The testing will be focusing on a variety of strains of STECs, including 026, 0111, 0103, 0121, 045, and 0145. These six types cause most illnesses among non-0157 bacteria, and once sufficient data is gathered, the USDA will make a decision on whether or not to include the bacteria as adulterants, subject to the same type of policies as products contaminated with 0157.

If the USDA does indeed declare these bacteria adulterants, they will undergo the following process, as reported by Meatingplace:

• define applicable products from slaughter/dressing and further processing

operations

• issue a Federal Register Notice in the form of an interpretive rule
• establish an effective date that ensures sufficient time to address seamless implementation for both domestic and imported products
• issue compliance guidelines
• issue policy implementation instructions and train FSIS inspection personnel
• conduct outreach to the regulated industry

The food industry will have to undergo major changes if this happens, especially among members of the meat industry. In response to this, FSIS Under Secretary Richard Raymond said, “You certainly may hear things you don’t agree with…Progress won’t occur if we’re just wanting to avoid discomfort by maintaining the old status quo. The E. coli bug is obviously not satisfied with the status quo and neither should we be.”

According to Discover, the researchers took 11 soil samples from various environments with different levels of antibiotics. Bacteria were discovered in all the samples that were able to survive by consuming antibiotics. These bacteria included types of E. coli as well as Shigella. The bacteria even existed in conditions that contained more that 100 times the amount of drugs given as a normal dose to patients and more than 50 times the amount needed to qualify bacteria as resistant.

The research provides a new angle on the use of antibiotics to combat bacteria like E. coli, both in patients and in livestock. There is also a possibility that the genes that allow the consumption of antibiotics could be spread to pathogenic bacteria and make infections from bacteria such as E. coli 0157:H7 even more dangerous.

If you have a question about E. coli O157:H7, please contact attorney Fred Pritzker at 1-888-377-8900 (toll-free) or e-mail Fred. If you would like to comment on this topic, please fill out the comment form below.

Microwave ovens are inherently flawed in that they do not always evenly heat and cook foods, which allow for hot and cold spots within cooked food. Not only are there variances in temperature, but not evenly cooking the product can result in the failure to inactivate pathogens (including E. coli O157:H7) in the food that may cause disease.

The presentations address a variety of areas that affect uneven heating:

• Non-uniform distribution of dipolar molecules and ionic materials within the food.
• Differences in microwave absorption of frozen/thawed areas.
• Product/component edge heating effects.
• Areas of high and low microwave field strength within the oven cavity and product.
• Different food component and thermal properties.

We support all efforts to make food safe. It is important to note, however, that consumers are not at fault for E. coli poisoning. It is the responsibility of manufacturers and others to provide food that is free of dangerous pathogens such as E. coli O157:H7.

Published by E. coli Lawyer.

Ethanol production has greatly increased with the increasing demand for the use of ethanol as a fuel additive. This demand has driven up the price of corn which makes distillers grain much more affordable for cattle producers to use as feed. Researchers have been testing for a correlation between the use of distillers grain and E. coli 0157:H7 for a few years already. According to the Des Moines Register:

Researchers at Kansas State University noticed the possible E. coli connection to distillers grains in 2005. A second study found a twofold increase in E. coli levels in cattle fed the product compared with those that ate only corn. Research at the University of Nebraska showed mixed results. Cattle fed a diet comprising 10 percent to 30 percent distillers grains actually had lower rates of E. coli than cattle on a diet of all corn. But cattle fed 40 percent to 50 percent distillers grains showed higher E. coli rates.

The U.S. Meat Animal Research Center in Clay Center, Nebraska is currently conducting a large scale experiment to get to the bottom of this issue. According to the Associated Press:

The research involves 600 cattle. Half are being fed a traditional grain feed and half are being fed distiller’s grain. The research will wrap up in June after the cattle have been sold for slaughter and samples of their carcasses have been collected.

The cattle fed with distillers grains receive a diet of 40 percent distillers grains. The research will be a valuable insight into both the beef and ethanol industry. The study hopes to gain a greater understanding of E. coli 0157:H7 so that its dangerous effects can be prevented. The bacteria can cause stomach cramps and diarrhea that may turn bloody within one to three days. It can also be lethal to the elderly, children, and those with weak immune systems.

The outbreak in 2006, which claimed the lives of three people, and sickening over 200 people in 26 different states, was found to be tied to California spinach. It is believed that wild pigs spread E. coli 0157:H7 from a cattle ranch to the spinach fields.

According to the Detroit Free Press:

The outbreak prompted the Western Growers Association to create an agreement that incorporates the latest scientific practices for growing and handling produce, said Jasper Hempel, executive vice president and attorney for the trade group. When a food distributor signs the pact, it agrees to buy only from growers who abide by the practices and who agree to inspections by federally trained state inspectors.

California produce distributors have already signed the agreement. California produces virtually all spinach and lettuce produce for the United States during the summer, but Arizona produces the nation’s supply during the winter. Most major distributors in Arizona have also signed an agreement similar to the one in California.

California and Arizona growers have adopted new standards to protect their crops from E. coli contamination, including spacing produce fields at least a quarter mile away from cattle grazing ground and a mile away from feed lots. Growers will also need to evaluate their fields in news ways to prevent contamination due to storm runoff, flooding, irrigation water and fertilizer. The Western Growers Association also supports the creation of federal standards similar to those implemented in California and Arizona.

In the current protocol, testing is mandatory for beef trim produced in the United States. FSIS, however, has no mandates for beef trim produced in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Canada, and others that are imported to the United States. NFBF President Keith Olsen states that the current procedure gives a competitive advantage to imported beef trim. This could also lead to an increase in beef recalls because of E. coli 0157:H7 contamination.

MANHATTAN, KAN. — Ethanol plants and livestock producers have created a symbiotic relationship. Cattle producers feed their livestock distiller’s grains, a byproduct of the ethanol distilling process, giving ethanol producers have an added source of income.

But recent research at Kansas State University has found that cattle fed distiller’s grain have an increased prevalence of E. coli 0157 in their hindgut. This particular type of E. coli is present in healthy cattle but poses a health risk to humans, who can acquire it through undercooked meat, raw dairy products and produce contaminated with cattle manure.

“Distiller’s grain is a good animal feed. That’s why ethanol plants are often built next to feedlots,” said T.G. Nagaraja, a professor of diagnostic medicine and pathobiology at K-State’s College of Veterinary Medicine.

The growth in ethanol plants means more cattle are likely to be fed distiller’s grain, therefore harboring 0157 and potentially a source of health risks to humans, Nagaraja said. That’s why he and Jim Drouillard, K-State professor of animal sciences, have been collaborating on testing distiller’s grain-fed cattle for 0157. Nagaraja and Drouillard, who studied the carcass quality of cattle fed distiller’s grain, are joined by Megan Jacob, a K-State doctoral student in pathobiology. Through three rounds of testing, Nagaraja said the prevalence of 0157 was about twice as high in cattle fed distiller’s grain compared with those cattle that were on a diet lacking the ethanol byproduct.

“This is a very interesting observation and is likely to have profound implications in food safety,” Nagaraja said.

Food safety and animal health are research priorities at K-State, which since 1999 has dedicated more than $70 million on research related to animal health and food safety. More than 150 K-Staters are actively involved in these areas.

Nagaraja said research in the next few years will focus on finding out why 0157 is more prevalent in cattle fed a distiller’s grain diet. He said it could be something that changes in the animals’ hindgut as a result of feeding distiller’s grains, or maybe the byproduct provides a nutrient for the bacteria.

“Feeding cattle distiller’s grain is a big economic advantage for ethanol plants,” Nagaraja said. “We realize we can’t tell cattle producers, ‘Don’t feed distiller’s grain.’ What we want to do is not only understand the reasons why 0157 increases, but also find a way to prevent that from happening.”

Pritzker | Ruohonen is one of the leading food safety law firms in the United States. To contact an E. coli lawyer at the firm, please call toll-free at 1-888-377-8900 or submit the firm’s online consultation form.

Above a stove, the girls mounted a camera that took a picture every 30 seconds. They measured how much each burger shrank during cooking, and recorded the size when it reached the proper temperature. Aided by computer software designed to measure geometric shapes, they calculated the percentage of shrinkage for various brands of frozen patties. And then they tested the finding by injecting raw burgers with E. coli.

“It pretty much worked every time,” Collipp says.

Say “cheese,” burgers.

8 Ounces of Cranberry Juice Cocktail Twice a Day

According to a study published in 2002 (Howell), 8 ounces of cranberry juice cocktail every morning and evening should help prevent an E. coli infection. The research conducted jointly between Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and the University of Michigan, looked at the affect of cranberry juice cocktail on E. coli adhesion in the urinary tract. Urine samples from healthy men and women were taken. Some of these people had consumed 8 ounces of cranberry juice cocktail. The urine was allowed to interact with urinary tract cells that had been exposed to E. coli. The urine of the people who had consumed the cranberry juice prevented 79% of the bacteria from sticking to the urinary tract cells. The study also found that cranberry juice cocktail’s beneficial effect may start within two hours and can last for up to 10 hours in the urine, which would mean an 8 ounce glass of cranberry juice cocktail every morning and evening might help prevent an E. coli infection.

How Cranberry Juice Affects E. coli

Research at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (Liu) found that a group of tannins (called proanthocyanidins) found primarily in cranberries affect E. coli in three devastating ways, all of which prevent the bacteria from adhering to cells in the body, a necessary first step in all infections:

• They change the shape of the bacteria from rods to spheres.
• They alter their cell membranes.
• They make it difficult for bacteria to make contact with cells, or from latching on to them should they get close enough.

For most of these effects, the impact on bacteria was stronger the higher the concentration of either cranberry juice or the tannins, suggesting that whole cranberry products and juice that has not been highly diluted may have the greatest health effects.

Disclaimer: Cranberry juice cocktail is a food, not a drug, nor should it be used in place of a drug. Anyone who suspects an infection should always consult a physician. Cranberry juice cocktail should not be used as a treatment for infection, but may be an effective part of a prevention routine.

References:
1. Amy B. Howell and Betsey Foxman, Cranberry Juice and Adhesion of Antibiotic-Resistant Uropathogens, Journal of the American Medical Association, 2002, 287, 3082-3083.
2. Liu, Y., Black, M.A., Caron, L., and T.A. Camesano. Role of cranberry juice on molecular-scale surface characteristics and adhesion of Escherichia coli, Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 2006, 93, 297-305.

One federal inspector calls it the “E. coli loophole.” Another says, “Nobody would buy it if they knew.”

The officials are referring to the little-discussed fact that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has deemed it acceptable for meat companies to cook and sell meat on which E. coli, a bacterium that can sicken and even kill humans, is found during processing.

The “E. coli loophole” affects millions of pounds of beef each year that tests positive for the presence of E. coli O157:H7, a particularly virulent strain of the bacterium.

The agency allows companies to put this E. coli-positive meat in a special category — “cook only.” Cooking the meat, the USDA and producers say, destroys the bacteria and makes it safe to eat as precooked hamburgers, meat loaf, crumbled taco meat and other products.

But some USDA inspectors say the “cook only” practice means that higher-than-appropriate levels of E. coli are tolerated in packing plants, raising the chance that clean meat will become contaminated. They say the “cook only” practice is part of the reason for this year’s sudden rise in incidents of E. coli contamination.

Read the full story in the Chicago Tribune.

The media are having a field day with this, and well they should. It is outrageous that contaminated meat is allowed to be sold to consumers in any form.

Here is some of the media reaction:

The USDA regulation allows processing plants to sell meat that tests positive for E. coli. The only stipulation is such meat carry a ”cook only” label, a practice that allows companies to profit from millions of pounds of bad meat. The USDA defended the rule, saying commercial cooking kills the bacteria and renders it safe to eat. This type of meat is usually sold as precooked hamburger, meatloaf and taco filling.

The $71 billion U.S. beef industry is fiercely protective of its product, and a Texas cattlemen’s association even sued Oprah Winfrey in 1996 for disparaging remarks about beef. But when the brain-wasting mad cow disease that decimated Europe’s beef markets was found in Washington state, American growers lost an estimated $4 billion in exports. Huge losses also are likely as consumers realize what the E. coli loophole really means.

Consumers may never again look at such precooked ”convenience” products the same way. After all, where’s the convenience in gagging, retching and diarrhea? If this loophole isn’t closed soon, consumers will consider anything the government says about food safety just a load of, well, you know. (Chicago Sun-Times)

You want feces with that?
It’s not a question you want to hear from the kid behind the fast-food counter. But because of a loophole in the way the U.S. Department of Agriculture regulates beef processing, it is, we regret to report, a realistic question.
It seems that the USDA deems it OK for meat suppliers to cook and sell beef that has been found to be contaminated by E. coli bacteria. As long as the tainted beef is put aside in a “cook only” category during processing, then pre-cooked to a temperature that will kill the bacterium, everything’s cool.
At least that’s what a number of angry USDA meat inspectors told The Chicago Tribune. Naturally, the inspectors didn’t want to be identified for fear of losing their jobs. (The Salt Lake Tribune)

We are encouraging people to contact their legislators and ask them to close the E. coli loophole. The beef industry will fight this tooth and nail (with millions of dollars dangled in front of legislators’ eyes), but we have to hope some of our politicians care more about their constituents than campaign finances.