Sandwiches recalled for Listeria from Target, Walgreens, others

Fresh, ready-to-eat egg salad and ham salad sandwiches, as well as a seafood stuffing mix, are under recall from several retailers and a vending machine company because federal inspectors found Listeria monocytogenes in the Greencore USA LLC facility where the products were made.

To view labels of all of the products subject to this recall, please click on the image.

Greencore is recalling sandwiches distributed between Sept. 24 and 27 to American Food and Vending, Hannaford Brothers, Target and Turkey Hill locations in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and New York.

To see more labels for the products subject to this recall, please click on the image.

There is concern that consumers may have unused portions of the recalled products in their homes because some of the sandwiches have use-by dates of Oct. 2. Of even greater concern is the seafood stuffing, which was only distributed to Hannaford locations, but has use-by-dates reaching to Oct. 19.

“The products are being recalled because Listeria monocytogenes was found in environmental sampling conducted by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration),” according to the Greencore recall notice.

“Greencore has not received any reports of confirmed illnesses associated with these recalled sandwiches. As of Sept. 29, all (corporate) customers have been instructed to remove and destroy impacted product.”

Consumers are urged to not eat any of the recalled products. For labeling details that can be used to identify the recalled products, please see chart at bottom.

Although no finished products had been found to be contaminated with Listeria as of the posting of the recall notice, the FDA did find Listeria monocytogenes in the production facility.

Consequently, anyone who has eaten any of the recalled products is urged to monitor themselves for symptoms of Listeria infection for the coming weeks. It can take up to 70 days for symptoms to develop. Anyone who develops symptoms should immediately seek medical attention and tell their doctors about the possible exposure to the bacteria.

Symptoms include high fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea. Young children, the elderly, pregnant women and people with compromised immune systems can develop serious and sometimes deadly infections from exposure to Listeria monocytogenes bacteria.

Not the first time
In January 2011 and June 2012, FDA inspectors found Listeria monocytogenes in the Greencore production facility in Byfield, MA. The inspectors found the pathogen on food contact surfaces, as well as on equipment and other surfaces.

After working with the company officials to resolve the cleaning and sanitizing problems that allowed the bacteria to thrive in the facility, the FDA issued a warning letter to Greencore in October 2012.

The FDA ordered Greencore to clean up its operations and institute ongoing programs to prevent pathogen contamination of its food production facility. In April 2013 the FDA finally issued a close-out letter regarding the 2011 and 2012 inspections.

In November 2016, Greencore recalled Fresh to Go brand chicken hummus sandwiches sold to 7-Eleven stores because of possible Listeria contamination, but it was a secondary recall. Sabra Dipping Co. had recalled its red pepper hummus — an ingredient in the Greencore product — for potential contamination.

Customer	Product	Size	UPC	Use-by date
Hannaford	Egg Salad Club Roll	5.1 oz	4126816587	9/28 – 10/2
	Ham Salad Club Roll	5.1 oz	4126816589	9/28 -10/2
	Seafood Stuffing	10 oz	4126820509	10/2 – 10/19
Walgreens	Egg salad on White Bread	6.1 oz	4902272043	9/29 – 10/1
Turkey Hill Fresh Selects	Egg salad on Homestyle Bread	4.7 oz	7350875001	9/29 – 10/1
	Ham salad on Homestyle Bread	4.9 oz	7350875003	9/29 – 10/1
Target	Egg salad on White Bread	5.9	7350875792	9/29 – 10/1
American Food and Vending	Enza Choice Egg Salad on White Bread	4.7	7350875735	10/1
American Food and Vending	Enza Choice Ham Salad on White Bread	4.7	7350875815	10/1

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2xOBnyl

Publisher’s Platform: It’s past time for FDA to out retailers

This peanut butter substitute was still on the shelf at a Luckys Market earlier this week, despite having been recalled in March for E. coli contamination.

On March 7, 2017, The SoyNut Butter Company recalled all varieties of I.M. Healthy SoyNut Butters and all varieties of I.M. Healthy Granola products. On March 10, 2017, The SoyNut Butter Company expanded its recall to include Dixie Diner’s Club brand Carb Not Beanit Butter.  This after poisoning over 30 people – mostly kids – several that suffered from acute kidney failure.

The recall notice, drafted by I.M. Healthy, on the FDA website did not mention where the tainted product was sold. Nearly six months later Food Safety News reported on September 5: “Earlier today, Amazon.com was still selling I.M. Healthy soy nut butter that was recalled in March when federal officials traced an E. coli outbreak to the product.”  Then on September 26 a friend of a client whose son nearly died from consuming the soy nut butter found the product on “Close Out” at Lucky’s Market on 200 Woodside Rd, Redwood City, CA 94061.

So, why does the FDA not release the names of retailers to retailers and consumers during a recall and/or an outbreak?

Caitlin Dewey of The Washington Post asked the same question in March of this year – “Why the FDA hides the names of grocery stores that sell contaminated food.”  I reread it today and it still makes my head hurt.

According to Caitlin:

The FDA does not specify, however, which stores, centers or schools — because that would violate its interpretation of an obscure trade secret rule. 

This interpretation differs from that of other agencies in the federal food safety system, an overlapping and often illogical network of regulatory fiefdoms. The system, which is responsible for keeping food free of bacteria and other pathogens, frequently has to weigh the very real interests of private food companies against potential risks to the public. In the case of releasing retailer lists during major outbreaks, the FDA has historically sided with business, ruling that such lists constitute “confidential commercial information” and thus should not be available for public consumption. 

Critics say that the agency’s unwillingness to share this information poses a clear danger to public health, particularly in cases like the current E. coli outbreak, where parents may not know if their child consumed the recalled product.

 “Our mantra is that a more transparent food system is a safer food system,” said Thomas Gremillion, the director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America. “And there are lots of instances where having that distribution list would help victims of food-borne illness.”

The FDA’s current recall process has been in effect for years, though the agency did gain more recall authority under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011. It is, for the most part, a voluntary system — which means there’s some variance in how quickly recalls happen. While most companies are highly motivated to clean up any contamination, it takes time to evaluate and respond to possible threats. And that time can be multiplied several times over if a product has moved through the hands of several distributors, manufacturers or other middlemen, an issue that the FDA was faulted for in a June 2016 alert by the Inspector General’s Office.

When a company does issue a recall, it has wide latitude over the amount of information it shares; in some cases, a recall will never be made public. Recalls that are made public typically contain a description of the product and an explanation of the problem. But companies are not required to reveal where the product was sold — whether to a store, a school, a restaurant or another manufacturer that put it in other products.

The recall for SoyNut Butter, for instance, says that “products were distributed in multiple states and may have been purchased in stores or through mail order. They were also distributed to childcare centers and schools in multiple states.” Those states include Virginia and Maryland, where two people have fallen ill. I.M. Healthy did not respond to a phone call or email requesting comment, though a statement on its website called the contamination “deeply concerning” and said that the company had immediately issued a recall. A list compiled by the site eFoodAlert claims that the product was sold at a number of major grocery chains, including Kroger, Giant and Whole Foods.

“Industry argues that they don’t want to turn over who they sell to, because competition will know and try to undercut them,” said Bill Marler, a prominent food safety lawyer who is representing the parents of one of the children sickened in the SoyNut outbreak. “That’s all well and good under normal circumstances. But those rules should not and do not apply to a product that could cause people to become ill.”

In a statement to The Washington Post, the FDA affirmed that it believes its disclosure measures are sufficient and blamed the lack of downstream recall information on federal disclosure rules. Federal regulations do limit the sort of information that can be released to the public. Under the Freedom of Information Act and Title 21 of the Code of Regulations, government agencies — and specifically, the FDA — are told to exempt trade secrets and commercial information from any of their releases.

“Examples of [confidential consumer information] include raw material supplier lists, finished product customer lists, trace back information, etc.,” said Peter Cassell, a spokesman for the FDA. “CCI is exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests, but can be shared through certain information sharing agreements (including with other Federal agencies).”

“The FDA publicizes recall notices, including pictures of affected products, and uses social media accounts to reach consumers as swiftly as possible,” he later added. “In some cases, the FDA can release certain information that is otherwise exempt from disclosure if it is necessary to effectuate a recall. In many cases, it is most efficient for the company to directly notify its distributors so they can take appropriate action.”

Cassell declined to make an agency lawyer available for comment or explain how the FDA had arrived at its definitions. But it’s probably worth noting that when another agency considered similar precedents, it came to different conclusions.

In the early 2000s, the Food Safety and Inspection Service — the branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture that regulates meat, poultry and egg products — decided to revisit its own interpretation of the trade secrets rule. During a lengthy comments period, industry groups concerned with protecting their distribution lists from competitors faced off against consumer advocates. In 2008, after several years of debate, FSIS’s final rule concluded that it would “not cause substantial harm to the competitive position of any business” to disclose retailer names.

“FSIS now routinely posts these lists,” said Deirdre Schlunegger, the chief executive of STOP Foodborne Illness, an advocacy group for patients that lobbied FSIS 10 years ago. “We obviously believe consumers should have as much information as possible to make safe food decisions.”

Today, when FSIS issues a Class I recall — those that seem “reasonably” likely to cause health problems — it also issues a list of all the retail locations that have, or have had, the product. During last month’s massive cheese recall, for instance, FSIS published a list of every Safeway, Albertsons and Pak ’n’ Save that sold Taylor Farms salads containing Sargento pepperjack. But because FDA regulates the cheese itself, there was no such list of stores that sold the cheese outside salads.

“It does makes me wonder why the FDA can’t do the same,” said Sandra Eskin, the director of the Safe Food Project at Pew Charitable Trusts. “The fundamental issue is — is this information important to consumers during a recall? I would argue yes.”

But the man who led the effort to reform FSIS’s traded secrets rule has his own suspicions as to why the FDA hasn’t followed his lead. Richard Raymond, who was the undersecretary of agriculture for food safety under President George W. Bush, says that the fiercest opposition to the change came from the food industry. Raymond, who had been the chief medical officer in his home state of Nebraska, came to Washington, D.C., determined to change the rules on confidential information. He found himself surprised by the level of resistance.

“They were scared to death it would hurt their business,” Raymond said. “The retail stores want to protect their brand. … When you ask why FDA hasn’t done it, I suspect they don’t want that fight themselves.”

The FDA did not respond to Raymond’s comment by press time. But Gremillion, of the Consumer Federation, would like to see the agency take action.

“Why do confidential business interests trump public health in some cases and not others?” he asked. “We need more transparency around this.

I think it is past time for the FDA and the industries it oversees to be transparent – willingly or not.

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2fxOaeA

Pride & Joy refuses to recall raw milk after Salmonella found

Owners of an organic raw milk dairy in Washington say they have “politely declined” the state’s request that they recall their unpasteurized milk, which showed Salmonella contamination during routine testing by agriculture officials.

Claiming they are being targeted by the Washington State Department of Agriculture, the owners of Pride & Joy Puget Sound LLC posted a notice on the dairy’s Facebook page today after being notified on the positive Salmonella lab report from the state.

Public health officials are concerned that consumers may have unused portions of the implicated unpasteurized milk in their homes because the recalled product has a best-by date of Oct. 4.

A health alert posted today advises the public to not consume Pride & Joy organic raw milk because of the danger of Salmonella infection. All sizes of containers are subject to the alert. The dairy, in Toppenish, distributed the implicated unpasteurized milk via numerous retailers, drop-off locations and its farm store (see list below).

Children younger than 5, elderly people, pregnant women and people with suppressed immune systems — such as cancer patients — are at a higher risk of contracting serious infections from Salmonella exposure, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

As of this afternoon, the state officials did not have any confirmed reports of illnesses linked to the dairy. However, earlier this year Washington officials investigated two Salmonella illnesses reported by people who consumed raw milk from Pride & Joy.

That investigation did not yield any positive results for Salmonella, but the dairy’s raw milk tested positive for E. coli bacteria, which generally causes more serious infections than Salmonella.

In February the owners of Pride & Joy — Allen Voortman, Cheryl Voortman, Ricky Umipig and Cindy Umipig — voluntarily recalled raw milk and shut down operations to clean and make other changes suggested by the state to reduce the chance of contamination.

Not it
In February, the dairy owners challenged the state’s lab results, saying the E. coli contamination could have occurred at any point in the supply chain after the unpasteurized, organic products left the dairy’s control. Retailers, consumers and officials in the chain of evidence were all cited by the dairy owners as possible sources of the contamination.

In their Facebook post today they took a similar stand.

“We have been targeted again. In a routine sample taken from our farm on Sept. 18, the WSDA (Washington State Department of Agriculture) is claiming they found Salmonella. In an unprecedented event, we have politely declined the ‘voluntary recall,’ ” according to the Facebook post.

“Since we have declined the recall, the WSDA admitted on a recorded phone conference yesterday with our attorneys present, that no one is sick, they can not (sic) shut us down and will not even be retesting our milk since we declined the recall. We will resume business as usual.”

The Pride & Joy owners also say they want to know what kind of Salmonella test the state used and the chain of custody of the sample.

In the state’s health alert, officials said that although unpasteurized, raw milk is legal to sell at retail in Washington, consumers should be aware of the risks.

“Retail raw milk is legal to sell and buy in Washington, but there are serious potential health risks. Consumers should read the warning label on the retail raw milk container carefully and ask their retailer to verify the milk was produced and processed by a WSDA-licensed operation,” according to the health alert.

Anyone who has consumed raw milk from the Pride & Joy dairy recently and developed symptoms of Salmonella infection, referred to as salmonellosis, should immediately seek medical attention.

Generally, symptoms develop within 72 hours of exposure, but it can take up to two weeks in some people, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Symptoms can fever, diarrhea that is often bloody, nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. In rare circumstances, infection with salmonella can result in the organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe illnesses such as arterial infections, endocarditis and arthritis.

The Washington health alert including the following distribution list, which it obtained from Pride & Joy Dairy’s website:

Eastern Washington:

• Pride & Joy Dairy farm store (Granger)
• Bear Foods (Chelan)
• Better Life Natural Foods (Ellensburg)
• Settler’s Country Market (Ephrata and Moses Lake)
• Sage Mountain Natural Foods (Leavenworth)
• The Mazama Store (Mazama)
• Yoke’s Fresh Market (Richland)
• Glover Street Market (Twisp)
• Lemongrass Natural Foods (Wenatchee)
• Rhubarb Market (Wenatchee)
• Wenatchee Natural Foods (Wenatchee)
• Mill Creek Natural Foods (Union Gap)
• Rosauers Supermarkets (Yakima)

Drop-off group locations:

• Cle Elum
• Ellensburg
• Leavenworth
• Selah
• Wenatchee

Western Washington:

• Marvel Food and Deli (Auburn)
• Battle Ground Produce (Battle Ground)
• The Family Grocer (Duvall)
• Sno-Isle Food Co-op (Everett)
• Marlene’s Market & Deli (Federal Way and Tacoma)
• San Juan Island Food Co-op (Friday Harbor)
• Nature’s Market (Kent)
• Sunshine Corners Nutrition (Kent)
• Skagit Valley Food Co-op (Mount Vernon)
• Central Co-op (Seattle)
• Arnada Naturals (Vancouver)
• Chuck’s Produce (2 locations in Vancouver)

 Drop-off group locations:

• Auburn
• Bellevue
• Bothell
• Issaquah/Tiger Mountain
• Kenmore
• Kent/Covington
• Kirkland
• Lake City
• Lynnwood
• North Bend
• Puyallup
• Sammamish
• Seattle/Seward Park
• Shoreline

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2fvgZbT

Frozen fish ball products recalled for not listing milk on label

America New York Ri Wang Food Group Co. Ltd. has recalled several fish products because an allergenic ingredient, milk, was not declared on the labeling.

The recalled products include: Fish Balls, Fried Pollock Balls, White Fish Balls, Pollock Fish Balls, Cuttlefish Balls, Imitation Lobster Balls, Fish Tofu, Fried Fish Tofu, Fish Tofu with Shrimp Filling, Fish Tofu with Shrimp, and Fish Balls with custard and Fish Roe

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) discovered the problem, and Wang Food opted to recall products where a similar mistake was made in listing ingredients.    These products were distributed in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Illinois by retail stores in those states.

The products were also distributed to food service providers.

At retail, the products are sold in the frozen food sections of grocery stores.   Product packaging and labeling information are available here.

No illnesses have yet been linked to mistakenly labeled products.  The U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is investigating to determine the root cause of the problem. Consumers who have purchased the above products are urged to return them to the manufacturer for a refund.

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2fpCQoB

Processing problem spurs recall for staphylococcal enterotoxin

Processing deviations discovered by inspectors reviewing records at a Washington sausage company have prompted a recall of numerous products because they could be contaminated with staphylococcal enterotoxin.

German Sausage Haus LLC of Camano Island, WA, is recalling 1,252 pounds of heat treated, not fully cooked, not shelf stable meat products. The company shipped the products to retailers in Washington and to institutional kitchens in undisclosed states, according to the recall notice posted by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

To view photos of more of the recalled German Sausage Haus products, please click on the image.

“The frozen products were produced and packaged on various dates from June 14 to Sept. 8,” according to the recall notice. “The problem was discovered on Sept. 14 by FSIS Inspection Program Personnel when they observed a possible processing deviation while reviewing records.”

No details about adverse reactions or illnesses were included in the recall notice.

Consumers, retailers and operators of institutional kitchens can identify the recalled products by looking for the establishment number “Est. 45952” inside the USDA mark of inspection and the following label information:

• 

  To view additional photos of the recalled products, please click on the image.

  Vacuum packed (1 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Smoked Bacon” with package code “72301” and a package date of “08/18/2017.”

• Vacuum packed (1 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Smoked Shank” with package code “72501” and a package date of “09/07/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (1 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Smoked Fat” with package code “72131” and a package date of “08/01/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (1 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Smoked Pork Lion” with package code “72232” and a package date of “08/11/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Danube Smoked Sausages” with package code “71951” and a package date of “07/14/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Pituaros Smoked Sausages” with package code “72051” and a package date of “07/24/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Cabaj Smoked Sausages” with package code “71651” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Backi Petrovac Smoked Sausages” with package code “71652” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Devil Dog Smoked Sausages” with package code “71653” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Danube Smoked Sausages” with package code “71654” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Christmas Smoked Sausages” with package code “71655” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (2 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Donauschwaben Smoked Sausages” with package code “71656” and a package date of “06/28/2017.”
• Vacuum packed (1 each) “GERMAN SAUSAGE HAUS Smoked Ribs” with the following package codes and package dates:
  Package code “72231” and package date “08/11/2017”
  Package code “72442” and package date “09/01/2017”
  Package code “72511” and package date “09/08/2017”

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2wAiYBE

Frozen sausage recalled in Canada, U.S. for undeclared milk

A New York company is recalling frozen pork sausage products in the United States and Canada because they contain milk, a known allergen that is not declared on the product labels.

In the United States, the recall by RI Wang Food Group of Maspeth, NY, includes almost 27 tons of “China Brand” sausage products, which the company sent to retailers and institutional kitchens in New York and New Jersey.

In Canada, an undisclosed volume of the China Brand sausage products from RI Wang are under recall by Canda Six Fortune Enterprise Co. Ltd. Food companies in Canada rarely include information on the amount of product subject to recall. Canada Six Fortune Enterprise distributed the sausage to retailers nationwide.

Canadian inspectors discovered the problem during routine product testing, according to the recall notice posted Friday night on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s website. After the CFIA notified the company, RI Wang alerted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about the finding.

Recall notices in both countries indicated no confirmed adverse reactions had been reported in relation to the China Brand pork sausage products as of Friday.

“If you have an allergy to milk, do not consume the recalled products as they may cause a serious or life-threatening reaction,” according to the Canadian recall notice. “Check to see if you have recalled products in your home. Recalled products should be thrown out or returned to the store where they were purchased.”

In the United States, consumers, retailers and operators of institutional kitchens can identify the recalled China Brand pork sausages by looking for the establishment number “EST. M/P-40200” inside the USDA mark of inspection and the following label information:

25-lb. institutional pack of “Chinese Brand Big Sausage,” with the following lot codes and package dates:

• lot code “0118348” and package date “1/17/2017”
• lot code “0918296” and package date “3/10/2017”

255-g. retail packages of “Chinese Brand Big Sausage,” with the following lot codes and package dates:

• lot code “117338” and package date “1/28/2016.”
• lot code “117334” and package date “2/1/2016.”
• lot code “417269” and package date “4/6/2016.”
• lot code “682016” and package date “6/8/2016.”
• lot code “817151” and package date “8/4/2016.”
• lot code “518235” and package date “5/10/2017.”

25-lb. institutional pack of “Chinese Brand Mini Bite Size Sausage,” with the following lot codes and package dates:

• lot code “0118356” and package date “1/10/2017.”
• lot code “0118345” and package date “1/20/2017.”
• lot code “0118335” and package date “1/30/2017.”
• lot code “0118326” and package date “2/10/2017.”
• lot code “0118296” and package date “3/10/2017.”
• lot code “0118269” and package date “4/6/2017.”
• lot code “0118254” and package date “4/21/2017.”
• lot code “0118247” and package date “4/28/2017.”
• lot code “0118243” and package date “5/2/2017.”
• lot code “011229” and package date “5/16/2017.”
• lot code “0118228” and package date “5/17/2017.”

255-g. retail packages of “Chinese Brand Mini Bite Size Sausage,” with the following lot codes and package dates:

• lot code “117338” and package date “1/28/2016.”
• lot code “117334” and package date “2/1/2016.”
• lot code “217306” and package date “2/29/2016.”
• lot code “817150” and package date “5/9/2016.”
• lot code “682016 and package date “6/8/2016.”
• lot code “817151” and package date “8/4/2016.”
• lot code “717110” and package date “9/9/2016.”
• lot code “121704” and package date “12/19/2016.”
• lot code “118659” and package date “1/9/2017.”
• lot code “218315” and package date “2/21/2017.”
• lot code “218301” and package date “3/7/2017.”
• lot code “518235” and package date “5/10/2017.”
• lot code “618208” and package date “6/6/2017.”

In Canada, consumers and retailers can identify the recalled China Brand products by looking for the following label information:

• Ri Wang Food Chinese Brand Mini Bite size Sausage in 25-g packages with the UPC number 8 15655 01060 7;
• Ri Wang Food Chinese Brand Mini Bite Sausage in 2.27-kg packages with the UPC number 8 15655 01089 8; and
• Ri Wang Food Chinese Brand Big Sausage in 255-g packages with the UPC number 8 15655 01088 1.

Consumers with questions about the recall can contact Karen Tam, customer service manager at RI Wang Food Group by calling 718-628-8999 or by sending email to Karenp@riwangusa.com.

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

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2h7CfIt

Texas raw milk Brucella contamination hits 7 states

Although it is against federal law to sell unpasteurized milk across state lines, the CDC and state health departments are investigating illnesses in at least seven states in relation to Brucella bacteria found in raw milk from a Texas dairy.

One woman in Texas has been in the hospital for weeks with a lab-confirmed case of brucellosis. A sample from her matches antibiotic-resistant Brucella bacteria found in raw milk from K-Bar dairy in Paradise, TX, according to Texas officials and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“It’s very important for people who drank raw milk from this dairy to seek treatment to prevent infection with Brucella RB51,” said Dr. William Bower who is leading the CDC’s brucellosis investigation group.

“Even if people don’t have any symptoms now, they can develop a chronic infection that can impact their health for years to come.”

As of this afternoon, the CDC and the Texas State Department of State Health Services had received reports about people who drank K-Bar milk or have symptoms consistent with brucellosis caused by Brucella RB51 in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Ohio, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas, according to a news release from the CDC.

The Texas department has been warning people about the Brucella bacteria found in the K-Bar milk for more than a month. In an Aug. 14 public alert the state urged consumers who drank the milk and their doctors to consider post-exposure antibiotic treatment, especially if there are brucellosis symptoms involved.

In a similar health alert Wednesday, the CDC recommended a 21-day regimen of rifampin and penicillin for anyone who consumed unpasteurized milk or dairy products from the K-Bar dairy from June 1 through Aug. 7. Brucellosis symptoms can develop as quickly as five days after exposure, but can also take up to six months to develop in some people.

“Initially, people with brucellosis experience fever, sweats, aches and fatigue,” according to CDC’s update today.

“If not treated, Brucella RB51 infection can result in long-term complications, like arthritis, heart problems, enlargement of the spleen or liver, and, in rare cases, nervous system problems. Like meningitis RB51 can cause severe illness in people with weakened immune systems and miscarriages in pregnant women.”

Hundreds may not know of risk
Texas officials report the owners of K-Bar Dairy have been “cooperating fully with the investigation” and has been operating in compliance with state dairy laws and rules.

However, the dairy does not have complete sales records, which has state and federal officials worried that hundreds of people may be unaware of they are at risk. The records K-Bar does have show people outside of Texas could be at risk of infection from its unpasteurized milk.”

In addition to raw milk, K-Bar Dairy offers unpasteurized cream, cheese, yogurt and other dairy products.

“Purchase records and illness reports indicate additional people in Texas and some as far away as California and North Dakota may need antibiotics to prevent or treat infection. In Texas, raw milk is only allowed to be sold on site at the dairy,” according to CDC’s update today.

Raw milk dairies are supposed to maintain contact information on customers in case they need to recall product. Unpasteurized milk is known to carry bacteria and viruses, which pasteurization kills, according to state and federal officials.

“Due to incomplete contact information, CDC staff have been unable to reach about 200 households in which someone bought K-Bar milk. People who sampled the milk at the dairy or got the milk from friends or family also may not be aware of their risk,” CDC reported.

Of the more than 800 households known to have purchased K-Bar raw milk during the exposure period, CDC is attempting to contact 672 and Texas is trying to reach 170. Generally households are considered to consist of an average of four people, meaning thousands of people are at risk of Brucella infection.

Officials do not have contact information on many of the households known to have purchased the contaminated raw milk. For the households that CDC has been able to reach, more than eight out of every 10 people were exposed to the bacteria.

“Of the 485 households with contact information, CDC successfully reached 236 households. Among the 236 households, 83 percent of people were exposed to RB51 by drinking the milk,” the federal agency reported.

Advice to consumers, physicians
People who consumed K-Bar raw milk should monitor themselves and their children for fever for four weeks after they last drank the milk. The CDC advises them to watch for other brucellosis symptoms for six months. These symptoms include but are not limited to muscle pain, lasting fatigue, arthritis, depression and swelling of the testicles.

Doctors can find more information about testing patients for Brucella RB51 and which antibiotics to use to prevent infection on the CDC website at: http://ift.tt/2vW2sMQ.

Blood cultures can be used to confirm infections, but the CDC warned health care providers Wednesday to indicate on lab orders that the cultures could grow Brucella, which could infect lab workers if they don’t take special precautions.

from Food Recalls – Food Safety News http://ift.tt/2yfvl8q