We report a norovirus GIV outbreak in the United States, 15 years after the last reported outbreak. During May 2016 in Wisconsin, 53 persons, including 4 food handlers, reported being ill. The outbreak was linked to individually prepared fruit consumed as a fruit salad. The virus was phylogenetically classified as a novel GIV genotype.
Rare norovirus GIV foodborne outbreak, Wisconsin, USA
Queensland, or maybe all of Australia, has banned single-use plastic bags at supermakets.
No biggie for me, I always have my knapsack.
But it would be more meaningful if Australian retailers could set aside their perverse fetish of wrapping every piece of cut fruit or veggie in plastic.
Fresh-cut presents unique risks and needs to be kept close to 4 C to limit microbial growth.
That ain’t happening at retail.
I have shared my evidence-based concerns with the supermarket, Coles, and they have done, nothing.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports that on December 7, 2019, Tailor Cut Produce recalled its Fruit Luau cut fruit mix as well as cut honeydew melon, cut cantaloupe, and cut pineapple products because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
These products were not sold directly to consumers in grocery stores.
These products were sold for use in institutional food service establishments such as hospitals, long-term care facilities, schools, and hotels.
Food service and institutional food operators should not sell or serve the recalled products.
The recalled fruit products were distributed between November 15 and December 1, 2019.
Twenty-seven hospitalizations have been reported. No deaths have been reported.
Since the last update on December 11, 85 additional ill people have been reported from 11 states.
These illnesses started during the same time period as the illnesses reported on December 11, but were not confirmed as part of the outbreak at that time.
Epidemiologic and traceback evidence indicate that cut fruit, including honeydew melon, cantaloupe, pineapple, and grapes, produced by Tailor Cut Produce of North Brunswick, New Jersey, is a likely source of this outbreak.
Passion fruit and mangoes are enough reason to move to Australia.
Sure, there are American versions, but not like these.
Bret Stetka of Scientific American writes that compared with other mammals, and along with those of a few other notably bright creatures—dolphins, whales and elephants among them—the brain to body-size ratios of monkeys, apes and humans are among the highest.
For decades the prevailing evolutionary explanation for this was increasing social complexity. The so-called “social brain hypothesis” holds that the pressures and nuances of interacting and functioning within a group gradually boosted brain size.
Yet new research suggests otherwise. A study conducted by a team of New York University anthropologists, and published Monday in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reports diet was in all likelihood much more instrumental in driving primate brain evolution. In particular, it appears that we and our primate cousins may owe our big brains to eating fruit.
I love my fruit.
In Guelph, I was the hockey coach who always ate a grapefruit during the game. I still do when I coach in Australia, but more towards the sweeter fruits.
That must be why I’m so smart (not).
Much of the research exploring the social hypothesis has rendered inconsistent results. And as many in the field have noted, a number of oft-cited studies in support of the theory suffer from small sample sizes and flawed design, including out-of-date species classification. The new work is based on a primate sample more than three times larger than that used in prior studies, and one that used a more accurate evolutionary family tree.
In over 140 primate species, the study authors compared brain size with the consumption of fruit, leaves and meat. They also compared it with group size, social organization and mating systems. By looking at factors such as whether or not a particular primate group prefers solitary to pair living or whether they are monogamous, the researchers figured they should theoretically be able to determine if social factors contributed to the evolution of larger brains.
And it appears they could not. Dietary preferences—especially fruit consumption—seems to have been much more influential. The researchers found that fruit-eating species, or frugivores, have significantly larger brains than both omnivores and “foliovores,” those that prefer eating leaves. “These findings call into question the current emphasis on the social brain hypothesis, which suggests larger brains are associated with increased social complexity,” explains Alex DeCasien, a doctoral candidate in anthropology and lead author of the study. “Instead, our results resurrect older ideas about the evolutionary relationship between foraging complexity and brain size.”
"At the consumer level, washing from the point of view of numbers, may reduce risk to 10 percent of the original risk. That’s been fairly consistent. But it’s definitely not solving the problem … If you happen to be lucky and the cells of the pathogen are not going to be attached to the surface, you may get lucky. If the cells have formed some structure and are strongly attached to the surface, you may not.”
Washing with water and some scrubbing motion applies friction, which has been shown to dramatically reduce the number of bacteria on a fruit or vegetable — from 100 percent risk to 10 percent risk, for example. But when the original numbers are in the trillions, that 10 percent risk can still be significant.
Running water on a fruit can reduce the risk to 15 percent. Scrubbing gets you to 10 percent, and using a mix of 3 parts water, 1 part vinegar can reduce the risk to 1 or 2 perecent.
So, it’s doing something, but it may not be enough.
Fruit compote may be the most likely culprit which sickened visitors to the Russian pavilion at Folklorama this past August, according to a report published by the Winnipeg Health Region.
The report details the probable cause of the verotoxigenic E-coli and its effect on 37 people who either attended the pavilion or who fell victim to secondary spread of the E. coli bacterium. Only three of the total 40 cases were not linked to the pavilion. In addition, the report offers a number of recommendations designed to reduce the risk of E-coli outbreaks in the future.
According to the "VTEC Outbreak 2010 Report," each person who was treated was interviewed to find the common connection with the pavilion. A study was then undertaken to determine the identity of the specific food item which was contaminated with E-coli, with 33 out of 34 people who attended the pavilion taking part.
Five patients were hospitalized with one case admitted to ICU and seventeen people visited an emergency room. There was one case of hemolytic uremic syndrome. VIP tour group attendees who had not been ill were asked to volunteer to be controls in the study.
The study looked at foods such as borscht, meatballs, a rice dish, and Russian juice (fruit compote). These four items were served together on the "Russian Combination platter." Analysis narrowed down the mostly likely choice to the compote over other sources, partially because the compote was served with both the vegetarian and non-vegetarian platters.
The most plausible source of contamination of the compote juice could have either been from cross-contamination from raw or undercooked ground beef – which is the most common source of E. coli in food products – which was also being handled at the same time in the kitchen or from E. coli contaminated apples used to make the compote.
Interviews with the kitchen staff revealed that most of the food was cooked in a pressure cooker. However, the compote juice was cooked in a separate pot. It was prepared by adding washed, unpeeled apples, blueberries and blackberries to boiling water. The fruit was bought fresh from a supermarket in Winnipeg.
Once boiled for five to 10 minutes, the compote juice was decanted into large 10-litre plastic pails. The boiled compote was then refrigerated until served cold. A new batch of compote was made every day. The only other food item that may have been cooked in the same pot was rice. The fruit was washed before boiling, kitchen staff wore gloves and practiced proper hand washing, and pots were washed and sanitized between use.
The Associated Press reports that a survey of fruit available via ubiquitous street carts in Thailand’s capital, Bangkok, found unsafe levels of bacteria and chemicals that help keep it looking fresh in the city’s tropical heat.
The Prime Minister’s Office launched a one-month campaign Monday to encourage fruit vendors and their suppliers to improve hygiene and provide consumers with safe, clean fruit. Authorities warned another survey will be taken at the end of the month after which vendors selling contaminated fruit will face up to two years in prison and fines of 20,000 baht ($650).
The study conducted throughout August by Bangkok City Hall, the Thai Food and Drug Administration and other health agencies sampled fruit from 38 vendors across the capital, where baggies packed with watermelon or pineapple sell for 10 baht (30 cents) and pricier guava costs 25 baht (80 cents).
Results of the study found that 67 percent of 153 samples of fresh fruit contained unsafe amounts of coliform bacteria. Coliform bacteria is common in digestive tracts and does not necessarily cause sickness, but its presence may indicate fecal matter, E. coli and other disease-causing organisms.
Every time there is a food safety outbreak with fresh fruits and vegetables, some journalist or lobby group will call up and say something like, “we want to do some sampling for E. coli or Salmonella and fresh produce.”
And every time, Chapman or I will walk the person through the limitations with testing, especially in fresh produce.
In a related study, none of the chemical residues detected were of health concern, although NZFSA principal advisor for chemicals Dr Paul Dansted says he is disappointed with results from this year’s Food Residue Surveillance Programme (FRSP), which targets food likely to show up problems. This year’s focus was on spinach, celery, ginger and garlic.
“A significant number of samples had levels over the maximum residue limit (MRL) which is used for monitoring purposes, but it’s important to stress that dietary intake assessments on the non-compliant food showed none posed a health or food safety concern.”
Eight out of 27 celery samples and four out of 24 spinach samples had residues that were over the limit. There were none over the limit in 50 samples of garlic, but ginger had 11 samples out of 39 over the limit.
“Celery and spinach can be more vulnerable to persistence of chemical residues,” Dr Dansted says. “Because of their shape, residues that wash off in the rain can collect in the base of the plant. We expected to find some problems, but this is not good enough. We will take regulatory action to ensure better compliance in future.”
Properly structured sampling programs are essential to validate that food safety programs are working. But testing is not enough.
It’s end-of-year, so lists are big, and I’m fond of my Top-5 Records label list.
But some are just dumb, and it’s good to see the science types in New Zealand calling out some BS.
The Dominion Post reports tomorrow that toxicologists have accused a food safety campaigner of a lack of understanding after she advised people to eat organic celery to avoid pesticides.
Alison White has ranked celery at the top of a list of foods likely to contain pesticide residue, but scientists say that does not mean indulging in the vegetable will cause any harm.
Ms White, who is a researcher and co-convenor of the Safe Food Campaign, said consumers wanted information about whether their food contained pesticide residues.
Canterbury University toxicology professor Ian Shaw said Ms White’s table, which she published on the group’s website, displayed "naughtiness" in referencing research about cancer risks among people who sprayed vegetables, not those who ate them.
Ms White’s comments also showed she did not understand the difference between how dangerous a chemical was, and the actual chance or risk of it causing any harm.
The Food Safety Authority’s principal toxicology adviser, John Reeve, dismissed Ms White’s suggestion that pesticide residues could be making our food unsafe.
"Alison White and her colleagues have no expertise in toxicology and don’t understand the science."
Dr Reeve said pesticide limits were determined by how much of a chemical growers needed for it to work.
That limit was hundreds of times lower than the levels that would have any impact on human health, he said.
Food is 21st century snake oil. In an era of unprecedented affluence, consumers now choose among a cacophony of low fat, enhanced nutrient staples reflecting a range of political statements and perceived lifestyle preferences, far beyond dolphin free tuna.
On May 17, 2001, Procter & Gamble announced that it was discontinuing its Fit Fruit & Vegetable Wash in the United States, Canada and Mexico effective September 28, 2001. The company said the market was too small for continued investment.
But FIT is still out there. And someone e-mailed me about it the other day.
I’m not up on the current version of Fit being marketed, but in fall 2000, I contacted P&G to ask for the data substantiating the claim that Fit would eliminate 99.9 per cent of bacteria on fresh produce,
After a bunch of calls to various PR types I got hooked up with some scientists at P&G in Cincinnati, who verbally told me that sample cucumbers, tomatoes and the like were grown on the same farm in California, sprayed with chemicals that would be used in conventional production, and then harvested immediately and washed with Fit or water. The Fit removed 99.9 per cent more, or so the company claimed, because no data was ever forthcoming.
One problem. Many of the chemicals used have harvest after dates, such as the one tomato chemical that must be applied at least 20 days before harvest. Residue data on produce in Canadian stores reveals extremely low levels, in the parts per million or billion. So that 99.9% reduction is really buying consumers an extra couple of zeros in the residue quantity, all well below health limits.
No idea what the new Fit is promoting. But pathogens and chemicals in fresh produce need to be controlled on the farm, and in transportation and distribution.