Everyone’s got a camera Arkansas, edition: Clinton students say school served them raw chicken

Color is still a lousy indicator of whether food is safe, but if Clinton High School wanted to make a case, they would provide internal temperature logs.

For two days a Clinton mother says her children sent her pictures of the food being served in the school cafeteria at lunch.  She says it appears to be undercooked chicken.

“I don’t want my child sick from food poisoning,” says Kathleen Page, mother of two teens at Clinton High School.

” It was so obviously raw,” says her son, Jonathan Carter, a junior at the school.  “You could see pink in it.  I’d cut it open with my fork and it’d be more red on the inside.”

Page called the school and was transferred to the cafeteria.  “I started to ask her questions and she told me it was none of my business and hung up.”

She also called the Health Department and they told her this wasn’t the first complaint they’d gotten about the school lunches.

Clinton School District Superintendent, Andrew Vining, released a statement regarding the issue.

“The Clinton School District strives to serve our students and staff a variety of meals that are healthy, nutritious, and appealing.  The photos that have been circulated do not appear that way.  This concerns us and we have taken steps to resolve the matter to ensure our students are provided with the best meals possible.

“There were also photos that were circulated regarding apparent raw pork; to clarify, no pork was served.

“The chicken fajita meat which was pictured was Tyson, fully cooked and prepackaged.  None of our staff or students have reported becoming ill after eating chicken from our cafeteria.  In the event someone does get sick, they need to notify my office and go to their doctor to see if symptoms were due to food-borne illness.

“We regret this has happened and we will continue to put the health of our students first in all things.”

1000 sick: As North America turns to Fall, another bumper crop of Cyclospora

CDC reports that as of September 13, 2017 they have been notified of 988 laboratory-confirmed cases of cyclosporiasis in persons who became ill in 2017. This number includes persons who reported international travel as well as persons who did not report travel. The reports have come from 40 states.

  • At least 553 (56%) of these persons did not report international travel (i.e., likely were infected in the United States) and became ill on or after May 1, 2017 (a date after which cases tend to increase each year). These 553 persons were from the following 36 states: Arizona (1), California (10), Colorado (6), Connecticut (23), Florida (68), Georgia (10), Illinois (17), Indiana (4), Iowa (14), Kansas (2), Louisiana (7), Maryland (12), Massachusetts (13), Michigan (3), Minnesota (11), Mississippi (1), Missouri (13), Montana (2), Nebraska (5), New Hampshire (4), New Jersey (19), New Mexico (1), New York (excluding NYC) (15), New York City (30), North Carolina (45), Ohio (16), Pennsylvania (2), Rhode Island (2), South Carolina (7), South Dakota (4), Tennessee (3), Texas (163), Utah (1), Virginia (7), Washington (1), West Virginia (2), and Wisconsin (9).
  • At this time, no specific vehicle of interest has been identified, and investigations to identify a potential source (or sources) of infection are ongoing. It is too early to say whether cases of Cyclosporainfection in different states are related to each other or to the same food item(s).

Previous U.S. outbreaks of cyclosporiasis have been linked to various types of imported fresh produce (e.g., basil, cilantro, mesclun lettuce, raspberries, snow peas). Consumers should continue to enjoy the health benefits of eating fresh fruits and vegetables as part of a well-balanced diet.

Chlorine works: Reducing Salmonella outbreaks in mangoes

The new crop of Australian mangoes is starting to arrive in spring-like Brisbane (because it’s more like summer with temps expected to hit 40 C this weekend), and they are delicious.

A team in one University of Connecticut lab recently processed 4,000 mangoes and water samples to test the efficacy of three disinfectants commonly used by the industry to avoid contamination.

To the utter surprise of researcher Mary Anne Amalaradjou, they found an unlikely candidate was extremely effective: chlorine. “When I saw the results, I didn’t believe it. So we re-ran the test ten times,” says the assistant professor in the Department of Animal Science.

Amalaradjou will present her findings at a meeting of the National Mango Board.

Salmonella is a frequent culprit for outbreaks in mangoes because it makes its way into the water used to wash the fruit in processing plants. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Salmonella leads to approximately 1.2 million cases of Salmonellosis each year in the United States and around 23,000 hospitalizations and 450 deaths.

“We had several outbreaks of people getting sick. The worrying part was the illnesses were not from cut mangoes, these were from mangoes they bought whole,” says Amalaradjou, whose work focuses on food safety and in finding new approaches to control or prevent foodborne illnesses.

In mango processing plants, the wash water is housed in gigantic tanks and once the water is contaminated, the bacteria are able to attach to the fruit’s skin and then enter the fruit’s pulp. Once bacteria make their way into the fruit, no amount of washing can remove them. With so many mangoes washed at once, the number of contaminated mangoes can be numerous, potentially causing many cases of Salmonellosis.

mango tropical fruit with male hand picking fruit from tree

Recognizing the danger, the Center for Produce Safety and the National Mango Board funded Amalaradjou’s study.  After taking on the project, Amalaradjou traveled to a mango processing plant to see the source of the contamination, the big wash water tanks, for herself in order to learn the processes so she could adapt them to a smaller-scale laboratory set up.

Amalaradjou was surprised by the results because chlorine is not very effective in the wash step for most produce. For one reason or another, from lettuce, to tomatoes to apples, chlorine simply doesn’t reliably kill Salmonella.

With mangoes, Amalaradjou found, chlorine cleaned the wash water and also helped prevent cross-contamination by cleaning the mangoes themselves.

One of the other challenges the research group had to tackle was not only effective Salmonella killing, but doing so with affordable and easily implementable measures on a large scale. Because chlorine is already used in the wash water, all that the processing plants need to do is to monitor the levels frequently to keep it at an effective concentration.

1 dead, over 200 sick: Salmonella Anatum infections linked to imported maradol papayas

This outbreak is one of four separate outbreaks currently under investigation that are linked to imported Maradol papayas from Mexico.

The Centers for Disease Control, public health and regulatory officials in several states, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are investigating a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Anatum infections.

Public health investigators are using the PulseNet system to identify illnesses that may be part of this outbreak. PulseNet is the national subtyping network of public health and food regulatory agency laboratories coordinated by CDC. DNA fingerprinting is performed on Salmonella bacteria isolated from ill people by using techniques called pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and whole genome sequencing (WGS). CDC PulseNet manages a national database of these DNA fingerprints to identify possible outbreaks. WGS gives a more detailed DNA fingerprint than PFGE.

This past spring, CDC investigated a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Anatum infections. Fourteen people infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Anatum were reported from three states. A list of the states and the number of cases in each can be found on the Case Count Map page. WGS showed that isolates from people infected with Salmonella Anatum were closely related genetically. This close genetic relationship meant that people in this outbreak were more likely to share a common source of infection.

Illnesses started on dates ranging from December 20, 2016, to April 8, 2017. Ill people ranged in age from less than 1 year to 85, with a median age of 38. Ninety-two percent were female. Among 11 people with available information, 10 (91%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. Among those 11 people, 5 (45%) were hospitalized. One death was reported from California.

In interviews, ill people answered questions about the foods they ate and other exposures in the week before they became ill. Seven (88%) of eight people interviewed reported eating papayas. This proportion was significantly higher than results from a survey of healthy Hispanic people in which 22% reported eating papayas in the week before they were interviewed. In addition, four of these seven people reported buying papayas from the same grocery store chain.

While the epidemiologic information indicated that papayas were the likely source of this outbreak at the time, investigators could not determine the specific source of contaminated papayas and the outbreak investigation ended after illnesses stopped.

FDA informed CDC that a sample from an imported papaya identified Salmonella Anatum on September 4, 2017. This sample came from a papaya from a grower in Mexico named Productores y Exportadores de Carica Papaya  de Tecomán y Costa Alegre in Tijuana, Mexico. WGS showed that the isolate from the papaya and the isolates from the 14 people infected with Salmonella Anatum this past spring were closely related. Bravo Produce Inc. was a supplier of Maradol papayas to the grocery store chain where four of seven ill people reported buying papayas. After receiving FDA’s recent Salmonella isolate from papayas, CDC reviewed the PulseNet database to look for matching DNA fingerprints in bacteria from people who got sick after the investigation closed in the spring of 2017. Six more ill people have been identified and CDC is investigating to determine if these more recent illnesses are also linked to Maradol papayas imported by Bravo Produce Inc.

On September 10, 2017, Bravo Produce Inc. recalled Maradol papayas packed by Frutas Selectas de Tijuana, S. de RL de CV. The grower of the recalled Maradol papayas is Productores y Exportadores de Carica Papaya de Tecoman y Costa Alegre in Tijuana, Mexico. The papayas were distributed to California from August 10 to August 29, 2017. The recalled papayas can be identified by the label on the fruit from the packing company, Frutas Selectas de Tijuana.

This investigation is ongoing. CDC and state and local public health partners are continuing laboratory surveillance through PulseNet to identify additional ill people and to interview them. FDA continues testing papayas from Mexico to see if other papayas from other farms are contaminated with Salmonella. Investigations are ongoing to determine if additional consumer warnings are needed beyond the advice not to eat papayas from specific importers or farms. Updates will be provided when more information is available.

39 sick: You’re a cute puppy, yes you are, but you have Campylobacter

The Ohio Department of Health, several other states, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, and USDA-APHIS are investigating a multistate outbreak of human Campylobacter infections linked to puppies sold through Petland stores.

Investigators are looking for the source of infections in people and puppies so they can recommend how to stop the outbreak and prevent more illnesses in order to protect human and animal health.

As of September 11, 2017, the outbreak includes 39 cases in 7 states (Florida, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin).

Illnesses began on dates ranging from September 15, 2016 through August 12, 2017. The most recent illness was reported on September 1, 2017.

Ill people range in age from <1 year to 64 years, with a median age of 22 years; 28 (72%) are female; and 9 (23%) report being hospitalized. No deaths have been reported.

Epidemiologic and laboratory findings have linked the outbreak to contact with puppies sold through Petland stores. Among the 39 ill people, 12 are Petland employees from 4 states and 27 either recently purchased a puppy at Petland, visited a Petland, or visited or live in a home with a puppy sold through Petland before illness began.

Whole genome sequencing showed samples of Campylobacter isolated from the stool of puppies sold through Petland in Florida were closely related to Campylobacter isolated from the stool of an ill person in Ohio. Additional laboratory results from people and dogs are pending.

Regardless of where they are from, any puppies and dogs may carry Campylobacter germs.

 

You’re such a cute bunny; yes you are; and you can carry dangerous bacteria

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in zoonotic (e.g. Salmonella spp.), pathogenic, and opportunistic (e.g. E. coli) bacteria in animals represents a potential reservoir of antimicrobial resistant bacteria and resistance genes to bacteria infecting humans and other animals. This study evaluated the prevalence of E. coli and Salmonella enterica, and the presence of associated AMR in commercial meat, companion, research, and shelter rabbits in Canada. Associations between antimicrobial usage and prevalence of AMR in bacterial isolates were also examined in commercial meat rabbits.

Culture and susceptibility testing was conducted on pooled fecal samples from weanling and adult commercial meat rabbits taken during both summer and winter months (n = 100, 27 farms), and from pooled laboratory (n = 14, 8 laboratory facilities), companion (n = 53), and shelter (n = 15, 4 shelters) rabbit fecal samples.

At the facility level, E. coli was identified in samples from each commercial rabbit farm, laboratory facility, and 3 of 4 shelters, and in 6 of 53 companion rabbit fecal samples. Seventy-nine of 314 (25.2%; CI: 20.7-30.2%) E. coli isolates demonstrated resistance to >1 antimicrobial agent. At least one E. coli isolate resistant to at least one antimicrobial agent was present in samples from 55.6% of commercial farms, and from 25% of each laboratory and shelter facilities, with resistance to tetracycline being most common; no resistance was identified in companion animal samples. Salmonella enterica subsp. was identified exclusively in pooled fecal samples from commercial rabbit farms; Salmonella enterica serovar London from one farm and Salmonella enterica serovar Kentucky from another. The S. Kentucky isolate was resistant to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin, cefoxitin, ceftiofur, ceftriaxone, streptomycin, and tetracycline, whereas the S. London isolate was pansusceptible. Routine use of antimicrobials on commercial meat rabbit farms was not significantly associated with the presence of antimicrobial resistant E. coli or S. enterica on farms; trends towards resistance were present when resistance to specific antimicrobial classes was examined. E. coli was widely prevalent in many Canadian domestic rabbit populations, while S. enterica was rare. The prevalence of AMR in isolated bacteria was variable and most common in isolates from commercial meat rabbits (96% of the AMR isolates were from commercial meat rabbit fecal samples).

Our results highlight that domestic rabbits, and particularly meat rabbits, may be carriers of phenotypically antimicrobial-resistant bacteria and AMR genes, possibly contributing to transmission of these bacteria and their genes to bacteria in humans through food or direct contact, as well as to other co-housed animal species.

Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in fecal Escherchia coli and Salmonella Enterica in Canadian commercial meat, companion, laboratory, and shelter rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) ad its association with routine antimicrobial use in commercial meat rabbits

Preventative Veterinary Medicine, vol 147, 1 November 2017, Pages 53-57, Jennifer Kylie, Scott A. McEwen, Patrick Boerlin, Richard J. Reid-Smith, J. Scott Weese, Patricia V. Turner, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.09.004

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587716305062

Sea lice threatening salmon production

Sea lice are copepods and have been around since Salmon have been in water. Not a public health concern but a massive threat for salmon farmers.

Zye Angiwan of Immortal News reports

Salmon farms are facing a large parasitic problem, which has disrupted production all over the world. An uptick in sea lice has become a growing problem in salmon farms, jacking up wholesale prices to as high as 50% from last year for salmon products, from fillets to lox. The tiny sea lice attach themselves to the fish and feed on them, eventually killing them or making them inedible, New York Daily News reports. The sea lice have infested salmon farms in the United States, Scotland, Canada, Norway and Chile – all major global suppliers of the popular fish. Scientists and fish farmers are working to control the pesky crustaceans, which costs the international aquaculture industry around $1 billion yearly.

Jake Elliott, vice president of Cooke Aquaculture in Blacks Harbour, New Brunswick, said, Our work has to be quicker than the evolution of the lice. Experts believe that the problem needs a new slew of advanced technology coupled with older tools such as pesticides. New strategies for breeding the high-protein fish for genetic resistance is necessary, as our methods such as bathing the salmon in warm water to remove the lice or using underwater lasers to take the parasites out. Salmon farmers consider sea lice the biggest threat to their industry, saying that the chronic problem is making the fish more expensive for consumers. The parasites thrive in the tightly packed ocean pens that fish farmers use, according to Shawn Robinson, a scientist with the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. “There are not enough tools right now to allow the farmer to really effectively deal with it,” he said. Atlantic salmon have managed to keep the sea lice at bay in the wild for centuries, and fish farmers have been managing them for many years. The lice were first identified as a problem in 1994, but the bigger concerns came when the sea lice started evolving to resist the tools farmers used to eradicate them. The chances of sea lice making their way to market-sold salmon is very slim, and should it happen, accidentally consuming a louse would not pose a threat to humans.

Plastic in shellfish

My wife and I were visiting her relatives in France back in 2009 and I can recall her uncle shucking fresh oysters that he had caught just moments before. He served them raw with a fresh wedge of lemon and beer. I enjoyed the beer, couldn’t stand the oysters. It seems that along the coast of British Columbia (Canada), researchers have found plastic particles in shellfish.

Ken Christensen of NPR writes

Sarah Dudas doesn’t mind shucking an oyster or a clam in the name of science.
But sit down with her and a plate of oysters on the half-shell or a bucket of steamed Manila clams, and she’ll probably point out a bivalve’s gonads or remark on its fertility.
“These are comments I make at dinner parties,” she said. “I’ve spent too much time doing dissections. I’ve done too many spawnings.”
And lately, the shellfish biologist is making other unappetizing comments to her dinner party guests — about plastics in those shellfish.
In 2016, she and her students at Vancouver Island University planted thousands of clams and oysters across coastal British Columbia and let them soak in the sand and saltwater of the Strait of Georgia. Three months later, they dissolved hundreds of them with chemicals, filtered out the biodegradable matter and looked at the remaining material under a microscope. Inside this Pacific Northwest culinary staple, they found a rainbow of little plastic particles.
“So when you eat clams and oysters, you’re eating plastics as well,” Dudas says.
Funded by the Canadian government and British Columbia’s shellfish trade association, the project aimed to learn whether the shellfish aquaculture industry may be contaminating its own crop by using plastic infrastructure like nets, buoys and ropes. The experiment was a response to those claims by local environmental groups.
But tracking the origins of tiny plastic particles in a big ocean is new territory. So Dudas turned to Peter Ross, who has studied the effects of ocean pollution on sea life for 30 years.
“We’ve long known that plastic and debris can be a problem for ocean life,” says Ross, director of the Vancouver Aquarium’s Ocean Pollution Research Program.
In 2013, he began sampling the coast of British Columbia for microplastics. The researchers found up to 9,200 particles of microplastic per cubic meter of seawater — about the equivalent of emptying a salt shaker into a large moving box.
“So, large numbers,” Ross says. “Rather shocking numbers.”

The rest of the story can be found here.