Food Safety News

Subscribe to Food Safety News feed Food Safety News
Breaking news for everyone's consumption
Updated: 47 min 11 sec ago

Olive oil and caterers subject to controls in Czech Republic

2 hours 44 min ago

An inspection campaign in the Czech Republic has revealed problems with almost half of olive oil samples tested.

State Agricultural and Food Inspection Authority (SZPI) testing focused on the quality of olive oils in the country.

The aim was to verify whether extra virgin and virgin olive oils from different countries of origin met the physical, chemical, and sensory parameters and labeling requirements defined in European regulations.

The more serious violations were for olive oils that did not correspond to the extra virgin designation during the evaluation and were oils of a lower quality. Non-compliant samples came from Spain, Greece and Tunisia.

Analyses in the accredited Laboratory of Olive Oil Testing in Slovenia and in the domestic accredited lab of SZPI, found that eight out of 18 samples were non-compliant.

Seven samples were not extra virgin oils, as the manufacturers stated on the packaging, but were a lower quality class of oil. SZPI said this means consumers were being deceived by false information on the label. In another sample, inspectors noted deficiencies in labeling.

Inspections of olive oils show that products imported into the Czech Republic are often not a match to the declared category. SZPI said this indicates that importers underestimate the ability of authorities in the Czech Republic to assess the quality of olive oils.

SZPI said it would inform authorities in the relevant countries about the non-compliant samples. The agency ordered sellers to withdraw implicated batches from the market and will initiate administrative proceedings in the form of fines.

Czech Republic is not a producer of olive oil but carries out inspections according to standards set by European legislation. The rate of compliance has improved compared to 2023 when 67 percent of samples evaluated failed the inspection.

Checking safety of single-portion food
In a separate control campaign, the Ministry of Health and regional public health agencies (KHS) checked the microbiological safety of single-portion packaged meals for immediate consumption.

Inspections looked at whether the meals, which are a frequent choice of consumers for fast food, met microbial criteria set by European and Czech legislation.

A total of 70 food establishments were inspected during October 2024, with at least one meal taken from each outlet for laboratory testing. Overall, 95 samples of packaged foods were taken, of which 87 samples were examined for microbiological contamination and eight for the presence of toxins.

Nine samples were judged to have failed. The most frequently detected bacteria was from the Enterobacteriaceae family, which occurs mainly in environments with insufficient hygiene or when food is handled incorrectly.

“Food safety plays a crucial role in protecting public health and it is essential that this standard is met at every stage of food preparation and distribution. With the ever-increasing popularity of single-portion packaged meals, it is important to ensure that these meals do not pose a health risk to consumers. The targeted task helped us map the current situation in this area and contributed to further strengthening food safety in the Czech Republic,” said Matyáš Fošum, chief hygienist of the Czech Republic.

Inspections also checked compliance with good manufacturing practices and HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) procedures. KHS staff assessed the accuracy of labeling, with a focus on information on the presence of allergens, the expiration date and storage conditions.

“Results of the inspections showed that Czech catering operations in most cases meet high safety standards. Prevention is essential so that the risks associated with food are minimized at the level of their preparation,” said Ondřej Fries, deputy director of the public health protection department.

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

Publisher’s Platform: Combating E. coli: A Call for Vigilance in Food Safety Practices

February 8, 2025 - 10:55am

Escherichia coli, commonly known as E. coli, is a versatile bacterium. While many strains are harmless and a natural part of our intestinal flora, some can cause severe illness, leading to serious public health concerns. Recent outbreaks associated with contaminated food sources highlight the urgent need for strengthened efforts in food safety and preventive measures against this persistent threat.

E. coli O157:H7, a particularly virulent strain, continues to capture headlines due to its ability to cause severe diarrhea, kidney failure, and even death. Vulnerable populations, including young children, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals, face the greatest risks. These incidents reiterate the importance of addressing E. coli contamination at various stages of food production and consumption.

Producers play a critical role in minimizing E. coli risks. Implementing strict hygiene protocols and maintaining clean environments in farms and processing plants are fundamental steps. Adopting technology-driven solutions, such as advanced testing methods and automated monitoring systems, can aid in early detection and prevention of contamination.

Moreover, regular training for food handlers on best practices must be a non-negotiable priority. From thoroughly cooking meats to understanding cross-contamination pitfalls, education can significantly reduce risks. Establishing comprehensive recall procedures further illustrates accountability and responsibility towards consumers.

For consumers, awareness and proactive measures are indispensable. Simple precautions—like washing hands and fresh produce, cooking ground meats to safe temperatures, and avoiding raw milk and unpasteurized juices—can dramatically lessen the likelihood of infection. Educating consumers about these essential safety practices through public outreach campaigns can build an informed populace.

Regulatory agencies must continue to enforce stringent food safety regulations and perform frequent inspections to ensure industry compliance. Supporting innovative research into new prevention techniques and contamination detection technologies is equally essential. Furthermore, fostering international cooperation to track and manage outbreaks can enhance global food safety resilience.

E. coli outbreaks also underline the need for transparent communication between government agencies, producers, and consumers. Open channels for sharing information and swift updates during outbreaks help contain the spread and mitigate impacts effectively.

Combating E. coli is a shared responsibility. We owe it to ourselves and future generations to ensure that our food systems are as safe and reliable as possible. With concerted efforts from all sectors—private, public, and individual—we can address the challenges posed by E. coli with vigilance and innovation. Together, shaping a safer food landscape is not just a protective measure; it’s an ethical imperative.

FDA steps up import enforcement because of pesticides, undeclared colors, and more

February 8, 2025 - 12:03am

The Food and Drug Administration uses import alerts to enforce U.S. food safety regulations for food from foreign countries. The agency updates and modifies the alerts as needed.

Recent modifications to FDA’s import alerts, as posted by the agency, are listed below.

Click here to go to the FDA page with links to details on specific alerts.

Click on table to enlarge. Use link above to go to FDA page with links to specific alerts.

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

New Zealand firm fined in lead contaminated sugar case

February 8, 2025 - 12:03am

New Zealand Sugar Company has been fined for manufacturing, distributing and selling sugar products that were contaminated with lead during transport.

In November and December 2021, the company, trading as Chelsea Sugar, recalled thousands of packs of sugar because of potential low lead levels.

Two other product recalls were needed when it was discovered New Zealand Sugar Company gave incorrect information to supermarkets, resulting in more sugar products being released to consumers.

In Auckland District Court, the company pled guilty in May 2024 and was sentenced on two charges, including breaching its National Program — designed to manage any food risk to consumers — and negligently endangering, harming, creating, or increasing risk to customers by distributing its product. A sentencing hearing was held in September 2024 and the court has now released its decision, which was a fine of NZ $149,500 (U.S. $85,000).

Ship cleaning unsuccessful
Vincent Arbuckle, New Zealand Food Safety deputy director general, said offending at this scale was rare, and the sentence sent a strong message that it will not be tolerated.

“These recalls had a significant impact on consumer access to certain sugar products, such as brown sugar. It also affected a large number of other businesses which had to recall products made with the contaminated sugar,” he said.

Arbuckle said the firm failed to properly detect the extent of lead contamination until after the sugar had been used in production.

In September 2021, the New Zealand Sugar Company imported sugar from Australia that became contaminated with lead during transport. It manufactured and distributed 971 tons of contaminated products to businesses in New Zealand.

Sugar had been sent to New Zealand from Australia aboard the cargo ship Rin Treasure — a vessel used to ship metal sulfide concentrates (lead and zinc) on its previous voyage.

Before choosing this ship, New Zealand Sugar Company was advised it had failed a survey report in early September, meaning it was not fit to load and transport bulk sugar. Prior to its departure, the vessel was cleaned, and a report certified the hold was fit to stow and carry raw sugar.

However, cleaning was not effective, and sugar became contaminated with lead during the journey from Queensland. This contamination may have been exacerbated by a broken pipe that spilled water into the sugar during the cargo unloading process by contractors.

Failure to stop production after testing
Samples of sugar were collected between Sept. 15 and 24 for testing but New Zealand Sugar Company followed its normal process of producing sugar for distribution and sale.

“The test result on Oct. 7 showed high readings of lead contamination, but rather than take immediate action and stop production and distribution, they instead sought more testing which confirmed the same result,” said Arbuckle.

“Some of this product was sold between October and early November. We were not informed of the lead contamination until Nov. 3, which is unacceptable. New Zealand Sugar Company’s lack of definitive action resulted in a consumer level recall of sugar products on Nov. 4 – around six weeks after the contaminated product arrived in New Zealand. Although the short-term exposure to increased lead levels through these sugar products would not have endangered people’s health – we cannot afford to take a chance on public health.”

Recent outbreaks
Meanwhile, the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) has detailed a number of outbreaks in December 2024.

Histamine (scombroid) fish poisoning was reported in the Southern District involving three cases in the same family who consumed wild caught kahawai. A sample of the fish was sent for testing.

Three gastroenteritis outbreaks associated with work functions catered by the same company were reported from Waikato District. Norovirus was identified from fecal specimens in one outbreak. They were attributed to an infected food handler.

An outbreak of Salmonella Typhimurium occurred in Auckland involving 15 patients who attended a church sports tournament. Eleven people were hospitalized. The cause was food prepared too far in advance and improper storage.

There were seven Listeria infections, including three pregnancy-associated cases compared with none for the same month in 2023. Patients ranged from 20 months to 53 years old. All seven people were hospitalized and one death was recorded. The serotype was identified for six cases, with three due to O1/2 and the other three serotype O4.

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

New Jersey company recalls tahini paste after state testing shows Salmonella

February 7, 2025 - 9:00pm

Turkana Food Inc. of Kenilworth, NJ, is recalling 858 cases of Aleppo Tahini Sesame Paste because it is contaminated with Salmonella.

The recall was the result of a routine sampling performed by the Ohio Department of Agriculture which revealed that the finished products contained Salmonella. The company has ceased production and distribution of the products as FDA and the company continue their investigation to what caused the problem. 

The Recalled Aleppo Tahini Sesame Paste was distributed in the states of Florida, Kentucky, Virginia, New York, New Jersey, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Texas, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Maryland, Ohio, Alabama, Missouri and California.

The product is packaged in 16-ounce plastic jars with gold lids and gold labels marked Aleppo Sesame Paste Tahini.

Consumers can identify the recalled product by looking for LOT# 120824-01 printed on the top portion of the jar UPC Label 854643003054 marked by a sticker on the side of the jar.

The product expiration date of August 2026 is on the top portion of the jar.

No reported illnesses have been confirmed in relation to the recalled product as of Feb. 5.

Consumers who purchased Aleppo Sesame Paste Tahini With lot code 120824-01 should not consume the product and they are urged to return it to the place of purchase for a full refund.

Consumers with questions may contact Turkana Foods Inc. 908-810-8800 or email info@turkanafood.com.

About Salmonella infections

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

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

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

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

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

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

Publisher’s Platform: Salmonella is one Nasty Bug

February 7, 2025 - 1:30am

In recent years, Salmonella outbreaks have become a pressing public health concern, highlighting the vulnerabilities in our food supply chain. Salmonella, a group of bacteria commonly linked to foodborne illnesses, is notorious for causing symptoms ranging from mild gastrointestinal distress to severe infections. It’s time for both consumers and industry players to adopt more rigorous safety practices to prevent these outbreaks and protect public health.

Salmonella can find its way into various foods, including poultry, eggs, produce, and even processed goods. The challenge lies in the bacteria’s resilience and adaptability, which allow it to thrive in diverse environments. Recent incidents trace back to unsanitary farming practices, cross-contamination in processing facilities, and improper food handling. Clearly, we need systemic changes to mitigate these risks.

At the industry level, manufacturers and farmers must adopt stricter hygiene standards and invest in regular inspections. Implementation of comprehensive safety protocols, such as better temperature control and sanitation methods, is essential in preventing contamination. The integration of technology, like blockchain for traceability, can help in quickly identifying and isolating sources during outbreaks, thereby reducing the spread of contaminated products.

Regulatory bodies also play an integral role in safeguarding our food supply. Updating and enforcing food safety regulations rigorously can push the industry towards compliance. Agencies should prioritize transparency and allow public access to safety records, which can boost consumer confidence and accountability. Additionally, increased funding for research can further our understanding of Salmonella and aid in developing innovative detection and prevention techniques.

For consumers, awareness and education are critical. Simple actions, such as washing hands thoroughly, cooking foods to the proper temperatures, and practicing safe food storage, can significantly reduce the risk of salmonella infection. Educational campaigns can empower consumers with knowledge about safe food practices, turning everyday actions into protective measures against foodborne illnesses.

As we navigate the complexities of our modern food system, prioritizing food safety is paramount. By calling for the collective efforts of industry leaders, regulatory bodies, and consumers, we can address the Salmonella challenge head-on. The health of our community depends on proactive measures and committed vigilance. It’s time we optimize our food safety strategies to ensure a healthier future for everyone.

A new foodborne illness benchmark, just in time for ‘shock and awe’

February 7, 2025 - 12:05am

— OPINION —

For nearly a decade and a half, food safety advocates like me have recited CDC’s 2011 foodborne illness estimates: 3,000 deaths. 128,000 hospitalizations. 48 million illnesses (1 in every 6 Americans).

At long last, CDC has provided us with an update to these estimates, or they have provided an update to the Government Accountability Office, which has provided us with an update because, as an independent, nonpartisan government agency within the legislative branch, GAO has not been indefinitely muzzled by the communications “pause” that prevents CDC from publishing more than “highlights” from its updates. In light of this “pause,” and many, many other recent developments, the new estimates set an important benchmark. 

As the GAO report makes clear that, in his second term, President Trump is inheriting significant food safety challenges. The new estimates do not provide an apples-to-apples comparison with the 2011 numbers. They focus instead on just the six most significant foodborne pathogens. Infections from those pathogens, however, have remained stubbornly high, causing about 10 million foodborne illnesses annually in the U.S., including an estimated 53,300 hospitalizations and more than 900 deaths. Infections from all foodborne pathogens greatly exceed the Healthy People 2030 goals, and for some, such as Campylobacter and E.coli, there has been “little or no detectable change” in illness rates.  

What kind of change awaits us? The new Administration has given a few causes for concern already. They fall into two broad, related categories: corruption and transparency. 

First consider corruption. Food safety, and public health more generally, depend on an extensive network of private and public sector experts working together to manage risk. A food processing company employs food safety managers, whose work is checked by private auditors and government inspectors, whose priorities are informed by illness surveillance at local health departments and outreach from foodborne illness victim advocacy groups, not to mention state and federal legislators, and plaintiff’s lawyers, and many more. The nodes in the network provide a check on each other and help to ensure that everyone is doing their part to manage foodborne illness risk. 

Companies and taxpayers spend a lot of money to manage this risk. And despite all of these efforts, illnesses and even outbreaks still occur. After an outbreak, foodborne illness victims may find a lawyer like Bill Marler who can force some financial accountability on the company that sold the contaminated food. But most foodborne illness victims have no idea who made them sick, and so civil liability alone provides incomplete incentives. Without the right rules and inspection regime, some companies will be tempted to cut corners on food safety, and those that wish to adequately invest in preventing foodborne illness may find they are competing on an uneven playing field.  

Now, what if the heads of federal food regulatory agencies allow the food companies to determine the rules and inspection regime? What if the biggest, richest food companies are allowed to pay for the rules they like? Then, the rules may have less to do with food safety than about protecting big companies from competition, or otherwise boosting their profits. 

Cynics out there might say we already have this system, that Big Food has already captured agencies like FDA and FSIS. But let’s be serious. Food safety advocates like me might push federal regulators to require more precautions from industry, and to defer less to claims that consumer protections — like Salmonella product standards for poultry — are too expensive. That is a far cry, however, from condemning these regulators as a tool of corporate oligarchs. 

Now that may change. The launch of $Trump coin appears to signal a new era of patronage politics. The coin essentially serves as “a deposit-only Swiss-bank-account number online, into which people can deposit funds and privately show . . .  the receipts for their deposits.” Will some unscrupulous company — maybe one with a history of paying bribes like the Brazilian conglomerate JBS — buy $Trump coin in exchange for favorable regulatory treatment? Maybe not. But the possibility alone undermines confidence in the whole food safety system. And the scam casts other actions of dubious legality, such as the dismissal without cause of 17 inspectors general, in an eerie light.

Transparency could counter these concerns. But here again we see bad omens. What justifies suspending notice to the public of foodborne illness outbreak investigations? Nothing legitimate comes to mind. On the other hand, if public health authorities stop sharing information, who’s to say whether all that corruption is hurting our health? 

More transparency means safer food. Information like sanitation grades on local restaurants, or updates on which chicken processors are meeting Salmonella performance standards, makes markets more efficient, creating a price signal for food safety. If federal agencies start withholding information to hide their corruption, the impact on public health could be severe. 

So what should food safety professionals do? One important lesson from the first Trump Administration: don’t believe the narrative! Remember the 2020 Executive Order that purported to keep meatpacking plants open, even when they failed to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks among their workers? As some of us pointed out then, President Trump had no authority to override local health departments’ efforts to protect their communities. But the bluff worked, according to a 2022 congressional investigation. Then Under Secretary for Food Safety Mindy Brashears served with distinction as “the industry go-to fixer in blocking attempts by other regulators to improve health and safety conditions in meatpacking plants.” Under Trump 2.0, state and local governments should not bow to similar pressure, nor should we let them.  

Less than 1,370 days remain until the next presidential election. A lot can happen, maybe even some good things, who knows? Marty Makary seems like a really smart guy. But let’s not pretend what’s happened so far is normal. And let’s not forget that we have a benchmark to measure the cost in lives of what this Administration does to manage foodborne illness risk.   

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

Study assesses food safety challenges with dark kitchens

February 7, 2025 - 12:03am

Researchers have said more needs to be done to ensure that the growth of dark kitchens is accompanied by effective food safety measures. 

Dark kitchens offer ready-to-eat meals for delivery or takeout through online platforms, including social media, mobile applications, restaurant websites or via phone/email. In 2020, it was estimated that more than 750 dark kitchens were operating in the UK.

A study involving a survey and two focus group discussions with Environmental Health Officers (EHOs) and 16 interviews with dark kitchen owners and tenants was conducted in England between April and May 2024. 

Results published in the journal Food Control revealed multiple challenges faced by dark kitchen operators in managing food safety in shared spaces, food handling during delivery, high turnover of staff, and delays in updating menu changes with online aggregators.

There were struggles in maintaining hygiene and cross-contamination risks because of shared resources and conflicts over responsibility for pest control. Operators mentioned how the food handling practices of delivery drivers was concerning, based on consumer complaints.

Two strategies were shared by dark kitchen operators to address some of these challenges. They include training and more frequent food hygiene inspections.

Local authority view
A total of 123 responses were received from 91 local authorities in England. The majority had inspected a dark kitchen.

Issues found by EHOs in identifying and inspecting these sites included resource constraints, lack of dark kitchens’ visibility, multiple trading names, insufficient guidance from regulators, communication difficulties, difficult working conditions in some kitchens, and problems identifying where responsibility lies. Some dark kitchen operators were unaware they are required to register.

EHOs mentioned revising registration forms to ensure dark kitchens include details of whether they operate under other trading names. They suggested using fixed penalty notices as a deterrent for businesses that fail to register to create a financial consequence for non-compliance.

Councils sometimes need to rely on customer complaints or tip-offs from other businesses before they become aware of a dark kitchen. One issue was the uncertain or sporadic operating hours which make it difficult for EHOs to visit and inspect the sites. Another was the inspection of shared kitchen space used by several different businesses at the same time. This made the visit more challenging, especially in determining responsibilities and how staff from different operations ensure hygiene.

The study highlighted the important role that online aggregators, such as UberEats, Just Eat and Deliveroo, can play in supporting local authorities, as they have the ability to monitor and ensure vetting of food businesses before listing them on their platforms.

“This study indicates that more needs to be done to ensure that the inevitable growth of dark kitchens are accompanied by effective food safety measures. The operating model of dark kitchens pose different challenges due to shared kitchen spaces, multiple trading names and sporadic operational times,” according to the researchers.

Issue in Australian state
Meanwhile, in Australia, the New South Wales Food Authority and local councils are trying to clamp down on illegally operating dark kitchens in the state.  

Also known as ghost or cloud kitchens, dark kitchens are delivery-only food businesses that rely on social media and apps for trade. They commonly operate from homes or industrial premises.  

Andrew Davies, NSW Food Authority acting CEO, said knowing the location of where companies operate allows enforcement agencies to monitor practices to ensure food they produce is safe to eat.  

“Online, delivery-only businesses tend not to notify their local authority, and without a public physical premises, these businesses can be difficult to reach. This means they are not having their food safety compliance assessed, presenting a considerable risk to their customers. Food poisoning, undeclared allergens and other food safety concerns can be quite serious and even deadly for some people,” he said. 

“Under national food safety laws, no matter how big or small your food business is, or if it’s home-based, online, or temporary; if you sell food, you must notify the appropriate enforcement agency before starting any food handling operations.”

A campaign led by 17 Sydney and regional NSW councils identified at least 131 illegally operating food businesses in their areas. Breaches included inadequate cleaning and sanitizing and health and hygiene practices, as well as using an unsuitable premises and equipment, a lack of food handling risk controls and insufficient food safety skills and knowledge.

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

Don’t let food poisoning ruin your Super Bowl party

February 7, 2025 - 12:02am

As the Kansas City Chiefs and Philadelphia Eagles prepare for their Super Bowl rematch in New Orleans on Sunday, fans are gearing up for a night of football, food, and — if recent history is any indication — plenty of Taylor Swift sightings.

Whether you’re watching for the game, the commercials, or just to see if Swift makes another appearance to support Travis Kelce of the Chiefs, food safety should also be part of your game plan.

Super Bowl Sunday is one of the biggest food consumption days of the year, with an estimated 1.45 billion chicken wings expected to be eaten nationwide. That’s enough wings to fill every seat in all 30 NFL stadiums with nearly 700 wings each. But before you dig into those wings — or any other game-day favorite — be sure to follow key food safety rules to avoid an upset off the field.

Avoid the ‘Danger Zone’

Click to enlarge. Courtesy of the USDA

Whether you’re serving takeout or home-cooked food, perishable items shouldn’t sit at room temperature for more than two hours. The USDA warns that food left out in the “Danger Zone” (40 degrees F to 140 degrees F) can allow bacteria to multiply rapidly, increasing the risk of foodborne illness. To keep your team safe:

  • Keep hot foods at 140 degrees F or above in a warming tray, oven, or slow cooker.
  • Keep cold foods at 40 degrees F or below by placing dishes on ice or refrigerating until serving.
  • If you plan to keep food out all game long, bring out fresh servings at halftime.

Safe temps for chicken wings and more
Chicken wings are a Super Bowl staple, but undercooked poultry is a common culprit of foodborne illness. Ensure your wings hit a safe internal temperature of 165 degrees F by using a food thermometer — checking multiple wings to confirm the entire batch is cooked.

Other game-day favorites have their own safe cooking temperatures:

  • Ground meats: 160 degrees F
  • Whole meats (beef, pork, lamb): 145 degrees F with a three-minute resting time before serving
  • Leftovers and casseroles: 165 degrees F

Halftime: Clean and store leftovers
When the halftime show kicks off, it’s also the perfect time to start packing up food. Store leftovers in shallow containers and refrigerate them promptly. If food has been left out for more than two hours, it’s time to throw it out.

As Swifties and football fans unite for the big game, don’t let a foodborne illness sideline your celebration. Whether you’re cheering for Kelce and the Chiefs, the Eagles’ revenge tour, or just here for Kendrick Lamar’s halftime performance, a little food safety prep will ensure your party is a win.

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

Consumer group highlights lack of trading standards staff

February 7, 2025 - 12:01am

An investigation by a consumer watchdog has revealed inadequate staffing levels for trading standards in many areas of the United Kingdom.

As part of a Freedom of Information request into capacity and performance, consumer group Which? contacted 187 trading standards services in England, Wales, and Scotland. Reponses were received by November 2024.

Which? said some areas have fewer than one trading standards officer per 100,000 people and there are situations where small teams of staff are responsible for enforcing certain areas of compliance by some of the world’s biggest businesses.

Trading standards officers have a range of responsibilities including the safety of consumer goods, food labeling and allergen requirements, and animal health and welfare.

About two thirds of trading standards services that answered Which?’s question about allocating resources said that low staffing levels meant they could not investigate tip-offs at least some of the time.

Which? said funding was a big factor but also called on the government to review and reform trading standards by looking at prioritizing resources more effectively and the sharing of services, better use of intelligence, and a greater role for national regulators. 

Rocio Concha, Which? director of policy and advocacy, said: “Our research shows that trading standards is no longer fit for purpose. Millions of people face a postcode lottery, which dictates whether they get adequate protection from crime, dangerous products and blatant rip-offs.”

Lack of financial and staff resources
The Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) welcomed the research and said findings reflect many previously highlighted challenges.

John Herriman, chief executive at CTSI, said: “While these findings from Which? help us to make the case for further investment in the service it is important to acknowledge that there has been a great deal of innovation across local authority trading standards in response to funding constraints.

“Recent initiatives to future proof the profession includes investing in new apprenticeships, adopting an intelligence-led model to help prioritize work, and building effective partnerships both locally and nationally, and these have yielded some impressive results. However, there is no escaping the fact that our trading standards service is severely under-resourced and that this research from Which? points to the stark fact that unless our service is properly resourced consumers continue to be at risk from unscrupulous businesses.”

Valerie Simpson, chair of the Association of Chief Trading Standards Officers (ACTSO), said reductions in staffing levels since 2011 have been well documented.

“Trading standards services nationally have moved away from routine inspections, as part of the Regulators Code, to reduce the burden on businesses and to have a targeted focus on those issues that pose the highest risk to consumers.”

Fiona Richardson, chief officer for Trading Standards Scotland, said: “The declining workforce coupled with an increasing range of legislation to enforce is creating serious issues for the service. Prioritization and effective use of intelligence is required to ensure trading standards can continue to prevent and tackle consumer detriment.”

Heather Kidd, from the Local Government Association, said: “Council’s trading standards teams work hard to provide effective inspections and ensure that products on sale to the public are safe for consumption. However, ongoing budget constraints have had an impact on council’s enforcement abilities. This is compounded by regulatory services’ aging workforce and a lack of new entrants.”

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

New Salmonella outbreak in U.S. linked to imported pastries; Canadian outbreak caused by same strain of pathogen

February 6, 2025 - 6:17pm

The FDA is investigating an outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis infections traced to frozen mini pastries. The outbreak is associated with a similar situation in Canada.

In the United States there are 18 confirmed patients with one of them requiring hospitalization, according to the Food and Drug Administration. There are 69 confirmed patients in Canada with 22 of them having been hospitalized. Neither country has reported any deaths.

The outbreak has been linked to Sweet Cream-brand mini pastries manufactured in Italy and exported into the United States by Importations Piu Che Dolci Inc. of Quebec, Canada.

On Jan. 21 the FDA was notified about the outbreak in Canada. In the United States the outbreak infections are caused by the same strain of Salmonella as the infections in Canada. The U.S. agency did not report whether this outbreak is the same one it announced on Feb. 5 as having an unknown source.

The implicated pastries were distributed to the states of Florida, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania. The FDA reports that the pastries may have been further distributed.

Patients live in California, Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania.

Importations Piu Che Dolci Inc. initiated a recall of all Sweet Cream-brand mini pastry products with best by dates from June 17 through Nov. 15. The pastries were sold to foodservice locations and may have been sold individually or in smaller packages, with or without a label that may not bear the same brand, product name, or best by date, according to the FDA. Consumers who are unsure if they have purchased the recalled products are advised to contact their retailer.

A second recall in Canada was initiated by D. Effe T. brand for its Lemon Delight and Tartlet with Forest Fruits. 

“Food service customers who received the recalled product have been contacted directly. FDA is continuing to work with Importations Piu Che Dolci Inc. and their U.S. customers to determine the distribution of this product and if additional downstream recalls are necessary,” according to the FDA.

“The recalled product should no longer be available for sale, and there does not appear to be a continued public health risk for consumers.”

As part of its investigation, FDA conducted traceback for one of the U.S. patients and identified that they were served recalled Sweet Cream-brand mini pastries at a restaurant prior to becoming sick. The restaurant received the pastries from one of the U.S. distributors.

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

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

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

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

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

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

A future-looking, prevention-based national food safety strategy

February 6, 2025 - 12:06am

— OPINION —

Recently, the Government Accountability Office issued a report calling for a unified food safety strategy.  

There aren’t too many topics more important for a nation than its ability to provide its citizens with access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food.  To do that efficiently and effectively, while being good stewards of taxpayers’ dollars, things must change. 

This past year, there has been an almost weekly drumbeat of foodborne outbreaks and recalls underscoring the need to strengthen our national food safety efforts to further protect consumers, food producers, and our economy. 

At the start of a new Presidential Administration, there is a once in a generation opportunity to establish a more modern, future-looking, and prevention-based National Food Safety Strategy.

The need for better public health outcomes
Despite the fact that Congress passed the Food Safety Modernization Act in 2010, we spend as a nation nearly $2.8 billion dollars of taxpayer money annually on food safety efforts between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and its Food Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and Drug Administration, food safety-related public health outcomes have not changed much during the past two decades.  

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the incidence (confirmed cases per 100,000 population) of many foodborne pathogens such as Salmonella, Shiga Toxin Producing E coli (STEC), Campylobacter, & Listeria) have not changed much in our country and, in some cases, increased during the past 20 years.

Trust in governments food safety efforts at an all-time low
Moreover, according to a recent survey conducted by Gallup, trust in the federal government’s ability to oversee food safety is at an all-time low.  In that survey, concerningly, slightly over half of Americans (53 percent) report avoiding buying certain brands or types of food because of a recall or advisory. That is an alarming high figure. Our goal as a nation should be for consumers to buy their desired food products without worrying about their safety. Food safety is first about human safety and public health, but it’s also about consumer trust.

The cost of foodborne illnesses
While the primary cost of foodborne illnesses is first and foremost a human one, with illnesses, hospitalizations, suffering, and in some cases even deaths, there’s a financial cost too. Per a study conducted by the USDA, in 2018 dollars, the national economic burden due to lapses in food safety was estimated to be approximately was about $18 billion, because of issues such as lost wages, medical expenditures, and mortality.  This cost would be dramatically higher in 2024 dollars.

Economic toll of food recalls
The disruption to the food system in the way of food recalls is costly too. For every recall executed, food companies incur significant costs, including retrieving and disposing of the affected products, legal fees, and lost revenue. And while the cost of a recall can vary, one study suggested that the average cost of a recall to be approximately $10 million in direct costs, in addition to brand damage and lost sales, according to a joint industry study by the Food Marketing Institute and the Grocery Manufacturers Association.

The current state
Today, the food safety regulatory system in the United States is a patchwork of multiple federal, state, and local agencies working to ensure food safety, sometimes with duplication of effort and not as coordinated as it should be.  

At the federal level, food safety rests primarily with USDA and the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA is responsible for ensuring the safety of all domestic and imported foods except meat and poultry. USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) regulates meat, poultry, some egg products and catfish. 

But it’s more than just the USDA and FDA. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has identified up to 15 federal agencies, collectively, responsible for ensuring the safety of food produced and sold in the United States and up to 30 different laws, adding complexity and cost to food production, often without a proven, favorable cost-benefit ratio to consumers and the nation.

To be clear, it’s more than just about what agency inspects what foods.  More importantly, it’s about how do we take a more modern, fiscally responsible, risk-based, and data-driven approach to how we regulate the safety of our food supply.  For example, USDA operates on a continuous system with each animal being inspected before and after harvest with DVM oversight. The FDA’s food inspection oversight model requires that high risk food facilities be inspected once every 3 years and non-high-risk facilities once every 5 years. Moreover, most of FDA’s food inspections are done by state officials on behalf of the FDA under contract with the agency.

In addition, the regulation of food has evolved, beyond microbiological hazards, into more complex questions of chemicals hazards and additives, nutrition, labeling, claims regarding health impacts, and a better understanding of the health effects of ultra processed foods.

The way forward
Modern times require more modern food safety approaches.  

In March of 2017, during President Trump’s first term, he issued Executive Order (EO) 13781, entitled “Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch.”  It included a proposal to consolidate FSIS and FDA’s food safety functions into a single “Federal Food Safety Agency.”

Such an effort would address a “fragmented and illogical division of federal oversight” and would “merge the thousands of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees between the FSIS and the FDA and their approximate $2.8 billion, collective, annual budget into a Single Food Safety Agency.”  

A proposed first step – a White House Task Force 
Establishing a single food agency has had previous support by the GAO, the National Academies of Sciences, past presidents (including President Trump), and Congressional leaders. It’s also been supported by a myriad of studies and reports.  However, it’s clear, some will resist such a change.

As a first step, the President could announce the creation of a new White House Food Safety Task Force to review the string of foodborne outbreaks and recalls that have occurred recently and to develop recommendations on what the government can and should do about it to include proposals that consider establishing a more Unified, National Food Safety Strategy and/or a Single Food Safety Agency.  

There hasn’t been a White House Task Force on Food Safety since the Jack-in-the Box outbreak in 1992. Moreover, there are natural connections to such an effort with the recently announced MAHA and DOGE efforts.

trategA newly formed White House Task Force on Food Safety could have Executive Sponsors, such as the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of HHS.  The Taskforce itself could contain a select number of seats made up of the best thinkers in food safety from both the public and private sector, including state representatives, with a requirement for a Recommendation Report to be issued back to the Administration within a reasonable time period.

It’s time for the U.S. to make the hard decision, put aside turf or political differences, and prioritize public health by setting a plan in motion to migrate towards a more modern, forward-looking, prevention-based, national food safety strategy.  Consumers nationwide, taxpayers, and the regulated industry deserve this.

About the author: Frank Yiannas served as Deputy Commissioner for Food Policy and Response at the FDA from 2018 to 2022.

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

.

New Salmonella outbreak under investigation

February 6, 2025 - 12:05am

Investigators from the Food and Drug Administration are working on a new Salmonella outbreak of unknown origin.

The Salmonella Enteritidis outbreak has sickened at least 18 people. The FDA has not reported the ages of the patients or where they live. The agency has initiated traceback efforts, but has not reported what food is being traced.

There are likely many more people who have been sickened in the outbreak than are reported at this time because the CDC estimates that for every confirmed Salmonella patient in an outbreak there are 29 patients who go unreported.

In other outbreak news, the FDA has determined that an outbreak of E. coli O26:H11 infections was likely due to alfalfa or clover sprouts. Public health officials conducted patient interviews and traceback investigations to determine the likely source of the pathogen.

“Although sprouts were confirmed as the vehicle, investigators were unable to determine which type of sprouts was making people sick,” according to the FDA.

The FDA first posted information about the outbreak on Oct. 30, 2024. Investigators confirmed 10 patients in the outbreak, but many more people were likely sickened. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that 26 patients go unreported for every confirmed patient in an E. coli outbreak.

Once investigators had enough information to confirm sprouts as the source of this outbreak, the products were past their shelf life and no longer available for sale.

Other outbreak updates
The FDA has closed an investigation into an outbreak of E. coli O145:H28 infections without finding the source of the pathogen. A total of eight people were confirmed as patients. The FDA initiated traceback efforts but did not report what food was traced.

For an outbreak of infections from Listeria monocytogenes, the number of patients has increased to 35. The FDA has not reported the ages of the patients or where they live. The agency has initiated an on-site inspection and sample testing but has not reported what location is being inspected or what kind of food is being tested. The agency first reported the outbreak on Jan. 15.

For another outbreak of infections from Listeria monocytogenes, the patient count now stands at 34. The FDA has not reported the ages of the patients or where they live. The agency has begun traceback but has not reported what food it is tracing. The agency also reports having begun an onsite inspection and sample testing but has not reported what location is being inspected or what is being tested. The FDA first reported the outbreak on Dec. 26, 2024. 

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

Legislation would increase safety of infant formula, help decrease shortages

February 6, 2025 - 12:04am

A bipartisan effort in the U.S. Senate seeks to improve the safety of infant formula.

Introduced by Sen. John Hoeven, R-ND, and Sen. Gary Peters, D-MI, the bill also seeks to prevent infant formula shortages.

The legislation is a reaction to a 2022 outbreak of cronobacter infections that sickened several babies, killing two. The outbreak was traced to an Abbott Nutrition manufacturing plant that was later found to have had systemic contamination with the bacteria.

The company recalled Similac and other major brands of its infant formula, causing a nationwide shortage that left parents driving for hours to find formula for their babies.   

The legislation would require formula manufacturers to test for cronobacter and salmonella, to notify the FDA of contamination within one business day, and require the FDA to monitor and report on in-stock rates of infant formula.

“Access to safe infant formula is essential for families across the U.S., and as shortages in recent years have demonstrated, improvements are needed to ensure our nation continues to have a secure supply of this important product. Our legislation would build greater resiliency into the infant formula market, helping to protect against contamination and bolstering supplies to prevent future shortages,” Sen. Hoeven said.

Sen. Peters released a similar statement.

“As a father and grandfather, I was devastated for the parents who lost their children. Parents deserve to know with complete confidence that the formula they are giving their babies is safe. I’m working to make sure something like that never, ever happens again. This commonsense bill would help intercept contaminated formula from reaching the shelves in the first place by allowing the FDA to have a hand in testing for dangerous bacteria. Doing so will help protect our children, but also prevent families from facing another nationwide shortage where folks were struggling to both find and afford infant formula,” Sen. Peters said.

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

EU passes regulation on use of WGS during outbreaks

February 6, 2025 - 12:03am

The European Commission has adopted legislation requiring EU countries to do Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) during foodborne outbreaks.

Member states will need to collect Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, E. coli, Campylobacter jejuni, and Campylobacter coli isolates from food, animal, feed, and related environmental samples from food and feed businesses, where the isolates are associated or suspected to be associated with a foodborne outbreak. They will also need to carry out WGS on those isolates.

EU countries would send results to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which developed the One Health WGS system with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). EFSA would compare the WGS results on these samples with findings from human isolates communicated to ECDC to identify the source of outbreaks.

Time to adjust
Authorities would have to carry out WGS on at least one isolate of each serovar, biotype or molecular type of the collected isolates in an official laboratory.

Food companies are also obliged to submit to the relevant authority, upon request, isolates of the listed pathogens and related WGS results from their own investigations when suspected to be linked to an outbreak.

The EU Commission said this would allow the identification of the source of an outbreak and of the affected consignments when combined with data from epidemiological investigations. When transmitting results to EFSA, additional related data, such as the date and country of sampling, should be included.

“The efficiency and the cross-sectorial cooperation between public health and food safety authorities in investigations is essential to limit the public health impact of an outbreak and to minimize the economic impact linked to recalls and withdrawal of unsafe or potentially unsafe food. For this purpose, the quick and reliable identification of batches and lots or consignments containing contaminated food and the cause of the outbreak is necessary.”

Rules will apply beginning Aug. 23, 2026, to allow member states and EFSA time to adapt to the new requirements.

Previous comments
A feedback period on the regulation in 2024 received 18 comments. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) backed the plans as they would “significantly improve food safety and public health within the European Union.”

FoodDrinkEurope, which represents the food and drink manufacturing sector, raised concerns about financial feasibility, data protection, technical accessibility, regulatory burden, and international competitiveness.

The European Chilled Food Federation said any test results submitted by firms to a government agency stays in that system, so if a match is found in the future, this company can be blamed for an outbreak, with allegations of persistent contamination.

CLITRAVI, the European Association for the Meat Processing Industry, said government agencies are pressuring firms to share their WGS data, although the companies have paid for the tests and own the data.

The Dutch Meat Association (COV) and Dutch Meat Products Association (VNV) said the move would not result in a representative dataset from companies, as only a few with enough resources are carrying out WGS. This could lead to a large company being blamed for a finding because other firms with fewer resources are not performing WGS. This will make businesses less willing to invest in WGS research and result in less research being carried out, according to the associations.

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

FAO highlights work on parasites and Clostridium

February 6, 2025 - 12:01am

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has issued a call for data and experts relating to parasites in food.

Approximately 30 percent of foodborne illnesses globally are caused by parasitic infections, according to FAO.

The agency is working to update scientific advice on the detection, prevention, inactivation, and other methods of control of foodborne parasitic hazards that present a public health risk.

To do this, FAO has arranged a series of expert consultations. The first meeting on protozoal foodborne parasites is scheduled for May 26 to 30. The second meeting will address cestodes, nematodes, and trematodes and is planned for the fourth quarter of 2025.

The purpose is to review and discuss data and background documents, and to assess the situation on foodborne parasites control in foods. Updated information will provide risk management options in a number of different regions and a variety of products.

Interested applicants should submit their curriculum vitae (CV) to the FAO Secretariat at Kang.zhou@fao.org. The review of candidates will begin March 15 at the latest and continue until enough experts are identified. More details can be found here

The data call aims to obtain more globally representative information on the occurrence, virulence, distribution, illnesses, and monitoring programs for parasites in foods. Data can be submitted to the same email address as above until March 15, 2025.

Clostridium work
FAO has also revealed the scientists that will be taking part in a meeting on Clostridium species in foods in Rome from Feb. 17 to 21.

The focus is on Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens, and Clostridium difficile. Foodborne botulism results in severe and frequently fatal symptoms. Clostridium perfringens ranks as one of the most frequent causes of foodborne illness in many countries, imposing a health and economic burden. Limited data are available on the control of Clostridium in foods, and specific strategies to inhibit its growth and toxin production in food sources remain undetermined.

FAO is undertaking work to collect recent research and surveillance findings about this group of pathogens as well as data representing the different food commodities and geographical regions associated with diseases caused by these organisms. Information will provide a range of risk management options for a variety of products.

Scientists will discuss the burden of disease caused by Clostridium attributed to food; prevalence of contamination of foods in different regions and consumption data of contaminated foodstuffs; hazard identification and characterization; and strategies for prevention and control.

Experts include Kathy Glass, recently retired from the Food Research Institute at the University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Kristin Schill, from the same institution; Declan Bolton from Teagasc; and Roger Cook from New Zealand Food Safety.

NAMS meeting
Finally, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore are to hold an in-person workshop on New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) from June 18 to 20.

NAMs include in silico computational models, in vitro assays, omics technologies, and Adverse Outcome Pathways. These technologies offer accurate insights into exposure of chemical and biological hazards, while reducing reliance on animal testing.

NAMs have been established for alternative assessment on chemical and environmental risks but regulatory integration remains slow and their potential for use in food safety risk assessment is not clear. One aim of the event is to assess NAMs’ current status and future prospects for novel foods.

Candidates from national and international organizations, academia, and industry with experience on topics related to NAMs are encouraged to apply. A few attendees will be given the opportunity to provide an oral or poster presentation. Applications must be submitted before March 2.

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

Government Accountability Office says the country needs a unified food safety system

February 5, 2025 - 12:05am

A new report from the Government Accountability Office states that most goals to reduce foodborne illnesses in America have not been met.

The GAO report points out that the safety and quality of the U.S. food supply is governed by at least 30 laws and 15 governmental agencies. The federal food safety system is supplemented by states, localities, Tribes and territories.

Most goals established by individual federal agencies and joint-agency efforts have not been met, according to the GAO report. The report says a national food safety strategy could help achieve goals to improve the safety of the food supply.

“. . . the most recently available data show that FDA (the Food and Drug Administration) and FSIS (the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the USDA) have not met their goals — in one case, by a wide margin,” says the GAO report. “Specifically, FSIS’s goal was to reduce the proportion of poultry samples with Salmonella serotypes commonly associated with human illness by 4 percent; however, the proportion of such samples increased by 22 percent that year.”

The GAO also found that a working group, which includes officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the FDA and FSIS, has made little progress in setting goals associated with the Healthy People 2030 initiative.

“. . . the working group has reported limited progress. For example, six metrics aimed at reducing foodborne illness outbreaks are still under development and do not have defined baseline data to measure progress about 5 years into the 10-year cycle,” the GAO reported.

During President Trump’s first term, in 2017, the GAO called for the Executive Office of the President to develop and implement a national strategy for overseeing food safety. If implemented, according to the new report, such action could address GAO’s prior matters for congressional consideration about a government-wide performance plan and sustained leadership for food safety.

“GAO has long reported that the fragmented nature of the federal food safety oversight system causes inconsistent oversight, ineffective coordination, and inefficient use of resources,” according to the report. “. . . Since 2007, GAO has cited federal oversight of food safety as a high-risk issue.”

Impact of foodborne illnesses
The CDC reports that foodborne illnesses in the United States are mainly caused by six pathogens — Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter, Clostridium perfringens, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli and norovirus.

Foodborne pathogens can be transmitted through multiple types of food and, therefore, can affect both FDA- and FSIS-regulated foods. The GAO report cites two Salmonella outbreaks in 2024. One of the outbreaks was attributed to cucumbers, an FDA-regulated food, and the other attributed to charcuterie meats, an FSIS-regulated food. Collectively the outbreaks caused 650 confirmed illnesses and about 180 hospitalizations. 

According to the GAO report, the CDC has found that only a small proportion of all foodborne illnesses are diagnosed and reported to public health authorities. For example, the CDC has estimated that foodborne Salmonella causes 29 illnesses for each case that is detected through laboratory testing. A case of foodborne illness may go undiagnosed if, for example, a sick person does not seek medical treatment. According to CDC officials, some cases of foodborne illness may not be investigated or reported because of resource limitations at the state or local level.

“Foodborne illness also has widespread economic consequences, costing Americans an estimated $75 billion (in 2023 dollars) annually in medical care, lost productivity, and premature deaths, including those associated with secondary chronic illnesses and conditions that develop after the initial illness, according to a study by researchers from USDA’s Economic Research Service and collaborators,” according to the GAO report.

The full GAO report is available here.

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

New EU commissioner lists food safety priorities

February 5, 2025 - 12:04am

The new European commissioner for health and animal safety has promised to improve areas related to food safety standards.

Olivér Várhelyi, Commissioner for Health and Animal Safety, said he wants to strengthen the implementation and enforcement of food safety standards, including for imported foods.

“Food safety standards are a trademark of Europe. They ensure that EU citizens have access to nutritious, safe and high quality food products. My priority is to strengthen the implementation and enforcement of these world leading rules during the coming mandate,” he said.

Várhelyi, who took over from Stella Kyriakides, European Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, is the first EU Commissioner with animal welfare listed in the title.

“I am fully aware of our citizens’ calls that we do more on this topic. I will be focused on finding solutions which respond to citizens’ expectations, and which are also economically and financially viable for farmers. It is my strong conviction that Europe must embrace our farmers to produce enough food and guarantee us high-quality local products that are deeply rooted in our culture.”

Várhelyi has worked on files related to DG Sante’s portfolio, such as medical products, pesticides, and GMOs.

On pesticides, Várhelyi, a Hungarian lawyer and diplomat, said he was aware they are an essential part of the toolbox for farmers to protect crops but he also wants to increase the availability of viable alternatives to reduce the use of chemical pesticides.

“In this regard, I would like to carefully consider the availability of alternatives in the context of the decision-making process on the renewal of approval of pesticides,” he said.

Meanwhile, the European Union has updated an agreement with Mexico. The EU is Mexico’s second export market and its third biggest trading partner. 

The EU Commission said the agreement will not change standards for food and agricultural products. All imports from Mexico must meet EU rules on animal and plant health as well as food safety and genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The parties will also work closer together in areas related to Codex Alimentarius – the food standards setting body created by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO).

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

Gene editing is not the same as GMO 

February 5, 2025 - 12:03am

In a shift away from GMOS, aka genetically modified organisms, important research is continuing in gene editing, sometimes referred to as “the next big thing in agriculture.”

The important difference between the two is that in the case of gene editing, no foreign DNA is inserted into a plant, animal or microorganism to achieve improvements in size, productivity, disease and insect resistance and in some cases even drought resistance.

In contrast, in the case of GMOs, foreign DNA from one organism is injected into a plant or animal to achieve improvements of one kind or another. This has some people uneasy, or even downright hostile, toward GMOs. Frankenfoods is what some people call them.

One example of a GMO is genetically modified salmon. In that case, the equivalent of a genetic on-off switch from an ocean pout, was introduced into the genetic structure of a salmon. This modification gives the salmon a year-round appetite enabling it to reach market size faster. 

In other words, these quick-growing larger fish can fetch better prices in the marketplace, as long at the marketplace accepts them.

While the Food and Drug Administration says that GMO foods are carefully studied before they are sold to the public to ensure they are as safe as the foods consumers currently eat and that they don’t affect them any differently than non-GMO foods, some foreign markets, the EU, and especially France, as well as many U.S. consumers, see things differently. So differently that they’re banned in some countries and voluntarily labeled as such in the United States.

Santosh Kumar

Now enter genetic editing, which Canadian scientist Santosh Kumar hails as the future of agricultural crop research. In a recent presentation for the Brandon Chamber of Commerce, he explained that current research focuses on breeding crops that are more productive without the use of foreign DNA. This, he said, improves the quality of crops, and is more acceptable in the global market than GMO crops.

Often called CRISPR, gene editing allows researchers to disable a gene or add one for a desirable trait by modifying a gene in a specific place in a genome. Think of a pair of scissors; only in this case it’s enzymes that do the work instead. The enzymes allow researchers to precisely insert or delete genes in an animal or plant’s DNA, intending to improve its health, productivity, and nutritional benefits.

Kumar said that to ensure that Canada retains its strong position in the agriculture market in the future, researchers are breeding better crops, while staying away from genetically modifying them. A big reason for this is that Canada needs to be able to sell what it grows.

The GMO label can turn some countries away, he said.

In contrast, crop bioengineering research that incorporates gene editing, genomics and phenomics are preferred.

Important to keep in mind is that gene editing works only within a species’ own DNA. The goal is to bring about desired changes that in the past would only happen with traditional breeding practices. For centuries, farmers have relied on selective breeding, which involves breeding plants and animals with desirable traits to others without those traits to improve food production and quality. It obviously takes a lot of hit-and-miss to achieve this goal, not to mention a lot of time — generations of time sometimes. That’s why gene-editing is often called “a high-tech form of selective breeding.”

Lindsey du Toit

Washington State University researcher Lindsey du Toit, who focuses on the biology and management of diseases affecting small-seeded vegetable seed crops grown in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States, agrees with Kumar that crops have to meet the needs of the market. 

“It all depends on what the market accepts,” she said.

With this in mind, Kumar said his work at the Brandon Research and Development Centre is focused on non-GMO research methods that still improve crops. Wheat and barley are examples of food grains the centre is working on.

To bolster the future of Canada’s foodgrain industry, scientists breed varieties that are better adapted to overcome challenges, such as crop diseases that are more prevalent in prairies, where most wheat is grown. These varieties also have better resistance to weather conditions like drought.

He told the group that this process results in an increase in yields at harvest time, disease-resistant breeds, and a higher quality of the end product. Speaking of Canada’s work in the field so far, Kumar said the country’s wheat is considered “premium” in the global market. “Even the Americans say it’s really good.”

Besides which, he said that the GMO label can turn some countries away, which is why gene editing is preferred. 

Some researchers in the EU involved in GMO studies have even quit and gone on to other endeavors. Widespread protests against GMOs and even paint splashed on the cars of GMO researchers are examples of the resistance against GMOs.

“In this context of high opposition, a change of attitude towards GMOs seems rather difficult to achieve in the EU, notably in France,” says a report on GMOs.

What about meat?
In 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized allowing gene-edited pigs into the human food chain.

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

Jon Oatley

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

But the research goes beyond pigs. Oatley said researchers  are also working cattle, goats, and sheep, all of which are important food-producing animals.

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

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

Tracey Forfa

Tracey Forfa, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Science, tied her agency’s role with its need “to keep our regulatory approach current with the evolution of science.”

“We recognize that innovations in animal biotechnology offer tremendous opportunities for advancing human and animal health,” she said.

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

Food safety?

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

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

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

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

Listeria contamination found in raw milk in New York; dairy closed by state

February 4, 2025 - 8:01pm

Unpasteurized, raw milk from Willow Marsh Farm in New York has been found to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.

The producer is now prohibited from selling raw milk until subsequent sampling indicates that the product is free of harmful bacteria.

New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets Commissioner Richard A. Ball is warning consumers not to consume the unpasteurized raw milk from Charles B. Curtiss dba Willow Marsh Farm because of the contamination. To date, no illnesses have been reported to the Department associated with this product.

A sample of the milk collected by an inspector from the Department was discovered to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. On Jan. 30, the producer was notified of a preliminary positive test result. Further laboratory testing, completed on Feb. 4 confirmed the presence of Listeria monocytogenes. 

The Department recommends that any consumers who purchased raw milk from Charles B. Curtiss dba Willow Marsh Farm immediately dispose of it and call the farm at (518) 288-3347.

“It is important to note that raw milk does not provide the protection of pasteurization. Pasteurization is a process that heats milk to a specific temperature for a specific amount of time,” according to a notice from the Department.

“Pasteurization kills the bacteria responsible for numerous illnesses and diseases such as listeriosis, salmonellosis, campylobacteriosis, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, diphtheria, and brucellosis. Pasteurization of milk is recognized internationally as an effective means of preventing outbreaks of foodborne illnesses, including listeriosis.”

About Listeria infections

Food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes may not look or smell spoiled but can still cause serious and sometimes life-threatening infections. Anyone who has consumed any unpasteurized raw milk from Willow Marsh Farm and developed symptoms of Listeria infection should seek medical treatment and tell their doctors about the possible Listeria exposure.

Also, anyone who has consumed any of the milk products should monitor themselves for symptoms during the coming weeks because it can take up to 70 days after exposure to Listeria for symptoms of listeriosis to develop. 

Symptoms of Listeria infection can include vomiting, nausea, persistent fever, muscle aches, severe headache, and neck stiffness. Specific laboratory tests are required to diagnose Listeria infections, which can mimic other illnesses. 

Pregnant women, the elderly, young children, and people such as cancer patients who have weakened immune systems are particularly at risk of serious illnesses, life-threatening infections, other complications and death. Although infected pregnant women may experience only mild, flu-like symptoms, their infections can lead to premature delivery, infection of the newborn, or even stillbirth.

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

Pages