NFBF Calls for Mandatory Testing for Imported Beef Trim
The Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation (NFBF) has sent a letter to the USDA criticizing certain aspects of the Food Safety and Inspection Service’s upgraded protocol to deal with E. coli 0157:H7 contamination, according to the Brownfield Network. The NFBF has issues with the FSIS protocol’s mandate on the testing of beef trimmings.
In the current protocol, testing is mandatory for beef trim produced in the United States. FSIS, however, has no mandates for beef trim produced in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Canada, and others that are imported to the United States. NFBF President Keith Olsen states that the current procedure gives a competitive advantage to imported beef trim. This could also lead to an increase in beef recalls because of E. coli 0157:H7 contamination.
E. coli and Grain-Fed Cattle
The debate continues as to whether grain-fed cattle are more likely to harbor deadly E. coli O157:H7 bacteria in their intestines. A recent Kansas State University study now finds that cattle fed distiller’s grain, a byproduct of the ethanol distilling process, may increase the incidence of E. coli O157:H7 in the cattle’s hindgut. Below is a Kansas State University press release regarding the study:
MANHATTAN, KAN. — Ethanol plants and livestock producers have created a symbiotic relationship. Cattle producers feed their livestock distiller’s grains, a byproduct of the ethanol distilling process, giving ethanol producers have an added source of income.
But recent research at Kansas State University has found that cattle fed distiller’s grain have an increased prevalence of E. coli 0157 in their hindgut. This particular type of E. coli is present in healthy cattle but poses a health risk to humans, who can acquire it through undercooked meat, raw dairy products and produce contaminated with cattle manure.
“Distiller’s grain is a good animal feed. That’s why ethanol plants are often built next to feedlots,” said T.G. Nagaraja, a professor of diagnostic medicine and pathobiology at K-State’s College of Veterinary Medicine.
The growth in ethanol plants means more cattle are likely to be fed distiller’s grain, therefore harboring 0157 and potentially a source of health risks to humans, Nagaraja said. That’s why he and Jim Drouillard, K-State professor of animal sciences, have been collaborating on testing distiller’s grain-fed cattle for 0157. Nagaraja and Drouillard, who studied the carcass quality of cattle fed distiller’s grain, are joined by Megan Jacob, a K-State doctoral student in pathobiology. Through three rounds of testing, Nagaraja said the prevalence of 0157 was about twice as high in cattle fed distiller’s grain compared with those cattle that were on a diet lacking the ethanol byproduct.
“This is a very interesting observation and is likely to have profound implications in food safety,” Nagaraja said.
Food safety and animal health are research priorities at K-State, which since 1999 has dedicated more than $70 million on research related to animal health and food safety. More than 150 K-Staters are actively involved in these areas.
Nagaraja said research in the next few years will focus on finding out why 0157 is more prevalent in cattle fed a distiller’s grain diet. He said it could be something that changes in the animals’ hindgut as a result of feeding distiller’s grains, or maybe the byproduct provides a nutrient for the bacteria.
“Feeding cattle distiller’s grain is a big economic advantage for ethanol plants,” Nagaraja said. “We realize we can’t tell cattle producers, ‘Don’t feed distiller’s grain.’ What we want to do is not only understand the reasons why 0157 increases, but also find a way to prevent that from happening.”
Pritzker | Ruohonen is one of the leading food safety law firms in the United States. To contact an E. coli lawyer at the firm, please call toll-free at 1-888-377-8900 or submit the firm’s online consultation form.
E. coli Prevention: Cooking with Cameras
Three home-schooled girls found a new way to determine if hamburgers are cooked well enough to kill any E. coli bacteria—“burgercam” (from the Philadelphia Inquirer):
Above a stove, the girls mounted a camera that took a picture every 30 seconds. They measured how much each burger shrank during cooking, and recorded the size when it reached the proper temperature. Aided by computer software designed to measure geometric shapes, they calculated the percentage of shrinkage for various brands of frozen patties. And then they tested the finding by injecting raw burgers with E. coli.
“It pretty much worked every time,” Collipp says.
Say “cheese,” burgers.
Cranberries Alter E. coli Bacteria
It has long been known that cranberries prevent urinary tract infections. Now research is being done that suggests that cranberries may also prevent E. coli infections.
8 Ounces of Cranberry Juice Cocktail Twice a Day
According to a study published in 2002 (Howell), 8 ounces of cranberry juice cocktail every morning and evening should help prevent an E. coli infection. The research conducted jointly between Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and the University of Michigan, looked at the affect of cranberry juice cocktail on E. coli adhesion in the urinary tract. Urine samples from healthy men and women were taken. Some of these people had consumed 8 ounces of cranberry juice cocktail. The urine was allowed to interact with urinary tract cells that had been exposed to E. coli. The urine of the people who had consumed the cranberry juice prevented 79% of the bacteria from sticking to the urinary tract cells. The study also found that cranberry juice cocktail’s beneficial effect may start within two hours and can last for up to 10 hours in the urine, which would mean an 8 ounce glass of cranberry juice cocktail every morning and evening might help prevent an E. coli infection.
How Cranberry Juice Affects E. coli
Research at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (Liu) found that a group of tannins (called proanthocyanidins) found primarily in cranberries affect E. coli in three devastating ways, all of which prevent the bacteria from adhering to cells in the body, a necessary first step in all infections:
- They change the shape of the bacteria from rods to spheres.
- They alter their cell membranes.
- They make it difficult for bacteria to make contact with cells, or from latching on to them should they get close enough.
For most of these effects, the impact on bacteria was stronger the higher the concentration of either cranberry juice or the tannins, suggesting that whole cranberry products and juice that has not been highly diluted may have the greatest health effects.
Disclaimer: Cranberry juice cocktail is a food, not a drug, nor should it be used in place of a drug. Anyone who suspects an infection should always consult a physician. Cranberry juice cocktail should not be used as a treatment for infection, but may be an effective part of a prevention routine.
References:
1. Amy B. Howell and Betsey Foxman, Cranberry Juice and Adhesion of Antibiotic-Resistant Uropathogens, Journal of the American Medical Association, 2002, 287, 3082-3083.
2. Liu, Y., Black, M.A., Caron, L., and T.A. Camesano. Role of cranberry juice on molecular-scale surface characteristics and adhesion of Escherichia coli, Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 2006, 93, 297-305.
E. coli-Contaminated Meat Sold to Consumers
As the USDA is scrambling to save face after dozens of people have been sickened in E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks linked to ground beef products, USDA meat inspectors revealed to the Chicago Tribune that USDA allows companies to sell meat contaminated with E. coli if it is cooked:
One federal inspector calls it the “E. coli loophole.” Another says, “Nobody would buy it if they knew.”
The officials are referring to the little-discussed fact that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has deemed it acceptable for meat companies to cook and sell meat on which E. coli, a bacterium that can sicken and even kill humans, is found during processing.
The “E. coli loophole” affects millions of pounds of beef each year that tests positive for the presence of E. coli O157:H7, a particularly virulent strain of the bacterium.
The agency allows companies to put this E. coli-positive meat in a special category — “cook only.” Cooking the meat, the USDA and producers say, destroys the bacteria and makes it safe to eat as precooked hamburgers, meat loaf, crumbled taco meat and other products.
But some USDA inspectors say the “cook only” practice means that higher-than-appropriate levels of E. coli are tolerated in packing plants, raising the chance that clean meat will become contaminated. They say the “cook only” practice is part of the reason for this year’s sudden rise in incidents of E. coli contamination.
Read the full story in the Chicago Tribune.
The media are having a field day with this, and well they should. It is outrageous that contaminated meat is allowed to be sold to consumers in any form.
Here is some of the media reaction:
The USDA regulation allows processing plants to sell meat that tests positive for E. coli. The only stipulation is such meat carry a ”cook only” label, a practice that allows companies to profit from millions of pounds of bad meat. The USDA defended the rule, saying commercial cooking kills the bacteria and renders it safe to eat. This type of meat is usually sold as precooked hamburger, meatloaf and taco filling.
The $71 billion U.S. beef industry is fiercely protective of its product, and a Texas cattlemen’s association even sued Oprah Winfrey in 1996 for disparaging remarks about beef. But when the brain-wasting mad cow disease that decimated Europe’s beef markets was found in Washington state, American growers lost an estimated $4 billion in exports. Huge losses also are likely as consumers realize what the E. coli loophole really means.
Consumers may never again look at such precooked ”convenience” products the same way. After all, where’s the convenience in gagging, retching and diarrhea? If this loophole isn’t closed soon, consumers will consider anything the government says about food safety just a load of, well, you know. (Chicago Sun-Times)
You want feces with that?
It’s not a question you want to hear from the kid behind the fast-food counter. But because of a loophole in the way the U.S. Department of Agriculture regulates beef processing, it is, we regret to report, a realistic question.
It seems that the USDA deems it OK for meat suppliers to cook and sell beef that has been found to be contaminated by E. coli bacteria. As long as the tainted beef is put aside in a “cook only” category during processing, then pre-cooked to a temperature that will kill the bacterium, everything’s cool.
At least that’s what a number of angry USDA meat inspectors told The Chicago Tribune. Naturally, the inspectors didn’t want to be identified for fear of losing their jobs. (The Salt Lake Tribune)
We are encouraging people to contact their legislators and ask them to close the E. coli loophole. The beef industry will fight this tooth and nail (with millions of dollars dangled in front of legislators’ eyes), but we have to hope some of our politicians care more about their constituents than campaign finances.
USDA-FSIS Vows to Take Aggressive Action to Combat E. coli
The USDA-FSIS issued a press release today entitled “FSIS Takes Aggressive Actions To Combat E. Coli O157:H7.” This confirms that the USDA-FSIS has not been taking aggressive action to combat E. coli O157:H7. In a recent article in The New York Times, it was brought to light that FSIS inspectors were at the Topps Meat Corporation plant (the one responsible for almost 22 million pounds of E. coli-contaminated hamburgers) for one to two hours a day and never cited Topps for unsafe practices. At least 40 people became ill because of this lack of aggression on the part of the FSIS. It is time the FSIS got aggressive.
Below is the USDA-FSIS press release:
FSIS Takes Aggressive Actions To Combat E. Coli O157:H7
WASHINGTON, Oct. 23, 2007 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced new, ongoing and upcoming actions to protect public health against the risk of E. coli O157:H7, including expanded testing and more rapid recalls. [E. coli Lawyer: Why wasn't this done years ago?] FSIS also provided an update on stepped-up efforts initiated in the spring and summer of 2007.
“We want the American consumer to know that FSIS has taken a number of aggressive actions to respond to a recent increase in E. coli O157:H7 recalls and illnesses associated with this pathogen and we are further expanding these efforts,” said Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Richard A. Raymond.
In June 2007, FSIS identified an increased number of E. coli O157:H7 positive tests in beef, as well as a larger number of recalls and illnesses caused by this pathogen than in recent years. [E. coli Lawyer: Recalls of about 28 million pounds of ground beef and dozens of confirmed cases of E. coli O157:H7.] Immediately, the agency took a number of steps. For example, FSIS increased the number of tests of ground beef for E. coli O157:H7 by more than 75 percent in July and began planning for a new follow-up testing program for federally inspected beef plants that had positive tests for E. coli O157:H7. Additionally, FSIS accelerated implementation of initiatives scheduled for spring 2008 in response to concerns about increased positives of E. coli O157:H7. FSIS accelerated its plans to review suppliers and processors based on a new checklist, once inspection program personnel complete specialized training, which begins next week.
