Raw milk consumption- Hazards and their control

Milk is a life sustaining food that can provide almost all the nutrients required by a human being. The dairy industry as we know to day is a high tech venture that involves high expenditure to ensure that the consumers get only safe milk after necessary tests are done. Consider the plight of vegetarians whose dietary habits do not permit consumption of high protein foods like egg, meat and fish and who depend on milk for deriving most of their protein requirements. For them milk is elixir of life though there are a few protein sources in the plant kingdom that can furnish proteins in the diet, albeit of a lower quality nutritionally. Since the world has moved away from small sized milk farms serving locally to huge mechanized and automated dairy conglomerates with adequate infrastructure to distribute their products over thousands of kilometers with absolute guaranteed safety, most consumers do not bother about safety relying heavily on the industry to ensure the same. It is only recently that a small movement started some years ago by some people to consume raw milk has grown into a phenomenon attracting all round attention. Though food scientists will never vouch safe for the safety of raw milk without pasteurization, those patronizing this product are least deterred and if latest reports are to be believed raw milk consumption is growing in a country like the US where there are sizeable patrons posing challenge to the organized dairy sector. Read further to understand and form your own opinion regarding this new phenomenon. 

"The numbers say it all. There were only six raw-milk dairies in the state in 2006. There are now 39 — more than double the number in 2013 when there were 18. All are Grade A licensed dairies, which means their milk must meet the same food-safety standards as milk from conventional dairies. State officials say the number of raw-milk dairies will likely continue to climb. Raw milk is milk that hasn't been pasteurized. When milk is pasteurized, it is heated to a high enough temperature to kill disease-causing bacteria such as E. coli , Salmonella andlisteria. Health officials warn that children are especially vulnerable to pathogens in raw milk, primarily because their immune systems are still developing. State law in Washington requires that all retail raw milk products carry a warning label that states: "WARNING:  This product has not been pasteurized and may contain harmful bacteria.  Pregnant women, children, the elderly and persons with lowered resistance to disease have the highest risk of harm from use of this product." Despite numerous outbreaks and recalls of raw milk across the country and warnings from federal and state agencies about the potential dangers associated with drinking raw milk, demand is strong. And continues to grow. A passionate lot, raw-milk advocates have a range of reasons for avoiding pasteurized milk. Many say they can drink raw milk without experiencing allergic reactions such as bloating and other digestive discomforts. Others like that it often comes from family farms, in contrast to what they refer to as "factory farms." Still others laud it for its power to cure ailments ranging from arthritis to cancer — claims that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says are anecdotal and not based on science. And, most raw-milk consumers say that it just plain tastes better. "The real deal" is a popular rallying cry in raw-milk circles. "The cat's been let out of the bag, and no one's going to be able to put it back in," said Jim Sinnema, owner the Old Silvana Creamery north of Seattle, referring to the growing popularity of raw milk. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration bans the interstate sale or distribution of raw milk. In other words, raw milk produced in one state cannot be sold in another state. The U.S. Pasteurized Milk Ordinance requires that milk sold across state lines be pasteurized and meet the standards of the ordinance. A dozen states currently allow raw milk sales at retail outlets. Among them are California, Idaho and Pennsylvania. However, the milk has to meet certain  standards, usually Grade A standards. Sixteen states ban raw milk altogether. With Washington state's requirement that raw-milk dairies be licensed as Grade A, the operations must be inspected and have their milk tested on a regular basis. It's a practical way for dealing with reality. If raw-milk sales are illegal, say many public health officials, consumers will seek it out anyway, putting themselves and their families at risk. Here's the rub — raw milk requires more tests than conventional milk. Yong Liu, manager of  the microbiology lab at Washington state's Agriculture Department, said since raw milk is not pasteurized, it must also be tested for foodborne pathogens, in addition to the same quality-control tests performed on pasteurized milk. The five pathogen tests are for Salmonella, Listeria, campylobacter and two types of E. coli. Up to nine tests are often conducted on raw-milk samples. Washington officials say raw milk is one of the highest risk food products for sale in the state."

Milk is a rich food and naturally it is more vulnerable to spoilage by many bacteria within a matter of few hours causing irreparable damage to its flavor, taste and texture. In a country like India where milking is done manually without using vacuum machines, the shelf life can be expected to be extremely short. Fresh milk vending still exists in the country but care is taken to deliver the extracted milk within a couple of hours and the buyers do not lose any time to boil the milk to kill all microorganisms which may be present in the product. If the maintenance of cows are scientifically efficient, if the milking person is hygienically "clean", if the utensils are washed thoroughly and if the milk is immediately chilled there is no reason why it should not keep for a day or two without "splitting". But large scale distribution of raw milk may be inconceivable in India because of the sanitation limitations at all levels. As for the claims that raw milk is superior to pasteurized milk, the jury is still out and unless scientifically proven will not stand critical scrutiny. As long as the avowed devotees of raw milk are prepared to take "risks", no one can grudge their privileges, if one can all them so!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

POULTRY PROCESSING-HAZARDS REMAIN IN SPITE OF NEW INSPECTION REGIME

The much touted new safety regulations supposed to ensure better protection to American consumers does not seem to be of much significance if those experienced inspectors with hands-on experience in policing the industry are to be believed. On the contrary the situation is likely to become worse because lot of trust is being placed on the industry for self inspection and self regulation. On one hand the inspection regime does not have adequate technical personnel to man the fast moving processing lines to do justice the spirit of safety inspection due to paucity of funds. On the other hand the industry is being allowed to to speed up production lines up to three birds a second to oblige their insatiable thirst for higher productivity and profitability. Here is a take on this emerging scenario in the US poultry industry which does not bode well for the future.

USDA's proposed rule to "modernize" the poultry inspection system would allow plants to speed the inspection line up to 175 birds per minute — that gives inspectors about a third of a second per bird to check for feces, tumors, defects, disease or other factors that could make consumers sick. (Read more on the rule and see what an animated version of one carcass per third of a second actually looks like here). Conventionally, plants could run poultry lines as fast as 140 carcasses per minute, but there were at least four FSIS inspectors on the line responsible for 35 birds each. Painter says that at the plant he's currently stationed at, which is participating in HIMP, the line was averaging up to 181 birds a minute with two plant-employed sorters and Painter at the end of the line. He says: "There's no humanly way possible two people can look inside 90 birds a minute." After the proposed modernization rule was published, USDA told the plant to cut its speed down to 175 birds per minute, Painter reports. Not that that makes much of a difference. "It's totally hands-off inspection," he told me. "Actually, it's not inspection, it's visualization. If you can't touch them, how can you inspect them? You can't even see inside the carcass." So, how can a plant meet basic food safety standards with less inspection? One way is dousing the poultry in chemicals. In fact, Painter told me that USDA encourages the use of chemicals. One chemical is called per acetic acid, an antimicrobial agent used to reduce the risk of food-borne pathogens salmonella and campylobacter. The problem is that after the carcasses are sprayed down with per acetic acid and then put in the chiller, depending on the chlorine concentration of the chiller, "it can be like having a bucket of bleach under your nose," Painter said. He said that it's not unusual to hear from poultry plant workers who say they're becoming ill after exposure to the chemical combination. "These chemicals keep getting pumped into the plant, but they don't increase ventilation," he said. Painter predicts that if current line speeds stay in place, he thinks plants will increase their reliance on chemicals to make up for inspection gaps. Painter said he'd "bet my last nickel on it." Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist for the food program at Food & Water Watch, said he and his colleagues suspect that poultry plants manipulate the levels of chemicals depending on when FSIS conducts salmonella testing. Testing kits are sent directly to the plant, not to the inspector, Corbo told me, so the plant gets a convenient heads-up. So, while USDA says that the new "modernized" inspection system is leading to reduced rates of salmonella, Corbo said plants can easily manipulate their systems to prepare for FSIS testing. He also noted that while industry says the chemical residue left on the poultry is fairly small, "I don't think anyone's doing any long-term testing to see if that's the case." In 2011, Corbo filed a Freedom of Information Act request to view data coming out of the HIMP plants. He found that plant-employed inspectors, as opposed to FSIS inspectors, where not upholding food safety standards. According to a Food & Water Watch news release, "the records show that bile, sores, scabs, feathers, and digestive tract tissue are often not being properly removed from chicken carcasses." Corbo said that the overwhelming majority of noncompliance reports coming from HIMP plants and filed by FSIS inspectors are for fecal contamination in the cavity of the bird. But if the FSIS inspector can only truly inspect a small fraction of the carcasses that speed by on the line each day, "we don't really know how many of those carcasses actually got into commerce," he said. "Essentially, the attitude of the industry is that chicken isn't something people eat raw…it has to be properly cooked," Corbo said. "They're saying it's really the responsibility of the consumer, which we think is ridiculous. The industry has a responsibility here too. …(With this proposed rule), we're essentially leaving it up to one (FSIS) inspector at the end of the line and chemicals to prevent food-borne illness from entering the food supply." Painter, who himself is struggling with health problems he believes stems from food tainted with salmonella or campylobacter, says he's not optimistic that there's enough opposition to stop the proposed modernization rule. His advice? "Wash it, clean it, cook it thoroughly." "I've worked for poultry prior to working for (USDA)," he said. "I'm not anti-industry…but we can't expect a plant to regulate itself when a dollar value is involved."

It is understandable that industry has to increase productivity very significantly to meet with the ever increasing demand of the consumers for chicken meat and products derived from it. But compromising the safety of these products, whatever be the excuse, cannot be condoned under any circumstances. Increased use of chemicals like per acetic acid and high levels of chlorine can be counter productive, besides being dangerous for the consumer as ell as the personnel working in the plant. Frustration experienced by the inspecting personnel is reflected in their advice to the consumers that they should not trust the industry and in stead take appropriate measures for cleaning and cooking the material at their home! The danger is magnified when it is realized that feces-contaminated poultry meat stored in kitchen refrigerators can pollute other food materials like fruits, vegetables, milk etc causing much more damage eventually.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

NON-PLASTIC PACKING MATERIALS-NEW FOCUS ON THEIR SAFETY

Modern food processing industry is totally dependent on functional packaging materials to preserve and present their products to the consumers. From the good old open top sanitary cans to to day's multitude of plastics, a frequently worrying aspect has been the extent of chemicals leached into the food contents during processing as well as storage for varying periods. It is a universally accepted norm that foods packed in any packaging mode must not cause any ill effect to the consumer at any stage. While cans were dominating the food packing landscape for a number of years, concerns were always there about the extent of leaching of substances like lead, arsenic, iron, tin etc and safe limits have been in vogue adopted by international community. Then came the plastics and as hundreds of chemicals are used in manufacturing different plastics, the problem of migration of some of the constituents of the plastics into foods packed became a matter of serious concern. There are safety limits for most of the leachates that could migrate into contents, universally accepted based on exhaustive studies. The latest focus of safety experts is on non-plastic packing materials which can pass on undesirable chemicals when used for food contact application. The EU, which is seriously concerned about consumer safety in their member countries, is taking the lead to look into this virgin area and world will come to know about the undesirable effect of the leachates from these packaging materials, if any, once the study is completed.

"The body's Scientific Cooperation (ESCO) Working Group has also proposed that a Pan-European network of experts be set up to help tackle crisis situations that surface in relation to such issues as printing inks, coatings, paper and board, and adhesives. What happens to substances that are used in the production of non-plastic FCMs is another major issue, it said. These are some of the findings contained in a report this week from a Europe-wide panel of experts brought together by the Parma-based food safety watchdog. EFSA convened the panel of experts last year after concerns were raised that a number of recent crises had originated from non-plastic parts of food contact materials (FCMs). Toxic substances leaching into foods from packaging inks and recycled cardboard have been two of the major issues grabbing industry and consumer attention".

There was a time in India when old news papers were being used for wrapping food materials and concerns expressed regarding the possibility of leaching Lead from the printed paper. It may be recalled that Lead based letters were part and parcel of printing presses for a number of decades. Of course the practice wrapping in news papers still continues though to a lesser extent after the advent of plastics which is used extensively as carry bags almost every where. But to day's printing industry hardly uses any lead based letters. With graphics becoming an integral part of advertisements, product promotions and pack designs, diverse colors used in the printing can be of danger though how serious this problem can be, is not known to day. The EU study can be expected to lay guidelines regarding this issue and other countries can benefit from their findings.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

HAZARDS OF VEGETABLES FROM CONTAMINATED FIELDS-NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Consumption of cold foods is invariably fraught with food safety risks, especially in many developing countries where traceability of raw material sources is very difficult. Whether it is meat, egg or salad vegetables all of them pose potential health risks due to contamination with bacterial pathogens. Though the conditions in countries like India are favorable for such contamination, paradoxically most cases of illness caused by these foods come from developed countries like the US. Besides Spinach, Tomato, Meat and others, most recent incidence of contamination pertained to egg in the US where half a million Salmonella infected eggs were recalled due to several instances of illness amongst the population there. Now comes the news that India also has to face such problems considering the agricultural practices followed by the farmers, as per a recent report.

It was traditionally believed that neurocysticercosis only spreads through consumption of pork. Now, strict vegetarians are also falling prey to the disease. Water and green leafy vegetables, especially those grown in fields where human faeces is found, are also favoured routes for the tapeworm. "Be careful about what vegetables you eat. Do not eat salads at roadside eateries or wedding functions. Fruits and burgers sprinkled with cabbage are also best given the miss outside the home. At home, vegetables like carrot, turnip, spinach, radish, coriander and cucumber should be washed thoroughly, preferably five or six times. Kebabs made with minced meat often have pork added to them to cut cost. Raw or insufficiently-cooked pork should be avoided at all costs. Poor personal hygiene of persons who handle the food - cooks or waiters is another matter of concern," is Sethi's advice. Padma adds, "Water is another common vehicle. Drink only bottled or boiled water or carbonated drinks in cans or bottles. Avoid drinks from vending machines or with ice-cubes. Even simple negligence like failure to wash your hands might cause problems." Verma believes that betel leaves, which might be kept in infected water, chutneys and jaljeera are also best avoided.

Though salad preparations are restricted to a few items like Onion, Cucumber, Green Chilli and Tomato, especially in the northern part of the country during summer, there can be worry about contamination from raw and sliced Tomato and the water used to wash the vegetables. Most other foods are cooked adequately to destroy microbes present on the surface giving very little chance for any food borne illnesses. As for eggs and meat products, they are also consumed only after cooking preempting any possibility of causing harm to the consumer. The increased incidence of Tapeworm infestation, especially amongst vegetarian population is a matter of concern and recent reports of brain afflictions due to cysts from this source is indeed alarming. Good handling practices reported above make sense and need to be widely disseminated.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

EGG "SAFETY"-POULTRY FARMERS' DILEMMA

Transformation of poultry production practices from a predominantly open rearing originally into a highly organized and controlled industry in the last century has brought along with it safety problems, haunting the industry. The increased incidences of pathogens related hazardous episodes during the last few years are making both the consumers and the safety agencies jittery and there is a wide spread demand for tightening the regulatory overseeing of this industry. Though the debate on the much talked about "caged vs free" animals was confined amongst animal welfare promoters till recently, it has now spilled into the public arena because of health concerns about the influence of over crowded cages on egg safety.

"In particular, Ohio's egg crop is a health risk, Greger said, largely because of the "battery-cage" units - about the size of an 81/2-by-11 sheet of paper - where laying hens spend most of the 13 months of their lives. They're unable to move around or flex their wings and are surrounded by other cages holding tens or even hundreds of thousands of other hens. It is an atmosphere where salmonella thrives, Greger said, because of an abundance of fecal dust, rodents and insects, and difficulty in sanitizing the cages. By comparison, numerous U.S. and international studies have shown that having cage-free or free-range hens cuts the odds of salmonella contamination by 43 percent, Greger said. What does that mean for egg lovers? Greger cited a study by the American Journal of Epidemiology that concluded people who eat eggs produced by chickens in cages - the vast majority of those in Ohio - are twice as likely to get salmonella poisoning".

Though the arguments against the caging of birds are logical there are also differing views that frown upon the cage free rearing practice. It is contented that hens reared in the open invariably sit on their feces during egg laying increasing the threat of contamination. Probably a via solution lies in redesigning cages giving more moving space for the birds and improving the sanitary and hygiene environment in these poultry houses.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

GM SUGAR BEETS-LITIGATION ABOUT "HAZARDS"

While in India many people have raised serious concerns about the safety of Bt Brinjal which has been recommended for introduction in the country by the concerned authorities, the genetically modified sugar beets cultivation, widespread in the US, is being challenged in the courts there. With practically all the sugar produced in that country from sugar beets coming from its GM version, any set back for future cultivation as a result of court orders, will throw the industry into unprecedented turmoil. While safety is not the main contention, it is the devastating effect on organic beets production, because of the real possibility of cross pollination from GM beets field, that is causing concern.

"Introduced into the market in 2008, farmers apparently agreed and Roundup Ready sugar beets saw the fastest adoption rate by farmers of any genetically modified crop. Sugar beets account for more than half of the United States' sugar production, and since the GM beets were deregulated nearly four years ago, nearly 95 percent of sugar beets produced in the US are genetically modified".
 


Some recent findings by European investigators do indicate that GM versions of corn and soybean are not completely safe and could cause some toxicity to humans. How ever no reports have so far surfaced raising serious safety questions on consumption of sugar made from GM beets. Unlike corn and soybean sugar beets undergo extensive processing leading to crystallization of almost pure sugar and therefore presence of toxic substances is unlikely. The decision of the Court will be awaited eagerly by both the protagonists and antagonists of GM crops realizing its implications on the future of GM technology.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com