Header graphic for print
Food Poison Journal Food Poisoning Outbreaks and Litigation: Surveillance and Analysis

Food Poisoning Resources

Subscribe to the Food Poisoning Resources Section RSS Feed

Is the Firefly Salmonella Outbreak 29 to 38 Times Larger than Reported?

Posted By Andy Weisbecker on May 7, 2013

Last week the Southern Nevada Health District identified Firefly as the source of an 86-person Salmonella outbreak in late April. [1]  In addition, three employees are also linked to the outbreak.  It is anticipated that the number of ill will rise as more people are counted from around the United States – and the world – who visited Las Vegas and dined at Firefly.

In 2009, over 40,000 cases of Salmonella (13.6 cases per 100,000 persons) were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by public health laboratories across the nation, representing a decrease of approximately 15% from the previous year, but a 4.2% increase since 1996. [2] Overall, the incidence of Salmonella in the United States has not significantly changed since 1996. [3]

Only a small proportion of all Salmonella infections are diagnosed and reported to health departments.  It is estimated that for every reported case, there are approximately 38.6 undiagnosed infections. [4]  More recently the CDC reported a revision of that estimate.  Now it is estimated that every year, approximately 42,000 cases of salmonellosis are reported in the United States. Because many milder cases are not diagnosed or reported, the actual number of infections may be twenty-nine or more times greater.  [5] The CDC estimates that 1.4 million cases, 15,000 hospitalizations, and 400 deaths are caused by Salmonella infections in the U.S. every year. [6, 7]

1.  Download Inspection Report and Interim Outbreak Report.

2.  CDC, “Salmonella Annual Summary Tables 2009,” 2009, available online at http://www.cdc.gov/ncezid/dfwed/PDFs/SalmonellaAnnualSummaryTables2009.pdf

3.  CDC, “Preliminary FoodNet Data on the Incidence of Infection with Pathogens Transmitted Commonly through Food—10 States, 2008,” MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY WEEKLY REPORT, Vol. 58, No. 14, pp. 333-37 (April 10, 2009), online at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5813a2.htm

4.  Voetsch, Andrew, et al., “FoodNet Estimate of the Burden of Illness Caused By Non-Typhoidal Salmonella Infections in the United States,” CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, Vol. 15, No. 38, Supplement 3, pp. S127-34 (April 15, 2004) available online at http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/38/Supplement_3/S127.long

5.  http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/

6.  Miller, S. and Pegues, D., “Salmonella Species, Including Salmonella Typhi,” in Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, Sixth Edition, Chap. 220, pp. 2636-650 (2005).

6.  Tauxe, R, “Emerging Foodborne Diseases: An Evolving Public Health Challenge.,” EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 425-34 (1997) at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640074/pdf/9366593.pdf

Protect Your Family From Germs Lurking in Your Kitchen

Posted By Patti Waller on April 13, 2013

In a germ study conducted by NSF International, 20 families swabbed 14 items in their kitchens. NSF’s microbiologists analyzed the results, looking for E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria, mold and yeast.  Download PDF.

The study revealed that the top five germ hot spots in the kitchen were the refrigerator vegetable and meat compartments, blender gaskets, can openers and rubber spatulas. Follow these tips to keep those items, as well as other kitchen items included in the study, clean and sanitized.

  1. Refrigerator vegetable compartment

Remove the compartment/drawer from the refrigerator if possible. Use a clean sponge or soft cloth and wash the bin with a mild detergent mixed with warm water. Rinse with tap water and wipe dry with a clean towel. To help control odors, use warm water mixed with a baking soda solution (about 1-2 tablespoons of baking soda to 1 quart of water). Rinse and wipe dry. Clean monthly.

Always store produce separately: Keep washed and packaged produce separate from raw unwashed produce. Separate all produce from other foods such as raw meat, poultry or seafood. In the refrigerator, produce should always be stored on a separate shelf above all meat, poultry and seafood to avoid raw juices dripping onto the produce. Also keep them separate in your grocery cart, during food preparation and when using kitchen tools and appliances.

  1. Refrigerator meat compartment

Remove the compartment/drawer from the refrigerator if possible. Use a clean sponge or soft cloth and wash the bin with a mild detergent mixed with warm water. Rinse with tap water and wipe dry with a clean towel. To help control odors, use warm water mixed with a baking soda solution (about 1-2 tablespoons of baking soda to 1 quart of water). Rinse and wipe dry. Clean monthly and whenever you see any spilled meat juices. In the refrigerator, store meat and seafood on a separate shelf below produce to avoid raw juices dripping onto the produce.

  1. Blender gasket

Unplug the blender and remove the blender jar from the base. Completely disassemble the jar, removing the blade and gasket at the bottom. If dishwasher safe, place all pieces in the dishwasher after each use. If hand washing, wash the gasket, blade assembly, jar and lid thoroughly in hot soapy water, rinse and dry before re-assembling. Perform this cleaning procedure after each use.

  1. Can opener

If dishwasher safe, place the can opener in the dishwasher after each use. If hand washing, wash the can opener in hot soapy water, rinsing thoroughly with clean tap water before air drying. If hand washing, pay special attention to the area around the cutting blades to be sure all food residue is removed.

  1. Rubber spatula

For two-piece spatulas, separate the handle from the spatula portion and, if dishwasher safe, place both sections in the dishwasher after each use. If hand washing, wash in hot soapy water, rinsing thoroughly with clean water. For one-piece spatulas, if dishwasher safe, place in the dishwasher after each use. Otherwise, hand wash thoroughly in hot soapy water, paying special attention to the area where the handle joins the spatula. Rinse thoroughly and dry.

  1. Refrigerator water dispenser

Check your refrigerator manual for cleaning instructions. Many companies recommend using a solution of vinegar and water to clean the dispenser and ice maker. First turn off the water supply to the refrigerator and then loosen the screw connecting the water supply line to the refrigerator. Once disconnected, use a small funnel to pour 3-4 cups of distilled white vinegar into the tube. Wait five to ten minutes and then reconnect the water line. Turn the dispenser on to allow the vinegar solution to flow through the dispenser’s system and spill out through the waterspout. To clean the waterspout, use a bottle or baby bottle nipple brush dipped in distilled white vinegar. Brush the inner side of the spout, then open the waterspout and allow it to run to clear of any dirt and excess vinegar solution. Close the lever when there are no traces of vinegar. Clean the waterspout weekly and the refrigerator water dispenser system once or twice a year.

  1. Refrigerator ice dispenser

Turn the icemaker off, empty the ice from the ice bin and wash the bin with mild dish soap and warm water using a sponge or soft cloth. Wipe dry with a clean towel. If also cleaning the refrigerator’s water dispensing system with vinegar, be sure to with throw away the first batch of ice, since it still might taste sour from the vinegar solution. Clean monthly.

  1. Knife block

First remove any knives stored in the block. Turn the knife block upside down and shake lightly or use a can of compressed air to remove crumbs and other loose debris. Hand wash the knife block in hot soapy water, using a small brush (like a baby bottle nipple brush) to scrub out the knife slots. Rinse thoroughly with clean water. To sanitize, prepare a mixture of one gallon lukewarm tap water with 1 tablespoon of 5.25-percent household bleach. Either immerse the complete block in the water/bleach mixture or fill the knife slots. Allow the bleach/water mixture to sit in contact with the slots for one minute. Rinse the block and knife slots thoroughly with clean tap water and place the block upside down on a clean surface to dry. To avoid mold and bacterial buildup, wash knives thoroughly after each use and let them dry completely before placing them in the knife block. Wash and sanitize the knife block monthly if used frequently.

  1. Food storage container with rubber seal

If dishwasher safe, place both the container and the lid in the dishwasher and wash after each use. If hand washing, wash both the container and lid in hot soapy water, paying special attention to the area around the seal as well as any grooves where the cover attaches to the container. Rinse thoroughly and allow to air dry.

In 2010 I received the NSF Food Safety Leadership Award: Innovation in Education.

CDC: Foodborne Pathogens Still Sickening Citizens

Posted By Bill Marler on July 29, 2012

Campylobacter, Listeria, Salmonella, Vibrio and Cryptosporidium are up; Shigella, E. coli O157:H7 and Yersinia are down in new CDC numbers

Graphs_going_up_and_down.jpgThe Washington Post’s Dina ElBoghdady must not have had a busy social calendar this Summer weekend if she was stalking the pages of FoodNet for the latest in foodborne illness trends. Her story, “Food-borne illnesses not diminishing” which ran this morning on the Post’s website, I caught while sneaking a peak on my forbidden iPhone on a family camping trip. I will get to the trends in a second, but this line in the story also struck me:

the CDC released the data without reaching out to consumer groups and other key stakeholders who typically are notified in advance. Instead, the charts and graphs were quietly posted online Friday.

Can someone at the CDC explain the rationale for that?

On the numbers front, there are some things that you would think that the CDC would not want to release in the middle of the night:

Screen Shot 2012-07-29 at 3.00.00 PM.png

Although Campylobacter, Listeria, Salmonella, Vibrio and Cryptosporidium are up, Shigella, E. coli O157:H7 and Yersinia are down that does not seem to justify a late Friday night posting on the CDC’s website.  It will be interesting to watch the non-O157 E. coli trends over the next years.  Here are the numbers for this year:

Screen Shot 2012-07-29 at 3.02.28 PM.png

Also, hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) was up in 2011 as compared to some earlier years.  Since this outcome can be caused by both E. coli O157:H7 and non E. coli O157 that might well be the reason.  Time will tell.

Screen Shot 2012-07-31 at 4.22.47 AM.png

Overall, however, we (public health and food producers) are doing better that when I started doing foodborne illnesses cases in the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak – that is a good thing.  Now we just need to implement the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) and drive the numbers done farther.  I really think it is time I spent more time camping.

Top 10 lawyers working to improve the food system

Posted By Bill Marler on July 6, 2012

Michele Simon of Appetite for Profit fame penned the below on her blog:

I admit this post is somewhat self-serving. But I am getting weary of so many lists (like this one) celebrating heroes of the food movement that leave out an entire category of professionals that deserve a little respect. They may not be as famous as Alice Waters but they are working just as hard, maybe even harder. So here, in no particular order, are ten lawyers doing critical work to improve how we eat.

1) Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety and veteran warrior fighting Monsanto and GMOs.

2) Steve Gardner, director of litigation for Center for Science in the Public Interest, one of the few lawyers willing to sue the likes of McDonald’s over marketing to children.

3) Mark Gottlieb, executive director of the Public Health Advocacy Institute, which was working on legal solutions to the obesity epidemic before it became popular. (h/t also to senior staff attorney Cara Wilking)

4) Doug Blanke, founder and executive director of the Public Health Law Center, which provides legal analysis and technical assistance on a variety of issues, including healthy eating.

5) Samantha Graff, research director at ChangeLab Solutions (formerly Public Health Law and Policy), which provides legal analysis and technical assistance on childhood obesity.

6) Jonathan Lovvern, senior vice president for Animal Protection Litigation & Investigations at the Humane Society of the United States, which has long fought to improve the lives of farm animals.

7) Bill Marler, pioneer in food safety litigation through his law firm, Marler Clark, a tireless advocate for outbreak victims, and publisher of the indispensable Food Safety News.

8) Ellen Fried, adjunct professor of food policy at New York University’s Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health and assistant attorney general for New York State.

9) Jennifer Pomeranz, director of legal initiatives for the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, which does important research and advocacy.

10) Angela Campbell, professor of law at Georgetown University and long-time advocate fighting to stop predatory marketing to children.

Of course this list is not exhaustive and my apologies to those I’ve left out. The good news is the number of lawyers fighting against the food industry is growing. We sure need them, especially as the battles with Big Food get uglier, so let’s remember to acknowledge them for their hard work. Thank you.

Michele should have made the list 11 – and added herself.

Ooops – Hand Sanitizer Recalled Due to Bacteria

Posted By Bill Marler on June 29, 2012

Kleenex-brand Luxury Foam Hand Sanitizer is under recall because of microbial contamination.

Health Canada said Thursday that product tests by manufacturer Kimberly-Clark Professional Corporation detected bacteria that may pose health risks to people with weakened immune systems, especially those with cystic fibrosis.

The recalled Kleenex-brand Luxury Foam Hand Sanitizer is sold in 1 litre and 1.2 litre containers.The recalled Kleenex-brand Luxury Foam Hand Sanitizer is sold in 1 litre and 1.2 litre containers. (Courtesy Kimberly-Clark Professional Corporation )

The product is sold in 1 litre and 1.2 litre containers and is used in large dispensers in public areas and workplaces.

The bacteria in the tested samples were Burkholderia cepacia, which pose little risk to healthy people but can cause serious problems such as pneumonia and blood infections in people with weakened immune systems.

The recall affects about 430 containers that were distributed to retail stores and wholesalers across Canada.

Health Canada said companies or individuals who’ve bought the affected product should remove it from use.

Consumers with compromised immune systems should not use the affected Kleenex sanitizer or any sanitizing product that can’t be identified from its dispenser, the regulator advised.

The affected products are:

Kleenex Luxury Foam Hand Sanitizer (Benzalkonium Chloride,0.1%), 1,000 ml manual cassette (used in manual dispensers) with Drug Identification Number: 02366045; lot number SA1229ANB.

Kleenex Luxury Foam Hand Sanitizer (Benzalkonium Chloride, 0.1%), 1,200 ml E-Cassette (used in electronic dispensers) with Drug Identification Number: 02366045; lot number SA1229ANA.

UC Davis Fresh Produce Symposium to spotlight new food safety discoveries

Posted By Bill Marler on June 26, 2012

The latest research findings related to the safety of fresh fruits and vegetables will be highlighted Wednesday, as more than 300 scientists, industry representatives and government officials gather for the annual Produce Research Symposium at UC Davis.

The daylong conference is coordinated by the Center for Produce Safety at UC Davis, a university-industry-government collaborative. Since its creation in 2007 in response to E. coli outbreaks in spinach, the center has played a unique role in providing science-based solutions to help safeguard the nation’s fresh produce supply against foodborne diseases.

This year’s symposium will include four sessions featuring presentations on new research findings in the areas of buffer zones between crops and animals; irrigation water quality; best practices for cultivation, harvest and farm management; and wash water and process control: Presentations will include:

“Reducing E. coli in irrigation water” – The project focuses on helping the produce industry identify risk-management practices and other remediation measures that reduce levels of generic E. coli in irrigation water supplies.

“Assessing postharvest Salmonella risks in pistachios” – The aim of this research was to identify points in postharvest handling of pistachios that may impact microbial safety. Those data were used to develop a risk-assessment model that can be used to enhance existing food safety risk-reduction strategies.

“Developing buffer zones between crops and sheep grazing” – Crop residues left in fields and orchards are an important source of food for livestock, however both domestic and wild animals represent a potential source of microbes that can cause foodborne diseases. This study focuses on how far – in time and geographic distance – grazing areas and crop plantings should be separated to prevent contamination from animal feces, soil, aerosols, wind, water or flies.

“Amphibians and reptiles as reservoirs of foodborne diseases” – Findings from this study will help the leafy greens produce industry determine if wild frogs, toads, lizards and snakes are potential carriers of E. coli 0157:H7 and Salmonella in California’s Central Coast region and a farming region of southeastern Georgia. The results will be used to identify co-management strategies that promote produce food safety and environmental stewardship.

“Risk assessment for Salmonella in melons and related crops” – This study aims to determine how much Salmonella must be present in irrigation water to pose a risk of fruit contamination. This information is critical for determining food-safety standards for growing cantaloupe, honeydew, watermelon, and other melons, as well as cucumbers and squash.

The symposium will conclude with a panel discussion, moderated by Bryan Silberman of the Produce Marketing Association. Panel members will include Mike Taylor of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Mary Ellen Burris of Wegmans, Bill Schuler of Castellini Group of Companies and Stephen Patricio of Westside Produce.

In all, the symposium speakers and discussion-panel members represent approximately 24 universities, government agencies, private firms and industry organizations.

Food Safety – June 14, 2 PM EDT Webinar – Producing Food is Risky Business: The Legal Consequences of Poor Food Safety

Posted By Bill Marler on June 12, 2012

All presenter fees donated to University of California at Davis Western Center for Food Safety

Register Now – http://www.foodseminarsinternational.com/Other-Discount-Marler.html

Overview

Bill Marler has been litigating foodborne illness cases for nearly two decades. The key to his success has been to find a quick, reliable method of distinguishing between legitimate food poisoning claims and suspect ones. In his experience, the food industry—from farmer to retailer to restaurant—tends to overemphasize the specious claim and undervalue the legitimate claim. It is an unfortunate situation that increases the likelihood that the industry will miss important opportunities to improve food safety.

By failing to improve food safety, the industry runs the risk of actually poisoning consumers and attracting expensive litigation that often results in public relations nightmares. Marler’s goal has been to bring forth only legitimate claims that have caused substantial personal damages and to force the food industry to think about the real costs of failing to ensure food safety.

Using case studies, this webinar will provide an overview of the various methods of proving a foodborne illness claim. The webinar will go over the obstacles companies face in prioritizing food safety. It will describe the legal basis of Strict Liability as well as the steps used to determine if a foodborne illness case fits into that legal definition. The important roles of epidemiology and Public Health and corporate and restaurant food safety will be covered. The webinar will also address what a food producer should do in an outbreak situation.

Who will benefit from this webinar

• All professionals in the food supply chain

• Educators and students concerned about food safety

• Educators and students interested in the law

• Government regulators

• Plantiff attorneys and defense attorneys

Presenter–William Marler, Managing Partner Marler Clark, The Food Safety Law Firm

William Marler began litigating food borne illness cases in 1993 by representing the seriously injured survivors of the landmark Jack in the Box E. coli O157:H7 outbreak. Since then, he has represented victims of every large foodborne illness outbreak in the United States and has secured over 600 million dollars for his clients in cases against food companies whose contaminated products have caused serious injury and death.

Bill Marler is a Technical Advisor to the National Environmental Health Association and, in 2010, was awarded the NSF Food Safety Leadership Award for Education. He has been repeatedly voted into Best Lawyers in America, has received the Public Justice Award from the Washington State Trial Lawyers Association and has been in the Bar Register of Preeminent Attorneys annually since 2002.

Marler is the publisher of the highly regarded online newspaper, Food Safety News. Additionally he maintains over 25 blogs and websites dedicated to the food safety and foodborne illness education, including his award-winning Marler Blog, which is read by over 1,000,000 people around the world each year.

Today, his firm, Marler Clark, The Food Safety Law Firm, is recognized as the nation’s leading law firm representing victims of foodborne illness, and Mr. Marler is considered a major force in food safety policy in the United States. His advocacy for better food regulation has led to invitations to address local, national, and international gatherings on food safety including testimony to the United States Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce.

So, what’s in your Chicken, Turkey, Beef or Pork? Salmonella, Campylobacter, and/or E. coli?

Posted By Bill Marler on March 1, 2012

The 2010 NARMS (National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System) Report (FULL REPORT PDF) fell into my inbox today. According to the Report, for 2010, 5,280 retail meat samples were collected from 10 CDC FoodNet sites, including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Tennessee and the Pennsylvania Department of Health. Each site collected samples from a randomized list of area grocery stores.

For 2010, some 35 Salmonella Serotypes were distributed among 400 Salmonella positive samples. Of the 400 Salmonella positive samples, 171 (42%) were in found in Chicken Breasts, 202 (50.5%) were found in Ground Turkey, 7 (1.8%) were found in Ground Beef and 20 (5%) were found in Pork Chops. Of note, 43.3% of Chicken Breasts and 33.7% of Ground Turkey were resistant to more than 3 antibiotics.

Screen Shot 201 at 12.51.07 PM.pngFor 2010, 3 types of Campylobacter were distributed among the 518 Campylobacter positive samples. Of the 518 positive samples, 505 (97.5%) were found in Chicken Breasts and 13 (2.5%) were found in Ground Turkey. Because of the low incidence of Campylobacter in Ground Beef and Pork Chops, no tests were performed.

Screen Sho2.51.33 PM.pngNARMS also tested for Escherichia coli (could include Shiga-toxin producing strains but not necessarily) by meat type.  Of the 460 positives, Chicken Breasts – 460 (77.6%), Ground Turkey – 369 (80.2%), Ground Beef – 269 (58.5%) and Pork Chops – 183 (39.8%).

Screen Shot 2012-03-01 at 3.28.11 PM.pngSo, what’s for dinner?

Last year we decided to fund yet another bacterial test on retail meat – this time chicken. All the chicken in the 100 chicken IEH Labs survey, which included whole fryers and packages of chicken parts, was collected and tested from March 1 to April 4 from Seattle area grocery stores. The chicken was purchased from Fred Meyer, Safeway, QFC, Whole Foods, Costco, Sam’s Club, Albertsons, Thriftway, PCC Natural Markets and Ken’s Market stores.

IEH Labs found S. aurea, or staph, in 42 percent of the samples overall and Campylobacter in 65 percent. The supermarket chicken was contaminated with other pathogens as well: 19 percent of the samples tested positive for Salmonella, one tested positive for Listeria, and 10 percent showed the presence of the methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). In an unusual finding, one of the chicken samples tested positive for E. coli 026, Shiga-toxin producing E. coli (STEC) bacteria more likely to be a contaminant of beef than poultry. Organic Chicken proved to be slightly less contaminated than nonorganic with 7 of the 13 (54%) testing positive for harmful bacteria.

Some comparisons to other studies:

Campylobacter – Our study: 65%. Miller WG, Mandrell RE. 2005. Prevalence of Campylobacter in the food and water supply: incidence, outbreaks, isolation and detection, p. 101-163. In J. Ketley and ME Konkel (ed), Campylobacter: Molecular and Cellular Biology. Horizon Bioscience, Norfolk, United Kingdom. 33-53% average; (3-98% range)

Staphylococcus aureus (“Staph” or S. aureus) and MRSA (Methicillan resistant Staph Aureus) – Our finding of 42% contamination with Staph is similar to recent findings (41% in chicken) by Price et. al published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. Price and colleagues found that (26% of the chicken samples with Staph) were resistant to at least 3 classes of antibiotics. In our study, 10 (24%) of the samples with S. aureus were Methicillan resistant. The importance of findings of S. aureus and MRSA in raw poultry needs to be evaluated. Extracellular toxin production by large cell numbers of S. aureus causes foodborne illness; ingestion of the bacteria themselves does not. MRSA typically causes nosocomial infection, not foodborne illness. Since there is no recognized increase in staphylococcal enterotoxin production by MRSA, while this pathogen is of great clinical significance its antibiotic resistance has no influence on staphylococcal food poisoning. While resistance may enable the pathogen to persist in the food processing environment, most cases of foodbonre illness related to S. aureus are related to post-processing contamination by human contact, making the industrial relevance of MRSA among S. aureus strains questionable.

Salmonella – Our study 19%. In 1996 the USDA FSIS published the “Final Rule on Pathogen Reduction and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Systems in an effort to reduce the prevalence of salmonella in meat. This rule requires that meat and poultry industries have a HACCP plan. Prior to passage of the Final Rule, the contamination rate in broiler chickens was 24%. After the Final Rule, the rate dropped to 11%. The rate has been increasing though and in 2005 the rate was 16%. (REF: D’oust JY, Maurer J. 2007. Salmonella species. p.187-236. In MP Doyle and LR Beuchat (ed), Food Microbiology Fundamentals and Frontiers, 3rd ed., ASM Press, Washington, DC.)

See our Full Survey in PDF and as Spreadsheet in PDF.

Marler Blog in Top 10 of ABA Blawgs

Posted By Bill Marler on January 9, 2012

BLAWG_100_HonoreeBadgeRed.jpgUsually it is best to be number 1, but considering that Marler Blog was 9th out of 100 in this years ABA Top Blawgs, that is pretty damn good.

As the ABA said, “You may never look at a produce aisle the same way again once you’ve read Seattle lawyer Bill Marler’s exhaustive coverage of food safety violations. Marler tracks food poisoning cases with a single-minded fervor, offering a valuable resource to trial attorneys, food producers and anyone sitting down to dinner.”

Marler Blog has also made it into the Top Agricultural Blogs, Lexis Nexis Top 25 Law Blogs and Best Legal Blogs.

As we used to say to our kids at dinner – “happy fooding.”

2011 National Integrated Food Safety Initiative Awards Granted by USDA

Posted By Bill Marler on December 10, 2011

Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, Ala., $100,000. Researchers will translate nucleic acid and biosensensor-based pathogen detection methods developed in the laboratory to local producer communities and train minority students in applied food safety educatioin and extension.

University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz., $542,969. Researchers are collecting biofilms from the irrigation infrastructure throughout Yuma, Arizona, to test for the presence and levels of shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli and Salmonella. Current intervention methods will be evaluated for their validity and a microbial risk assessment will be conducted.

Fort Valley State University, Fort Valley, Ga., $100,000. This project aims to improve processing operation methods in small and very small meat plants to enhance meat product safety.

University of Georgia, Athens, Ga., $535,725. This project will update and maintain the current National Center for Home Food Processing and Preservation website and conduct research on the safe and appropriate use of the home-style atmospheric steam canner for small batch canning.

University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., $424,878. Through this partnership, university extension faculty and staff, county educators, local farm-to-preschool programs, early child care educators and local agricultural organizations in Massachusetts and New Hampshire will collaborate to identify and improve fresh produce safety knowledge and practices of staff, educators, and parent volunteers.

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich., $542,824. A team from Washington State University and Michigan State University will generate, validate and communicate process validation tools for low-moisture foods using innovative technologies such as fluid-based heating, radio frequency energy and low-energy X-ray.

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich., $543,000. This project conducted at Michigan State University, with Ohio State University, the University of Maryland and the Joint Institute for Food Safety and Nutrition, will develop standardized food safety education and training materials for the global food system.

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich., $1,809,934. This research and extension project will enhance the microbial safety and quality of ready-to-eat products by conducting research and training on the processing, packaging and retail distribution segment of the produce chain.

North Carolina State University, Raleigh., N.C., $541,621. This project conducted in collaboration with Alabama State University will identify and characterize the routes and mechanisms of transmission of campylobacter to turkeys.

Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, $1,864,665. Researchers and extension specialists will conduct research to better understand the impact of wildlife on the transmission of antimicrobial resistant organisms to food producing animals.

Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Okla., $543,000. Researchers, extension faculty and industry are working together at Oklahoma State University and the University of Arkansas to develop and implement an Internet-based, stakeholder driven traceability and marketing system for agriculture commodities utilizing RFID technology and GS1 item-level labeling.

Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pa., $542,607. This collaborative project with Pennsylvania State University and Iowa State University will develop an updated and optimized Egg Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) that will significantly reduces Salmonella Enteritidis contamination of shell eggs.

Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., $542,999. Researchers and extension faculty at Clemson University will determine if and when alcohol-based hand rubs can be used to replace hand-washing in ten elementary schools in South Carolina as a way to slow the transmission of Human Norovirus.

Tennessee State University, Nashville, Tenn., $100,000. This project will determine the occurrence of antibiotic resistant Clostridium difficile in poultry and pork products and the farm environment and develop and distribute educational materials on improving management practices to limited resource poultry and pig producers.

University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn., $542,977. This project will determine if modifications to educational interventions greatly impacts the overall effectiveness of food safety training or participant learning outcomes.

Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, $540,326. Researchers will study Salmonella harborage in the lymph nodes of cattle in order to develop, test and disseminate practical solutions for control of Salmonella in beef cattle.

University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisc., $541,313. Research and extension specialists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and North Carolina State University will collaborate with academic colleagues, state and federal regulators, food processors and other stakeholders to fill the knowledge gap which exists in understanding the survival of shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in acidified canned foods.