a 2 percent sales tax on food to help bridge this budget gap. The proposed tax could bring in half a billion dollars over the 2-year cycle.

“I believe that we should have had a 2 percent sales tax on food on the ballot this fall,” Assemblyman Pete Goicoechea, R-Eureka, said on KRNV-TV’s Nevada Newsmakers.

His proposal runs into a problem, however, because the Nevada Constitution prohibits taxing food that is not intended for immediate consumption, such as Restaurant food. Amending the constitution requires passage by voters in two successive general elections.

Food taxes have always been subject to fierce national debate. Many states have similar laws to Nevada banning the taxes. Washington state is one of these states, and prohibits taxing most grocery items–excluding soda. However, some communities are starting to resort to food taxes in order to cover record deficits. The Phoenix City Council passed a tax on grocery items earlier this year that was designed to save its fire and police departments.

Politicians in Nevada agree that they are facing desperate times and keeping vital services may indeed call for desperate measures. However, some see other places for bueget cuts before resorting to taxing food, one of the most vital components of human survival.

Assemblyman Ed Goedhart, R-Amargosa Valley pointed to excessively high public salaries such as those earned by firefighters as one example of where spending reductions can be made. Additionally, assemblyman Tom Grady, R-Yerington, said any specific tax proposals are premature, and that the idea of going to the voters for an expansion of the state share of the sales tax to include food would not help in the upcoming biennium, reported the Nevada News Bureau.

The proposed tax did not make it onto the November ballot so Nevada citizens have until 2011 to make up their minds about the legislation.

A section of the health care legislation passed in March mandates that restaurants clearly display calorie information on menus, including sit down and drive through menus. Food Safety News reported that the FDA has been looking for public comment since early July. The comments they received helped shape the draft guidelines released on Tuesday.

The new rules will apply to many different types of eateries, ranging from the deli sandwich counter at your local grocery store to fast food establishments and sit down restaurants like Red Lobster, Applebee’s and Olive Garden. The general rule is that any restaurant with twenty or more locations is required to label products with calorie information.  This rule also includes vending machines.

The diversity among current city and state laws has resulted in a patchwork of different menu labeling standards across the nation. The new rules will streamline the labeling process and give every consumer equal access to nutrition content.

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) co-authored the legislation upon which the draft guidelines are based back in 2003. They worked closely with the restaurant industry and public health officials to craft this section of the health care law which they claim to be a bipartisan and broadly endorsed provision.

“This is a great step forward towards ensuring that Americans will be able to make more informed choices about the food they are eating, which will help to combat obesity, cut health care costs, and improve and enhance our lives. The FDA’s efforts in making this a reality are admirable, as is the cooperation and participation of the restaurant industry as we move forward,” said DeLauro in a press release from her office. “With childhood obesity rates tripling over the last 30 years, this legislation is absolutely imperative to the health of our nation.”
 


“The issuance of today’s guidance regarding menu labeling is an important step in efforts to empower consumers by giving them the information necessary to make sound decisions about their health,” said Harkin in a statement.  “And the endorsement of this effort by the restaurant industry and the public health community demonstrates just how far this effort has come.  Just as consumers embraced the nutrition information on packaged foods when Congress made it available 20 years ago, so too will they use similar information at chain restaurants when the requirements of menu labeling are fully implemented.”

The draft guidelines can be viewed here.

Oliver tweeted, “I can’t believe we won the Emmy! Thanks to everyone that signed the petition, 650,000 of you.”

His show defeated the likes of Mythbusters, Dirty Jobs, and Antiques Roadshow to claim the title of Outstanding Reality Program.

His show focused on changing the eating habits in Huntington, West Virginia, which has deemed the most obese city in America by the Federal Government.  He centered his fight on the school lunch program and infamously tried to explain to local officials that French fries don’t count as vegetables. 

He also showed his 7.5 million viewers what plus-size coffins look like and opened up a community kitchen to continue teaching local families about alternatives to fast food and TV dinners. He made parents and school administrators aware of unhealthy ingredients in the food their children were consuming. The program included extensive coverage at Huntington High School and Central City Elementary School, where most children couldn’t identify a tomato.

Even though his show only consisted of six episodes, it gathered a significant following. He won the prestigious 2010 TED Award earlier this year. TED is a non-profit community of some of the world’s most influential “thinkers and do-ers”.  Past award recipients include Bono and Bill Clinton.  With the award, he won a $100,000 donation towards his current projects as well as one “wish” that the TED community pledged to help make a reality.

“I wish for the TED community to create a movement to educate every child about food, inspire families to cook again, and bring people together everywhere to fight obesity,” said Oliver. “My hope is that millions more people will learn, as so many have already, that it is a happier, healthier life that is built around eating good food, together with family and friends.” He laid out a number of different steps towards making this a reality. These include mobilizing a theater group to travel around the country and teach children about eating healthy.

Part of Oliver’s revolution includes a petition he is circulating around the nation that he hopes will eventually improve the U.S. school lunch system.  It has already garnered support from celebrities such as P. Diddy, Wendy Williams, Randy Jackson, Dr. Drew, Heidi Klum, Kate Goslin, Heidi Montag, Ellen DeGeneres, Justin Beiber, Whoopie Goldberg, Larry King, Adam Lambert, and Jennifer Aniston. The petition can be signed here.

Oliver’s website includes details of the petition, his successful school lunch overhaul in England, and his efforts in Huntington.  He advocates for healthy home cooking, and a revamped school lunch program.

While promoting fresh home cooking, Oliver also emphasizes the importance of food safety precautions. He has published numerous articles and videos on his website that are designed to teach people about the importance of cooking safely in the home. Some of these include articles on how to safely freeze homemade food, how to prevent cross contamination, and directions on how to prepare meat safely. 

In an article titled “Chopping Boards” he says, “I can only speak from my own personal experience but I use wooden chopping boards for all my fruit & veg and only ever use a plastic chopping board for meat & fish. The reason for this is the plastic board does not absorb like wood and can be cleaned better.”

Additionally, his website includes healthy sample lunch menus and home cooking guides.

Oliver’s supporters hope that the recognition that comes with this Emmy award will only progress his efforts to bring about change to America’s food system and general eating habits.

The agency decided that the chemical poses unnecessary dietary risks to humans, especially young children. The pesticide is currently used on crops such as peanuts, potatoes, citrus, cotton, coffee, and soybeans.

“Aldicarb is registered for use as a systemic insecticide and nematicide on agricultural crops, and is formulated and marketed solely as a granular pesticide under the trade name Temik,” the EPA said in a statement.

Bayer will discontinue registrations for Temik on certain crops like citrus and potatoes immediately, and completely discontinue its distribution to U.S. and other international markets by 2014.  Citrus and potato farmers are allowed to use the supplies they have already purchased until the end of 2011.

The company will discontinue production of aldicarb for other crops by the end of 2014 and will end distribution by the end of 2016.  The company plans to eliminate use of the product altogether by 2018.  The labeling of Temik will be changed immediately in order to decrease its use on crops like cotton, soybeans, coffee, and peanuts. 

Additionally, the EPA plans to revoke the tolerance, or legal pesticide residue allowed in food, that is associated with these commodities.

Bayer CropScience President and Chief Executive Bill Buckner said in a statement that he recognizes “the significant impact” the EPA decision will have on farmers and the food industry. He added that the company is prepared to help address concerns during the transition period.

The EPA has expressed concern over the chemical finding its way into shallow water wells, and plans to pass new measures protecting these wells all over the country.  The agency is paying particular attention to protecting vulnerable areas in parts of the southeastern United States. Bayer has agreed to do its part ensuring these wells and other areas avoid contamination. 

“Although the company does not fully agree with this new risk assessment approach, Bayer CropScience respects the oversight authority of the EPA and is cooperating with them,” the company said in a statement. “This new assessment does not mean that aldicarb poses an actual risk.”

The EPA says side effects of aldicarb can cause sweating, nausea, dizziness, blurred vision, abdominal pain, vomiting, and diarrhea. It said that those side effects very rarely occur at levels typically found in food.

“The U.S. has a safe and abundant food supply, and children and others should continue to eat a variety of foods, as recommended by the federal government and nutritional experts,” the EPA said in a statement.

In September, EPA plans to publish a Federal Register notice announcing receipt of the registrant’s request for voluntary cancellation of aldicarb use on citrus and potato. Public comment will be invited for 30 days. The agency plans to grant the requested cancellations after the close of the comment period.

Tammy is one of 155 people from 21 states who are confirmed victims of two Salmonella outbreaks traced back to food served at Taco Bell restaurants this summer.  Two serotypes of Salmonella were associated with the outbreak–Salmonella Hartford and Salmonella Baildon.  Among Salmonella serotypes, these two are relatively rare.

Yum! Brands, the parent company of Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut and other fast food chain restaurants is the named defendant in the lawsuit.  Attorneys Bill Marler of the Seattle food safety law firm Marler Clark and Fred Wendel of the Columbias, Ohio firm Stewart & DeChant filed the suit in the Court of Common Pleas of Scioto County, Ohio.

Marler said that in the past his firm has represented victims of E. coli and hepatitis A outbreaks that were ultimately traced back to Taco Bell food.

The plaintiff consumed food from Taco Bell in early June, and the next day began experiencing Salmonella symptoms. Her gastrointestinal pain increased over the next several days until she was hospitalized.  Tests done in the ER confirmed that she was indeed infected with Salmonella Hartford.  Hale is still recovering from her illness.

“Ohio has been hard-hit by these outbreaks,” said Marler.  “Studies show that for every confirmed Salmonella illness in an outbreak, another 38.5 people who are sick don’t visit the doctor or don’t get tested.  Using that math, close to a thousand Ohioans have likely been sickened.  Many, like Tammy, are still trying to regain their health.  At this point in the outbreak, our job is to help them do that.”

The two outbreaks are thought to have begun in April and stretched into early June. Salmonella symptoms include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, fever, nausea, and/or vomiting. In mild cases diarrhea may be non-bloody, occur several times per day, and not be very voluminous; in severe cases it may be frequent, bloody and/or mucoid, and of high volume. Fever generally occurs in the 100 F to 102 F range.  Headaches, muscle pain, and joint pain are often reported as well. Whereas the diarrhea typically lasts 24 to 72 hours, patients often report fatigue and other nonspecific symptoms lasting 7 days or longer.

The owner of the Davenport, Iowa restaurant where the chef works has agreed to pay the fine, and promises to address the health risks associated with amphibian handling.

The restaurant’s head chef was seen holding two toads that he found outside the building.  In the video he kisses them each a few times, then proceeds to lick their bodies and stuff them both into his mouth. After this he sets them back on the prep table and continues cooking. The chef’s brother videotaped the entire episode and posted it on YouTube.

Though the act was meant to be a joke, the health inspectors watching the video did not find it amusing. Toads can carry a number of different diseases, including Salmonella. Food inspector Lindsay Gorishek said that they found multiple different food safety violations in the video. 

The Scott County Health Department fined the restaurant for compromising sanitation guidelines and failing to abide by good hygienic practices.

In 2009 the state passed a law that tightened food safety standards, which most experts agreed were subpar during the time of the outbreak.  The law’s purpose was “to provide requirements for testing of samples or specimens of foods and ingredients of food processing plants for the presence of poisonous or deleterious substances or other contaminants.” It was also designed to “provide for food safety plans; to provide for reports and records; to provide for rules and regulations; to provide for inspections; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other services.”

Some experts claimed that this law was “like putting a band aid on a broken leg,” and did not provide the strict vigilance needed to avoid another outbreak. However, this spring the house passed another law strengthening its fist one. This law made it a felony to knowingly distribute contaminated products, with penalties resulting in up to 20 years in prison and a $20,000 fine. It also made failure to report possible positive tests for contamination to the government within 24 hours a misdemeanor charge.

These laws have indeed strengthened the food safety standards in the state of Georgia. In March, Peter Hurley, the father of a three-year-old boy who became ill with Salmonella from Georgia peanuts, spoke with Food Safety News about the Georgia laws.

“I think it would be in the best interest of every state to pass a bill like this; not only for the consumers, but also to let food producers know the government is serious about food safety.  I wish all the states would pass a law like Georgia’s,” he said in an email.

A recent article published by WALB News shows evidence that the government is not the only body still focused on preventing another outbreak. It reports that this month over 100 people showed up for a voluntary–and pricey–food safety training course geared towards the storage facilities in which peanuts are kept for months on end before they are de-shelled. These facilities are called “buying points”, and are a likely source for contamination.

The Executive Director of the National Peanut Buying Points Association, Tyron Spearman, spoke with WALB News. He said that food safety is on the forefront of the industry’s agenda.

“We have more direction now as to what should we do to prevent something like this from happening again,” said Spearman, referring to the massive outbreak last year.

He named a few concrete changes the industry is making in order to ensure safety. “The pits have to be cleaned periodically, you cannot have birds or places for birds to build bird nests,” he said of the warehouses. He also mentioned that they are changing out glass light bulbs for non-shatter bulbs with protectors around them. They also have amped up rodent control in and around the facilities.

Though the producers, industry organizations, and Georgia State government are still reacting to the outbreak, peanuts are not only grown in Georgia. Food safety attorney Bill Marler, who has brought claims against companies on behalf of peanut outbreak victims, told Food Safety News:

“With respect to over all legislation, everyone has been waiting on the passage of S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, which would mandate more inspections of plants like peanuts.”

The Senate struck a bipartisan agreement on the bill last week.

This year alone the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued a staggering 18 pet food recalls and safety alerts.  In light of a recent study connecting two specific recalls from one company to 79 cases of human Salmonella, it is time to reevaluate the way that dog and cat owners handle pet food in the household.

The Salmonella study published in the journal Pediatrics, titled “Human Salmonella Infections Linked to Contaminated Dry Dog and Cat Food, 2006-2008”, is confirmation that humans can indeed fall ill in large numbers from being exposed to contaminated pet food. The study focused on 79 infected individuals in 21 states, 32 of whom were 2 years old or younger. The Salmonella strain identified in the study is a rare one called Salmonella Schwarzengrund, and was traced back to a particular type of dry dog food that was included in a 23,000 ton 2007 recall. In 2008 a second recall traced back to the same Pennsylvania plant resulted in its permanent closure.

Since January 2010 the FDA has announced 18 pet food recalls and safety alerts, up from only 9 last year. These include:

– January 14, FDA health alert for Merrick Beef Filet Squares

– February 12, Nature’s Variety recalls Raw Frozen Chicken Diets with best if used by date of 11/10/10

– March 8, Nature’s Variety expands recall to include all Raw Frozen Chicken
Diets with best if used by dates on or before 2/5/11

– April 16, Purina Mills recalls some Strategy Hourse Feed and Layena Poultry Feed

– June 2, Kent Nutrition Group recalls Kent Feeds 20 Lamb DQ45 Medicated

– June 9, Procter & Gamble recalls Canned Cat Food

– June 18, Kent Nutrition Group recalls Kent Feeds Swine Products

– June 18, Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc. recalls Natural Balance Sweet Potato & Chicken Dry Dog Food

– June 22, United Pet Group Recalls Pro-Pet Adult Daily Vitamin Supplement for Dogs

– July 1, Feline’s Pride Issues Nationwide Recall of Natural Chicken Formula

– July 2, Merrick Pet Care Recalls Beef Filet Squares

– July 15, Feline’s Pride Expands Nationwide Recall of Natural Chicken Formula Cat Food

– July 25, Procter & Gamble recalls two lots of Prescription Renal Diet Cat Food

– July 27, Biggers & Callaham recalls Frozen Reptile Feed

– July 30, Procter & Gamble expands recall of Specialized Dry Pet Foods

– August 3, Merrick Pet Care recalls Texas Hold’ems 10 oz Bag because of Salmonella Risk

Did the pet food industry learn its lesson after the deaths of over 8,500 pets in 2007?

Some experts think that the industry has indeed self-regulated and that the increase in recalls does not reflect a decrease in pet food safety.

The American Veterinary Medical Association’s Kimberly May thinks that the rise is just a sign of increased vigilance and attention from the FDA and not necessarily decreased safety.

“Based on what I’ve seen so far, pet food is not becoming unsafe,” May told Consumer Ally. “We’re not seeing any evidence that these foods are unsafe and more animals are getting sick.”

The Washington State Veterinary Medical Association agrees with May. In a recent newsletter sent out to all registered Washington state veterinarians, the organization lists possible reasons for the uptick in recalls:

– The large-scale, melamine-related pet food recall of 2007 increased public and media awareness of and sensitivity to pet food safety concerns.

– Increased vigilance of the manufacturers and the federal government regarding Salmonella and other public health concerns, leading to increased surveillance and reporting.

– The recent launch of an early detection reporting system–the Reportable Food Registry–that requires and allows immediate reporting of safety problems with food and animal feed (including pet food), instead of relying on inspection to identify problems. According to a July 2010 FDA press release, the registry has been very successful in identifying at-risk foods.

The registry newsletter claims that, “These recalls are not an indication that pet foods are unsafe. Considering that the majority of these recalls have been precautionary and no illnesses have been reported, these recalls may indicate that they are preventing illness by catching the problems earlier.”

Consumer Response

Though many of these recalls may be preemptive, the Pet Food Products Safety Alliance is concerned about the dangers posed by pet food. This non-profit conducts independent testing on many different types of food, treats, and biscuits, hoping to regulate the industry through test results.  The alliance claims that powerful pet food lobbyists have resulted in a lack of oversight for the industry.

The alliance Website says: “Aggressive lobbying tactics have resulted in poor legislation, leaving pet owners with little recourse when their companion animals are harmed by dangerous or deadly pet food products.”

Don Earl, the founder of the watchdog alliance, told Consumer Ally that the manufacturing plants are probably behind the contaminated batches. “Pet food is cooked at high temperatures, which would kill any Salmonella that raw ingredients might have picked up,” he said in an email. “That means it is the pet food factories themselves that are unclean.”

“An American Pet Owner” wrote on her blog, “The poisoning of thousands of househeld pets and the 2007 North American Pet Food Recalls should have been a wakeup call to all pet owners. Apparently, they weren’t. Here it is 3-1/2 years later, and we still see recall after recall of the food we feed our cats and dogs. Pets are now considered family members by the majority of US families. Is this any way for pet food companies to treat our family members? Is human food any safer than pet food? I don’t think so. Buyer beware.”

Anni Quinn, another concerned pet owner, gave Food Safety News a list of five ways she feels pet food can be made safer and fewer recalls issued:

1. Redefine the legal status of pets as more than replacement-value property, but as a special class of family members, and include damages to the owners and families of pets sickened or killed by pet foods or pet treats or pet supplements. Make it cost pet food manufacturers
to sicken and kill pets with inferior quality food products.

2. Remove regulation of pet food and pet treats and pet supplements from the American Association of Feed Control Officials (and indirectly from the Pet Food Institute) and make it the sole responsibility of the FDA through the Center for Veterinary Medicine under the same
standards as human food regulation, not for-slaughter animal feeds.

3. Inspect pet food/treat/supplement facilities at least yearly and give the FDA mandatory authority to recall any and all dangerous pet products of any type, foods, treats, supplements.

4. Make the results of Quality Control {QC} practices listed on pet food manufacturers’ websites also be posted on pet food manufacturers’ websites for the consuming public to review by lot, batch, and UPC number as delivered to retail shelves.

5. When a pet food, treat, supplement is recalled, publicize it in the press, TV, and newspapers, as well as social media online, and post prominently on the pet food manufacturer’s website. No more silent call-backs or product withdrawals.

“That would be a start at keeping the contaminants/adulterants away from my pet family members,” Quinn wrote in an email to Food Safety News.  “And more importantly, my kids and grandkids!”

Preventing Salmonella Infection After Handling Pet Food

Though the Washington State Veterinary Medical Association does not think that food is any less safe than it was before the 2007 recalls, it does publish a comprehensive list of pet food safety guidelines to help protect both humans and pets from contracting Salmonella. The association recommends that pet owners:

– Wash your hands thoroughly after handling any pet food or treats

– Don’t allow your children to handle the food; or, if you choose to let them handle the pet food or treats, make sure they thoroughly wash their hands (under your direct supervision) afterward.

– Do not allow immunocompromised, very young, or elderly people to handle pet food and treats; or, if they handle the products, they should thoroughly wash their hands immediately after handling the products.

– Keep all pet foods and treats away from your family’s food.

– Do not prepare pet foods in the same area or with the same equipment/utensils you use to prepare human foods.

– Do not allow pets on countertops or other areas where human food is prepared.

– If it is possible for you to feed your pet in an area other than your kitchen, you may wish to consider doing so. If it is not an option, or if you choose to feed your pet in the kitchen, feed your pet as far away from human food preparation areas as possible and follow the other guidelines above.

The last of these guidelines is in tandem with one of the central findings of the Pediatrics study. In this study, researchers determined that most human Salmonella infections occurred in households where animals were fed in the kitchen. The abstract of the study explained, “Illness among infant case-patients was significantly associated with feeding pets in the kitchen.”

There are approximately 10,000 guide dogs in the U.S. and Canada, with equally high numbers assisting people with other disabilities. Service dogs are becoming increasingly popular for veterans suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Dogs are integral units in the police and military services. Small furry animals captivate children and are companions for the lonely. Pets are an integral part of American culture and will remain as such.

Most food safety attention is understandably focused on human food, but don’t forget the importance of ‘man’s best friend’.

The Senate Website is set up so that you can easily search for companies lobbying on behalf of a particular subject like food safety.  Anyone can even view the particular actions of a favorite grocery chain, coffee company, or fast food restaurant.

Corresponding with the progress of a number of food safety bills, the second quarter of this year (April 1 through June 30) saw increased lobbying on the food safety front.  Mcdonald’s Corp. spent $315,160 this past quarter, which is three times what the company spent during the same quarter in 2009.  McDonald’s’ lobbying efforts focused on S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act; food labeling legislation; childhood nutrition bills; climate change; global warming; and the Food Safety Enhancement Act.

Cargill, Inc., the company that recently resolved an E. coli lawsuit with Stephanie Smith, spent $400,000 lobbying S. 510, greenhouse gas legislation, climate change, and childhood nutrition bills.

ConAgra Foods, which recently recalled Marie Callendar’s frozen entrees after they were determined to be the source of a Salmonella outbreak, spent about $100,000 lobbying S. 510, school nutrition programs, workers rights legislation and climate bills.

Dunkin’ Brands of Dunkin’ Donuts and Baskin Robins spent $150,000 on lobbying S. 510 and nutrition labeling legislation.

Starbucks Corporation spent $230,000 lobbying the federal government on S. 510 and other legislation involved with nutrition labeling procedures.

Kellogg’s spent $363,860 lobbying on issues involving marketing rules, advertising regulations, and bills regarding nutrition in schools.

Kraft spent $700,000 on more than twelve different bills navigating through congress, including S. 510, H.R. 4053 the Healthy Kids Act–for Childrens Advertising, S. 558–a labeling bill, the Ban Poisonous Additives Act of 2009–S. 593, the Healthy Food for Healthy Schools Act of 2010–S. 1650, H.R. 1324–child nutrition bill, and many more.

Coca Cola spent $2,180,000 on “Health and nutrition issues including support of the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act and appropriations for physical education programs,” according to the company’s lobbying report.  The company also focused on water safety issues, recycling requirements, and issues surrounding food safety.

Walmart spent a whopping $1,673,000 during the three month period through four different lobbying organizations. The company focused on clean energy legislation, cheap healthy food legislation, and food safety.

Nestle spent $735,920 on lobbying S. 510, a bill banning poisonous additives, bills associated with childhood nutrition, clean air and water bills, and a derivatives market transparency bill.

Yum! Brands, the parent company of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC and other chains, spent $360,000 lobbying about nutrition disclosure, a paid sick leave bill, S. 510, and other food safety legislation.  Taco Bell was recently linked to an outbreak that has resulted in at least 155 people with Salmonella, and has been sued on behalf of at least one victim. The amount of money they spent this quarter more than doubled the $150,000 they spent in the first quarter of 2010.

Procter and Gamble spent a total of $1,079,067 lobbying the federal government on employment legislation, small business bills, trade relations, clean water bills, clean energy bills, various health legislation, S. 510, the bill banning poisonous additives, the bill banning BPA in children’s food and beverage containers, immigration legislation, and the S. 1074 Shareholder’s Bill of Rights.

Other popular companies that registered for lobbying disclosure include Mead Johnson with $60,000, Safeway with $480,000, and Hershey with $155,000.

Nearly every company and organization that registered for lobbying designated some money to lobbying policy makers on S. 510, FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. This bill has received a lot of objection and support from many different interest groups and continues to be one of the most contested pieces of legislation.

The complete Lobbying Disclosure Database can be found here.

The candies were manufactured in China and distributed by Au’some, Inc. located in New Jersey. Only one batch of candies contains high levels of lead, and each package from this batch is labeled with the Lot #09168. The number is printed in black ink on the clear plastic seam at the back of the packaging. Each package is 4.5 oz and has a clear portion of the cover through which you can see the pink, blue, purple, and orange hard candies.

The candies were sold exclusively at 99 Cent Only stores throughout California, Arizona, Nevada, and Texas. Au’some, Inc. has initiated a voluntary recall of the candy since learning of the results of the California Department of Health test.

Lead poisoning can lead to serious medical complications. Children are normally asymptomatic, and if they do show symptoms they are often extremely subtle. These symptoms can manifest as hyperactivity, irritability, sleeplessness, and lack of concentration. More severe poisoning can be accompanied by hearing problems, headaches, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, loss of appetite, constipation, muscle soreness, anemia, neurological impairment, seizures, and coma.

It should be noted that even mild lead poisoning can lead to neurological damage. It is important to contact your physician immediately if either you or your child have eaten these candies. This is especially important for pregnant women.

The Candies contained 0.27 parts per million (ppm) of lead, and California health law considers any food item with 0.10 ppm or more contaminated and unfit for human consumption.

If you have found any Transformers ‘Revenge of the Fallen” Crunchy Candies please call the California Department of Public Health Complaint Hotline at (800) 495-3232.

“Both restaurants have had very good records of inspections in the past and both are cooperating in the investigation. There are no other confirmed cases of hepatitis A at this time,” said the Grand County Public Health Department.

The Department recommends that anyone who has not already received a Hepatitis A vaccine series and ate at Max and T’s between July 26 and July 30, or at Sagebrush BBQ and Grill between July 24 and August 3 receive a Hepatitis A vaccination within 14 days of their meal. People who ate at those restaurants between July 10 and 23 may also have been exposed to the virus, but have run out of time to receive the vaccination. These people should watch for signs of Hepatitis A and contact their physician if they develop illness. Those who consumed only dessert or drinks are not at risk.

Early signs of Hepatitis A infection appear between 2 and 6 weeks after contact. These symptoms can include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, fatigue, loss of appetite, dark urine, jaundice (yellowness of eyes or skin) and pain in the upper right side of the abdomen. Illnesses can be as short as 2 weeks but are also known to last up to 6 weeks. Children often show very few symptoms and may have illnesses so mild they go unnoticed. However, children are still highly contagious. Anyone with even mild symptoms of Hepatitis A should contact their health care provider immediately.

This past weekend there were two Immunization clinics at Grand Lake Elementary school for exposed customers. If you missed one of these clinics you are encouraged to contact the Grand County Public Health Department.Patrons no longer in the Grand Lake Area should contact their public health department to acquire the vaccination.


People under the age of 40 are advised to obtain the Hepatitis A vaccination series, but individuals over 40 should receive an injection of immune globulin instead.

Hepatitis A is extremely contagious and can be spread through person-to-person contact. Historically the virus has been spread through contaminated food and beverages. It is for this reason that the Grand County Health Department is treating the situation with such vigilance. 

“Workers at both restaurants were immunized with hepatitis A vaccine on Thursday as a precaution,” said the health department.

Hepatitis A vaccines have been offered since 1995 and are required in many school districts. Since the vaccine was introduced we have had the lowest rates of infection in 40 years. It is estimated that about 25,000 new cases crop up in the United States each year.

For more information, call Grand County Public Health at 970-725-3288; or COHELP – 1-877-462-2911.

Sezmu Meats’ fifth generation rancher, Jandince Ravndahl came up with the idea, according to the Vancouver Sun. She was inspired by a cooking show that showed pigs being fed beer. Wine appeared a better alternative since beer caused bloating, so last November she began feeding her Angus cows one liter of homemade red wine each day. For a typical cow one liter is about equivalent to one glass for a human.

“When the cows first drink the wine, it’s like ‘what is this?'” says Ravndahl.

“But once they have it, they’re happy to have it again. They moo at one another a little more and seem more relaxed. There are a few that lap it up out of the pail. After they’ve had it for a while, when they see us coming with the pitchers, they don’t run, but they come faster than usual,” she said.

A number of prominent chefs are already serving the new meat, including Food Network star Ned Bell.

Culinary Arts instructor Michael Allemeier is extremely excited about the new beef. “I’ve cooked with almost all of the premium beef programs throughout my career and I have been very impressed with Sezmu beef,” he says.

“Red wine and beef are natural pairing partners to begin with. Why not in the finishing program? I found the meat to have a wonderful texture–one of the benefits of dry-aging–but the aroma and flavor are what truly impressed me.”

Fans claim the beef has a sweeter taste, is “self-marinated” and ultra tender. Reports indicate that the cows also enjoy the wine.

So, does this designer beef come with any health benefits or drawbacks? One drawback is the fact that it costs 15 cents more per pound than regular grass-fed, antibiotic- and hormone-free beef. In terms of health, researchers at Thompson Rivers University in Canada are performing a number of tests on the wine-fed cows and their meat.

One study hypothesizes that the red wine may lessen methane production.  A typical cow releases between 26 and 53 gallons of the gas daily. Studies show that agricultural methane gasses are responsible for 14 percent of the greenhouse gasses polluting our atmosphere and resulting in global warming. A second study by Thompson Rivers University is trying to figure out if red wine can increase disease prevention in cows or benefit the health of their hearts.

Currently Sezmu wine-fed beef is only available in British Columbia, but The Week reports their market will be expanding in the next year.

The report’s central point is that the FDA is in dire need of a shift in focus “from a reactive approach to a risk-based approach.”  The study’s authors state that the agency can do this by centralizing FDA’s limited resources towards the riskiest foods.

Robert Wallace, a member of the committee and professor at the University of Iowa, told the Canadian Medical Association that the FDA needs to “go where the problems are, and that’s why you need good data.” Improved data, he says, is “where they put inspection resources, where they put communication resources, where they put their scientific portfolio.”

“FDA uses some risk assessment and management tactics, but the agency’s approach is too often reactive and lacks a systematic focus on prevention.  Our report’s recommendations aim to help FDA achieve a comprehensive vision for proactively protecting against threats to the nation’s food supply,” he said.

The report offers in-depth recommendations for achieving the goals the committee sets forth. The authors believe that the U.S. needs a single agency to handle all food safety areas, similar to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency established in 1996. Currently more than 15 separate agencies play a roll in U.S. food safety.

The National Academies, a non-profit organization that helped generate the report, summarized part of the recommendations on its website:

“To enhance its efficiency, FDA should explore alternative approaches to regulating food safety, such as delegating food facility inspections to the states, the report says.  FDA should establish national standards for the intensity and frequency of these facility reviews and help states and local municipalities bring their safety programs up to those standards.  Once all programs are standardized, FDA should train and certify state inspectors with the goal of turning over the majority of inspections to them under the agency’s supervision.  This change would build on current practices in which roughly 60 percent of inspections are already conducted by state inspectors under contract with FDA.  This integration and leveraging of resources would increase the quality of inspections and eliminate duplication of effort, the committee said.”

The report also recommends legislative action. The authors think the FDA should have more authority to conduct recalls, expanded access to records and testing results, and increase inspections at food facilities. The Food Safety bill currently before the Senate is in step with a number of these ideas.

The committee reported that each year over 76 million Americans are affected by foodborne illness. More than 300,000 of them require hospitalization and 5,000 die as a result of their illness. Over the past few years there have been a number of extremely high profile E. coli, Salmonella and Listeria outbreaks, resulting in massive amounts of recalled food.

The report was well-received by both the FDA and Congress, both of which see it has a valuable resource to use in accomplishing the goal of providing the United States with a safer food supply.

The study was conducted by the Committee on the Review of Food and Drug Administration’s Role in Ensuring Safe Food, the Institute of Medicine, and the National Research Council.

A complete copy of the report can be purchased here.

Restaurants can register with the organization and have their employees taught about safe food preparation techniques, how to purchase safe food, and other ways to minimize the risk of illness for their customers. The Safe Food Destination program will require each establishment to score a minimum of 40 percent on an evaluation in order to receive a certificate stating its status as a “Safe Food Destination.” They will be subject to subsequent tests with the idea being that their scores will improve with every evaluation. 

A score of 75 percent will reward the restaurant with a silver certificate, while an 85 percent garners a golden one. Establishments scoring 95 percent or higher will receive a platinum certificate. The organization will investigate illnesses associated with member restaurants. If an establishment is found guilty of sickening a client, its registration and certificate will be revoked.

NLB Pantulu, the vice president of operations at TQS Global Management System, spoke about the new program:  “For the first time in India, we have brought consumer insurance as in terms of limited claims towards any mishap or illness arising out of food safety issues in TQS registered SFD outlets,” he said. “The consumer is at peace of mind as he is insured against any health injury arising out of food borne disease. At the same time the restaurant stakeholder is also confident as his liabilities are limited,” he told DNA India, a local newspaper.

Street vendors are a very popular lunch and dinner venue in New Delhi, and the Safe Food Destination program has adapted a special section of the initiative designed for these vendors. 

“We have a modern vending cart for street vendors that is much safer to use. We are working on further guidelines in this matter,” says Pantulu.

The Commonwealth Games are the third largest athletic sporting event, after the Olympics and the Asian Games. The pre-game tradition even includes the “Queen’s Baton Relay,” an international relay strikingly similar to that of the Olympic torch. 

Teams from 54 nations participate in the games, all but two of which were once colonies or commonwealths of the British Empire. These nations include twenty African countries, seven nations from the Americas, fourteen from Asia, fifteen from the Carribean, ten from Europe, and thirteen Oceanic nations.

India is playing host to the games this fall, and expects millions of visitors to the capital city, New Dheli. As with the world cup, the influx of visitors raise questions about the safety of the local food they will consume.

“There has been a lot of noise over food safety during [the Commonwealth Games]. We aim to do something concrete so that foreign tourists get international standards in food safety and hygiene during the games,” said Pantulu.

Sporting festivals give special incentive to host nations to improve food safety, in part by the fact that suddenly every aspect of the country is set on an international stage. Earlier this summer in South Africa at the FIFA World Cup, ninety volunteers were sickened with food poisoning.

Earlier this summer, Food Safety News reported on a separate food safety accreditation system in India. That program was handed down by the Indian Food Safety and Standard Authority and received very little interest. 

The newer program–Safe Food Destination–is run independent of the Indian Food Safety and Standards Authority, by the TQS Global Management System, an independent consulting firm. The Food Safety And Standards Authority appears to be delighted with the new program, especially since India is playing host to the Commonwealth Games this October.  DNA India reports that hundreds of establishments have already signed up.

A unique part of the Safe Food Destination program is the plan to name one restaurant Food Ambassador of India before the games begin.  TQS Global Management System will subject the top ten establishments to an evaluation by an independent body, the restaurant scoring highest will be granted the prestigious honor and recognition that comes with holding this title.

At the time there were no chickens in the barns, and they were being renovated for future bird habitation. Ohio Fresh Eggs produces around 5 million eggs per day throughout Ohio.

The two men killed have been identified as Kevin Maddox and Joseph Dixon. Dixon planned to be married next month, and had two daughters aged 5 and 9 years old, reported FoodManufacturing.com.

A different Ohio Fresh facility suffered another casualty last September when a worker fell from a ladder to his death inside a grain bin. In March over 250,000 hens were killed at another farm by a massive fire.

Ohio Farm Fresh has a history of high water pollution and has been cited for many law violations. Just last year the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fined the company $300,000 for water pollution. Neighbors complain about fly and rodent infestations around the company’s facilities. In 2003 the Department of Agriculture revoked the farm’s permit to operate, but this decision was overturned by an appeals panel.

Ohio Fresh Eggs spokeswoman Hinda Mitchell said the two workers killed were not employed by the farm, but by an outside contractor.

Hijiki is a very dark, shredded type of seaweed traditionally eaten as an appetizer in Japanese cuisine. It is not used in sushi or Chinese restaurants. Occasionally it can be used in soups, salads, and other vegetarian and vegan dishes.

Currently there is no ban in place in Britain or the European Union. The food can be found in the specialty section of many supermarkets, health food stores, and Asian specialty stores. The British agency has contacted the EU about taking action to prohibit the sale of the food.

The Food Standards Agency carried out its own study, finding, “that hijiki contains inorganic arsenic–a form that occurs naturally in some foods. The survey also tested arame, kombu, nori and wakame but no inorganic arsenic was found in these types of seaweed.” The agency advises choosing from one of these other four types of seaweed instead of Hijiki.

The Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment is an independent scientific committee in Britain. It has concluded that people should consume as little inorganic arsenic as reasonably practicable. The organic form is far less harmful and found in many foods including baked goods, cereals, meat, poultry, vegetables, and fruit.

According to Japanese folklore, consumption of hijiki aids with health and beauty. Specifically, traditional myths say the seaweed causes hair to grow thick, shiny, and luscious.

However, scientific studies in many nations have shown the food contains very high levels of the chemical inorganic arsenic. Many governments have warned their citizens not to consume the product, though it is not outlawed anywhere. The Japanese government is skeptical of the claim that ingesting this seafood poses a serious health risk. They released a statement in 2004 claiming, “There are no records of cases of arsenic poisoning as a result of the arsenic content of sea vegetables.” Despite this claim, tests show that inorganic arsenic does indeed exist in high levels in Hijiki. 

“If you have eaten hijiki occasionally it is unlikely that you will have raised your risk significantly of getting cancer. However, the Agency is advising that you stop eating it,” said the Food Standards Agency.

Rusty Graybill, a fisherman in the gulf, spoke about his doubts in the government’s testing methods. 

“If I put fish in a barrel of water and poured oil and Dove detergent over that, and mixed it up, would you eat that fish?” asked Graybill. “I wouldn’t feed it to you or my family. I’m afraid someone’s going to get sick,” reported FoodManufacturing.com.

Ryan Lambert, 52, a charter fishing captain also does not think fishing should resume so quickly, calling for more data from the experts.

“I have no confidence in their testing methods,” Lambert said.

Lambert and Graybill represent the views of many fishermen and consumers who are unsure about the safety of gulf seafood.

John Stein, head of the seafood safety program in the Gulf, was interviewed on NPR Tuesday.  He explained that each day the government assesses the fishing situation and decides whether or not to keep the grounds closed or decides to test the food and potentially reopen them.  When considering re-opening a fishing area federal agencies take into account a multi-faceted test. 

One of the steps of this test is indeed the controversial “sniff test”, officially referred to as a “sensory analysis.” He says that this test is only one part of a series of tests, including laboratory chemical analysis, all of which collaborate to accurately analyze the safety of the seafood.

Stein said of the controversial test, “This test is not something unique to this oil spill situation. It is a method that is used widely throughout the food industry.” In terms of the seafood that undergoes the test he said, “If it passes then it will be put to a chemistry test and it must pass this to be deemed safe.”

In terms of getting the word out that this and other mandatory tests do indeed insure the safety of the food, “You always can do more,” Stein said.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal called on BP Monday to fund a 20-year testing and certification program to restore confidence in seafood from the Gulf.

The article sparking this most recent controversy was published in the New York Times. It focused on the emergence of cloned livestock in Europe, comparing this to the staunch laws prohibiting genetically modified (GM) crops that have sparked trade disputes with strong agricultural exporting nations such as the United States, Brazil, and Argentina. As with GM crops, European consumers traditionally have shown a general lack of support for cloned animals. Food Safety News reported earlier this summer on a piece of European Union legislation now on the desks of member state governors, awaiting final signatures. If passed, the law ban all meat and dairy products deriving from cloned animals and their offspring.

The farmer interviewed by the New York Times lives and farms in Britain. The article reads: “Another British dairy farmer said he was using milk from a cow bred from a clone as part of his daily production. He also said he was selling embryos from the same cow to breeders in Canada. The farmer insisted on anonymity, saying that the British public regarded cloning as so distasteful that buyers would stop taking his milk.”

After this article was published on July 29, fear spread throughout Britain, rippling beyond into Europe and around the world. Articles referencing the anonymous farmer have been published in all major British newspapers, as well as on BBC and ABC, and in The Canadian Press and Australian Food.

The British Food Standards Agency has released two press statements this week, claiming that the agency is doing all in its power to find the controversial dairy cow. “The Agency’s investigation has been wide-reaching and has involved, among others, farming organizations, the dairy industry, local authorities, and breed associations,” the agency said.

In the interest of transparency, the agency revealed in its second news release that during the process of the dairy cow investigation it discovered two bulls born in the UK to females impregnated with cloned sperm from the United States. Both bulls have been slaughtered. The meat from the first bull named Dundee Paratrooper entered the food supply over a year ago and has since been consumed. The second bull was slaughtered last week and disposed of. This revelation expanded the international debate from milk products to beef.

The Food Standards Agency also revealed that investigators had found a single dairy cow that was bred with cloned sperm, but cannot confirm if her milk has entered the food supply. “As part of this investigation local authority officials are visiting the farm on which this herd is kept,” the agency said.

Though “Dolly,” the world’s first cloned animal, was born in Scotland, the only way for a cloned animal to currently live in Great Britain is through the purchase of embryos from countries exporting such items like the United States. 

The BBC reported that only eight embryos have been imported into the UK. Each embryo can cost up to $15,943. The offspring from these embryos are the only cloned cows and bulls whose meat and dairy products could be on the market. The Daily Mail reports that these cows have gone on to produce a further 97 offspring. Britain does not have a system in place to keep track of imported embryos or their offspring.

In one of the reports issued by the Food Standards Agency the authors admit that there has been no conclusive evidence showing cloned animal products are in any way dangerous to human health. However, the general consensus in Europe is that animal cloning may be morally wrong.

Dutch MEP Kartika Liotard explained to the New York Times, “A clear majority in the European Parliament supports ethical objections to the industrial production of cloned meat for food. Cloned animals suffer disproportionately highly from illnesses, malformations, and premature death.”

Though there is currently no research implying that cloned animal products can be harmful to human health, current law prohibits such products from being sold. These laws support the many consumer, agricultural, and animal rights groups calling for an outright ban on cloned products due to ethical beliefs.

The FSA ended its most recent news release by saying, “The Agency would like to remind food business operators of their responsibility to ensure food they produce is compliant with the law. In order to produce food products from clones or their offspring, a novel food application must be submitted and authorization granted at a European level before any such food is placed on the market.”

In the suit, attorneys representing the health advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest as well as consumers from three different states accuse Vitamin Water of deceptive labeling.

One of the deceptive labeling accusations involves the brand’s claim that its drinks reduce risk of disease. The plaintiffs also take offense to the fact that the name Vitamin Water may cause customers to believe that the drink is made up of only water and healthy vitamins. The name does not lead one to believe that sugar is a central ingredient. However, the 33 grams of sugar in each 20-ounce bottle, as well as calorie content, is displayed on the side of each bottle.

These numbers are listed next to health words such as “defense,” “rescue,” “energy” and “endurance”.

CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner claims that, “For too long, Coca-Cola has been exploiting Americans’ desire to eat and drink more healthfully by deceiving them into thinking that Vitamin Water can actually prevent disease. In fact, Vitamin Water is no more than non-carbonated soda, providing unnecessary added sugar and contributing to weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other diseases. We look forward to representing all Americans whom Coke has deceived.”

Coca Cola replied with a press release stating the company’s view of the lawsuit. “We don’t need a “healthful” alternative to sodas. All our beverages, including sparkling and diets, can be part of healthful diet. Furthermore, consumers today are aware and are looking for more from their beverages than just hydration. Products like Glacéau Vitamin Water provide a great tasting choice for hydration that also helps contribute to daily needs for some essential nutrients.” It continues, “Put simply, Glacéau Vitamin Water is a great complement to our often less-than-perfect diet.”

The three states involved in the lawsuit include California on behalf of which six claims were filed, New York on behalf of which two were filed, and New Jersey, which filed one claim. The remaining four claims were filed on behalf of all three states. This is a class action lawsuit. Three of the twelve claims were dismissed without prejudice. The motion to dismiss the other nine claims was denied by U.S. District Court of New York Judge John Gleeson.

The case is proceeding under Gleeson, who said that that Vitamin Water’s use of the word “healthy” violates U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling rules.

In 1994 the FDA passed a rule traditionally referred to as the “Jelly Bean Rule”.  It states that foods low in fat, cholesterol, and sodium cannot claim to be “healthy” unless they contain at least 10 percent of: vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium, protein, fiber, or iron.  Another FDA policy asserted that companies could not include these levels of vitamin content in a product with the sole intent of making that claim.

“The potential for confusion is heightened by the presence of other statements in Vitamin Water’s labeling, such as the description of the product as a ‘vitamin enhanced water beverage’ and the phrases ‘vitamins+water = all you need’ and ‘vitamins+water = what’s in your hand’, which have the potential to reinforce a consumer’s mistaken belief that the product is comprised of only vitamins and water,” Gleeson said, reported by Reuters.

According to FoodManufacturing.com, Coca-Cola spokesman Kenth Kaerhoeg said the court’s opinion “was not a decision on the merits, but simply a determination that the case can proceed beyond the initial pleadings stage. We believe plaintiff’s claims are without merit and will ultimately be rejected”.