The Canadian Food Inspection Agency tested mussel meats on Aug. 21 and found the contamination, according to the FDA’s warning posted this afternoon. The Canadian agency informed the FDA of the testing results on Aug. 23.

Canadian officials are continuing their investigation. The FDA is awaiting further information on the distribution of the mussels and will continue to monitor the investigation and provide assistance to state authorities as needed.

Freezing does not kill the bacteria.

Restaurants and food retailers in Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York that have recently purchased cultured mussels from East River Shellfish Inc. based in Glenfinnan, Prince Edward Island, Canada, should not sell and should dispose of the mussels.

The mussels subject to the warning were harvested from harvest location PE 4-C on Aug. 14 and shipped on Aug. 15. 

The symptoms of E. coli infections vary for each person but often include severe stomach cramps and diarrhea, which is often bloody. Some patients may also have a fever. Most patients recover within five to seven days. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), others can develop severe or life-threatening symptoms and complications.

Consumers who have recently consumed cultured mussels from East River Shellfish Inc. in Illinois, Massachusetts, or New York should immediately contact their medical providers if they develop Salmonella or E. coli infection symptoms. Symptoms are outlined below.

Many people with HUS recover within a few weeks, but some suffer permanent injuries or death. This condition can occur among people of any age but is most common in children younger than five years old because of their immature immune systems, older adults because of deteriorating immune systems, and people with compromised immune systems such as cancer patients. 

People who experience HUS symptoms should immediately seek emergency medical care. People with HUS will likely be hospitalized because the condition can cause other serious and ongoing problems such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, brain damage, and neurologic problems.

About E. coli infections
Anyone who has eaten any of the implicated mussels and developed symptoms of E. coli infection should seek medical attention and tell their doctor about their possible exposure to the bacteria. Specific tests are required to diagnose the infections, which can mimic other illnesses.

About 5 to 10 percent of those diagnosed with E. coli infections develop a potentially life-threatening kidney failure complication known as a hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Symptoms of HUS include fever, abdominal pain, tiredness, decreased frequency of urination, small unexplained bruises or bleeding, and pallor. 

Anyone who has eaten any of the implicated mussels and developed symptoms of Salmonella infection should seek medical attention. Sick people should tell their doctors about the possible exposure to Salmonella bacteria because special tests are necessary to diagnose salmonellosis. Salmonella infection symptoms can mimic other illnesses, frequently leading to misdiagnosis.

About Salmonella infections
Food contaminated with Salmonella bacteria does not usually look, smell, or taste spoiled. Anyone can become sick with a Salmonella infection. According to the CDC, infants, children, seniors, and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk of serious illness because their immune systems are fragile.

Symptoms of Salmonella infection can include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever within 12 to 72 hours after eating contaminated food. Otherwise, healthy adults are usually sick for four to seven days. In some cases, however, diarrhea may be so severe that patients require hospitalization.

Some people get infected without getting sick or showing any symptoms. However, they may still spread the infections to others.

Older adults, children, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems, such as cancer patients, are more likely to develop severe illness and serious, sometimes life-threatening conditions.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Caffeinated energy drinks are beverages or mixtures that include added caffeine, often accompanied by various other ingredients like vitamins, minerals, taurine and herbal elements. These products can also contain natural caffeine sources such as guarana and yerba mate. In Canada, these drinks are allowed to have a maximum caffeine content of 180 mg per serving.

Consumers are urged to carefully review product labels to ascertain the caffeine content per serving, the number of servings in the container, and the recommended daily consumption. It is advised that CEDs should not be consumed by individuals younger than 14 years old, pregnant or breastfeeding women, or those sensitive to caffeine. Adults aged 18 and over are cautioned not to exceed a daily caffeine intake of 400 mg.

Excessive caffeine consumption can result in adverse health effects including insomnia, irritability, headaches, and nervousness. The CFIA has recently recalled certain caffeinated energy drinks because of excessive caffeine levels and improper labeling, including missing cautionary statements. Consumers are encouraged to report any consumption-related incidents to the CFIA and can also reach out to the manufacturers directly.

To ensure safety, the CFIA recommends that children, pregnant or breastfeeding individuals, and those sensitive to caffeine refrain from consuming caffeinated energy drinks. Others are advised to limit their intake and adhere to the cautionary instructions on the product labels.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

People can be infected when they deliberately or accidentally eat a raw snail or slug containing the lungworm larvae or eat unwashed lettuce or other raw leafy vegetables that the slime of infected snails or slugs has contaminated.

Each of the 300+ PBS stations makes its own decision about when, where and if to air the film. It’s had good uptake in many markets, including Florida, Puerto Rico and various midwestern states. Programmers at other major stations have not yet aired the show because of the limitations of their schedules. The film’s distribution as an Accidental Host to PBS stations will continue through September 2025, and the content will undoubtedly hold up for at least that long, if not longer.

On the other hand, PBS Passport is an app available to anyone who supports their local PBS station at a basic level (usually $60/year). So whether or not their home station has already aired the show, a supporter can access the film at no additional charge through the PBS Passport streaming site.

Paznosian is an infectious disease specialist at UCLA and Food Safety News contributor. She is an expert in rat lungworm disease.

This public education approach comes after the best minds with the best science have concluded that Hawaii’s rat lungworm is not spreading beyond the state. In fact, Hawaii is the epicenter of rat lungworm disease which was first found in Asia.

According to Hawaii’s State Department of Health:

“Angiostrongyliasis, also known as neuroangiostrongyliasis or rat lungworm, is a disease that affects the brain and spinal cord. It is caused by a parasitic nematode (roundworm parasite) called Angiostrongylus cantonensis. The adult form of A. cantonensis is only found in rodents. However, infected rodents can pass larvae of the worm in their feces. Snails, slugs, and certain other animals (including freshwater shrimp, land crabs, and frogs) can become infected by ingesting this larvae; these are considered intermediate hosts. Humans can become infected with A. cantonensis if they eat (intentionally or otherwise) a raw or undercooked infected intermediate host, thereby ingesting the parasite.”

And the Hawaii Department of Health says this is what puts you at risk:

“You can get angiostrongyliasis by eating food contaminated by the larval stage of A. cantonensis worms. In Hawaii, these larval worms can be found in raw or undercooked snails or slugs. Sometimes people can become infected by eating raw produce that contains a small infected snail or slug, or part of one. It is not known for certain whether the slime left by infected snails and slugs are able to cause infection. Angiostrongyliasis is not spread person-to-person.”

With these results:

“This infection can cause a rare type of meningitis (eosinophilic meningitis).

The clinical presentation can vary. Symptoms can start with non-specific symptoms and evolve into more specific symptoms over the next following weeks. People may experience nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain a few hours to a few days after ingestion. Symptoms can then progress to headache and other neurologic symptoms. Non-specific symptoms include fever, light sensitivity, muscle pain, fatigue, and insomnia. More specific symptoms may include constant headache, neck stiffness and pain, tingling or burning of the skin, double vision, bowel or bladder difficulties, and seizures.

Children may experience more fever, irritability, somnolence, lethargy, gastrointestinal symptoms, muscle twitching, convulsions, and extremity weakness. In addition, individuals may experience a few days to weeks of no symptoms followed by neurologic symptoms.

Although it varies from individual to individual, the symptoms usually last between two to eight weeks. Symptoms have also been reported to last for longer periods of time.

Risk in Hawaii
According to the Hawaii Health Department: “The majority of cases of rat lungworm that are identified in Hawaii have occurred on the Big Island, but cases, and infected intermediate hosts (snails and slugs), have also been identified on all of the major neighbor islands. Since the risk for infection is present statewide, the recommendations for preventing infection should be followed no matter where in the state you are.

Prevention:

To prevent angiostrongyliasis, the Hawaii Department of Health says don’t eat raw or undercooked snails or slugs, and if you handle snails or slugs, be sure to wear gloves and wash your hands. Eating raw or undercooked freshwater shrimp, land crabs and frogs may also result in infection, although, there have not been any documented cases in Hawaii.

You should thoroughly inspect and rinse produce using potable water. Leaves of leafy greens should be washed one by one under running potable water. Boil snails, freshwater prawns, crabs, and frogs for at least 3–5 minutes. Only drink potable water and do not drink from garden hoses.

Eliminating snails, slugs, and rats founds near houses and gardens might also help reduce risk exposure to A. cantonensis. Eliminating snails, slugs, and rats can be achieved through pesticide baits, traps, rodent proofing your home and sanitation.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The state Legislature approved a measure this year making the sales possible, but it specifically bans the sale of unpasteurized, raw milk to wholesalers or retailers. The new law also reinforces the federal ban on the interstate sale of raw milk.

The law also makes it illegal to donate raw milk.

The sale of raw milk products such as cream, cheese or yogurt remains illegal.

Raw milk producers selling direct to consumers are exempted from other dairy, food handling or consumer protection laws.

Public health officials across the nation and most state health and agriculture departments advise that raw milk is dangerous because without pasteurization to kill bacteria and viruses it can cause severe illness. Pathogens often found in raw milk include E. coli, Salmonella and campylobacter.

The sale of raw milk under the new law does not give any liability protections if someone consumes it and becomes ill. Anyone harmed by consuming foods with microbial pathogens may have the option to take legal action to claim monetary damages for their injuries or wrongful death.

Sellers of raw milk should contact an insurance agent and legal counsel for more information on liability and liability protection, according to a statement from the state.

Raw milk has many advocates and consumers, despite the known food safety risks. The North Dakota Department of Agriculture is exempted from, and does not provide, any regulatory oversight of a raw milk facility, and does not provide any assurances for milk safety of a raw milk producer selling to the end consumer.

The state has posted a cautionary statement for consumers. “The Food and Drug Administration has posted many resources for individuals, providing factual information about raw milk and misconceptions about its purported benefits: https://www.fda.gov/food/buy-store-serve-safe-food/raw-milk-misconceptions-and-danger-raw-milk-consumption

“Pasteurized milk is a proven safe product that provides the essential nutrients of a healthy diet, without the risks associated with raw milk,” according to the statement.

The state of North Dakota has published information for raw milk sellers that includes:

• Milk is produced on dairy farms, an environment that naturally contains a plethora of microorganisms, including yeasts, molds, viruses and bacteria. 

• Healthy animals can carry disease-causing germs such as e. coli O157:H7, campylobacter jejuni, and pathogenic serotypes of salmonella. 

• People have also contracted tuberculosis, undulant fever and Q fever from consuming raw milk.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Into the cart it went. When she got home, she opened it and excitedly showed it to her husband. Does it look OK to you, she asked. He picked it up and gave it a sniff test. Looks and smells fine to me, he said. That assured her, but in the back of her mind, she wondered about what she had read about not buying cut up fruit.

At supper, she ate almost all of the fruit and declared it delicious. Her husband had a few pieces.

Late at night, she woke up feeling sick. She ran into the bathroom with what she immediately realized was a severe case of diarrhea. Worse yet, she started vomiting. While still on the toilet, she picked up the nearby trash can and started vomiting into it. Her entire system was exploding. It scared her. To make matters worse, she was experiencing painful cramps. What could it be? Was she dying?

Her husband told her not to worry, that it was nothing more than an upset stomach. The stomach flu, perhaps. But the diarrhea and vomiting wouldn’t stop. Nor would the cramps.

She wanted to call her doctor but it was late and night, and it was Saturday. Besides which she knew he was on an overseas vacation with his family.

When morning came, she was still feeling miserable but managed to get dressed and ready to walk around the corner to an urgent care facility. But diarrhea hit again and she had to turn back. But later that afternoon, she did manage to get there.

She told the medical provider that she thought it was the cut-up fruit she had eaten. But he said it would be hard to say what it was. But he did recommend the BRAT diet — bananas, rice, apples and toast. But when she got home and googled it, she found that some physicians caution that the BRAT diet does not alleviate diarrhea and can actually cause individuals to have diarrhea for longer periods, according to randomized clinical trials.

She called the grocery store where she had bought the fruit and asked to speak to the manager. He told her he had had no complaints from any customers. When she told him how sick she was and suggested he throw out all of the cut-up fruit, he told her he was too busy “to deal with this” and hung up on her.

So much for that. She was exhausted and decided to take the Urgent Care medical provider’s advice and get plenty of rest and drink a lot of fluids. She did exactly that for 2 days and began to feel better. But she felt drained, both physically and emotionally, by the entire experience.

Several days later when she called a friend and told her about how her digestive system had “exploded,” her friend told her it could have been a foodborne pathogen, perhaps E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria or norovirus. And she explained that any of these pathogens could have gotten into the package of cut up fruit in various ways. The person handling the fruit, for example, might not have washed his or her hands before cutting it up. Or perhaps the cutting board had been used for something like meat and not washed off before being used to cut up the fruit. Maybe the knife that was used to cut up the fruit hadn’t been cleaned. Or maybe the fruit, itself, had come in with pathogens on it.

Or maybe it wasn’t even the fruit. 

Once again she turned to Google and quickly discovered that she probably would never know what germ had invaded her system mainly because some of the foodborne illnesses had the very symptoms she had experienced. But her friend told her the vomiting and diarrhea had been her system’s way of getting whatever the pathogen that had been in her out of her, which is why a person shouldn’t take medicine to stop the diarrhea, unless recommended by a doctor.

She was scared and confused.

Some advice about what to do
Seek medical help as soon as possible if your symptoms are severe. Examples would be dehydration, prolonged vomiting and diarrhea, stomach pains, nausea and/or a fever over 101.5 degrees F.

Food safety attorney Bill Marler said that in many cases, doctors hedge their bets and jump to the conclusion that it’s norovirus, often referred to as a “stomach bug,” and that it will usually pass. Norovirus is the leading cause of vomiting and diarrhea, and foodborne illness in the United States.

Even so, Marler said that a patient can always ask for a stool culture to be done.

“I would push for that,” he said. “It’s good practice for doctors to order them.”

He pointed out that if the “bug” that has caused the problem turns out to be a reportable foodborne disease, such as E. coli, listeria, Salmonella, norovirus, or hepatitis, then the health department can take the necessary steps to determine what caused it and then, if enough cases have been reported, issue a recall.

Marler said that’s very important because a recall can help prevent other people from becoming ill.

Marler also said that in the case of children under 5, adults over 65, or anyone whose system is immunocompromised (in cancer treatment, for example), “You can’t mess with these infections.”

According to estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), each year 48 million people get sick from a foodborne illness, 128,000 are hospitalized and 3,000 die.

More than half of all foodborne outbreaks in the United States are associated with restaurants, delis, banquet facilities, schools, and other institutions.

Advice from the Mayo Clinic
Here’s what to do to prevent dehydration and reduce symptoms at home when you are recovering from a foodborne illness:

° Drink plenty of clear liquids: water, clear sodas and broths, gelatin and juices. But steer clear of apple and pear juices, caffeine and alcohol.

° Avoid foods such as dairy products, fatty foods, high-fiber foods or highly seasoned foods, which can make the symptoms worse.

°When you start feeling better you can go back to your normal diet.

What to do if seeking medical help

°Write down any symptoms you’re experiencing, even any that might seem unrelated to what you’re experiencing.

° Write down key personal information, which would include any international travel or recent life changes.

°Take along a list of all medications, including vitamins or supplements, that you’re taking.

°Take along a family member or friend, who will be able to help you remember what the medical provider said.

°Write down questions to ask the medical provider.

°Record any foods eaten in the past 7 days.

°Save the receipts, if possible.

°If any of the food you suspect turns out to be the problem, save some of it (if possible) in case the health department asks for a sample. But keep some of the sample.

°Use the Internet to tap into iwaspoisoned.com, which may have some information about other people near you who have gotten sick.

°Go to foodsafetynews.com or to stopfoodborneillness.org/recent-recalls to to see if there has been a recall of food you have eaten or outbreaks of the illness for which you tested positive.

Go here (https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/prevention.html) to learn how to prevent coming down with a foodborne illness.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Since July 1, three cases of Vibrio vulnificus infections have been reported to the state health department. The three patients are between 60-80 years of age. 

All three patients were hospitalized and one died. One patient reported consuming raw oysters from an out-of-state establishment. Two patients reported exposure to salt or brackish water in Long Island Sound. Both patients had pre-existing open cuts or wounds or sustained new wounds during these activities which likely led to the infections.  

“The identification of these severe cases, including one fatality, due to V. vulnificus is concerning,” said DPH Commissioner Manisha Juthani, MD. 

“People should consider the potential risk of consuming raw oysters and exposure to salt or brackish water and take appropriate precautions. Particularly during the hottest months of the summer, bacteria are more likely to overgrow and contaminate raw shellfish. Given our current heat wave, this may be a time to exercise particular caution in what you consume.”

Vibrio vulnificus infection is an extremely rare illness. Only five cases were reported in 2020 in Connecticut, and none in 2021 and 2022. Vibrio vulnificus infections from oysters can result in severe illness, including bloodstream infections.  Vibrio vulnificus can also cause wound infections when open wounds are exposed to warm salt or brackish water (mix of salt and fresh water).  

People with a Vibrio vulnificus infection can get seriously ill and need intensive care or limb amputation. About one in five people with this type of infection die. People at greatest risk for illness from Vibrio vulnificus are those with weakened immune systems and the elderly. 

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

The advice comes from a risk assessment by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and Food Standards Scotland (FSS) that shows these groups are at a higher risk of severe illness from listeriosis. The risk assessment was prompted by an outbreak of Listeria infections linked to RTE cold-smoked fish.

Past advice listed smoked fish as a food of concern with the recommendation that care should be taken during pregnancy and it should only be eaten by vulnerable groups after being thoroughly cooked.

The FSA, FSS, and UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) have been investigating the ongoing outbreak since October 2020. There have been 19 linked cases of listeriosis in England and Scotland and four people have died, this is up from the 15 cases and three deaths reported several months ago. Most patients are above 65 years old but one was a pregnant woman. 

In December 2022, Lidl recalled Deluxe Oak Smoked Scottish Louch Trout and Lighthouse Bay Smoked Trout Trimmings, produced by St James Smokehouse. Product testing found Listeria monocytogenes that matched the outbreak strain but levels were below permitted limits.

Potential for serious illness
In RTE foods that can support growth of Listeria, which include smoked fish, the bacterium must not be present in 25-grams of sample when leaving production plants, or businesses must show the products will not exceed the limit of 100 Colony Forming Units per gram (CFU/g) during their shelf life.

As the risk of serious illness from listeriosis increases with age, FSA and FSS are also advising that people older than 65 should be aware of the potential danger posed by products such as smoked salmon or trout and gravlax. Neither the cold-smoking process nor refrigeration kill Listeria.

The assessment found that while the risk of contracting listeriosis in higher-risk individuals from cold-smoked fish is low, severity of illness is high. This means there is the potential for serious illness, hospitalization, and death among higher risk groups.  

Uncertainties included the difficulty in estimating the infectious dose for Listeria monocytogenes and how it varies between different vulnerable groups; the long incubation period which can make attribution to a food vehicle difficult; the initial level of contamination and how it multiplies through the food chain; and consumer behavior around use-by dates and temperature abuse.

Professor Robin May, FSA chief scientific adviser, said: “Our risk assessment shows that there is still an ongoing risk to health associated with eating cold-smoked fish for specific groups of vulnerable people, including pregnant women and individuals with impaired immunity. In light of the risk assessment, we are advising that these consumers avoid ready-to-eat cold-smoked and cured fish products.” 

Those with weakened immune systems are people with certain underlying conditions such as cancer, diabetes or liver and kidney disease.

Fish processing details
Cold-smoked fish such as smoked salmon or trout, and cured fish such as gravlax, have not been fully cooked during the production process to kill any Listeria that may be present. Cold-smoked fish is normally labeled as smoked fish on packaging, so processing type is unclear. RTE cold-smoked fish typically comes in thin slices, and can be eaten cold. It may also be found in sushi.   

Smoked fish products that have been heat-treated during production, such as tinned smoked fish, are safe for consumption without further cooking. These products are subjected to a high temperature during processing, which is sufficient to kill Listeria.

Gauri Godbole, consultant microbiologist at UKHSA, said: “While smoked fish has a higher risk of carrying Listeria, the overall risk to the population is very low. However, some people are more likely to get a serious infection including those who are pregnant and those with weakened immune systems. The risk also increases with age. Those who are more vulnerable can be at risk of severe illness such as meningitis and life-threatening sepsis. Listeriosis in pregnancy can cause very serious illness in mothers and their babies.”

UKHSA has identified 31 patients with microbiological and epidemiological links to eight smoked fish incidents between 2015 and June 2023, with eight deaths and three pregnancy associated patients.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The poll revealed 45 percent of barbecue-goers in summer were given items such as burgers, chicken and sausages but left them untouched because of the risk of food poisoning.

Safefood conducted the survey of 300 adults across Northern Ireland to shed light on barbecue cooking habits. The group safefood promotes food safety and nutrition in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

Advice is to use a thermometer
Research discovered that two-thirds of home barbecue chefs were unaware of the correct temperature required to ensure meats were cooked and safe to eat. It also found that 5 percent of people relied on taste to check if meat was cooked.

Almost a third of people said they used a meat thermometer to measure the internal temperature of cooked barbecue meats like burgers, chicken and sausages to determine whether they are safe to eat before serving to guests.

Safefood urged home barbecue chefs to prioritize food safety this summer by using a meat thermometer and taking the guess work out of cooking by checking burgers, chicken, kebabs, and sausages should be cooked to 75 degrees C (167 degrees F). Steaks can be served more rare as harmful bacteria are usually on the outside and not in the center.

Gary Kearney, interim CEO at safefood, said: “With almost half of Northern Ireland’s barbecue-goers having been offered raw or undercooked meat, it is crucial that home barbecue chefs across Northern Ireland eliminate any guesswork and avert any potential barbecue food poisoning mishaps this summer.”

Other tips include keeping perishable food like salads, coleslaw, and quiche in the fridge until they are ready to be served. When handling raw meat and poultry, wash hands thoroughly and frequently, including before preparing salads and other ready-to-eat foods. If there are leftovers, allow food to cool before refrigerating, however, make sure to refrigerate within two hours of cooking and use any leftovers within three days. 

Alex Huston, a chef, said: “Using a meat thermometer really is a game-changer. It takes the guesswork out of grilling your favorite meats and ensures it’s cooked to perfection, both in terms of taste and safety.” 

Ready meal project findings
In late 2022, safefood published research on pre-prepared convenience meals and food safety risks.

A literature review highlighted limited research into consumer behavior relating to pre-prepared convenience foods. It showed that food safety knowledge varied among sociodemographic groups and that behaviors relating to storage and following use-by dates were not always in line with the guidance.

An audit survey including 266 meals indicated that some convenience foods did not comply with legislation around ingredient and allergen lists and that details provided for reheating and freezing were insufficient.

In-home observations of 50 people showed participants did not always check the use-by instructions and were unlikely to identify food safety hazards such as damaged packaging. Some participants were willing to inappropriately reheat and consume leftovers.

Interviews with 50 consumers revealed the main reasons for using pre-prepared food products are convenience and a general belief that they are safe. Problems relating to type size, the level of detail and location of instructions were identified.

Online survey participants demonstrated relatively low safe behaviors in relation to storage, preparation and use of leftovers of pre-prepared convenience foods. Older respondents had higher food safety knowledge and safer behaviors.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) released their aspartame hazard and risk assessment results Friday. The IARC classified aspartame as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” because of “limited evidence” for carcinogenicity in humans. Meanwhile, the JECFA reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg body weight for aspartame.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued a response to the recent assessments. While the IARC classified aspartame as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” the FDA maintains that there is no evidence linking the artificial sweetener to cancer.

Aspartame, an artificial sweetener widely used in various food and beverage products since the 1980s, has become a topic of concern due to its potential health effects. It is commonly found in diet drinks, chewing gum, gelatin, ice cream, dairy products such as yogurt, breakfast cereal, toothpaste, and even medications such as cough drops and chewable vitamins.

Dr. Francesco Branca, Director of the Department of Nutrition and Food Safety at the World Health Organization (WHO), emphasized the importance of understanding potential factors contributing to cancer and the need for further studies. “The assessments of aspartame have indicated that, while safety is not a major concern at the doses which are commonly used, potential effects have been described that need to be investigated by more and better studies,” he stated.

The IARC and JECFA conducted separate evaluations of aspartame, considering its potential carcinogenic hazard and other health risks. IARC classified aspartame as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” based on limited evidence for cancer in humans, experimental animals and possible mechanisms for causing cancer. On the other hand, JECFA reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 40 mg/kg body weight and concluded that aspartame consumption within this limit is safe.

Addressing the IARC’s classification, Dr. Mary Schubauer-Berigan of the IARC Monographs program acknowledged the need for more research to refine understanding regarding aspartame’s potential carcinogenic hazard. Meanwhile, Dr. Moez Sanaa, WHO’s Head of the Standards and Scientific Advice on Food and Nutrition Unit, stressed the necessity for further studies on mechanistic pathways relevant to insulin regulation, metabolic syndrome and diabetes, particularly in relation to carcinogenicity.

In response to the external safety reviews, the FDA expressed disagreement with the IARC’s conclusion, citing significant shortcomings in the studies relied upon. The FDA’s own scientists reviewed the scientific information provided by the IARC in 2021 and found no safety concerns when aspartame is used under approved conditions. The regulatory and scientific authorities of various countries, including Health Canada and the European Food Safety Authority, have also deemed aspartame safe at currently permitted use levels.

The FDA recognizes that some consumers rely on products containing aspartame and other sweeteners to reduce their sugar consumption. In order to assist consumers in making informed choices, the FDA will continue to provide reliable, science-based information on aspartame and other sweeteners on its website.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

McGonigle-Martin has opposed unpasteurized, raw milk in one state action after another, but the trend is clear.

State legislative actions over the past decade have retail sales of raw milk legal in the West, on-farm sales permitted in the Midwest states from Canada through Texas, and an eastern assortment but with only Rhode Island, Washington D.C., and Louisiana making raw milk illegal.

A basic coalition has often been successful in beating raw milk back in legislative chambers, but bills to loosen raw milk regulation are often repeated in the next legislative session. That’s what happened in Iowa, where raw milk was kept more illegal than legal for years.

Iowa’s push-back in 2023 to allow up to ten animals for raw milk production is typical of how little openings are made for raw milk producers.

Most states make some opening for unpasteurized raw milk, be it on-farm sales or herd share agreements, and incremental additions to the sales of unpasteurized milk are easier than worrying about public health warnings.

Public health often joined by major medical groups and the mainstream major dairy industry usually have joined to oppose raw milk with its dangers for spreading dangerous bacteria including E. coli, Salmonella and listeria.

Eric Heinen, a public health officer for Iowa’s Black Hawk County, says he was discouraged but but not shocked by this year’s Iowa Legislature. He blames Iowa being in a different atmosphere for its flipping raw milk over to legal.

Heinen says he could have accepted making raw milk legal for adults, but not children who sometimes cannot survive the complications.

The new raw milk law took effect in Iowa July 1. It opens the door on direct sale of raw milk to consumers, but still not in retail stores.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service is granting inspections to two companies. It also issued instructions to its inspection program personnel (IPP) about their roles and responsibilities with regard to inspection and verification activities in establishments that harvest or process so-called cell-cultured meat or poultry food products for human food.

FSIS cited these “key points.”

• FDA and FSIS jointly oversee the production of cell-cultured meat and poultry food products and share information necessary to carry out their respective oversight responsibilities.
• Establishments that harvest cells for cell-cultured meat and poultry food products are dual jurisdiction establishments (DJE).
• Cell-cultured meat and poultry food products are subject to the same FSIS regulatory requirements and oversight authority as meat and poultry food products derived from the slaughter of amenable species.
• Labels applied to any FSIS-regulated products comprised of or containing cell-cultured meat and poultry food products are not eligible for generic approval.

As for now, USDA is allowing two California companies, Upside Foods and Good Meat, to pursue in laboratory settings the growth of meat from animal cells. USDA and FDA are partners in the regulation of lab-grown meat. FDA earlier found the products from both companies are safe to eat.

Animal cell culture technology for lab-grown meat and poultry is a production process used to produce meat and poultry food products without much slaughter activity by growing the cells of livestock or poultry in a controlled environment, such as a bioreactor, and then harvesting those cells to grow food,

If consumers warm to it, lab-grown meat and poultry could bankrupt countless farms and ranches let alone the entire production industry. But if consumers don’t like the alternatives, the fortunes invested in lab-grown products could go the way of “New Coke.” So, there is a lot at stake over whether consumers will accept meat grown in a petri dish.

At this point, consumers are not going to see much from all the lab work. Lab-grown chicken is really expensive chicken, making large-scale production unrealistic. Public availability in a couple of upscale restaurants will likely be found long before lab-grown products show up in any grocery store or Chick-Fil-A.

These attempts at lab-growth meat and poultry are reported involve more than 150 companies worldwide doing experiments on chicken, pork, lamb, fish, and beef.

The two lab-based companies that now have USDA inspection and with it, the ability to sell the food products they produce are:

• Berkeley-based Upside Foods; and

• Alameda-based Good Meat Co., with the affiliated John Biologics.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

The St. Louis County Department of Public Health reported the death on June 12 when it was notified by St. Claire Hospital. The man died on June 8 from an infection caused by the bacteria Vibrio vulnificus.

County officials issued a public health warning about the raw oysters, which came from “The Fruit Stand & Seafood” in Manchester, MO. Anyone who ate raw oysters from the location and has become sick should immediately seek medical attention.

Infections from the bacteria Vibrio vulnificus cause symptoms that include abdominal cramping, nausea, vomiting, fever, chills, and blisters. Anyone who ate raw oysters from the business and became sick should inform their healthcare providers that they consumed raw shellfish that may have been contaminated with Vibrio vulnificus.

“There is no evidence that the business did anything to contaminate the oysters, which likely were already contaminated when the establishment received them,” St. Louis County health officials said.

The 54-year-old man was not identified by health officials. He consumed raw oysters from The Fruit Stand & Seafood sometime during the past week.

Officials are continuing to investigate the situation. They are conducting traceback efforts to determine where the oysters came from, according to the health department.

All oysters at the business were embargoed by the health department.

Several types of vibrio bacteria can cause disease, although Vibrio vulnificus is the type that is most likely to cause severe disease, according to county health officials. Vibriosis is a very different illness from cholera, which is caused by another vibrio species, Vibrio cholerae. 

Vibrio vulnificus can be found in warm, coastal waters, usually during the summer months. People typically become sick with Vibrio vulnificus by consuming raw or undercooked oysters and other shellfish. Vibrio vulnificus can also cause wound infection if someone with skin lesions swims in or is exposed to water contaminated with the bacteria. Infections caused by Vibrio vulnificus are not spread from person to person.

People infected with Vibrio vulnificus typically begin experiencing symptoms 12 to 72 hours after consuming raw or undercooked seafood, although it may take up to a week before symptoms appear. Symptoms of infection usually come on very quickly. Unlike other types of vibriosis, Vibrio vulnificus does not typically cause diarrhea, although some people do experience gastrointestinal symptoms. 

Illness caused by Vibrio vulnificus can be very serious. In the United States, the mortality rate associated with Vibrio vulnificus infection is approximately one in three people infected by the bacteria, according to the health department.

Vibrio vulnificus causes more than 95 percent of seafood-related deaths in the United States. People who have chronic liver disease or abuse alcohol, as well as people who are immunocompromised, are at an increased risk of developing severe illness and should avoid eating raw or undercooked oysters and other shellfish.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Those sick range in age from 2 months to 83 years. Epidemiologic data of the three Salmonella outbreak serotypes —Braenderup, Enteritidis and Infantis — show that contact with backyard poultry is making people sick, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The outbreak has been detected in 31 states and the CDC’s investigation is ongoing. Illnesses started on dates ranging from Jan. 1 to April 20, 2023.

“The true number of sick people in an outbreak is likely much higher than the number reported, and the outbreak may not be limited to the states with known illnesses. This is because many people recover without medical care and are not tested for Salmonella. In addition, recent illnesses may not yet be reported as it usually takes 2 to 4 weeks to determine if a sick person is part of an outbreak,” according to the CDC.

Quick facts:

• Backyard poultry can carry Salmonella germs even if they look healthy and clean. These germs can easily spread in areas where the poultry live and roam.
• These outbreaks occur annually and coincide with the increase in baby poultry purchases, beginning in the spring. In 2022, at least 1,230 people got sick from contact with backyard poultry.

Steps to staying healthy:

• Always wash your hands with soap and running water for 20 seconds after touching birds, their living areas, supplies or collecting eggs.
• Use a pair of dedicated shoes or boots for your coop and don’t wear them inside your house.
• Keep birds and supplies outside the house to prevent spreading germs into your house.
• Don’t let children younger than 5 years touch the birds (including chicks and ducklings) or anything in the area where the birds live and roam. This helps protect young children from getting sick, as their immune systems are still developing,  are more likely to put items in their mouths or not wash hands fully.

About Salmonella infections
Poultry and eggs that are contaminated with Salmonella bacteria usually do not look, smell or taste spoiled. Animals usually do not appear sick. Anyone can become sick with a Salmonella infection, but infants, children, seniors and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk of serious illness because their immune systems are fragile, according to the CDC.

Anyone who has had contact with backyard flocks or farm animals — such as those at petting zoos — and developed symptoms of Salmonella infection should seek medical attention. Sick people should tell their doctors about the possible exposure to Salmonella bacteria because special tests are necessary to diagnose salmonellosis. Salmonella infection symptoms can mimic other illnesses, frequently leading to misdiagnosis.

Symptoms of Salmonella infection can include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever within 12 to 72 hours after eating contaminated food. Otherwise healthy adults are usually sick for four to seven days. In some cases, however, diarrhea may be so severe that patients need to be hospitalized. 

Older adults, children, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems, such as cancer patients, are more likely to develop a severe illness and serious, sometimes life-threatening conditions.

It is possible for some people to be infected with the bacteria and to not get sick or show any symptoms, but to still be able to spread the infection to others.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Food has often been at the center of these self-destructive experiments. The latest of these was by a social media user who opted to eat out-of-date food in an attempt to determine how long food actually lasts compared with expiration dates.

The man found milk that was 41 days past its expiration date was “absolutely fine,” but in-date spinach made him sick.

The man said his experiment proved that you can ignore use-by dates without risking your health.

Beginning with year-old cheese kept in Tupperware, the “use-by” date experiment was undertaken to show people how to reduce food waste by people who toss still good food out of too much caution

The man pushing the “use-by” dates is named Gavin Wren, who is acting as a “Tik Toker.” His methods are not unlike the 19th Century “Poison Squad” that used human volunteers to consume food of unknown origins. It passed for scientific method during Dr. Harvey Washington Wiley’s tenure as USDA’s chief chemist

Those grisly experiments on human volunteers did help make food safer for consumers — and Wiley’s work still echoes on today.

Wren is not the first to claim more flexible “use-by” dates can be followed without being harmful to one’s health. Wren wants to help people reduce their food waste. Food waste could be massively reduced if people just stopped throwing so much good food away.

Wren is not suggesting people copy what he does. While he was eating past the use-by dates, he did get a “nasty round of food poisoning” from in-date spinach. He says some foods are just riskier than others.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Now that the Food and Drug Administration has authorized letting gene-edited pigs enter the human food chain, that may be the case for a vastly different sort of pig than the one in the Mother Goose poem. 

As a starter, German-style sausages, made from five 2-year-old genetically edited pigs, which were cooked up earlier this month at Washington State University, were a test case. Jon Oatley,  a professor in the college’s School of Molecular Biosciences, said he went through the FDA food-use authorization process for the pigs to show that food made from the animals using a CRISPR application is safe to eat. 

Oatley explained that the “base genetics” of the pigs was a mix of commercial breeds and reflective of what a standard pig operation would have.

“The CRISPR editing application targets a specific gene that is conserved in all mammals, so this would definitely be relevant to all types of pigs,” he said.

For Oatley and his fellow researchers, the overall goal is to develop desirable traits for improved food production and meat quality, which will help feed the planet’s growing population. This, in turn, is an important goal for boosting protein sources in developing nations.

But the research goes beyond pigs. 

“We are working as well on cattle, goats, and sheep, all of which are important food-producing animals,” he said. “But the research on pigs has advanced faster compared to other livestock we work with because they bear litters and the generation interval is comparatively faster.”

Pork is the most widely eaten meat in the world. Pigs are usually butchered for meat at only 5 1/2 to 6 months of age, whereas beef cows are generally butchered at 30 to 42  months.

The FDA authorization is investigational and limited to the pigs in Oatley’s research. 

“But in the future, we will be seeking food-use authorization for the other species as well,” he said.

Food safety?
As for food safety, Oatley said there is no concern about food safety from the CRISPR edits that were made. 

“The DNA changes were not in any part of the genome that would make the animals more susceptible to infectious disease compared to normal non-edited pigs,” he said. “The USDA FSIS (Food Safety and Inspection Service) inspected the animals prior to processing and the carcass after processing using the standards applied to all processed livestock and found no abnormalities.”

Oatley also confirmed that as long as standard food-safety practices are used in raising, slaughtering, packaging, and cooking the meat, the pork will be free of foodborne pathogens.

What is this all about
In the gene-editing technology, known as CRISPR that Oatley used — a 2-year process that cost $200,000 for collecting data for the FDA authorization — the male pigs were “gene-edited in a way that let researchers use them to produce offspring with traits from another male pig. That was done by making the pigs sterile by knocking out a gene called NANOS2, which is specific to male fertility. With that much done, the animals were implanted with another male’s stem cells that created sperm with those other males’ traits, which can be passed on to the next generation.

To see a YouTube video about CRISPR, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pp17E4E-O8.

The offspring of the pigs in Oatley’s research are not gene-edited and have not yet been reviewed by FDA for possible inclusion in the food chain. 

But Oatley said that in the future, the research team will be seeking food-use authorization for the other species as well. 

It won’t happen overnight, of course. Oatley conceded that scaling up to a large production setting is one of the next challenges ahead.

“My estimation is that we can achieve commercial scaling within 5 years,” he said.

Surrogate studs
Some are referring to this procedure as a “high-tech form of selective breeding,” and the pigs as “surrogate sires.” Traditionally, producers had to rely on selective breeding . . . or even just time, often a long time, . . . for the sort of improvements that Oatley and his fellow researchers achieved. 

The pigs are not genetically modified animals (GMOs), which involves a different technology that involves inserting DNA from an outside species into the genome of an organism.

In the case of genetically modified salmon, for example, the salmon have an added gene from the ocean pout fish that acts as an “on switch” to produce the growth hormone year-round. This, therefore, shortens the time it takes to grow a mature salmon.

Oatley said that the GMO salmon possess foreign DNA that could never have arisen in nature without humans purposely inserting the foreign DNA.

“Our gene edits did not involve incorporation of foreign DNA, rather they were changes that could arise in nature,” he said. “Gene-editing is a modern cutting-edge technology that works only within a species’ own DNA and that can make changes that could come about naturally or through traditional breeding practices,” he said.

A genome is the complete set of DNA (genetic material) in an organism. In the case of humans, for example, almost every cell in the body contains a complete copy of the genome. The genome contains all of the information needed for a person to develop and grow.

Two sides of the coin
Any artificial manipulation that invades living cells for the purpose of altering its genome in a direct way, including gene editing, constitutes genetic engineering, according to a Friends of the Earth report (https://foe.org/news/gene-editing-risks-health-environment/).

Going one step further, the report points to the importance of human acceptance of gene editing.

“While it is critical for more scientific studies to be conducted about the specific impacts of the unintended consequences of gene editing on agricultural systems, ecological systems, human and animal health, the discussion regarding the use of gene editing in agriculture also needs to go further than a science-based risk assessment to encompass wide public discussion about the future of agriculture.”

The report also calls for more safety assessment and oversight of gene editing..

The Institute for Responsible Technology’s website describes gene editing as a cheap, easy, prone to side effects, poorly regulated and can permanently alter nature’s gene pool — a Recipe for disaster. Go here for a video outlining the organization’s concerns.

Labels?
As for the need to label genetically edited foods, Oatley said that currently labeling is not required, which he believes is the best way to go.

“The DNA changes we are making with CRISPRs are changes that can arise in nature to be propagated via selective breeding, but it would take screening thousands of animals to identify those with the desired combination of genetics and then decades to breed out a pure line for eventual use in a production setting,” he said. “Therefore, from my perspective, if a label would be required on edible products from an animal with CRISPR edited DNA, we should also apply a label to all products because traditional selective breeding also generated genetic combinations that have arisen by way of human intervention.

The future
Charlie Arnot of the Center for Integrity describes gene editing as one of the many tools agriculture can use to produce the healthy affordable food consumers expect using fewer natural resources.

“It can allow breeders to make genetic improvements more quickly and precisely than other breeding methods,” he told Food Safety News in an earlier interview. “Being able to make improvements more quickly and precisely to produce the food we need with less environmental impact is an important social benefit.”

He also said that gene editing has “tremendous potential to help farmers grow the food we need using less land,  water, chemicals and other resources. 

The Coalition for Responsible Gene Editing in Agriculture continues to refine the Framework for Responsible Use of Gene Editing in Agriculture as a market assurance program that organizations can follow to demonstrate their commitment to the safe and transparent use of gene editing technology. 

“We designed the process with a focus on continuous improvements and an annual review to ensure the program remains credible, workable and affordable and the technology and applications evolve over time,” said Arnot.

When Oatley looks to the future, he believes that over the next 30 to 50 years, food animals will need to be more resilient in changing climate conditions and more efficient in how inputs like water and feedstuffs are converted to outputs for human consumption.

“Conventional production practices will not be sufficient for feeding the global population in 2050,” he said. To address the future of food security, adoption of biotechnologies like CRISPR gene editing will be critical.

“We’re just driving to the ballpark,” said John Dombrosky, CEO of Ag Tec Accelerator in an interview with Bloomberg News. “Gene editing will be free to do tremendous things across the ag continuum, and the promise is just gigantic. We’ll be able to fine-tune food for amazing health and nutrition benefits.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

The unpasteurized, raw milk was sold at a farmers market in Missoula County, according to the Missoula City-County Health Department. The department did not specify what farmers market is involved.

“We don’t know if the cow was shedding the bacteria at the time it was milked, or if that cow’s milk was sold at the farmers market,” said Environmental Health Director Shannon Therriault. “So we can’t say for sure whether anyone was exposed. However, what we do know is that unpasteurized milk can contain harmful bacteria that can make you and your loved ones sick.”

The health department warned that unpasteurized milk products have been linked to outbreaks of E. coli, campylobacter, salmonella, brucella, listeria and cryptosporidium in addition to Q fever. In the case of Q fever, symptoms can take two or three weeks to become apparent following exposure. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, symptoms of Q fever include fever, chills, fatigue, headache, muscle aches, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, chest pain, stomach pain, weight loss and a non-productive cough.

“While drinking ‘raw’ milk has become more widespread in recent years, we want people to know that it can easily be contaminated with harmful bacteria, even when the milking operation is well-run,” Therriault said. 

In the 1980s, Missoula experienced a large salmonella outbreak caused by unpasteurized milk from a local dairy. More than 100 cases were linked to the outbreak, and half of those cases were children 14 and younger, according to the health department. 

The strain of salmonella was multi-drug resistant, and 15 percent of those who got sick were hospitalized. An inspection of the dairy revealed no sanitation laws or practices on the books at that time were broken, but people still got sick.

After that outbreak, Montana passed a law that all milk sold to consumers had to be pasteurized. The CDC reports that when milk pasteurization requirements began in the early 1990s, deaths and diarrheal illnesses in young children declined dramatically.

In 2021, the legislature reversed course, and unpasteurized milk sales are now allowed in Montana under certain, limited conditions. Unpasteurized milk can be sold at a farm, farmers markets and other traditional community events, as long as the herd is five lactating cows or fewer, and the seller informs the end consumer that the product is not licensed, certified, packaged, labeled or inspected under any official regulations.

The Iowa State Dairy Association opposes the sale of unpasteurized, raw milk direct to consumers. The association says raw milk can harbor dangerous microorganisms, such as salmonella, E coli, campylobacter, and Listeria, which can pose serious health risks. Raw milk can be especially dangerous for infants and young children, the elderly, and people with weakened immune systems.

Most state health departments and departments of agriculture, as well as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, advise against the consumption of raw milk for the same reasons. 

The transport and sale of raw milk across state lines are against federal law because of health concerns.

The Iowa legislature OK’d the bill to allow some sales of raw milk by votes of 64-to-35 in the House and 37-13 in the Senate. Sen. Jason Schultz, R-Crawford, and the floor manager for the bill said it has taken 17 years for a raw milk bill to survive the legislative process.

Supporters of the plan argued it gives consumers more freedom in the choice of foods they buy. Those against the plan said they worry about the health impact that drinking raw milk can have on Iowans.

Rep. Megan Srinivas, D-Des Moines, is an infectious disease doctor. She said raw milk increases the chances of infection by 150 times and brings about outbreaks that impact others beyond just those who are milk drinkers.

The measure sent to the governor permits sales from farms directly to consumers of raw, unpasteurized milk.

The off-farm sale of raw milk, such as at farmer’s markets and grocery stores is still prohibited. Raw milk sold on farms must carry labels warning about the lack of inspections or freedom from regulations involving pasteurization and grading.

Raw milk dairies will have to submit to testing, mostly on animals, and keep records that health officials can access. Monthly “coliform counts” for bacteria levels and yearly veterinarian check-ups are required.

The law also states that raw milk can only be sold if stored at 45 degrees or lower and needs to be distributed within seven days. Farmers can’t distribute milk from animals recently treated with antibiotics.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

However, a number of outbreaks of foodborne illness from eating raw or undercooked fiddleheads have been reported in the United States and Canada since 1994. Proper handling and thorough cooking of fiddleheads can reduce the risk of foodborne illness.

Tips for safe consumption of fiddleheads:

Cleaning Fresh Fiddleheads
Before cooking fiddleheads, it is important to clean them properly. To do this, remove as much of the brown papery husk as possible using your fingers. Then, wash the fiddleheads in fresh, cold water to remove any residual husk or dirt.

Cooking Fiddleheads

Under no circumstances should fiddleheads be eaten raw. To ensure they are safe for consumption, follow these steps:

1. Cook them in a generous amount of boiling water for 15 minutes or steam them for 10 to 12 minutes.
2. Discard the water used for boiling or steaming fiddleheads and thoroughly wash pans and bowls used for cooking.
3. Follow the above instructions before sautéing, frying, baking, or making other foods (e.g. soups, casseroles) using fiddleheads.

Freezing Fiddleheads
If you plan to freeze fiddleheads, it is important to follow these steps:

1. Clean fiddleheads as outlined above.
2. Blanch fiddleheads for two minutes.
3. Plunge fiddleheads in cold water. Drain.
4. Discard the blanching water.
5. Pack drained fiddleheads in freezer containers or bags.
6. Store them in the freezer for up to one year.
7. Follow the complete cooking steps outlined above before.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Federal officials say the new deadline for submitting comments will be determined when the reopening notice is officially published.

“The FDA is reopening the comment period in response to requests from stakeholders to allow additional time for interested persons to develop and submit comments,” according to the agency.

The draft guidance is entitled “Labeling of Plant-Based Milk Alternatives and Voluntary Nutrient Statements; Draft Guidance for Industry.” The draft was initially published in the Federal Register on Feb. 23 this year. Comments should be submitted to Regulations.gov and identified with the docket number FDA-2023-D-0451.

The draft recommendations are for industry on the naming of plant-based beverages that are marketed and sold as alternatives to milk. The draft guidance also recommends voluntary nutrient statements for the labeling of some plant-based milk alternatives. 

“Today’s draft guidance was developed to help address the significant increase in plant-based milk alternative products that we have seen become available in the marketplace over the past decade,” FDA Commissioner Robert Califf said when the draft guidance was published on Feb. 23. 

“The draft recommendations issued today should lead to providing consumers with clear labeling to give them the information they need to make informed nutrition and purchasing decisions on the products they buy for themselves and their families.” 

In addition to the increase in market availability and consumption, the variety of alternatives to dairy products has greatly expanded from soy, rice, and almond to include cashew, coconut, flaxseed, hazelnut, hemp seed, macadamia nut, oat, pea, peanut, pecan, quinoa and walnut-based beverages. Although these products are made from liquid-based extracts of plant materials, such as tree nuts, legumes, seeds, or grains, they are frequently labeled with names that include the term “milk.”

The draft guidance recommends that a plant-based milk alternative product that includes the term “milk” in its name such as “soy milk” or “almond milk,” and that has a nutrient composition that is different than dairy milk, include a voluntary nutrient statement that conveys how the product compares with dairy milk based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service fluid milk substitutes nutrient criteria. For example, the label could say, “Contains lower amounts of Vitamin D and calcium than milk.” 

In September 2018, the FDA requested information on the labeling of plant-based milk alternatives (PBMA) with terms that include the names of dairy foods such as “milk.” More than 13,000 comments were received, and the FDA determined that consumers generally understand that PBMA does not contain dairy milk and choose to purchase PBMA because they are not dairy milk. 

However, according to the FDA, many consumers may not be aware of the nutritional differences between milk and PBMA products. For example, almond- or oat-based PBMA products may contain calcium and be consumed as a source of calcium, but their overall nutritional content is not similar to dairy milk and fortified soy beverages, and they are not included as part of the dairy group in the Dietary Guidelines 2020-2025.

Dairy foods, including milk, are recommended by the Dietary Guidelines as part of a healthy eating pattern and contribute multiple key nutrients, including protein and vitamins A and B-12, along with calcium, potassium, and vitamin D, which are currently under-consumed, according to federal studies. The Dietary Guidelines only include fortified soy beverages in the dairy group because their nutrient composition is similar to that of dairy milk. However, the nutritional composition of PBMA products varies widely within and across types, and many PBMAs do not contain the same levels of key nutrients as milk. 

“Getting enough of the nutrients in milk and fortified soy beverages is especially important to help children grow and develop, and parents and caregivers should know that many plant-based alternatives do not have the same nutrients as milk,” said Susan Mayne, director of the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. “Food labels are an important way to help support consumer behavior, so we encourage the use of the voluntary nutritional statements to better help customers make informed decisions.” 

To support consistency across federal nutrition policies, the draft guidance recommends that the industry use the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service fluid milk substitutes nutrient criteria to determine if a PBMA is nutritionally similar to dairy milk. Also, the FDA encourages consumers to use the Nutrition Facts label to compare the nutrient content of different products to help make informed choices.

The draft guidance does not apply to other plant-based dairy alternatives, such as plant-based cheese or yogurt alternatives. The FDA is in the process of developing a draft guidance to address the labeling and naming of other plant-based alternative products and will communicate updates when available.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

Healthcare and agricultural groups, including the Iowa Public Health Association, Iowa Farm Bureau, and Iowa State Dairy Association, are on record as being opposed to the bill because of public health concerns.

The bill was already approved by the Senate, but the House made revisions to it that require the proposed legislation to be voted on again by the higher chamber. The bill, referred to as Senate File 315 was approved in the House of Representatives by a 64-35 vote.

The approved version includes an amendment added by Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, to require that raw milk producers test dairy animals for bacteria. It does not require that the raw milk itself be tested for bacteria or viruses, which can allow contaminated milk to enter the stream of commerce.

Rep. Megan Srinivas, D-Des Moines, is opposed to allowing the sale of unpasteurized milk in the state. She says as an infectious disease physician she has seen multiple children as patients who fell ill after consuming raw milk.

“It’s one thing if it’s an adult choosing what milk that they’re consuming,” Srinivas told the Iowa Capital Dispatch. “But when we have children who are falling victim because they are being given milk that can make them sick, (and) have permanent or even lethal ramifications, that’s where I get concerned.”

Kaufmann said he understands Srinivas’ perspective but disagrees with her assessment that her concerns mean the government should not allow the production and sale of raw milk. According to the Capital Dispatch, he likened such government control to the Disney character Jiminy Cricket sitting on consumers’ shoulders and telling them what to do.

Most state health and agriculture departments as well as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say it is not safe to consume unpasteurized, raw milk because it often contains dangerous pathogens. The sale of such milk is banned from sale across state lines.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Lene Idland, of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) faculty of veterinary medicine, provided updated figures on the prevalence of some pathogens that may be present in raw milk in three published studies.

Idland collected milk and environmental samples from 18 dairy farms in Eastern Norway. Sites were visited six times from August 2019 to July 2020.

Pathogens found at farms
Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter, and Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) were found in environmental and milk filter samples from farms. Around 3 percent of the bulk tank and teat milk samples were contaminated by Campylobacter and one type of STEC was isolated from bulk tank milk.

A total of 7 percent of milk filters were contaminated by STEC, 13 percent by Listeria monocytogenes, and 4 percent by Campylobacter. Four STEC isolates were eae positive, which is a gene associated with the ability to cause severe human disease.

The three pathogens are commonly found in Norwegian dairy farms, and it is difficult to avoid transmission to raw milk. Good on-farm hygiene can reduce the risk of milk being contaminated but it does not eliminate it, said Idland.

The second study showed the same Listeria clone can persist in a cattle herd over time, and that clones detected in the farm environment can contaminate milk filters and bulk tank milk.

Isolates from farm environments and raw milk were compared with those from other environmental habitats and listeriosis patients. Findings revealed that clusters of isolates with no likely association were indistinguishable using different types of analysis. This indicates the need to improve surveillance systems and not rely only on DNA analyses, found the study.

Drinking milk that has not been pasteurized is gaining popularity. In Norway, it is mandatory to pasteurize milk sold commercially but this does not apply to the random sale of raw milk directly from farms.

Related outbreaks in Norway are relatively rare but 17 children were infected by Campylobacter after drinking raw milk or Cryptosporidium after contact with animals during a farm visit in 2021.

Impact of changing practices
Dairy cattle production in the country is in transition from tie-stall housing with conventional pipeline milking systems, to modern loose housing systems with robotic milking. The occurrence of the three pathogens was higher in samples collected from farms with loose housing compared to those with tie-stall housing.

“New farm technologies may create novel niches for microbes to survive or grow in which can cause food safety challenges. Good hygienic measures seem to reduce the risk of zoonotic pathogens entering the milk production chain,” found the study.

The third study highlighted the importance of storing raw milk at low temperatures between milking and consumption, including during transportation.

An experiment showed that storage at abusive temperatures may lead to rapid propagation of STEC, which increases the risk of infection.

People who have a preference for drinking raw milk or giving it to their children should be made aware of the risks associated with consumption, particularly for young children, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Whether you’re decorating Easter eggs, enjoying a Passover Seder, or indulging in a beloved delicacy such as pickled eggs, it’s crucial to remember that eggs can carry salmonella, a common bacteria that can cause food poisoning. While some may be more susceptible to severe symptoms, anyone can become ill from salmonella, which can be present both inside and outside of eggs.

To ensure a safe and enjoyable holiday season, it’s important to follow safe handling and preparation guidelines.

Helpful tips:
Choose clean and fresh eggs and wash hands thoroughly before and after handling them.

If you’re planning on eating Easter eggs that have been dyed, make sure make sure to use safe, edible dyes Most store-bought Easter egg kits have food-safe dyes, so you can usually eat the eggs after they’ve dried. Just be sure to check the label to make sure the dye is safe to eat. One way to avoid this concern completely is to use natural dyes.

You can make natural dyes for Easter eggs by following these steps:

• Choose foods with coloring properties, such as:
  • Chopped beets for pink or red hues
  • Purple or red cabbage for blue hues
  • Yellow onion skins for orange hues
  • Spinach for green and brown hues
  • Blueberries for a purple-silverish hue
• Add a quart of water and 2 tablespoons of white vinegar to a medium pot and bring to a boil.
• Add the chosen dye ingredients and let it boil before reducing the heat to simmer for 30 minutes.
• Let the dye cool, then strain it.
• Add the eggs to the dye mixture and allow them to soak for a minimum of 30 minutes. The longer they soak, the brighter the color they will have.
• Use tongs to remove the eggs and pat them dry.

It’s also important to store eggs properly in the refrigerator at 40 degrees F or below, and to avoid cross-contamination with other foods. When cooking with eggs, they should be cooked until both the egg white and yolk are firm, and dishes containing eggs should be cooked to a safe internal temperature of 160 degrees F (71 degrees C).

If a recipe calls for lightly cooked eggs, pasteurized egg products can be used to reduce the risk of pathogenic contamination. It’s also important to refrigerate eggs or egg-containing dishes within 2 hours of cooking to prevent the growth of harmful bacteria.

These guidelines can also be helpful when preparing other spring holiday dishes, such as Easter ham. It’s important to cook it to an internal temperature of at least 145 degrees F (63 degrees C) before serving and let it rest for at least three minutes before carving.

Pickled eggs
When it comes to pickled eggs, it’s important to be aware of proper storage methods to prevent foodborne illness. Pickled eggs have a long and rich history and have become increasingly popular in recent years. To make pickled eggs, small to medium-sized eggs are boiled and peeled before being submerged in a boiling brine of vinegar, salt, and spices. The eggs are then left to sit in the brine in the refrigerator for a couple of weeks to take on the flavors before being consumed.

While commercially pickled eggs are safe to consume if refrigerated after opening and used within seven days, the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service and The National Center for Home Food Preservation (NCHFP) both advise against canning pickled eggs at home. The NCHFP warns that botulism has been associated with home-pickled eggs stored at room temperature.

For those interested in making their own pickled eggs, the NCHFP provides safe recipes on their website. It’s essential to follow the directions carefully to ensure safe storage and prevent foodborne illness.

By following these tips, you and your loved ones can safely enjoy all the festivities of the spring season, without the worry of foodborne illness.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

In 2021 the FDA investigated a deadly Listeria monocytogenes outbreak linked to El Abuelito Cheese products that sickened at least 13 people in four states and killed one person in Maryland.

Additionally, from 2014 to 2017 there were outbreaks of infections caused by Listeria in the United States that were linked to the consumption of soft Queso Fresco type (QFT) cheeses. From 1998 to 2014 officials identified a dozen outbreaks of listeriosis in the United States that were associated with soft cheeses made from pasteurized milk. Most were related to soft Queso Fresco-type cheeses.

The outbreaks have frequently been traced to cheeses from raw, unpasteurized milk. However, some of the outbreaks have been traced to cheese made from pasteurized milk that was contaminated when the cheese was being produced.

To address the problems associated with soft, Queso Fresco-type cheeses, the FDA has developed measures to provide public health interventions. 

“Food safety is a shared responsibility. Producers of QFT are responsible for producing safe food, including satisfying applicable food safety requirements,” according to the FDA’s announcement.

“In addition, the FDA believes it is imperative that we share data, knowledge, and information, and work collaboratively to enhance food safety.  Based on the review of the outbreak findings, historical data, and engagements with industry and other stakeholders, the agency has identified measures that can be taken to reduce future incidences of foodborne illness related to Queso Fresco-type soft cheeses, including:

• Prioritizing inspections with environmental sampling at soft fresh QFT manufacturing firms.
• Engaging with state partners to increase sampling of QFT cheese at retail operations in the U.S.  for the presence of Listeria monocytogenes bacteria. This could result in potentially contaminated products being recalled and removed from the market.
• Develop and distribute a publication that outlines the potential causes of recent listeriosis outbreaks in soft cheeses and a fact sheet that describes requirements for Listeria monocytogenes control in cheese manufacturing.
• Collaborate with states and other food safety partners to disseminate training and education materials to producers and consumers of soft fresh QFT.

By implementing these activities, the FDA hopes to:

• Ensure that the cheese industry is aware of regulatory requirements applicable to the production of QFT.
• Enhance compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements by producers of QFT. 
• Verify through inspections and sampling that QFT producers adhere to those requirements.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

The FDA has completed its second pre-market consultation for human food made from cultured animal cells.

“We evaluated the information Good Meat Inc. submitted to the agency and have no further questions at this time about the firm’s safety conclusion,” the FDA announced Tuesday. “The firm will use animal cell culture technology to take living cells from chickens and grow the cells in a controlled environment to make cultured animal cell food.”

The FDA said the voluntary pre-market consultation is not an approval process. “Instead, it means that after our careful evaluation of the data and information shared by the firm, we have no further questions at this time about the firm’s safety conclusion,” the agency said.

Nor did the FDA really share much about its review. It is promising more substantive information in the near future.

It said the pre-market consultation with the firm included an evaluation of Good Meat’s production process and the cultured cell material made by the production process, including the establishment of cell lines and cell banks, manufacturing controls, and all components and inputs.

The FDA claims to be “committed to sharing information about our approach to regulating human food made from cultured animal cells.

It did provide Information about this pre-market consultation at  FDA’s Human Food Made with Cultured Animal Cells Inventory (fda.gov).

It said human food produced by this firm from cultured animal cells must meet the same stringent FDA requirements, including facility registration and applicable safety requirements, as other food.

In addition, the firm will need a grant of inspection from the United States Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA-FSIS) for the manufacturing establishment. The food itself also requires a mark of inspection from USDA-FSIS before it can enter the U.S. market. As this product comes closer to entering the U.S. market, FDA officials said they are closely coordinating with USDA-FSIS to ensure it is properly regulated and labeled.

The FDA said it is ready to work with additional firms that are developing cultured animal cell food and production processes to ensure their food is considered safe and lawful under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. We encourage firms to engage with us often and early in their product and process development phase, well ahead of making any submissions to the agency, said the statement from the agency.

The public may learn more when the FDA opts to issue guidance to assist firms that intend to produce human food made from cultured animal cells prepare for pre-market consultations, and the published draft of this guidance will represent a formal opportunity for public comment and discussion.

“As we continue to support innovation in food technologies, resulting in more choices for consumers in the marketplace, our priority is the safety of food produced through both new and traditional methods.” FDA’s statement said.

For More Information:

• Human Food Made with Cultured Animal Cells
• Human Food Made with Cultured Animal Cells Inventory

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

The group has compiled its list for several years to highlight produce with pesticide residues. All of the fresh fruits and vegetables on the list have residues below the legal limits but are culled from a list of thousands of tests by the USDA.

This year the Environmental Working Group, EWG, says a single strawberry tested positive for 22 different pesticides. The EWG suggests that consumers buy organic fruits and vegetables to avoid such situations. Some pesticides are approved for use on organic crops.

“Strawberries aren’t the only problematic produce item. 90 percent of blueberry samples were contaminated with toxic pesticide residues, including pesticides linked to cancer and nervous system harm,” according to the EWG.

“Among the 54 pesticides found on blueberries were several bee-killing neonic pesticides. Not only have these pesticides been linked to the massive decline in bee populations worldwide, they’ve also been linked to neurological damage in children.”

The organization says 75 percent of non-organic fruits and vegetables sold in the U.S. are “riddled” with potentially toxic agricultural chemicals. Some of the pesticides detected have been banned in the U.S. or Europe because of concerns about how they harm people.

“Despite the abundance of science linking exposure to pesticides with serious health issues, a potentially toxic cocktail of concerning chemicals continues to taint many of the non-organic fruits and vegetables are eaten by consumers,” said Alexis Temkin, EWG toxicologist.

EWG’s analysis of the latest fruit and vegetable is from testing data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The 2023 edition includes data from 46,569 samples of 46 fruits and vegetables, covering 251 different pesticides.

“Everyone – adults and kids – should eat more fruits and vegetables, whether organic or not,“ Temkin said. “A produce-rich diet provides many health benefits.

“But in the ongoing absence of meaningful federal oversight, consumers concerned about pesticide exposure can use EWG’s Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce to navigate the produce aisle in ways that work best for them and their families.”

The fruits and vegetables on EWG’s Dirty Dozen for this year are:

1. Strawberries
2. Spinach
3. Kale, collard, and mustard greens
4. Peaches
5. Pears
6. Nectarines
7. Apples
8. Grapes
9. Bell and hot Peppers
10. Cherries
11. Blueberries
12. Green Beans

The group also compiles a list of what it considers to be the cleanest produce in terms of pesticide residues. This year the Clean 15 are:

1. Avocados
2. Sweet corn*
3. Pineapple
4. Onions
5. Papaya*
6. Sweet peas (frozen)
7. Asparagus
8. Honeydew melon
9. Kiwi
10. Cabbage
11. Mushrooms
12. Mangoes
13. Sweet Potatoes
14. Watermelon
15. Carrots

* Some sweet corn, papaya, and summer squash sold in the United States is produced from genetically modified seeds. The EWG recommends that consumers buy organic varieties of these crops if they want to avoid genetically modified produce.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News ,click here)

Turns out that an Israeli company, Vgarden Ltd. has developed what it calls a “game-changing’ vegan tinned tuna.”

“Game-changing” in more ways than one because tuna is the most popular fish in the world. Open up a food cupboard in just about any household, and you’ll likely find a can, or more, of tuna on one of its shelves. And look at a family’s list of meals, and you’ll likely see favorites such as tuna casserole and tuna sandwiches.

But with tuna so plentiful on the grocery shelves, why the push to produce fish-free tuna, especially since it’s such an affordable and convenient source of protein not only in the United States but also in Europe and Asia, not to mention growing markets in South America and the Middle East.

For the Israeli company, the problem is that overfishing of this high-in-demand fish has had a devastating effect on their numbers to the point that it has put several species, such as the yellowfin and the Atlantic Bluefin, on the edge of extinction, said Tom Rothman, head of global sales of the Israeli plant-based start-up Vgarden.

“This not only poses problems in terms of food security,” he said, “but also negatively impacts the delicate and fragile balance of the marine environment.”

Hoping to “turn the tide” on this, the company has devoted 12 months of research and development to the challenge of creating a canned tuna that will help contribute to restoring the ocean’s wild tuna populations.

The goal of this venture is to create a product with the taste, texture, and smell of tinned tuna with plants. 

“This was the greatest challenge,” said Omer Eliav, chief of research and development and Vgarden co-founder explained. “The biggest challenge in creating an identical tinned tuna is to provide the complete sensory experience of taste, texture, and smell. We want to make it enticing to all consumers, not just vegans.”

After a lot of trials and tastings, the start-up managed to achieve what the company says has the “exact look and feel” of tuna.

Ilan Adut, CE of Vgarden, said the company’s tinned tuna has a very distinct flaky, yet moist and chewy texture, with a powerful fresh-from-the sea aroma.

With a bow to the modern consumer who wants foods with “clean labels” Eliav said it was also important to clean up the label from any unwanted additives and make sure it contained just a short list of ingredients.

”Our new tuna-like product is clean-label, scalable, affordable, and sustainable,” he said. “But for our plant-based creation to serve as a true substitute, even beyond compellingly mimicking all of the sensory qualities, it also has to match tuna as much as possible in nutritional value.”

Vgarden’s tuna is based on pea protein, with a total protein content of 11.2 to14 percent before and after filtration. It contains a short list of natural ingredients including fibers and sunflower oil.

The company’s private-label tuna is already available in some retail and food-service sectors.  It is available in two packaging formats: pouches for chilled storage and cans to give the full authentic tuna experience and to facilitate convenient non-chilled storage. 

What about food safety?
Conventional tuna has some food-safety setbacks, the major one being mercury.

In recent research, Consumer Reports tested five brands of tuna to check mercury levels: Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea, Starkist, Safe Catch and Wild Planet in cans. Pouch containers have the same kind of tuna as cans, but pouches were not tested.

There was a wide range of mercury levels between types — light and albacore — and brands. Albacore had higher levels of mercury in all brands, not surprisingly because the fish are larger, according to Consumer Reports.

Albacore tuna is a larger fish with a lighter colored flesh, a firmer texture, and a milder flavor than the solid or chunk light fish varieties.

Generally speaking, the larger the fish of any kind, the more mercury it can contain.

The researchers found that regardless of brand or type, mercury levels can spike from can to can, therefore pregnant women are advised not to eat the fish.  And children should not have any albacore at all.

A known neurotoxin, mercury can cause many problems with a developing fetus. It is also a health risk for children whose bodies and brains are still growing and harmful to adults, causing problems with fine motor coordination, speech, sleep, walking and prickly sensations.

Company spokesman Ben Dotan told Food Safety News that plant-based tuna does not contain any animal derived ingredients. And because it doesn’t contain fish parts, it doesn’t contain any mercury, heavy metals, microplastics derived from marine and fish farming contamination, or cholesterol.

“One of the major challenges in the development of this product was getting it to maintain its texture and taste after canning and sterilizing the product at high temperature,” Dotan said. “Our canned tuna goes through sterilization in very high temperatures for a long time and therefore does not spoil over long periods of time.”

According to Consumer Reports, if your child will only eat tuna and no other fish, safe amounts per week are listed below:

Age 1-3 — 2 ounces

Age 4-7 — 4 ounces

Age 8-10 — 6 ounces

Surprisingly, canned tuna actually has less mercury than fresh tuna primarily because smaller fish, which contain less mercury than larger fish, are used in the canning process.

Canned tuna is widely consumed in America and is often the only fish a person ever eats, according to Consumer Reports.

The well known benefits of fish, including tuna, make it a delicate balancing act to know how much is enough.

About one-third of Americans eat canned tuna two or more times per month and 10 percent eat it at least once a week, according to a Consumer Reports 2022 national survey of 2,185 adults. 

Globally, tuna is the world’s most consumed fish, according to a United Nations report. The global tuna fish market is projected to grow from $41.06 billion in 2022 to $49.70 billion in 2029. 

Even so, tuna’s popularity coincides with a major rise in ethically and ecologically motivated health-conscious consumers seeking plant-based seafood alternatives, say Vgarden officials.

Consumer Reports asked all companies and the National Fisheries Institute, a trade association representing canned tuna manufacturers, to comment on the research. The institute said the levels Consumer Reports found were well below the FDA limit and said the products are safe. 

Where does the Mercury come from
Mercury occurs naturally at low levels in rock, soil and water throughout the world, according to an article in “FoodPrint”. But human activities have increased total mercury concentrations in the atmosphere by about 450 percent. This makes it a serious human-health issue.

The burning of fossil fuels like coal and gold mining are the most to blame for human-caused mercury emissions,

Once the mercury is in the air, it can travel for thousands of miles and will eventually make its way into the ocean or large bodies of water, either by being deposited there or on land and getting washed downstream.

When bacteria in the ocean process mercury, the highly toxic chemical methylmercury is created. This chemical builds up in seafood thus causing health problems for humans, especially the young.  

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Food and You 2 is a survey commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA). It measures consumers’ self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to food safety and other issues in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. A total of 6,770 adults from 4,727 households took part between April and July 2022.

“Food and You 2 provides FSA and the rest of the Government with robust data on what people think and do when it comes to food. We are seeing high levels of concern about food prices, as well as people making changes to their eating habits for financial reasons,” said Emily Miles, FSA chief executive.

More than 90 percent of respondents were confident that the food they buy is safe to eat.

Eighty percent were confident that FSA, or the government agency responsible for food safety, can be relied upon to protect the public from risks such as food poisoning or allergic reactions.

The same amount had no concerns about the food they eat. The main worries related to food production methods and food safety and hygiene while 11 percent mentioned food contamination.

From a list, the top concern was food prices, with food hygiene when ordering takeaways and when eating out, and food poisoning also in the Top 10. About a third were concerned about food from outside the UK is safe and hygienic.

Domestic food safety
Two-thirds of respondents identified the use-by date as the information which shows that food is no longer safe to eat and almost the same amount said they always check this date before they cook or prepare food.

Most respondents would not eat shellfish or other fish past the use-by date. This was about half for raw meat and smoked fish. When foods are eaten past the use-by date, this is typically one to two days after. Of specified foods, people would be most likely to eat bagged salad and cheese after the use-by date.

Most respondents do not always follow on-pack instructions about food being eaten within a few days of opening. The majority said they never consume raw oysters or raw milk.

People were more likely to say that they, at least occasionally before cooking, washed fish or seafood and raw chicken compared to lamb, beef, or pork and raw duck, goose, or turkey. The FSA tells people not to wash raw meat as it can spread bacteria.

Half of those surveyed reported always washing their hands before eating and three-quarters said they always wash their hands before preparing or cooking food.

Six in 10 knew fridge temperature should be between 0 to 5 degrees C (32 to 41 degrees F). A fifth said it should be above 5 degrees C, and 18 percent didn’t know.

Less than half of respondents leave meat or fish to defrost at room temperature, a practice that is not advised.

The main method to check food was ready when reheated was to see if the middle is hot, and the least common was to use a thermometer or probe.

Online food ordering
Eating habits in the past 12 months had changed for most respondents, mainly because of finances but a few cited food safety reasons and to avoid food poisoning.

Over half of the respondents had ordered food or drink from the websites of a restaurant, takeaway, or café or from an online ordering and delivery company such as Just Eat, Deliveroo, or Uber Eats.

About a quarter had ordered via an online marketplace like Amazon, Gumtree, or Etsy and around 1 in 10 had used a food-sharing app, for example, Olio or Too Good to Go, or social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, or Nextdoor. Most people ordered food from each type of platform two to three times a month or less.

Prepared cooked meals or snacks and baked goods and desserts were the products most commonly bought through online ordering and delivery companies; restaurants, takeaway or café sites, food-sharing apps, and social media. However, sweets and chocolates, and packaged goods were top of the list on online marketplaces.

Of those that had heard of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS), almost half always or most of the time checked the scores when ordering. Most people said ratings were either often or about half of the time easy to find online.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

House Bill 1515 would allow dairy owners to sell so-called raw milk at their farms. It was approved by North Dakota’s lower chamber with an 83-10 vote.

The bill has public health advocates butting heads with supporters of raw milk. Raw milk advocates say that exposure to pathogens such as E. Coli, Salmonella, and Listeria is less important that their perceived benefits of unpasteurized milk.

Rep. Dawson Holle, R-Mandan, sponsored the bill, which would prohibit farms from selling the controversial product to grocery stores or wholesalers.

Federal law prohibits the sale of raw, unpasteurized milk across state lines, leaving its status for in-state sales up to individual state legislatures.

Holle works on a dairy farm and told the House of Representatives this week that allowing so-called farm sales of raw milk could boost local agriculture.  

Public health officials and agriculture officials in North Dakota oppose the bill, as do their counterparts in other states as well as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The sale of raw milk is illegal in 23 states. Several states allow only on-farm sales, which is what the North Dakota bill would do.

Rep. Eric Murphy, R-Grand Forks, told the Bismarck Tribune that he sides with public health experts, noting that the consequences of legalizing raw milk “would be an extended bacterial infection, especially in young children, which are difficult to fight.

“The risk is potential death and potential infection that could cause disability or hospitalization,” Murphy told the newspaper. “There’s virtually zero benefits to raw milk versus drinking pasteurized milk.”

In 2017 the North Dakota Legislature removed a provision to legalize raw milk from a bill regarding the sale of certain homemade foods.

The sale of raw milk is illegal in 23 states. Several states allow only on-farm sales, which is what the North Dakota bill would do.

Bill 1515 in the North Dakota Legislature states:

A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 4.1-25 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the sale of raw milk directly to a consumer.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 4.1-25 of the North Dakota Century Code is created and enacted as follows:

Sale of raw milk directly to a consumer – Prohibitions – Exemptions.

A farm may sell raw milk directly to the end consumer for personal consumption.

A farm may not sell raw milk to a wholesaler or retail store for mass consumption under this chapter. The seller shall only sell milk within this state. The sale may not involve interstate commerce. Raw milk may not be donated.

A farm selling raw milk under the provisions of this section is not subject to chapters 4.1-05, 4.1-25, 4.1-26, 19-02.1, 23-9, or title 64.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

The 72-page report provides an overall view of organic produce retail performance in 2022 and specific insights into the top 20 organic produce categories.

While total organic produce sales increased by 3 percent and volume decreased by −3.7 percent year over year, the performance of the top 20 categories was quite variable as inflation and other pressures created a dynamic market environment.

The best performers in terms of year-over-year sales increases were onions at 15.4 percent, cucumbers at 11.3 percent and potatoes at 10.7 percent. The worst performers were lettuce at −3.1 percent, celery at −2.3 percent, and bell peppers at −2.1 percent.

On the volume side, the best-performing organic commodities year over year were grapes at 6.9 percent, herbs and spices at 6.5 percent and cucumbers at 2.7 percent, while the weakest were lettuce at −12.7 percent, avocados at −11.4 percent and apples at −10.3 percent.

The three bottom year-over-year volume performers all had significant contributing factors beyond inflation. Lettuce suffered aphid pressure in the desert because of warmer temperatures in the first and second quarters and was later dealt a devastating blow by INSV (impatiens necrotic spot virus) in the Salinas Valley in the fall/early winter; avocados had a lower-than-normal volume out of Mexico in the first half of the year; and apple supply was impacted by a very small Washington crop.

Two categories that bucked the organic produce sector’s overall trend of increased sales and decreased volume were fresh herbs and spices, and grapes. Both categories posted year-over-year increases in sales and volume, with organic herbs and spices showing gains of 4.1 percent and 6.5 percent, respectively, and organic grapes showing respective gains of 8.3 percent and 6.9 percent. In short, last year’s highly inflationary environment wasn’t able to keep these two categories down.  

When it came to the top spot by total retail sales, berries took the lead in 2022, edging out packaged salads ever so slightly with $1.561 billion in sales. Packaged salad sales totaled $1.556 billion.

Bananas held on to their spot as the top volume mover with nearly 509 million pounds sold at retail in 2022.

One data set that gives a look into organic produce performance is the price premiums commanded by various organic categories over their conventional counterparts. Of the categories analyzed, organic cucumbers took the lead in price premium percentage in 2022, selling for an average of 138 percent more per pound than conventional cucumbers. Celery, on the other hand, had one of the lowest premiums at 22 percent, dropping from 32 percent in 2021. Apparently, consumers were willing to pay a pretty penny for an organic cucumber compared to a conventional one, but organic celery did not enjoy a similar elevated status.

Organic bananas, which were grappling with increased costs last year, had a very welcome gain in their price premium over conventional bananas, jumping from 25 percent in 2021 to 32 percent in 2022.

State of Organic Produce 2022 also explores the 20 leading categories by their regional performance, which varied quite widely in certain circumstances. A notable example was organic celery, which lost significant year-over-year volume in every region except the West where it posted an enormous gain of 26.7 percent, suggesting perhaps that the organic celery juicing trend is far more popular there than in the other three regions.

Another incidence of disparate regional data involved organic fresh herbs and spices, which declined in volume in the Northeast by −9.4 percent yet posted a whopping 19.7 percent increase in the West. The latter region was clearly making these culinary favorites a priority in 2022 despite inflation.

In terms of year-over-year performance that was consistent across the US, organic onions were a prime example as they enjoyed double-digit sales gains in all four regions, which makes sense given their staple status.

Packaged salads, an organic produce mainstay, also had similar results across all four regions, declining in volume by mid-single digits and increasing in sales by low single digits, closely reflecting the performance of the overall organic produce category.

The State of Organic Produce 2022 report can be found here for more insights into last year’s organic produce performance.

The OPN is a marketing organization that serves as the go-to resource for the organic fresh produce industry. The company’s mission is to inform and educate through a strong digital presence with an emphasis on original content complemented by live events that bring together various components of the organic produce community. OPN’s target audience includes organic producers, handlers, distributors, processors, wholesalers, food service operators, and retailers.  www.organicproducenetwork.com

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Researchers also found some product samples contained similar types of Salmonella identified in human patients, prompting them to urge hygiene measures, including thorough handwashing by dog owners, pet food retailers, and veterinary professionals.

A selection of dried treats from local pet shops and online retailers were tested for Salmonella in the UK. Treats were purchased from an independent pet shop and a large nationwide chain in Merseyside, and also from two nationwide-supplying online retailers from September to October 2021.

Air or freeze-dried and dehydrated treats have not undergone cooking or heat treatment as part of production; however, the process used must have been proven in sampling tests to destroy Salmonella.

Eighty-four samples were tested. Animal proteins included buffalo/bison, chicken, beef, lamb, pork, duck, rabbit, and camel, according to the study published in the journal Vet Record.

A variety of Salmonella detected
Salmonella was isolated from 13 treats. Samples that tested positive were dried bull’s penis “pizzle sticks,” bison ears, furry rabbit ears, and dried chicken treats. All positives came from the same independent pet shop on two separate visits. 

This could represent a local problem, but could also be a result of contamination at the supplier’s or within the supply chain, and without further environmental sampling, it was not possible to identify where within the production chain contamination occurred, found the study.

Salmonella types found were Salmonella Anatum, Derby, Dublin, Infantis, and monophasic Salmonella Typhimurium. The most frequently isolated serotype was Salmonella Derby six times from bison ears, with Salmonella Dublin in two pizzle stick samples. 

Salmonella Derby and monophasic Salmonella Typhimurium strains were genetically similar to patient samples but there was no epidemiological information to confirm a connection. The risk of transmission to humans has been linked to a lack of hygiene following the handling of dog treats or contact with animals that may shed Salmonella in their feces.

Treats from the independent pet shop were unpackaged with no labeling or traceability information. Those from the nationwide chain were individually wrapped in branded plastic sealed packets.

Treats from the first online retailer were delivered in a box with some loose unpackaged ear snacks and other items in branded sealed bags. Those from the other online seller came as multiple items in clear plastic bags with no labeling.

Country of origin was unknown for the majority of treats, although four were produced in the UK, and a quarter stated materials were sourced from the UK and Europe on their website. A lack of information on origin poses a risk of importing Salmonella serotypes not commonly reported in the UK and highlights the importance of clear labeling for traceability, said scientists.

Government guidelines state that dog chews must be packed in unused packaging. However, treats contaminated with Salmonella in the study were sold as loose items that could be picked up by hand and purchased in paper bags.  

“Efforts should be made to educate dog owners further regarding the potential risks posed by these treats if they choose to feed them, especially in households with higher risk individuals present, such as immunocompromised individuals or young children. The importance of hygienic practice surrounding their use should be stressed, particularly regarding handwashing after use and consideration against feeding them within the home environment,” said researchers.

Raw-meat-based diet risks
Meanwhile, another study looked to see if raw meat-based diets (RMBDs) for pets are a source of bacteria with linezolid resistance genes. Such bacteria may spread from animals to humans upon close contact between pets and their owners.

Fifty-nine samples of RMBDs from 10 suppliers in Germany and Switzerland were screened for florfenicol-resistant Gram-positive bacteria. A total of 27 Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, and Vagococcus lutrae isolates were obtained from 24 samples. Researchers found genes that may confer resistance to linezolid.

Linezolid is a last-resort drug to treat some severe infections in people, according to a study published in the journal Eurosurveillance.

Samples were beef, poultry, horse, lamb, fish, rabbit, and venison and were bought between September 2018 and May 2020.

A high occurrence of florfenicol-resistant isolates in raw pet food made from meat primarily of European origin is concerning and underlines the need for its rational use in the agricultural sector, said scientists.

“The occurrence of isolates harboring linezolid resistance genes in raw dog food highlights the importance of promoting awareness of the possible risks associated with RMBDs and of providing information to pet owners on correct handling and feeding of RMBDs in order to mitigate potential health risks,” said researchers.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)