Food Poisoning Lawyer & Attorney : Marler Clark : Food Poison Journal

Nobody can speak more authoritatively about the risks of foodpoisoning than those who have succumbed to severe illness in large outbreaks, and had there lives permanently changed as a result.  Barb Pruitt will not be in Washington DC next week to speak with key senators and staffers on the importance of new food safety legislation, but hers is certainly a voice that needs to be heard as well.

A little background first.  Barb was infected by Salmonella typhimurium in an 2009 outbreak ultimately linked to lettuce from Salinas valley California.  Barb's illness very quickly became life-threatening because the bacteria caused the tissues in her gastrointestinal tract to die, leading to a perforation of her small intestine that allowed the bacteria to escape into her bloodstream.  She ultimately had to be life-flighted to a major medical center, where she underwent emergency surgery to remove approximately four feet of her small intestine.  She has spent over a month in the hospital, and has endured constant, severe gastrointesinal problems ever since as a result of her inability to properly digest foods due to the loss of her small intestine.  Barb's problems, including multiple days a week where she suffers 15-20 bouts of diarrhea, are permanent.

Senator Harry Reid, who has spoken with food safety victims in the past seeking passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act, and every other senator and staffer who can help get the bill, S 510, to the floor for a vote, need to know about Barb.  Her illness was caused by a product, lettuce, that is regulated by the FDA; and its certainly possible that earlier action on the Food Safety Modernization Act would have helped to prevent her life from being permanently changed.  At the very least, action on S 510 now will help others avoid what Barb has gone through. 

Barb Pruitt's Statement to the Senate:

First, let me make it clear that I have no authority or expertise in the field of foodborne illnesses, however; I am a survivor of Salmonella poisoning and can speak from experience. I speak for ALL that have experienced, could experience, or have died from food poisoning. In addition, I speak for those that are left disabled for life, such as me, due to the inadequacies and failures within our food industries. I choose to be the voice for us all.

If I were to personally stand before you today, I would implore you to please pursue the vote for the Food Safety Modernization Act. The Act will enable increased authority for the FDA and food regulations will be more effective. What I like best is that the Act would require preventative programs. It is clear that the regulations we currently have in place are not followed nor are they effective. The Food Safety Modernization Act would provide necessary modification of and improved regulations. Food poisoning is preventable, let us enforce it.

As citizens, we should not be fearful of the food that we consume. We are hard working Americans who spend our hard working money on life’s necessities - FOOD. We should NOT under any circumstances fear the consumption of our food; we assume and TRUST that our food is prepared with quality and that it is SAFE. No one ever assumes that their next bite of food may sicken them or worse yet kill them, leaving families destroyed and experiencing financial devastation with medical bills.

The failure in our system is that producers focus on quantity rather than quality. They have the ability to focus on quantity rather than quality because our current structured food regulations are failing. We have the power to change that. We must stand together and apply strict regulations and by all means ENFORCE them. We have to give authority where necessary to preserve human life and quality of life.

When a food product is produced and sent to the public, when tainted, millions of unsuspecting people may be facing a death sentence or lifetime disabilities. It is not like a piece of clothing that has been sewn incorrectly so therefore it is sold at a discount store. This is food we are talking about. Our food, more often than not, is not tested for quality until it is consumed by the public. There is no taking it back once it has been eaten and someone falls prey to illness.

Every case of foodborne illness is a case of a failure in our food industry reguations and a lack of regard for human life as producers are able to ignore current regulations and push for quantity rather than quality. It is sad that we have come to the point of actually having to babysit our food supply, not only on a local level but worldwide; we must also be strict with our incoming food as well. All food must be produced with the mindset that EVERY human life is valuable.

I urgently ask you to please vote on this Act and pass it. Stronger regulations, increased involvement from authorities, and preventative programs are a necessity. I know I am but only one voice, but I hope that I am ultimately a strong, and unfortunately very experienced, voice.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Today the FDA released its Form 483 Inspection Observation Report from the on-site inspections it recently conducted at Wright County Egg's egg laying farms/plants, and the findings are nothing short of disgusting.  Here are just a sampling of the conditions witnessed by FDA's inspectors: 

• Chicken manure located in the manure pits below the egg laying operations was observed to be approximately 4 feet high to 8 feet high at the following locations: Layer 1 – House 1; Layer 3 – Houses 2, 7, 17, and 18. The outside access doors to the manure pits at these locations had been pushed out by the weight of the manure, leaving open access to wildlife or domesticated animals.
• Un-baited, unsealed holes appearing to be rodent burrows located along the second floor baseboards were observed inside Layer 1 – Houses 1-9 and 11-13; Layer 2 – Houses 7 and 11; Layer 3 – Houses 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6; Layer 4 – House 3.
• Dark liquid which appeared to be manure was observed seeping through the concrete foundation to the outside of the laying houses at the following locations: Layer 1 – Houses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, and 14; and Layer 3 – Houses 1, 8, 13, and 17.
• Standing water approximately 3 inches deep was observed at the southeast corner of the manure pit located inside Layer 1 – House 13.
• Un-caged birds (chickens having escaped) were observed in the egg laying operations in contact with the egg laying birds at Layer 3 – Houses 9 and 16. The un-caged birds were using the manure, which was approximately 8 feet high, to access the egg laying area.
• Layer 3 – House 11, the house entrance door to access both House 11 and 12 was blocked with excessive amounts of manure in the manure pits.
• There were between 2 to 5 live mice observed inside the egg laying Houses 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 14.
• Live and dead flies too numerous to count were observed at the following locations inside the egg laying houses: Layer 1 – Houses 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12; Layer 2 – Houses 7 and 11; Layer 3 – Houses 3, 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 15, 16, 17, and 18. The live flies were on and around egg belts, feed, shell eggs and walkways in the different sections of each egg laying area. In addition, live and dead maggots too numerous to count were observed on the manure pit floor located in Layer 2 – House 7.
• You did not document washing and disinfecting of your dead hen truck and manure equipment prior to moving from farm to farm.
• You did not maintain records documenting the washing and disinfection of the trailers used for the movement of pullets to laying houses.
• Birds were observed roosting and flying, chicks heard chirping in the storage and milking facilities. In addition, nesting material was observed in the feed mill closed mixing system, ingredient storage and truck filling areas.
• Outdoor whole kernel corn grain bins 4 and 6 observed to have the topside doors/lids open to the environment and pigeons were observed entering and leaving these openings. Birds were also observed sitting/flying around and over the openings.

In addition, numerous samples were collected during the course of te inspection and tested by an FDA laboratory.  The results revealed the following positive analytical results for Salmonella Enteritidis:

• On 8/13/2010, an environmental sample was collected from Layer 2, house 7 manure swab from row 1 – left side.
• On 8/16/2010, an environmental sample was collected from Layer 2, house 11 at manure scraper blade from row 3 – right side.
• On 8/13/2010, an environmental sample was collected from Layer 4, house 3 at walkway 1 – right side and walkway 3 – right side.
• On 8/14/2010, a sample of meat and bone meal was collected from ingredient bin 7 located at your feed mill.
• On 8/17/2010, a sample of finished feed “Developer” pullet feed was collected from the feed mill.
• On 8/16/2010, an environmental sample was collected from the roof level covered ingredient bin chute 8; Second Floor ingredient bin cover 19 (ingredient bin 19 holds ground corn) located at your feed mill.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Food Safety Advocate has Petitioned USDA 

Seattle, WA (August 30, 2010) The recent outbreak of E. coli O26 linked to three illnesses and the recall of four tons of ground beef products produced by Cargill Meat Solutions is the precise reason these pathogen needs to be monitored, says Seattle food safety attorney, Bill Marler. 

“It took a massive outbreak in 1993 for the USDA and beef industry to accept E. coli O157:H7 as an ‘adulterant,’ which means that it is actively tested for in our food supply.  Its presence in beef halts distribution and triggers a recall,” said Bill Marler.  “The USDA and beef industry know well that there are at least six additional strains of shiga-toxin producing E. coli: O45, O111, O121, O145, O103 and O26 that are highly dangerous to humans and should not exist in food.”

Marler has been working since 2007 to get the additional E. coli strains added as adulterants, culminating in a $500,000 study to determine the prevalence of these toxins in the commercial beef supply.  The study found these pathogens in nearly 1% of the tests.  His firm, Marler Clark, in October 2009 filed a petition to the USDA requesting the change in USDA policy. It is estimated by the CDC that the six unregulated strains of E. coli sicken over 30,000 people a year and kills dozens.

“The food safety community has been extremely frustrated with the lack of action from the USDA and the beef industry,” continued Marler.  “I’m sure the families of the people affected in this most recent outbreak will be as outraged as I am that these pathogens, which can severely sicken and even kill, are allowed into the food supply unregulated.”

Cargill has now recalled 8,500 pounds of ground beef products due to E. coli O26; three are sick in Maine and New York.  In August 2008, an outbreak of E. coli O111 at an Oklahoma restaurant sickened 300 and killed one.  A May 2010 outbreak of E. coli O145 in lettuce sickened 26.

ABOUT BILL MARLER: An accomplished personal injury lawyer and national expert in foodborne illness litigation, William ‘Bill’ Marler has been a major force in food safety policy in the United States and abroad.  He and his partners at Marler Clark have represented thousands of individuals in claims against food companies whose contaminated products have caused serious injury and death.  His advocacy for better food regulation has led to invitations to address local, national, and international gatherings on food safety, including testimony to the US Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce.  Marler Clark is the nation’s foremost law firm representing victims of foodborne illness. 

Contact Mary Siceloff at msiceloff@marlerclark.com or (206) 719-4705.  For further information visit www.marlerclark.com and www.marlerblog.com. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Sometimes major food-safety events (i.e. large-scale outbreaks and recalls) have the effect of bringing important issues to the fore, thereby preventing them from being ignored any longer.  The 2006 Spinch E. coli O157 recall certainly did; the Leafy Green Marketing Agreement--which sets forth standardized, fairly stringent rules for the production of leafy greens--came out the other end of the illness vortex that sickened over 200 people and killed 5 (not 3, which is normally the number given).  (It has also been effective at reducing the number of people that we represent in produce-related outbreaks).  Maybe the egg outbreak will leave senators with absolutely no excuse for letting the issue of food safety and recalls languish any longer in the hands of producers alone.  

It never hurts to have widely-viewed media outlets supporting the cause.  Boston Globe's op-ed today, "Egg debacle reveals loopholes:"

IF FEDERAL inspectors had miraculously discovered salmonella bacteria at two Iowa egg farms before the microbes infected at least 1,470 people with food poisoning this summer, they would have had no authority to mandate a recall of potentially contaminated eggs.

Eventually, the two farms agreed voluntarily to recall more than a half-billion eggs in the largest outbreak of this salmonella strain since government scientists began keeping track in the late 1970s. But granting mandatory recall authority to the Food and Drug Administration should be a no-brainer response by Congress to this latest demonstration of the yawning gaps in the nation’s safety net for food.

Today's editorial in the USA Today titled "Egg recalls fit pattern of negligence, lax oversight:"

Here we go again. With the massive recall by two farms in Iowa, eggs now join spinach, hamburger and peanuts on a list of things you thought you could eat without worry but now might have doubts about.

***

The FDA, like other federal regulators, has a sad history of inspecting but ignoring: For six years, for example, inspectors found violations at the Del Rey Tortilleria in Chicago, whose tortillas were repeatedly linked to outbreaks of vomiting and diarrhea in school kids. It wasn't until last year that FDA higher-ups finally moved to shut the plant down.

As for bad eggs, broader vaccination of chickens would help. So would a long-stalled food safety bill, pending in the Senate, that would mandate inspections of farms and give the FDA authority to order recalls that are now voluntary. Good, but even this is no magic bullet. The agency will need more money for inspections. Just as important, instead of just writing up violations, it needs to crack down on rogue companies, treating them the same way the criminal justice system treats repeat offenders.

The FDA, like other federal regulators, has a sad history of inspecting but ignoring: For six years, for example, inspectors found violations at the Del Rey Tortilleria in Chicago, whose tortillas were repeatedly linked to outbreaks of vomiting and diarrhea in school kids. It wasn't until last year that FDA higher-ups finally moved to shut the plant down.

And this from Mina Kimes in an article that appeared on CNN and in Fortune titled "Egg recall is a golden opportunity to whip food safety into shape:"

The section of the bill [S 510, aka "Food Safety Modernization Act"] that calls for increased surveillance may be the most pertinent to the current salmonella outbreak. Bill Marler, a Seattle attorney who specializes in taking on food recall cases (including the current egg outbreak), thinks that particular proposal, which calls on the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a pilot project to improve tracking methods and enhance surveillance systems, could have helped regulators catch the outbreak much earlier.

"There's no question in my mind that, if there was more communication and coordination going on between health departments, this thing would have been figured out months ago," says Marler.

Though the salmonella outbreak began in May, the first egg recall didn't occur until mid-August. Such delays are common, says Marler. "If you look back historically at every major food-borne illness outbreak, by the time the CDC or state or local health departments are announcing an outbreak that's nationwide in scope, the outbreak is usually over," he says.

It's definitely hard to look past the current issues that matter in this outbreak--thousands of people ill, millions of eggs recalled, and blatant disregard for health and safety by the company involved.  See Decosters in Iowa: a checkered history, which appeared today in the Des Moines Register.  But maybe it'll all give us some momentum before we go into retrospective mode again, and things become less important. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In light of this weekends recall by Cargill Meat Solutions of approximately 8,500 pounds of ground beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O26, and the sickening of three people, it is time for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) to deem another six “enterohemorrhagic (EHEC) Shiga toxin-producing serotypes of Escherichia coli (E. coli) strains - O26, O45, O111, O121, O145, and O103 – “adulterants.”

Non-E. coli O157:H7 EHEC as “Adulterants.”

According to the CDC, E. coli O157:H7 causes 73,000 illnesses and 50 deaths every year in the United States. Another six E. coli strains - O26, O45, O111, O121, O145, and O103 - are considered less pervasive, sickening “only” an estimated 37,000 people a year and killing nearly 30. E. coli O157:H7 is considered an adulterant in beef by the USDA (particularly ground beef), the other six strains are not.

Under 21 U.S.C. § 601 … (m), the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), the term “adulterated:”

shall apply to any carcass, part thereof, meat or meat food product under one or more of the following circumstances: (1) if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance, such article shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in or on such article does not ordinarily render it injurious to health; ...

It is hard to read the above and not think that the word “adulterated” does not apply to all E. coli. Presently, industry does not test for it because the USDA and FSIS does not require it – because they are not considered “adulterants.” In addition, only five percent of labs in the U.S. routinely test for these other E. coli leaving a gap in our food safety network and the true level of illness unknown.

Non-E. coli O157:H7 EHEC have been found in ground beef.

In 2008 Marler Clark hired a private lab to conduct a large-scale, nationwide study of ground beef, a key vector in E. coli O157:H7 cases. During the past year and a half, that lab has tested 5,000 samples from a variety of manufacturers. IEH Laboratories found that about 1 percent of the samples were tainted by E. coli O26, O45, O111, O121, O145, and O103. The results and the testing methodology have been shared with USDA and FSIS and the beef industry.

A history of E. coli O157:H7 as an “Adulterant” and why other EHEC’s should be.

It seems that any serious discussion of E. coli O157:H7 always has to start with one event: the 1993 outbreak associated with the Jack in the Box restaurant chain. This, of course, is with good reason. That outbreak left over 650 persons ill (many with life-long complications) and 4 children dead. The “9/11 for the food industry,” precipitated a whirlwind of events including media coverage, consumer outrage, lawsuits, and stricter federal regulations regarding meat safety. Though the swell of emotion that spiraled out of the Jack in the Box disaster dulls somewhat with each passing year, the federal regulations that sprung up in its wake continue to generate more questions.

To understand the significance of these regulations, a little background information is useful. The FSIS stated mission renders it “responsible for ensuring that the nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry, and egg products is safe, wholesome, and correctly labeled and packaged.” FSIS operates as part of the USDA. To promote its mission, FSIS has the power under the FMIA to, among other things, seek the recall of products that have been deemed “adulterated.” FSIS drastically shifted how it interpreted and enforced the FMIA in 1994 when, following the Jack in the Box outbreak, the agency declared E. coli O157:H7 to be an “adulterant.” This marked a dramatic change from its previous stance that pathogens in raw meat were not “adulterants.”

The declaration of E. coli O157:H7 as an “adulterant” was met with strong opposition from the meat industry. In a lawsuit filed soon after the 1994 declaration, the industry accused the FSIS of not following proper rulemaking procedures and of acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner beyond its legal authority. The United States District Court held, however, that the FSIS was allowed to interpret the FMIA and that the FSIS has the power to declare substances to be “adulterants” with the intended purpose of spurring the meat industry to create and implement preventative measures. 

During the early part of this decade, however, it became readily apparent that E. coli O157:H7 was not the only deadly pathogen in E. coli family - in fact, far from it. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recognized this fact when, in 2000, the agency made all EHEC’s nationally notifiable. The CDC subsequently referred to non-O157 EHEC’s as emerging pathogens that pose a significant health threat, with more strains reported every year.

Still, FSIS remained steadfast in its stance that O157:H7 is the only EHEC that should be deemed to be an adulterant. So what’s wrong with FSIS’s position regarding E. coli O157:H7? The simple answer is this: the people of this nation do not deserve another Jack in the Box-sized catastrophe as a pre-requisite for currently needed agency action.

The scientific and medical communities have recognized the dangers of all EHEC’s, not just O157:H7. Nearly three years ago, on October 17, 2007, the CDC, FDA and FSIS even went so far as to hold a public meeting to consider the public health significance of non-O157 EHEC’s. In the Notice of the meeting, FSIS referred to the “growing awareness that EHEC’s other than E. coli O157:H7 cause sporadic and outbreak-associated illnesses.” Nevertheless, following the meeting, FSIS failed to re-interpret its policies.

It is time for the USDA and FSIS to deem another six EHEC strains - O26, O45, O111, O121, O145, and O103 – “adulterants.”

This brings us to today. We’re nearing the end of 2010, closing in on eighteen years since the Jack in the Box outbreak. Millions of Americans have suffered foodborne illnesses, injuries, and deaths in that time, thousands of them likely due to EHEC’s other than E. coli O157:H7.

It was on behalf of those persons that the law firm of Marler Clark has authored a petition to FSIS requesting the agency to issue an interpretive rule declaring all EHEC’s to be adulterants within the meaning of the FMIA. The petition details the scientific and legal bases for the requested action, but perhaps more importantly it details the suffering that food contaminated with non-O157:H7 E. coli inflicted upon three individuals: June Dunning, Megan Richards, and Shiloh Johnson.  Ms. Dunning, whose infection was caused by E. coli O146:H21, unfortunately succumbed to her illness, passing in 2006. Ms. Richards and Ms. Johnson endured lengthy hospitalizations, kidney failure, and will both endure a lifetime of medical complications as a result of their E. coli O121:H19 and E. coli O111 infections (respectively).

It would be naïve to assume that a change to FSIS policy will immediately rid the world of all foodborne E. coli infections. It has been unequivocally proven, however, that all EHEC’s are potentially lethal pathogens that we must fight tooth and nail to keep out of this nation’s food supply. If we trust science, and do our part to push government agencies to enact regulations to require better monitoring, we can no doubt begin to prevent further harm. In the end, after all, the requisite wading through the mess of bureaucracy required to change federal regulation is all worth it, so long as the outcome prevents at least one more case like that of June Dunning, Megan Richards, or Shiloh Johnson.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BJ's grocery establishments in 8 states appear to be the only retailers to have received the Cargill ground beef products that have sickened 3 people in New York and Maine since early August.  The 8 states where BJ's stores are known to have received recalled product are New York, Maine, Connecticut, Virginia, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachussetts, and Maryland.  The stores that received the recalled product are as follows:

New York:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 1440 Central Ave., Albany
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 5183 Transit Rd., Clarence
• BJ's Wholesale Club, Two Chevy Dr., East Syracuse
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 131-07 40th Rd., Ste. A100, Flushing
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 300 Bellwood Dr., Greece
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 232 Larkin Dr., Monroe
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 756 State Highway 28, Oneonta
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 3303 Crompond Rd., Yorktown Heights

Maine:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 110 Mt. Auburn Ave., Auburn
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 513 Warren Avenue, Portland

Connecticut:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 1046 Tolland Turnpike, Manchester

Virginia:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 2301 Taylor Rd., Chesapeake

New Jersey:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 941 Route 37 W, Tom River

New Hampshire:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 400 Quality Dr., Hooksett
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 8 Sexton Ave., Nashua
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 262 Plainfield Rd., West Lebanon

Massachussetts:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 287 Washington Street, Attleboro
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 777 Washington St., Auburn
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 115 Erdman Way, Leominster
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 105 Shops At 5 Way, Plymouth
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 5 Ward St, Revere
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 85 Cedar St, Stoneham
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 2085 Bay St., Taunton
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 66 Seyon St, Waltham
• BJ's Wholesale Club, 622 Washington St, Weymouth

Maryland:

• BJ's Wholesale Club, 4201 Wholesale Club Drive, Baltimore

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

At least 3 people have been sickened recently in Maine and New York after consuming ground beef manufactured by Cargill (but sold under various brand names) that was contaminated by E. coli O126, a rare strain of shiga-toxin producing Escherichia coli.  There is no indication yet whether any of the victims developed hemolytic uremic syndrome, or HUS.

Unfortunately, both states' residents have experienced E. coli illness in the wake of other major outbreaks recently.  In late October of 2009, Fairbank Farms, a New York state ground beef company, recalled over half a million pounds of beef after being linked to an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak that sickened at least 26 people in 8 states, including both New York and Maine.  Five people developed HUS.

And in April and May 2010, shredded romaine lettuce distributed by Freshway Foods sickened at least 33 people in New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio with E. coli O145 (yet another non-O157 outbreak).  Among the 30 patients with available information, 12 (40%) were hospitalized. Three people developed HUS. 

In the current E. coli outbreak linked to Cargill ground beef products, the recalled products bear  establishment number "EST. 9400" inside the USDA mark of inspection. These products were produced on June 11, 2010, and were shipped to distribution centers in Connecticut and Maryland for further distribution. It is important to note that the above listed products were repackaged into consumer-size packages and sold under different retail brand names.

FSIS and the establishment are concerned that consumers may also freeze the product before use and that some product may still be in consumers' freezers. FSIS strongly encourages consumers to check their freezers and immediately discard any product subject to this recall.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Cargill Meat Solutions Corp., a Wyalusing, Pa. establishment, is recalling approximately 8,500 pounds of ground beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O26, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

* 42-pound cases of "GROUND BEEF FINE 90/10," containing three (3) - approximately 14 pound chubs each. These products have a "use/freeze by" date of "07/01/10," and an identifying product code of "W69032."

The products subject to recall bears the establishment number "EST. 9400" inside the USDA mark of inspection. These products were produced on June 11, 2010, and were shipped to distribution centers in Connecticut and Maryland for further distribution. It is important to note that the above listed products were repackaged into consumer-size packages and sold under different retail brand names. 

FSIS and the establishment are concerned that consumers may also freeze the product before use and that some product may still be in consumers' freezers. FSIS strongly encourages consumers to check their freezers and immediately discard any product subject to this recall.

FSIS became aware of the problem on August 5, 2010 when the agency was notified by the Maine Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources of an E. coli O26 cluster of illnesses. In conjunction with the Maine Department of Health and Human Services, Maine Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources, the New York State Department of Health, and New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets, two (2) case-patients have been identified in Maine, as well as one (1) case-patient in New York with a rare, indistinguishable PFGE pattern as determined by PFGE subtyping in PulseNet. PulseNet is a national network of public health and food regulatory agency laboratories coordinated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Illness onset dates range from June 24, 2010, through July 16, 2010.

FSIS determined that there is an association between the ground beef products subject to recall and the cluster of illnesses in the states of Maine and New York. FSIS regulations and statute allow the agency to take action on a product under its jurisdiction in cases where the product is convincingly associated to illness by evidence collected though an epidemiological, traceback investigation, and/or laboratory analysis. FSIS is continuing to work with affected state public health partners and the company on the investigation.

E. coli O26 is a bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and in the most severe cases, kidney failure. The very young, seniors and persons with weak immune systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness. Individuals concerned about an illness should contact a health care provider.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Sheila Mclaughlin at the Cincinnati Enquirer today reported that as many as 264 restaurants in the greater Cincinnati, Louisville, and Indianapolis metro areas received recalled eggs from Wright County Egg company, which has been linked to a major Salmonella outbreak that has sickened thousands.  

Documents from the Indiana Department of Health indicate that 264 Asian restaurants in Greater Cincinnati, Louisville and Indianapolis received the Wright County eggs through DW Trading, and that many have already used them.

Hamilton County health inspectors were checking Friday on six Asian restaurants that apparently were not notified of the recall by DW Trading.

Spokeswoman Megan Hummel did not know how many total restaurants in Hamilton County may have received the eggs. She and others are cautioning Asian restaurant patrons not to panic.

“It’s different if you are in some type of other restaurant where they have a Caesar salad and sometimes it has raw eggs in it – or a chocolate mousse. You don’t get those at Asian restaurants. They are usually scrambled up and should be cooked hard,” Hummel said

Aside from Wright County Egg's clear failures, which lead to this public health nightmare, Ms. Mclaughlin raises another issue of pre-eminent concern in foodpoisoning outbreaks, particularly outbreaks and recalls the magnitude of this one:  the importance of all companies in the chain of distribution of recalled products doing all they can to notify retail centers that they have received contaminated food. 

As with many problems that we currently face in our food supply, this one is particularly potent in large part because of the nature of our production and distribution systems. This is also a discussion that is not only long overdue (see 2007 ConAgra pot pie outbreak), but has been raised multiple times before. Phyllis Entis, at efoodalert.com recently made several recommendations to address the problem:

1. Provide a retail distribution list for all recalls. The list should include food service outlets, restaurants, cafés, and institutional kitchens – not just retail stores.

2. Require retail stores to post a prominent recall notice on the store shelf or refrigerator/freezer where the recalled product is typically displayed. This is already done in some countries, including the United Kingdom.

3. Fine retailers who ignore recall notices and neglect to remove recalled products from sale. This has been done in Australia.

4. Post on FDA and USDA web sites in a timely fashion the reports for all inspections during which "significant violations" or "significant deviations" were noted (FDA does this selectively, based on its perception of the public's interest in the results of specific inspections).

5. Post on FDA and USDA web sites in a timely fashion all Warning Letters and other enforcement actions taken (FDA posts Warning Letters, although not always timely).

I would also add a report back requirement for retailers--i.e. that the retailer must report back to (agency/recalling company) within a certain number of days of receiving notice of a recall through dedicated channels, plus fines for each day that the retailer does not report back as required. Something for the FDA to consider when the Food Safety Modernization Act is finally passed.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link