Feed aggregator

CN Frozen Foods, Inc. of Coral Gables, FL is recalling Sysco Classic Riced Cauliflower after the product tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes.

According to the details posted online by the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA), the recall was initiated on April 27, 2024 and is ongoing.

The recalled product was sold in Texas.

Recalled product:

Sysco Classic Riced Cauliflower packed in a 4lb plastic bag (6 units of 4 lb. per carton box)

• Product Quantity: 3,240 cases
• Manufacture #: 30.05.2023
• Best Buy Date: 05/2025
• Reorder #: 5087729

Consumers should not use this product. Recalled products should be thrown out or returned to their place of purchase.

About Listeria infections
Food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes may not look or smell spoiled but can still cause serious and sometimes life-threatening infections. Anyone who has eaten any recalled products and developed symptoms of Listeria infection should seek medical treatment and tell their doctors about the possible Listeria exposure.

Also, anyone who has eaten any of the recalled products should monitor themselves for symptoms during the coming weeks because it can take up to 70 days after exposure to Listeria for symptoms of listeriosis to develop. 

Symptoms of Listeria infection can include vomiting, nausea, persistent fever, muscle aches, severe headache, and neck stiffness. Specific laboratory tests are required to diagnose Listeria infections, which can mimic other illnesses. 

Pregnant women, the elderly, young children, and people such as cancer patients who have weakened immune systems are particularly at risk of serious illnesses, life-threatening infections, other complications and death. Although infected pregnant women may experience only mild, flu-like symptoms, their infections can lead to premature delivery, infection of the newborn, or even stillbirth.

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

Western Mixers Produce & Nuts, Inc. of Ontario, CA is recalling Yogurt Covered Pretzels because of potential Salmonella contamination.

The recall is the result of a routine sampling program by the source supplier of the yogurt coating, which revealed that the finished products contained the bacteria. The company has ceased the production and distribution of the product as FDA and the company continue their investigation as to what caused the problem.

Yogurt Covered Pretzels was distributed in California, through Thorp Fruit, Down Home Goods, Smart & Final and Gelson’s retail stores.

Recalled products:

Yogurt Covered Pretzels

• Smart & Final, First Street Brand; plastic containers, 6 oz& 15 oz.
  Product Lot #: 241091, 241161, 241241
• Gelson’s, Gelson’s Brand; plastic containers, 15 oz.
  Product Lot #: 241062
• Down Home Goods; Sold as bulk, 14 lb.
  Product Lot #: 241010 Thorp Fruit, Sold as bulk, 14 lb. Product Lot #: 241010

As of the posting of this recall, no illnesses have been reported to date.

Customers who purchased the product should dispose it or return it to the place of purchase.

About Salmonella

Food contaminated with Salmonella bacteria does not usually look, smell, or taste spoiled. Anyone can become sick with a Salmonella infection. Infants, children, seniors, and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk of serious illness because their immune systems are fragile, according to the CDC.

Anyone who has eaten any of the recalled products and developed symptoms of Salmonella infection should seek medical attention. Sick people should tell their doctors about the possible exposure to Salmonella bacteria because special tests are necessary to diagnose salmonellosis. Salmonella infection symptoms can mimic other illnesses, frequently leading to misdiagnosis.

Symptoms of Salmonella infection can include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever within 12 to 72 hours after eating contaminated food. Otherwise, healthy adults are usually sick for four to seven days. In some cases, however, diarrhea may be so severe that patients require hospitalization.

Older adults, children, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems, such as cancer patients, are more likely to develop severe illness and serious, sometimes life-threatening conditions.

Some people get infected without getting sick or showing any symptoms. However, they may still spread the infections to others.

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

Public health officials have determined that an outbreak of E. coli infections in a Utah city were caused by untreated municipal irrigation water.

In July through September 2023, there were 13 children confirmed with infections. Seven of the patients required hospitalization and two developed hemolytic uremic syndrome, a type of kidney failure.

The children had played in or drank water from home hoses and sprinklers before becoming ill. A report on the situation by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did not name the city, as is standard practice for certain of the agency’s investigations.

Public health officials recommended education about the untreated irrigation water including lines and spigots with a designated color, and providing conspicuous signage to communicate risk and intended use.

Untreated, pressurized irrigation water is surface water that is piped from reservoirs to homes. iI is intended for outdoor landscapes and is not suitable for drinking or recreational activities. untreated, pressurized, municipal irrigation water is not routinely monitored or tested.

Outbreak investigators collected samples at two reservoirs and nine sites where persons with confirmed illness reported exposure, including private homes. In addition to water, samples of sediment and bird feces from the reservoirs; and swabs of spigots, hoses, toys, and other surfaces likely to have had contact with the water were collected.

Investigators observed birds on and around the reservoirs during the environmental investigation, but no other animals or obvious potential sources of E. coli O157:H7 were observed during sampling.

Public health officials issued a press release on Aug. 4 after identification of the first eight patients, before the environmental investigation, notifying the public of the outbreak, and warning against drinking or playing in the irrigation water. After the press release, two additional patients were reported.

On Aug. 19, the city issued a second press release, stating that E. coli O157:H7 had been detected in irrigation water samples and recommending that residents cook homegrown produce and avoid watering lawns and renewed warnings not to drink or play in the irrigation water.

The city distributed mailers on Aug. 28, further informing residents of the risks associated with using the irrigation water for drinking or recreation.

Untreated, pressurized irrigation water systems are generally uncommon in the United States, according to the CDC. However, they are used in some Utah communities to irrigate residential outdoor landscapes. These systems were designed to conserve drinking water and reduce water treatment costs. 

In 2010 and 2015, two other Utah cities experienced campylobacteriosis outbreaks that were suspected to have been caused by cross-connections between untrusted irrigation water and drinking water lines, according to the Utah Department of Health and Human Services. Data from the city’s outbreak did not specifically implicate homegrown produce as an illness-causing vehicle, but previous outbreaks demonstrated that produce grown with water containing E. coli O157:H7 can cause illness.

“This outbreak demonstrates the need for ongoing educational efforts and reminders. Educating residents of communities with (pressurized, untreated irrigation water) systems, especially those at higher risk for severe illness, including older adults, children, and persons with compromised immune systems, about the importance of using (pressurized, untrusted irrigation water) for its intended purposes as well as the risks associated with drinking and recreational exposure, could prevent future cases of waterborne illness,” according to the CDC.

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

More than 80 comments have been submitted on plans to update Listeria monocytogenes rules concerning ready-to-eat (RTE) food in Europe.

Many submissions were against the proposals and raised concerns about how they would work in practice as well as issues around challenge testing and the fact that a zero tolerance approach puts companies off testing and results in problems not being discovered.

The majority of respondents were either companies or business associations. More than a quarter came from the UK while 13 were from France and 12 from Spain.

The new rules would apply to RTE foods, other than those intended for infants and special medical purposes that are able to support the growth of Listeria monocytogenes. The earliest the regulation will become applicable is January 2026.

The Chilled Food Association said the current legislation is effective when enforced and does not need to be changed. The group added legislation and guidance was not being enforced effectively or risk-focused in those countries where rates have escalated.

Lack of support for changes
Comments from groups such as the Food and Drink Federation, Dairy UK, and Provision Trade Federation, supported the position of the Industry Listeria Group, which said proposed changes were a move away from the current risk-based approach to a hazard-based law.

“It is likely that extending the not detected of Listeria monocytogenes in 25-gram and having to prove that the product will not exceed the limit of 100 cfu/g throughout the remaining shelf life, will result in issues when products are produced in one member state and distributed in another.”

Respondents were also worried that having a zero tolerance during shelf life may result in products testing negative when leaving the control of the food business while later in the chain testing positive without a clear view on the history of sampled products, such as temperature abuse in the distribution chain.

The Czech Agriculture and Food Inspection Authority (SZPI) said the amendment brings more obligations and financial burdens both for control authorities and the food industry.

Pilgrims Europe said it was “deeply concerned” about the proposals.

“The control of Listeria monocytogenes in food manufacture is achieved via good hygiene practices, adequate environmental monitoring, historical trending, HACCP and adhering to an appropriate shelf-life,” said the company, whose products include ready-to-eat chicken and pork, ready meals, meat-free products and snacks.

“We do not believe the proposals will advance food safety and will not obtain the goal of reversing the increasing rate of listeriosis in some member states. With respect to the footprint of our business, especially our unique situation of having businesses in the EU, Northern Ireland and Great Britain, we would also have concerns about the enforcement across these three different locations.”

Challenge test concerns
Greencore, a provider of convenience foods, said the plans could lead to a reduction in environmental monitoring and more industry reliance on challenge testing as a control.

“A move towards this approach could give food businesses a false sense of security whilst ongoing and continuous controls need to be the focus. Testing does not make a product safe and is merely a sampling exercise and should never replace good hygiene practices, HACCP and best practice shelf-life principles.”

A joint submission from the European Sprouted Seeds Association and Freshfel Europe – European Fresh Produce Association said while complete absence of Listeria monocytogenes should always be the goal, for certain foods, such as raw fruit and vegetables, it is not feasible.

“All efforts put on end product control, including challenge testing, divert financial resources away from cleaning and disinfection and environmental hygiene monitoring, which are critical prerequisite requirements of HACCP. The challenge test cannot replicate factory conditions, nor can it replace the volume of experimental data and professional knowledge.

“Not detecting Listeria monocytogenes in a 25-gram sample does not guarantee absence in a whole batch, and if Listeria monocytogenes is detected in a 25-gram sample, it does not imply that the whole batch is contaminated.”

Consequences of having a zero-tolerance limit are that testing on finished products will reduce, as seen in the United States, due to the fear of finding Listeria monocytogenes and facing product recalls, with the associated damage to brand reputation and cost to industry, said the European Dairy Association.

EuroCommerce, which represents the retail and wholesale sector, said the move could trigger unnecessary product recalls, which could lead to food waste, even when Listeria is detected at low levels that do not pose a food safety risk at the end of the product’s shelf life.

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

The Food and Drug Administration sends warning letters to entities under its jurisdiction as part of its enforcement activities. Some letters are not posted for public view until weeks or months after they are sent. Business owners have 15 days to respond to FDA warning letters. Warning letters often are not issued until a company has been given months to years to correct problems.

Pingdingshan Tianjing Plant Albumen Co., Ltd.
Ye Xian Pingdingshan Shi Henan Sheng, China

A food firm in China is on notice from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for violations of the Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food regulation.

In an April 17, 2024 warning letter, the FDA described an August 15-17, 2023, inspection of Pingdingshan Tianjing Plant Albumen Co. manufacturing facility in China.

FDA investigators found that the ready-to-eat (RTE) Soy Protein Isolate manufactured in their facility is adulterated because it was prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. 

After the inspection, the FDA investigator issued a Form FDA-483, Inspectional Observations, listing deviations found at the facility.

Some of the significant violations are as follows:

Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls

1. The firm did not appropriately evaluate a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard to determine whether it requires a preventive control. Specifically, their hazard analysis covering in their RTE Soy Protein Isolate did not identify the hazard of recontamination with environmental pathogens (e.g., Salmonella) as requiring a preventive control. Their hazard analysis included within their HACCP plan collected during the inspection indicates that sanitation is managed through a pre-requisite program which states that packing personnel operate according to standard operating procedures. However, their facility manufactures RTE Soy Protein Isolate which is exposed to the environment after their “(redacted by FDA)” step prior to packaging. The firm’s employees hand-pack the Soy Protein Isolate using a scoop and the packaged food does not receive any further lethal treatment or otherwise include a control measure (such as a formulation lethal to the pathogen) that would significantly minimize the pathogen. A knowledgeable person manufacturing/processing food in their circumstances would identify contamination with environmental pathogens as a hazard requiring a preventive control (i.e., sanitation controls). Thus, their hazard analysis should have concluded that environmental pathogens such as Salmonella are a hazard requiring a preventive control (i.e., sanitation controls). Sanitation controls include procedures, practices, and processes to ensure that the facility is maintained in a sanitary condition adequate to significantly minimize or prevent hazards such as environmental pathogens.

Furthermore, after employees completed and documented cleaning of the packing room, the investigator visually observed apparent soy protein powder residue on food-contact surfaces including the manual hand scoop, powder filling spout, and air removal probes.

Additionally, the firm’s production manager informed the investigator that they use a vacuum for cleaning their post-lethal treatment direct food-contact surfaces in their packaging room. However, after employees completed and documented cleaning, the investigator visually observed soy protein powder residue on food-contact surfaces including the manual hand scoop, powder filling spout, and air removal probes. The firm’s production manager also informed the investigator that the only method of sanitization for the equipment in the packaging room is turning on the ceiling-mounted ultraviolet light for (redacted by the FDA) minutes before starting packaging. They should ensure that their sanitization system is effective in reducing environmental pathogens on food-contact packaging surfaces to a safe level (including those far from the light source, those where the light might not reach, and those with organic residues.)

Also, the firm has a written environmental monitoring program which includes weekly equipment swabs, employee hand swabs, and air samples collected for total plate count, coliforms, and “pathogenic bacteria”, which their Laboratory Manager stated was for Salmonella. However, they did not have any documentation that environmental swabs were ever tested for Salmonella or an appropriate indicator organism. Further, their written environmental monitoring procedure does not identify the test microorganism(s), test method(s), laboratory conducting the testing, or corrective action procedures that include describing the steps to be taken to ensure that the appropriate action is taken to identify and correct the problem; reduce the likelihood of reoccurrence; evaluate all affected food for safety; and prevent affected food from entering commerce.

Current Good Manufacturing Practice

2. The firm did not take effective measures to exclude pests from their processing, packing, and holding areas and to protect against the contamination of food on the premises by pests. Specifically:

i. A live insect was observed crawling inside the facility’s post-heat treatment packaging room for their RTE soy protein products.
ii. Three live crawling insects and two dead insects were observed on the floor of their spray dryer room, which is directly adjacent and connected to their post-heat treatment packaging room.
iii. A gap was observed at the bottom of the packaging room entry doors.

3. The firm failed to properly store equipment, remove litter and waste, and cut weeds and grass within the immediate vicinity of the plant that may constitute an attractant, breeding place, or harborage for pests. Specifically, the exterior ground along the south side of the facility was overgrown with weeds and being used as a storage area for scrap metal and old equipment. This area is directly outside their soy packaging room.

Additional Comments:

During the inspection, the firm provided the investigator with certificates of analysis (COAs) for outgoing shipments of Soy Protein Isolate to U.S. customers which included results for Salmonella and E. coli testing. However, the firm had no original testing data to support the results on the COA. According to their Laboratory Manager and Food Safety Plan Systems manager, the firm sends their U.S. customers COAs with data that is not supported by actual results but creates the COA with values to satisfy the customer specifications. The firm then performs testing after the batches are sent to the U.S.; however, the testing does not include Salmonella or E. coli.

The full warning letter can be viewed here.

Shang Kee of California Inc. dba Sheng Kee Bakery
Brisbane, CA

A food firm in California is on notice from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for violations of the Current Good Manufacturing Practice, as well as Color Additive Adulteration, and Misbranded Foods.

In an April 24, 2024 warning letter, the FDA described an Aug. 14-31, 2023, inspection of Sheng Kee Bakery’s manufacturing and distributing facility in Brisband, CA.

FDA investigators found significant violations of the Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food regulation. After the inspection, the FDA investigator issued a Form FDA-483, Inspectional Observations, listing deviations found at the facility.

Some of the significant violations are as follows:

Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls:

1. The firm did not prepare, or have prepared, and implement a food safety plan. The preparation of the food safety plan must be overseen by one or more preventive controls qualified individuals (PCQIs). The firm’s food safety plan must also include the following:

1) The written hazard analysis;
2) The written preventive controls;
3) The written supply-chain program;
4) The written recall plan;
5) The written procedures for monitoring the implementation of the preventive controls;
6) The written corrective action procedures; and
7) The written verification procedures.

However, they did not have a food safety plan with any of the required elements. For example, they did not conduct a hazard analysis to identify and evaluate known or reasonably foreseeable hazards for each type of food manufactured, processed, packed, or held at their facility to determine whether there are any hazards requiring a preventive control. Also, they did not identify and implement preventive controls to provide assurances that any hazards requiring a preventive control will be significantly minimized or prevented and the food manufactured, processed, packed, or held by their facility will not be adulterated or misbranded. Preventive controls include, as appropriate to the facility and the food, process controls, food allergen controls, sanitation controls, supply-chain controls, and a recall plan. Preventive controls are subject to preventive control management components (monitoring, verification, and corrective actions) as appropriate to ensure the effectiveness of the preventive controls, taking into account the nature of the preventive control and its role in the facility’s food safety system. They must also validate that the preventive controls are adequate to control the hazard as appropriate to the nature of the preventive control and its role in the facility’s food safety system. Specifically:

a. The firm did not identify and evaluate allergens as a known or reasonably foreseeable hazards to determine whether they are hazards requiring a preventive control. Their facility manufactures Ready-to-eat (RTE) and non-RTE bakery products that contain allergens such as egg, soy, wheat, milk, sesame, peanuts and tree nuts. Allergens are a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard. A knowledgeable person manufacturing/processing food in their circumstances would identify allergens as a hazard requiring a preventive control. Food allergen controls include procedures, practices, and processes employed for labeling to ensure that all food allergens required to be stated are included on the label..

The firm did not perform and document the review of labels for proper declaration of allergens. For example, on Aug. 15, 2023, FDA observed their employees apply an egg wash to their two Cantonese-style mooncake lines, producing Lotus Mooncake and Red Bean Mooncake. They did not identify egg as an ingredient in their product labels for Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), Assorted Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS), Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS), and Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS/TIN PACK). As a result, the firm recalled these products on Sept. 1, 2023.

b. For their RTE bakery products, they did not identify environmental pathogens, such as Salmonella, as a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard to determine whether it is a hazard requiring a preventive control. Their facility manufactures RTE bakery products which are exposed to the environment after baking and handled by employees prior to packaging. The packaged food does not receive any further lethal treatment or otherwise include a control measure (such as a formulation lethal to the pathogen) that would significantly minimize the pathogen. A knowledgeable person manufacturing/processing food in their circumstances would identify contamination with environmental pathogens as a hazard requiring a preventive control. Sanitation controls include procedures, practices, and processes to ensure that the facility is maintained in a sanitary condition adequate to significantly minimize or prevent hazards such as environmental pathogens and biological hazards due to employee handling. In addition, environmental monitoring is required if contamination of an RTE food with an environmental pathogen is a hazard requiring a preventive control. In addition, note that environmental monitoring is required if contamination of an RTE food with an environmental pathogen is a hazard requiring a preventative control. The firm is not performing environmental monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of their sanitation practices regarding employee practices and cleanliness of food contact surfaces.

c. The firm did not identify and evaluate mycotoxins as a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard to determine whether they require a preventive control. Their facility manufactures bakery products from wheat, soy and tree nuts. These ingredients have been associated with mycotoxins. A knowledgeable person manufacturing/ processing food in their circumstances would identify mycotoxins as a hazard requiring a preventive control in these ingredients. Further, a facility that identifies raw materials and other ingredients that require a supply-chain-applied control, such as mycotoxins, must establish and implement a risk-based supply-chain program for those raw materials and ingredients. The supply-chain program must include using approved suppliers and conducting supplier verification activities. They do not have this program in place.

Current Good Manufacturing Practice:

1. The firm did not take effective measures to exclude pests from the food plant to protect against the contamination of food on the premises by pests.

a. On Aug. 15, 2023, the FDA investigator observed apparent flying insects in mixing bowls, which employees planned to use for a cold dessert mix.
b. On Aug. 14, 2023, the FDA investigator observed numerous apparent flying insects in the ambient warehouse where the firm stores ingredients, food products, processing equipment, and various other items, and the large loading door was left open directly to the outdoors during operational hours. In addition, flying insects were observed in each of the production rooms where food was being processed.
c. On Aug. 14, 2023, the FDA investigator observed apparent insects crawling on the floor near a pile of flour underneath their flour silo and observed apparent live spiders in their ambient storage warehouse, Recipe/Prep Room and in the Electrical Room where they store ingredients.

2. The firm failed to take reasonable measures or precautions related to personnel practices. Specifically,

a. On Aug. 14, 2023, FDA observed that their employees were storing personal belongings, including personal clothing, cell phones and water bottles, in the production areas where food is exposed. FDA also observed a partially eaten bag of crackers in the washroom on top of the (redacted by FDA) where equipment was being cleaned.
b. On Aug. 17, 2023, one employee was observed applying egg wash and sprinkling sesame on Egg Bread, then checking his cell phone, and returning to applying egg wash and sprinkling sesame without washing his hands.

3. The firm failed to clean non-food contact surfaces of equipment used in the operation of a food plant in a manner and as frequently as necessary to protect against allergen cross-contact and against contamination of food, food-contact surfaces, and food-packaging materials. Specifically:

a. On Aug. 17, 2023, the FDA investigator observed that cutting and application utensils were stored against the wall, hung on a discolored and dirty metal pipe.
b. On Aug. 14, 2023, the FDA investigator observed the steel frame shelves used to store clean bowls, utensils, containers, ingredients, and equipment in their production rooms and storage areas were unclean and had accumulated debris or residue on their surfaces. The investigator also observed employees grabbing mixing bowls and using them without additional cleaning.
c. On Aug. 15, 2023, the FDA investigator observed the interior of their (redacted by FDA), specifically the internal machine components under the lid, had accumulated a large amount of blackened residue and debris, and there was also an apparent dead spider.

4. The firm did not store and transport food under conditions that protect against allergen cross-contact, contamination of food, and deterioration of food. Specifically,

a. On Aug. 14, 2023, an FDA inspector observed a bag of raw onions stored on the floor of their cooler room. They also observed various food containers being stored on the floor in the storage and processing areas, including pails of chocolate powder and pails of filling/paste for bread and cakes.
b. On Aug. 17, 2023, the FDA investigator observed blocks of chocolates, to be used as chocolate shavings on top of RTE cake, stored against the wall on a table and in direct contact with a dirty electrical cable.

5. The firm’s plant is not constructed in such a manner that floors, walls, and ceilings may be adequately cleaned and kept in good repair. Specifically, during the inspection of their facility, the FDA investigator observed apparent black residue on walls, ceilings and floor in the production room, coolers, freezers, blast freezer and ambient warehouse. The black material was also present in washroom and cake room where sanitation is performed, including on sinks and near sanitizer dispensers.

Color Additive Adulteration

The firm’s Egg Bread and Green Tea & Milky Pudding products are adulterated because the products bear or contain a color additive which is unsafe. Certain color additives have been deemed to be unsafe unless its use is in conformity with the color additive listing regulation. Specifically, the listing regulation for FD&C Yellow No. 5 requires that certified color additive be listed by that name in the ingredient list on the labels of foods for human use.

• The firm’s Egg Bread product is manufactured with (redacted by FDA) which contains FD&C Yellow No. 5; however, the label for this product fails to declare FD&C Yellow No. 5 in the ingredient statement.
• The firm’s Green Tea & Milky Pudding product is made using a Green Tea Flavored Powder which is labeled to contain Tartrazine (which may be certified as FD&C Yellow 5); however, the label for this product fails to declare FD&C Yellow No. 5 in the ingredient statement.

Misbranded Foods

1. The firm’s Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), Assorted Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS), Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS), and Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake products are misbranded, in that the finished product labels fail to accurately declare major food allergens. Specifically, their Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), Assorted Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS), Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS), and Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake do not declare the allergen of eggs from the egg wash used on all moon cakes.

“Major food allergens” are defined as milk, egg, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, soybeans, and sesame as well as any food ingredient that contains protein derived from one of these foods, with the exception of highly refined oils. A food is misbranded if it is not a raw agricultural commodity and it is, or it contains, an ingredient that bears or contains, a major food allergen, unless either:

• The word “Contains” followed by the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived, is printed immediately after or adjacent to the list of ingredients, or
• The common or usual name of the major food allergen in the list of ingredients is followed in parentheses by the name of the food source from which the major food allergen is derived (e.g., “Whey (Milk)”), except the name of the food source is not required when either the common or usual name of the ingredient uses the name of the food source or the name of the food source appears elsewhere in the ingredient list (unless the name of the food source that appears elsewhere in the ingredient list appears as part of the name of an ingredient that is not a major food allergen.)

2. The firm’s Egg Bread and Green Tea & Milky Pudding products are misbranded because the products contain artificial coloring and fail to bear labeling stating that fact. Specifically:

• Their Egg Bread product is manufactured with (redacted by FDA) which contains FD&C Yellow No. 5 and FD&C Yellow No. 6 as ingredients; however, the product does not bear a label identifying the presence of these color additives using their listed names or appropriate abbreviations.
• The firm’s Green Tea & Milky Pudding product is manufactured using Green tea flavored powder ingredient. This ingredient declares “Tartrazine (E102) and Brilliant blue FCF (E133)” on its product label; however, the “Green Tea & Milky Pudding” product does not declare these color additives.
• The Egg Bread ingredient list declares calcium propionate; however, the preservative function is not declared in accordance with regulation.

3. The firm’s Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS), and Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS) products are misbranded because:

• The product labels contain information in a foreign language, but do not repeat all the required information in all languages. The net quantity of contents and Nutrition Facts (such as “Includes Added Sugars”) must be on the labels in all languages used on the labels. Further, for the Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS), the ingredient list, Nutrition Facts label, firm addresses, and the net quantity of contents are not provided in the foreign language.
• The statement of identity on the Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS) and the Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS) is not provided in English on the Principal Display Panel (PDP).
• The Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS) and Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS) labels do not declare the net quantity of contents in English on the PDP.
• The allergen “Contains” statements on the sticker labels are not placed immediately following or adjacent to the ingredient lists on the Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS) and Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS).

4. The firm’s Egg Bread is misbranded because its labeling is false or misleading. Specifically, the major food allergen, sesame, is declared in the ingredient list and the label includes a Contains statement but sesame is not declared in the Contains statement. FDA noted that if a “Contains” statement is used on a food label, the statement is to include the names of the food sources of all major food allergens used as ingredients in the packaged food. More information on Food Allergen Labeling Requirements and the “Contains” statement can be found in the publication “Questions and Answers Regarding Food Allergens, Including the Food Allergen Labeling Requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Edition 5): Guidance for Industry.”

5. The firm’s Assorted Tea Flavor Mini Moon Cake (12 PCS), the Assorted Mini Moon Cake (9 PCS), the Assorted Large Moon Cake (4 PCS), and the Egg Bread products are misbranded in that the products are fabricated from two or more ingredients and the common or usual name of each ingredient is not declared on the label. 

The full warning letter can be viewed here.

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

— ADVERTORIAL —

The food processing industry has rapidly adopted new technologies to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance food safety. Knitting them together to develop the kind of efficiencies promised by ‘new tech’ has been a growing problem, however.

To meet growing demand, most food processors, especially meat packers and processors, have been implementing sophisticated traceability systems so consumers can trace origin and processing. Poultry processors are feeling similar market pressure. Add in the complexities caused as the Internet of Things (IoT) moves deeper into food plants and the problem of mastering it all can be daunting. These new technologies along with the requirements established by governmental and third-party auditing have made it extremely difficult to gather the data needed to improve in plant operations or complete an audit.

If you’re considering a third-party audit to help improve your food safety practices, consider this: “Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement.” If you can’t measure something, you can’t understand it. If you can’t understand it, you can’t control it. 

Peter Drucker, called by BusinessWeek the man who invented management, distilled it into “If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it.” 

In other words, no matter how good your food safety programs are, you will inevitably have to make them better. You can’t do that if you don’t have adequate measurement data. With more than half a dozen recognized standards that can serve as goals, it is difficult to ensure your standards can meet or exceed the minimums set by:

1. FSSC 22000
2. IFS
3. ISO
4. HACCP
5. GMP
6. BRCGS
7. Federal, state and local governments

In the highly regulated industry of food manufacturing, compliance with local, national, and international standards is a matter of business survival. Internal audits are the only effective way to ensure that a facility and its processes align with often complicated regulatory requirements, lower the risk of financial penalties, and reduce the chance of costly legal issues.

AIB TALKS ABOUT HOW TO FORM AN INTERNAL AUDIT TEAM

The first step is the formation and training of a food safety team charged with conducting an internal audit suggests AIB International. Each team member must know the audit process and be familiar with how to maintain records and internal procedures. They will be charged with detecting and mitigating risks and identifying noncomformances. 

AIB insists a schedule of continuous education will keep your internal audit team up-to-date with the latest food safety regulations and trends. A regularly scheduled internal audit is the basis of any food safety audit plan. It guarantees audits are conducted on time and consistently throughout the year and provides an opportunity for your team to define the scope of every food safety audit.

The frequency of your internal audits should develop continuous improvement opportunities. If a particular process has more issues, for instance, you’ll want to boost the frequency of internal audits. Auditing problem areas where you’ve implemented corrective action ensures your leadership team has successfully addressed non-conformances. 

AIB says you should always manage an internal audit as an independent program with its own procedures, cross-department representation, and analysis reporting.

Here are some steps suggested by AIB to help formalize an internal auditing process:

• Prepare a comprehensive checklist that includes facility-specific questions.
• Details, details, details! Document with detailed descriptions and photographic evidence for evaluations against standard requirements. Do not have auditors simply check off a “complies” or “does not comply” box.
• Complete a non-conformity report, which should include deadlines and assigned responsibilities for conducting root cause analysis and developing corrective action plans.
• Schedule a post-audit findings meeting with appropriate department managers to discuss corrective actions taken and completed.

HOW DOES INTERNAL AUDITING SAFEGUARD THE COMPANY?

Well-developed and regularly scheduled internal audits allow your company to take corrective actions before problems occur, protecting your company from recalls, and the financial and brand damage caused by unsafe practices. 

Internal audits add value by identifying areas for improvement and cost savings. They allow food manufacturers to identify gaps in their processes and systems before they cause expensive product recalls or disastrous lawsuits.

Compliance with recognized governmental standards is an important reason for internal auditing in food manufacturing. With proper execution of internal audits, food manufacturers can also identify areas for improvement that deliver financial gains while enhancing overall operational efficiencies.

HOW THE SAFE FOOD ALLIANCE DEFINES THE PROCESS

The Safe Food Alliance (SFA) agrees with the AIB guidelines. SFA defines “The internal auditor’s main goal is to verify and provide supporting evidence that the program audited either complies with or does not comply with the established standards.” 

A successful internal audit should confirm that the plant is meeting the planned and established standard. Once the Internal Audit has been concluded; the auditor will conduct a meeting with the appropriate department staff, confirm the scope or area covered during the audit, read out non-conformities, assign responsibility, and agree to corrective actions with deadlines.

SFA says there are many challenges facilities face when conducting internal audits and published some steps to help overcome those challenges.

• Develop Internal Audit Program objectives with Senior Management to include reducing non-conforming product, promoting continuous improvement, passing the GFSI Audit, and meeting customer and regulatory specifications.
• Manage internal audits as a separate program that includes procedures, trending analysis, formal training, and cross-department representation.
• Ensure the internal audit is an official event and do not let other work interfere with audit completion or reporting. 
• Ensure internal auditors are objective and only collect evidence or facts. 
• Do not interfere with production activities. Take pictures for training purposes and reduce audit bias by having a cross-function internal audit team.
• Train internal auditors to properly communicate by asking open-ended questions. 
• Internal Auditors must always remember to audit the system and not the person.

WHAT’S THE BEST WAY TO MANAGE INTERNAL AUDITS?

A problem faced by small- to medium-sized producers is the reliance on simple ‘home-brewed’ solutions such as Excel spreadsheets which fall far short of capturing the scope and complexities of modern food safety standards. As an auditing resource, those solutions are wholly inadequate and call for much more reliable data delivered quickly to your entire food safety team, especially when considering third-party audits.

To help effectively manage internal audits, food processing plants are turning to SaaS-based software management tools for better, more reliable data. SaaS is an acronym that stands for ‘Software as aService’ and describes any software that isn’t run at your premises, never resides on a local machine, and is a full-blown app on its own. It is cloud-based and tamper-proof. 

SaaS software is deployed almost immediately. Unlike traditional software, which is sold as a perpetual license with an up-front cost and an optional ongoing support fee, SaaS providers usually ask for a subscription fee. The initial setup cost is typically lower than the equivalent enterprise software. 

According to user reports, using a secure SaaS software solution has proven to produce consistently accurate audit and compliance reporting. It can measure supplier quality, improve food safety, tie your supply chain into a cohesive unit, and provide a coordinating point for the electronic measuring devices used in your plant. 

Sillas Larsen, SEO/SEM Content Specialist, FOSS Software Services, listed a few of the advantages of using advanced SaaS software. “The aggregated data offers immediate system-wide accessibility and allows information to be accessed from any location. The software management tools give the user quick transformation of food safety and quality control records into accurate, usable data. Management can use the information to improve food safety practices, business decisions, operational performance, and profitability.”

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

A Japanese company has issued a recall of bread after the discovery of rat remains in two packs.

Pasco Shikishima Corporation said the recall was due to contamination with a foreign object, part of which appeared to be a small animal, being mixed into the sliced bread.

As yet, there have been no reports of any related health issues, said the company.

The affected bread has dates from May 7 to 11, 2024 and 104,000 packs are subject to the recall.

It was produced at a factory in Tama, Tokyo and sold in Ibaraki, Gunma, Saitama, Yamanashi, Niigata, Kanagawa, Shizuoka, Chiba, Tokyo, Tochigi, Fukushima, Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, and Yamagata.

“We have completed the recall of the products that were contaminated with foreign substances, but as a precaution, we have recalled products that were produced on the same line, and have suspended the line for the time being in order to investigate the cause and strengthen countermeasures,” said a company statement.

“We deeply apologize for the inconvenience caused to our customers, business partners, and all concerned parties. We will strive to further strengthen our quality control system and take all possible measures to ensure that such a situation does not occur again in the future.”

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

JBS has lost an appeal against a fine for one of its subsidiaries as part of Operation Carne Fraca in Brazil.

The Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU) rejected the reconsideration request from Seara Alimentos, the company sanctioned under Operation Carne Fraca (Weak Flesh). Seara Alimentos is a subsidiary of JBS S.A., the Brazilian-based parent company of JBS USA.

In October 2023, Seara Alimentos was fined Brazilian Real $14.8 million (U.S. $2.9 million). However, the company appealed the decision. The CGU heard the claim and considered the evidence but dismissed it based on input from the Directorate of Liability of Legal Entities (DIREP).

JBS previously said that those responsible for the Carne Fraca investigation did not raise any suspicions about the quality or security of Seara’s or JBS’ products and brands.

Offences came to light during Operation Carne Fraca, a Federal Police investigation that uncovered a meat fraud scheme involving some of the largest companies in the country.

Historical violations
In March 2017, Brazilian police announced the results of Operation Carne Fraca, which began in 2015 and highlighted cases of fraud and corruption in about 20 beef and poultry processing plants in the country. Major changes were made by the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Food (MAPA) as a result of the incident.

Fines for Seara Alimentos totaled almost Brazilian Real $14.8 million (U.S. $2.9 million) and the decision was officially published earlier this month.

The CGU found that Seara Alimentos, in 2015 and 2016, paid “undue benefits” to public MAPA agents in the state of Paraná.

Financial payments targeted inspection activities and impacted the issuing of national and international health certificates during sanitary inspections for food products shipped to Chile and China.

In another case in February this year, a regional court in Santa Maria, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, denied the request of a local unnamed slaughterhouse to annul a fine imposed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock based on findings as part of Operation Carne Fraca.

The judge ruled the penalty was correct, and the company was told to pay Brazilian Real $450,000 (U.S. $90,800). In June 2021, the meat firm filed a case against the decision covering issues found in 2017.

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

Chocolate milk sold in New York State is being recalled for improper pasteurization, according to New York State Agriculture Commissioner Richard A. Ball. 

The milk was produced by Meadowbrook Farms Dairy, which is located in Clarksville, NY. No illnesses have been reported to the company to date in connection with this issue.

Pasteurization heats milk briefly to a temperature high enough to destroy pathogens such as Listeria monocytogenes, E. coli, brucella, and Salmonella. Unpasteurized, or raw, milk, has been linked to many food poisoning outbreaks over the years.

The chocolate milk was sold across the Capital region. The milk is packaged in half gallon glass containers that were processed on April 24, 2024. The lot of milk that is included in this recall has a black dot on the cap signifying the lot code.

The recall was triggered when a routine inspection that was conducted by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets found that the lot was improperly pasteurized.

If you purchased this product, do not consume it and do not use it in cooking because of the possibility of cross-contamination. You can throw the milk away in a secure trash can, or you can take it back to the store where you bought it for a full refund.

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

Tradewind Foods de Puerto Rico Inc. of Bayamon, PR is recalling Goya Red Kidney Beans after an FDA Inspection discovered swollen and leaking cans.

According to the details posted online by the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA), the recall was initiated on March 21, 2024, and is ongoing.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), consumers should never use food from cans that are leaking, bulging, or badly dented; cracked jars or jars with loose or bulging lids; canned food with a foul odor; or any container that spurts liquid when opening. Such cans could contain Clostridium botulinum.

The recalled product was distributed in Puerto Rico and St. Croix.

Recalled product:

Goya Red Kidney Beans

• Net Wt.15.5oz. (439g), metal (tin) cans, 24 cans/15.5 oz. per case
• Product Quantity: 1,349 cases
• Code Information: A2402-8BB Expiration date: 03/04/2029

Consumers should not use this product. Recalled products should be thrown out or returned to their place of purchase.

About botulism
While a variety of illnesses can result from eating under-processed food, one of the most dangerous is botulism poisoning. Untreated, botulism can paralyze the muscles needed for breathing, resulting in sudden death.

Anyone who has eaten any recalled product and developed signs of botulism poisoning should immediately seek medical attention, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“In foodborne botulism, symptoms generally begin 18 to 36 hours after eating contaminated food. However, symptoms can begin as soon as 6 hours after or up to 10 days later,” according to the CDC website.

The symptoms of botulism may include some of all of the following: double vision, blurred vision, drooping eyelids, slurred speech, difficulty swallowing, difficulty breathing, a thick-feeling tongue, dry mouth, and muscle weakness. People with botulism poisoning may not show all of these symptoms at once.

These symptoms result from muscle paralysis caused by the toxin. If untreated, the disease may progress, and symptoms may worsen to cause paralysis of specific muscles, including those used in breathing and those in the arms, legs, and the body from the neck to the pelvis area.

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

Imported beef is to blame for a Salmonella outbreak that has sickened more than 50 people, according to Danish officials.

Since March, 51 people in Denmark have been infected with the same type of Salmonella, said the Statens Serum Institut (SSI).

The Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak has sickened 31 men and 20 women. Patients are between the ages of less than 1 year old to 83 years old with a median age of 37. They live throughout the country. 18 people have been hospitalized but no deaths have been recorded.

From patient interviews, 35 of 37 people reported eating ground beef prior to disease onset. The trace-back link to Hilton Foods was made through investigation of eight patients’ consumer purchase data.

The SSI, Danish Veterinary and Food Administration (Fødevarestyrelsen), and DTU Food Institute investigation revealed the meat is imported from England and ground at the Danish site of Hilton Foods.

Associated recalls
Hilton Foods Danmark has recalled a variety of ground (minced) beef produced between March 12 and May 6. Products have use-by dates ranging from March 11 to May 13. They were sold in Dagli’Brugsen, SuperBrugsen, 365 Discount, Coop, Irma, and Kvickly stores across the country.

Ground beef containing meat of English origin produced from March 19 to 23 has been recalled as it is the probable source of Salmonella infection.

Beef including meat of English origin produced on May 4 and 5 has also been recalled as Salmonella was found in the product after the company’s own checks.

Ground beef produced with English raw materials on other dates in the period from March 12 to May 6 is also recalled, as raw materials from the same supplier are included in the products.

Some of the meat has passed its use-by date and is no longer in stores, but consumers may still have it in the freezer. Other potentially affected products were in stores until recently, and authorities advised consumers to throw the meat away or return it to the place where it was purchased.

A spokesperson for Hilton Foods said the company operates to the “highest standards of health, safety, and hygiene”.

“These are standards that we also expect and demand of all our food suppliers and are verified through our supplier management and audit programme.

“Hilton Foods Danmark A/S has recently identified an issue relating to beef mince packaged in Denmark. Having traced this to an individual site of one of our suppliers, we have suspended all supply of meat from that site. This supplier is undertaking a thorough investigation, and all supply will remain suspended while the investigation remains ongoing.”

Whole genome sequencing of bacteria isolated from patients revealed samples were closely related, and all belonged to sequence type 19.

In 2022, 899 Salmonella cases were recorded in Denmark, which was up from 2021 and 2020 but down from 2019. Salmonella caused 11 outbreaks in 2022, with three of them part of international incidents. 

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

How surprised was science when bird flu was detected in dairy cattle with those warnings against raw milk or eating unpasteurized dairy products?

Two Auburn University researchers are offering their expertise on the topic. Dr. Shollie Falkenberg, an associate professor and coordinator of animal health research, and Dr. Cris Young, a professor of practice at Auburn’s College of Veterinary Medicine, provide the following informed, broad perspective on the issue.

The expertise and opinions of individual faculty members do not necessarily represent an official policy or position of Auburn University. Still, two of its top searchers are sharing their knowledge on the recent discovery of avian flu in dairy cattle.

So, was it surprising that avian flu was recently found in dairy cattle? And If so, why?

Professor Young: Yes, it wasn’t on our radar. We consider this an emerging disease event in cattle. While HPAI is reportable in poultry, the current regulatory environment does not similarly categorize Influenza A (IAV) in cattle. That is to say, no regulations exist for testing or movement controls. That is why the federal order was the first action taken. 

Associate Professor  Falkenberg:  Yes and no. Yes, it was surprising as this was not being monitored and was thought to be a significant threat to the cattle industry, but no, given the number of other mammals that have been shown to become infected with HPAI. Furthermore, in the 1990s, a correlation between influenza A virus infection, reduced milk yield, and respiratory symptoms in dairy cows has previously been reported. However, HPAI infection has not been reported until recently in dairy cattle. Other reports of cattle infected with influenza A virus have also been documented. Given that influenza viruses are negative-sense single-stranded viruses prone to reassortment and spillover, it is not beyond the scope that it would be possible for cattle to become infected with HPAI. It is more generally accepted and thought that cattle become infected with influenza D, not A.

Should people be worried about contracting avian flu from food?

Young: People should always handle food safely regardless of source. If you develop good food preparation habits and techniques, they will serve you well.

Falkenberg: Proper food handling should always be practiced. 

Can you explain the term “highly pathogenic avian flu” (HPAI)?

Young: HPAI means that the IAV is a highly contagious, multi-organ systemic disease of poultry that leads to high mortality in poultry. 

Falkenberg:  HPAI is a highly contagious disease often associated with increased mortality in poultry. It is generally caused by influenza A (H5 and sometimes H7) viruses. It should be noted that the “highly pathogenic” refers to the impact these viruses have on birds, not necessarily on humans and other mammals that have been shown to become infected.  

Should we be worried about cows transmitting bird flu to humans?

 Young: We should. HPAI has the opportunity to mix with other human-adapted IAV strains, potentially allowing HPAI to incorporate genetic material from the human IAV strain. This could potentially lead to a strain that circulates in people and possibly a pandemic.

 Falkenberg: As with any pathogen and morbid animal, proper biosecurity and risk assessment of transmission to humans and other animals should be considered. Additionally, given that individuals handling infected birds have become infected, it would be assumed that if one species can transmit the virus, another species would also have that potential.   

Do we know how bird flu is affecting dairy cattle?

Young: The virus appears to be affecting lactating dairy cattle. Milk production is reduced, some milk is thickened in appearance, and some cattle are mildly ill.  

 Falkenberg: It appears that older cows in mid to late lactation are most affected. The clinical presentation was associated with reduced feed intake, decreased milk production, and thickened yellow milk. This peaked four to six days after onset and subsided within 10 to 14 days.  

With bird flu having spread recently to dairy cattle, can it be transmitted through milk?

Young: Yes, through raw, unpasteurized milk, but not through the milk or dairy products you would buy at the grocery store. Pasteurization is an essential food safety process. 

 Falkenberg: It would be assumed that there would be an increased risk of transmission with unpasteurized (raw) milk.  

How does the pasteurization process of milk work, and why is it so vital?

Young: The most common method of pasteurization is High-Temperature Short Time (HTST) pasteurization, where milk passes between metal plates, and hot water is used to raise the temperature of the milk to 161 degrees Fahrenheit for not less than 15 seconds, followed by rapid cooling.  

 Falkenberg: The most common method of pasteurization typically utilizes high temperature. To follow up and give some perspective on the previous question, influenza viruses have been reported to be inactivated (non-infectious) at the following temperatures: Viral genomic RNA becomes denatured at temperatures higher than 60 degrees Celsius. Immunoglobin denatures at temperatures higher than 56 degrees Celsius. On the other hand, pasteurization temperatures are typically greater than 100 degrees Celsius. 

What are the symptoms of bird flu, and what should someone do if they suspect they might have been exposed to it?

Young: Very few, if any, individuals should worry about “bird flu” at this time. However, if you work around poultry, live birds, or processing, you should consider influenza if you have a fever, chills, cough, runny or stuffy nose, headaches, fatigue, or body aches. 

 Falkenberg: Generally, people should not be overly concerned about being exposed to “bird flu” now. However, people who work around poultry, live birds, or processing may be at greater risk and should seek medical advice if they suspect an exposure or if they have a fever, chills, cough, runny or stuffy nose, headaches, fatigue, or body aches.  

How is Auburn helping address the disease-causing strain of avian flu, known as H5N1?

Young: Auburn has many phenomenal researchers, and at the College of Veterinary Medicine, our virologists like Dr. Miria Criado, Dr. Falkenberg, and Dr. Constantinos Kyriakis are leading cutting-edge programs. 

I believe the BISR project has game-changing potential:

Falkenberg: Auburn continues to monitor the information released from the current outbreak and is communicating with government agencies and other researchers to assist as needed. Auburn has a solid group of scientists who have ongoing research programs focusing on influenza and are involved in ongoing discussions about research needs to address the current concerns.

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

A global food standards-setting body has advanced work on various issues, including lead levels, Ciguatera, and tropane alkaloids.

The latest Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food session was held in Panama City in April.

New maximum levels (MLs) were agreed for lead in various spices, including dried aril, dried seeds, dried rhizomes and roots including galangal, dried bark, dried floral parts, dried fruit and berries, paprika, and sumac. New MLs were also agreed on 0.15 mg/kg for cadmium and 0.2 mg/kg for lead in quinoa.

However, the Indian delegation said more time and research were needed to collect geographically representative data on spices, including from developing countries. The European Union proposed lower MLs based on the As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle and available data.

Another text forwarded to the main Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting in Switzerland in November was the draft code of practice/guidelines for preventing and reducing ciguatera poisoning. The United States chaired the group that worked on this topic. Ciguatera poisoning is estimated to cause from 10,000 to 500,000 cases per year.

New areas of focus
Sampling plans for methylmercury in fish and for total aflatoxin and ochratoxin in certain spices have been sent to November’s meeting for adoption.

New work will include reviews of the code of practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Aflatoxin Contamination in Peanuts and the code of practice for the Reduction of Aflatoxin B1 in Raw Materials and Supplemental Feedingstuffs for Milk-Producing Animals.

A code of practice will be developed to prevent and reduce cadmium contamination in foods. The United States will lead the work expected to be completed in 2027.

There are plans to update the code of practice for Weed Control to Prevent and Reduce Pyrrolizidine Alkaloid Contamination in Food and Feed. A code of practice will also be developed to prevent and reduce the presence of tropane alkaloids in food. These issues will be discussed at the next Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food meeting planned for June 2025.

The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) will issue calls for data on areas including tropane alkaloids in food and feed at different production stages, total aflatoxins in various cereal products, and in ready-to-eat peanuts as well as for lead in spices, dried bark, and dried culinary herbs to support the committee’s efforts.

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

A food safety line item in the federal budget would go a long way toward “bringing clarity and certainty” to the human foods programs of the Food and Drug Administration.

House and Senate Appropriations leaders are finding themselves subject to just such a lobbying approach by some 21 consumer and industry groups as well as state and local food safety agencies.

In letters to House and Senate Appropriations leaders, the food safety line item advocates call the elected officials to FDA’s restructuring of the human foods program to “streamline operations and better fulfill its mission of food safety protection.”

The letters seek a food safety line item in the FDA’s fiscal year 2025 appropriation. In this way, Congress can help modernize the human foods program.

Currently, the FDA’s budget calls for a cut of $34 million in state and local programs, which would be reduced to $83 million from current levels of over $117 million. The cuts would “decimate” state and local programs.

Signing on to the letters are representatives of the American Frozen Food Institute (AFFI); Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO); Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO); Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL); Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO); Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI); Conference for Food Protection (CFP); Consumer Brands Association (CBA); Consumer Federation of America; Consumer Report; FMI – The Food Industry Association, George Washington University; Milken Institute School of Public Health, International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), International Fresh Produce Association (IFPA), Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC); National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA); National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS); National Environmental Health Association (NEHA); Pet Food Institute; Stop Foodborne Illness, and Western Growers. 

Bipartisan appropriation leaders were urged to take advantage of the current restructuring of the FDA human foods program to streamline operations and better fulfill its mission of food safety protection. The groups believe that while many of the proposed changes will strengthen the FDA’s ability to ensure the safety of our food supply, Congress can help modernize the human foods program by bringing clarity and certainty to the agency’s budget. 

The letters further explained that despite the critical role played by state and local food agencies, those agencies frequently lack the budgetary certainty needed to operate effectively, which leads to difficulties in hiring and maintaining an adequate number of properly trained staff. 

Although increased funding provided since the passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act has significantly enhanced state and local agencies’ capacity to fulfill their food safety mission, the FDA often uses funds meant for state and local agencies to pursue other priorities while giving little to no warning to impacted agencies. 

Further, the groups believe a “consistent and predictable funding mechanism for state and local programs is needed. As such, it urged including a line item detailing specific funding for state and local food safety issues in the budget allocation for FDA to ensure state and local programs have the budgetary certainty needed to carry out their work.” 

The letters to House and Senate Appropriation leaders can be found in their entirety here:

Senate letter https://www.afdo.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/May-2024-State-and-Local-Funding-Letter-Senate.pdf

House of Representatives letter https://www.afdo.org/wp- content/uploads/2024/05/May-2024-State-and-Local-Funding-Letter-House.pdf

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

Almost 550 people have fallen sick in a large food poisoning outbreak in Vietnam.

People were taken ill after eating at a bakery in Long Khánh, a city in Đồng Nai Province.

In the past week, 547 people were sickened, according to the Dong Nai Department of Health.

466 cases have been discharged from hospitals and continue to be monitored at home, while 81 patients are being treated in hospital.

Operations at the Cô Băng bakery were temporarily suspended while authorities investigated the incident. Officials said more than 1,000 banh mi sandwiches were sold to consumers, with some later developing symptoms of diarrhea and vomiting. These sandwiches usually come on a baguette with pate, pork, and vegetables.

Salmonella suspicion

An inspection by authorities found the bakery did not have a business license or an eligible food safety certificate. Four employees did not have a certificate of food safety training or a health certificate.

A meeting with local food producers and traders earlier this week revealed that only around 20 percent of 132 bakery outlets in Long Khánh have business licenses. In 2023, a training session was organized for food businesses in the area. The owner of Co Bang bakery attended but was not given a certificate on food safety.

Hospitals conducted test results on 29 patient samples, and the Ho Chi Minh City Institute of Public Health recorded 16 positives for two Salmonella and E. coli strains, and nine samples were positive for E. coli.

Results from food samples taken at the implicated bakery by the Ho Chi Minh City Institute of Public Health recorded Salmonella positives in four of eight samples.

Officials said these findings mean it can be concluded that Salmonella caused the food poisoning.

Wider picture

Deputy Prime Minister Tran Luu Quang asked the Ministry of Health to promote information and advice on the risk of food poisoning and how to prevent it, especially in tourist areas, school cafeterias, and street food sites.

In 2023, Vietnam recorded 125 epidemics that infected more than 2,100 people and caused 28 deaths, which is an increase on 2022 figures.

In March 2024, the Ministry of Health’s Vietnam Food Administration and the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Food and Drug Safety announced the official operation of a food safety management system in Vietnam.

The announcement was the outcome of a project between the two governments approved by the Vietnamese Prime Minister in 2020.

Most food production and processing facilities in Vietnam are small-scale and follow seasonal production. Among the country’s 500,000 food processing establishments, 85 percent are small- and medium-sized and family-run with limited equipment and facilities.

The system has five components: an online food safety reporting system, a public web portal with general food safety information, a professional portal for officials, and a system monitoring laboratory information.

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

The Food and Drug Administration continues using import alerts to enforce U.S. food safety regulations for food from foreign countries. The agency updates and modifies the alerts as needed.

Recent modifications to FDA’s import alerts, as posted by the agency, are listed below. 

Click here to go to the FDA page with links to details on specific alerts. See chart below for list of alert modifications.

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

Researchers have shared details about how a Listeria outbreak in Switzerland in 2022 traced to fish was solved.

In the summer of 2022, the Federal Office of Public Health (OFSP) noticed increased reports of listeriosis cases, indicating a possible outbreak.

Twenty Listeria monocytogenes patient isolates were found to belong to an outbreak cluster, and 18 cases occurred in northeastern Switzerland. The median age of patients was 77.4 years old, with a range of 58 to 89 years old, and both sexes were equally affected. Nineteen people were hospitalized, and one person died.

In April 2022, four cases of listeriosis were reported who lived in the canton of St. Gallen. Samples from two patients were related, and both consumed fish. According to a study published in Swiss Medical Weekly, the last patient tested positive at the end of July.

Initial signal

Analysis of interview data revealed smoked trout from a local producer called Kundelfingerhof as a suspected infection source, triggering an onsite investigation of the production facility and sampling of suspected products by the responsible cantonal food inspection team in mid-July 2022.

Interviews with patients four to eight revealed overlapping information on the consumption of smoked trout, the brand, producer, and retailer where trout had been purchased, and provided the information that led to the audit of the suspected facility.

In total, 17 of the 20 outbreak patients mentioned consumption of fish. Smoked trout was confirmed for 15 patients, and nine named the same producer for smoked trout. According to information from physicians, another three people ate smoked trout from this firm.

Seven of 10 samples tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes, and the cantonal authority ordered a ban on production and distribution and a product recall. The Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (OSAV) issued a nationwide public alert for the smoked fish products concerned.

Kundelfingerhof supplied several of the main retailers in the area, ran a farm shop, and sold products directly to the public at a weekly and online market.

Whole-genome sequencing confirmed the relatedness of Listeria monocytogenes smoked trout product isolates and the patient-derived isolates. Following the ban on production and distribution and the recall, reporting of new outbreak-related cases dropped to zero.

Contamination at the plant

Sanitation measures at the manufacturing facility were informed by analyzing 60 swabs from the production environment and revising the company’s self-monitoring policy. Several months later, the ban on production and distribution was lifted after Kundelfingerhof took action to restore its legal status, and Listeria was no longer detectable in environmental samples and ready-to-eat products.

Listeriosis is a rare disease in Switzerland, with 40 to 60 cases confirmed every year.

All clinical Listeria monocytogenes isolates are whole-genome sequenced at the National Reference Laboratory for Enteropathogenic Bacteria and Listeria (NENT). The Competence Centre for Epidemiological Outbreak Investigations (KEA) at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute interviews patients diagnosed and reported with listeriosis using a standardized questionnaire.

“In the present outbreak, related cases were reported over nearly four months despite the short shelf life of the food item identified. This indicates a persistent contamination source in the production facility rather than contamination of a specific batch,” said scientists.

“Epidemiological surveillance through timely routine interviewing of all listeriosis patients in Switzerland played a key role in rapidly identifying the source of contamination and provided the basis for re-establishing food safety for consumers in this outbreak.”

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

It’s unknown if humans can become infected with the Avian Flu virus from unpasteurized, raw milk, but we’ve certainly set up the experiment to find out.

That’s because several state legislatures in recent years have eased up on raw milk restrictions, mostly to permit the direct transfer of the it at the dairy or a nearby farmers market. However, some states allow raw milk at retail stores.

The direct sale of raw milk contrasts with the Food and Drug Administration’s long-standing recommendation against consuming raw milk. It remains against federal law to sell unpasteurized, raw milk across state lines.

Now, those looser direct sale provisions favored by many a state are being tested after the spread of the H5N1 bird flu virus was found in raw milk.

FDA responded by warning consumers to avoid all raw milk products.  FDA sees pasteurization as a method of inactivating the Avian virus.

At this point, it’s only fair to note that science does not know if people can get H5N1 from drinking raw milk, but because of the high levels of viral loads, it’s certainly a possibility.

Avoidance would seem to be the best action that raw milk drinkers could take.

The FDA, which continues to test, has “advisedly strongly” against raw milk since May 1.

Several states have issued similar warnings. New Mexico is the latest, issuing its warning yesterday.

“Raw milk that has not been pasteurized may present a higher risk of HPAI and other virus/bacteria transmission,” David Morgan, a public information officer for the New Mexico Department of Health said. “People should avoid consuming raw milk or raw cheeses.”

It’s legal to buy raw milk in some manner in 27 states, with direct options most common.  Raw milk advocates often claim the choice is more nutritious, but that is without scientific evidence.

Pasteurization is the best mechanism for combating bird flu because it inactivates viruses and kills the harmful bacteria in milk.

The FDA has found fragments of the bird flu virus in commercially available milk, cottage cheese, and sour cream.  That’s enough for health experts to advise steering clear of raw milk until there is an all-clear signal on bird flu.

North Dakota raw milk dairy farmers acknowledge that their cows have a low avian flu risk. Raw milk dairy cows in 10 states have tested positive for the bird flu.

But so far the customers who are the direct buyers of that raw milk are not being deterred.

Raw milk customers have plenty of experience in not worrying about potential harmful outcomes. Raw milk is milk that has not been pasteurized to kill harmful bacteria. Raw milk can carry harmful germs, such as Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium, E. coli, Listeria, Brucella, and Salmonella. These germs can pose serious health risks even before there is any bird flu contamination to worry about..

Raw milk is one of the riskiest foods. People who get sick from raw milk might have many days of diarrhea, stomach cramping, and vomiting. Some people can develop severe or even life-threatening diseases, including:

• Guillain-Barré syndrome, which can cause paralysis, and
• Hemolytic uremic syndrome can result in kidney failure, stroke, and even death.

Here are some things to know:

• Raw milk is linked to a variety of food-borne illnesses. Some of these illnesses can be severe.
• People can get ill from the same brand and source of raw milk they drank previously, even for a long time, without becoming ill.
• Pasteurizing milk reduces the chance of illness. Pasteurization is the process of heating milk to a high enough temperature for enough time to kill harmful germs.
• Raw milk can get contaminated in many ways. Healthy animals can carry germs that are harmful to people. Germs in these animals’ poop can get into raw milk and contaminate it.
• Sound safety practices can reduce the chance of germs getting in raw milk but not eliminate it.

People most at risk for several foodborne illnesses are adults 65 years and older, children younger than 5 years, and people with weakened immune systems. However, healthy people of any age can get sick after drinking raw milk contaminated with harmful germs.

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

A woman facing charges in a fatal mushroom poisoning incident in Australia has pleaded not guilty to murder.

Erin Patterson entered the plea at Latrobe Valley Magistrates Court and was remanded in custody. The case will now be moved to the Supreme Court of Victoria for trial, with the first hearing set for later this month.

Detectives from Victoria Police arrested the 49-year-old in November 2023. She was charged with three counts of murder and five of attempted murder.

In July 2023, four people were taken to hospital after they became ill following a meal at a private residence in Leongatha. Two Korumburra women, aged 66 and 70, died on August 4. A 70-year-old Korumburra man died on August 5. A 69-year-old Korumburra man was released from the hospital on Sept. 23.

Don and Gail Patterson and her sister Heather Wilkinson are thought to have died from symptoms consistent with death cap mushroom poisoning. Ian Wilkinson survived the incident. Erin Patterson is the daughter-in-law of the couple who died.

Three attempted murder charges cover separate incidents in Victoria between 2021 and 2022. It’s alleged a 48-year-old Korumburra man, her ex-husband Simon Patterson, became ill following meals over this period.

Eating just one death cap mushroom may kill an adult, according to the Victorian Department of Health. Poisonous mushrooms, including death caps, occur in Victoria during autumn as the weather becomes wetter and cooler.

Cooking, peeling, or drying these mushrooms does not remove the poison. No home test distinguishes safe and edible mushrooms from poisonous types.

Symptoms of poisoning can include violent stomach pains, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea and usually occur six to 24 hours after eating the mushrooms. Even if initial symptoms subside, severe liver damage may have happened. If they believe they’ve eaten a poisonous mushroom, people should urgently attend an emergency department and take any remaining mushrooms with them for identification.

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

Two articles have been published giving an insight into official controls in France on Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) and Listeria contamination in food.

In the first report, monitoring plans aimed to establish the contamination rates of ground (minced) beef and raw milk cheeses by the STEC strains identified as the most risky in France.

Results from monitoring in 2021 and 2022 confirmed the contamination rates of ground beef were low and comparable to previous plans. In 2021, 579 tests were done at the distribution stage and 570 at the production stage in 2022.

Positive findings
Three beef samples were positive in 2021, with two being E. coli O157 and the other E. coli O26. Another three were positive in 2022. Two were E. coli O157, and the third was E. coli O45.

Contamination rates of raw milk cheeses in 2022 were slightly higher than those observed during previous plans but were still relatively low. In 2022, 476 analyses were conducted at the production stage.

Eight samples were positive, with six of these being E. coli O26. One sample each was positive for E. coli O157 and E. coli O103.

Data indicated that the risk of exposure by consuming these two types of foods remains limited. However, STEC strains that are highly pathogenic for people were isolated in some samples.

Official advice is that raw milk cheeses should not be given to or eaten by children younger than 5.

Scientists said it was important to implement measures to control and monitor the risk in these sectors. They added that raising consumer awareness about respecting the cooking and consumption conditions on product labels was also crucial.

Listeria analysis
Another article in the epidemiological bulletin, published by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES) and the Directorate General for Food (DGAL), covered the results of official controls on Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat (RTE) food from 2019 to 2021.

Since 2019, the National Reference Laboratory for Listeria monocytogenes has been analyzing strains isolated from official controls. Characterization of these strains contributes to a better understanding of them and the health risks linked to food.

Across six food categories, the 227 strains were divided into four serotypes and 83 clonal complexes (CC). As described in the literature, results show that CC121 and CC9 were mainly isolated. 36 genomic clusters were also identified, with 14 including strains isolated across several years, suggesting the persistence of Listeria strains or reintroduction.

Official Listeria surveillance included surveillance plans from DGAL and control plans from DGCCRF. This system changed in 2023. Under the past control plans, the National Reference Laboratory for Listeria received 81 strains in 2019, 57 in 2020, and 45 in 2021. As part of surveillance plans, the lab received seven strains in 2019, 19 in 2020, and 25 in 2021.

Overall, 21 clonal complexes were found in vegetable products, 18 in meat products, and 17 in fishery products. 54 strains were found in vegetable products, 69 in meat products, and 87 in fishery products.

Scientists said results underline the importance of interactions with the Listeria National Reference Center, which handles alerts and surveillance of listeriosis cases.

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