Author: Phyllis Entis

Guest Blog: Listeria monocytogenes and Food Processing Equipment, 1/3

The following Guest Blog first appeared as a three-part series in French on Le Blog d’Albert Amgar, a regular feature on ProcessAlimentaire.com, and is reproduced here in English (translation by Phyllis Entis) with the kind permission and cooperation of its author, Albert Amgar.

Five Canadian provinces experienced an outbreak of listeriosis in July and August 2008 that caused the deaths of 22 people. The outbreak was traced to refrigerated, ready-to-eat meat products manufactured by Maple Leaf Foods. An independent investigation report (pdf format) into the background and handling of the outbreak was commissioned in January 2009 and released on July 20 2009. The following is a brief summary of the findings.


“Ironically, Listeria is sometimes described as a bug of clean plants because some believe that intense sanitizing kills off the bacteria’s natural predators. This belief, however, has not been demonstrated to be true and contributes to ineffective Listeria control procedures.” Dr. Bruce Tompkin, Member of the Listeriosis Investigation Expert Advisory Group 

What was the origin of the outbreak? According to Michael McCain, President and CEO of Maple Leaf Foods Inc., “It was a failure to analyze test data that we weren’t even obligated to collect – a failure on our part to analyze that data and look for root-cause analysis, investigate and follow-up on individual trends, to look for patterns so that we could find the bacteria that we couldn’t see inside these facilities, and end up with a different result. It was more a failure to analyze those findings for a root cause, and a failure of those protocols, than it was a failure of inspection, per se.” This admission is made more striking, because Maple Leaf is one of the few companies since the close of the 1990s to have developed a HACCP plan. Nevertheless, as we know, a HACCP plan does not confer immunity against contamination.

One of the concerns for those interested in process sanitation for refrigerated, ready-to-eat (sometimes also referred to as high-risk) products is to understand how to improve their own systems for managing food safety. According to Bruce Tompkin (2004, Asept, Laval), “A higher prevalence of Listeria on surfaces in contact with the product indicates a higher potential for the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the product.” This observation goes to the heart of the problem of equipment sanitation!

The independent investigator wrote: “I am calling for swift and significant action in key areas that are critical to food safety – the culture of food processing companies, the design of food processing equipment, the rules and requirements for food safety set out by the federal government as well as governments’ capacity to manage national foodborne emergencies.”

Chap. 5, rec. 14: “Increased coordination and improved communication about food processing equipment is needed among the manufacturer, the food processor and the CFIA regarding design specifications and the validation of sanitation procedures.”

All meat processors should ensure that new and existing equipment is and remains appropriate for the intended use. Sanitation methods should be validated and implemented by meat processors in consultation with the equipment manufacturer, with a particular focus on the intended use and the products being processed on each piece of equipment.

This requirement already is embedded in European regulations; but, to the best of my knowledge, it is seldom, if ever, applied. Thus, Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC (recast), mandates the following: “The instructions for foodstuffs machinery and machinery for use with cosmetics or pharmaceutical products must indicate recommended products and methods for cleaning, disinfecting and rinsing, not only for easily accessible areas but also for areas to which access is impossible or inadvisable.”

Watch for Listeria monocytogenes and Food Processing Equipment, 2/3

About Albert Amgar: Albert Amgar lives in Changé near Laval in Mayenne, France. He worked as young scientist at the Parasitology and Tropical Medicine Service of the Pitié Salpétrière Hospital and later spent 12 years in the pharmaceutical industry. In 1989, he became director of a new association of agro-food industrialists named ASEPT in Laval (France). He was the general manager of ASEPT until his recent retirement.

Chicken Jerky Dog Treats: The Latest Word From FDA

December 30, 2008

As we wrote earlier this month, there appears to be a connection between kidney failure in dogs and consumption of chicken jerky dog treats made in China. The problem has been reported in Australia, where one brand of treats already has been recalled by The Kramar Pet Company as a precaution. The Kramar treats had been manufactured in China.
The US investigation into this mysterious kidney ailment has been in progress for more than a year. FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine issued a warning to consumers in 2007, and repeated the advisory earlier this month – shortly after the Australian recall was announced.
FDA posted a Consumer Update on its website on December 24th, entitled Caution to Dog Owners About Chicken Jerky Products. This update summarized the information contained in the agency’s earlier 2007 and 2008 warnings, but provided no new information. Our curiosity was piqued, and we e-mailed the Center for Veterinary Medicine to ask some direct questions on the status and progress of the FDA investigation.
Earlier today, we received the following statement from FDA spokeswoman, Laura Alvey:
“FDA is actively investigating the matter and conducting analysis for multiple different chemical and microbiological contaminants. We have tested numerous samples of chicken jerky products for possible contaminants including melamine. 
The complaints received have been on various chicken jerky products but to date we have not detected any contaminants and therefore have not issued a recall or implicated any products. We are continuing to test and will notify the public if we find evidence of any contaminants.”
What should we conclude from this statement?
  • The problem is not linked to a single manufacturer or importer of chicken jerky dog treats.
  • The problem is chronic and long-standing – not of short duration.
  • The contaminant still has not been identified, but is probably NOT melamine.
  • FDA is taking this problem seriously, and has not put it on the back-burner.
As for any possible recalls, FDA’s hands are tied – understandably so. Before requesting a recall, the agency must have evidence that links a specific product and/or contaminant to the problem. Until FDA is able to pinpoint the source of the problem, it can do no more than issue generalized warnings to consumers – at it has done twice this month.
Until this mystery is solved, consumers can take certain actions to protect their dogs:
  • Pay attention to the country of origin when purchasing dog treats.
  • Only offer treats in very small quantities, and not as a substitute for a meal.
  • Watch closely for any unusual behavior or symptoms.
  • Report any adverse reactions to pet foods or treats to FDA.
We’ll continue to watch for, and report, any new developments 

Food Safety: Perpetual Policy Orphan

December 21, 2008

President-elect Obama has introduced his Cabinet nominees and major staff appointments, and has left Chicago for a two-week rest – admittedly well-earned – in Hawaii with his family.

We have met the new President’s foreign policy team, his economic team, his energy/climate change team, his trade & commerce team, and the rest of the people who will be sitting around the Cabinet table.

We have been introduced to the incoming President’s Energy Czarina, his Chief Science & Technology Advisor, and his Director of the new White House Office on Health Care Reform.

We can deduce – to some extent – from these appointments the new policy directions in which President-elect Obama hopes to lead the United States. But on one issue that affects the health of every US resident, the incoming President has remained silent.

There is no one at the Cabinet table to speak for food safety.

The responsibility for ensuring the microbiological and chemical safety of our food supply is shared among several federal departments, most prominently the Department of Health & Human Services and the Department of Agriculture. In each case, food safety is a Cinderella praying for her fairy godmother to save her from the ashes.

Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, the current FDA Commissioner, has already announced that he will resign effective Inauguration Day. His replacement will have a full plate replenishing an agency that has been bleeding expertise for the last eight years and more. The FDA’s food safety enforcement activities represent only a small part of the agency’s overall mandate.

The newly nominated Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, is a proponent of bioethanol, and was governor of an agricultural state. We haven’t received a single hint of his attitude toward the food safety side of USDA – again only a small part of the department’s mandate.

Food safety, once more, will be the orphan of US government policy – unless President-elect Obama gives this vital area a seat at the Cabinet table. There is precedent for this move.

Former President Clinton established a President’s Council on Food Safety to review, and recommend improvements to, the country’s food safety policies. The Council’s recommendations, for the most part, have been gathering dust for the last eight years.

Please, Mr. President-elect. Give food safety policy a strong voice in your administration. Give those of us who care about food safety “Change We Can Believe In.”