Comprehensive
News List
General
Food Safety News/
Outbreak News/ Recall
News/ New Methods
News/
USDA/FDA
News/ On-Line Slides/
Job Information/Internet
Journal of Food Safety
1/07
2007
ISSUE:286
Sponsors
Click
here
to go
List of Newsletters
To subscribe this Food Safety Newsletter,
Click
here
Internet Journal of Food Saety
A LEGAL HISTORY
OF RAW MILK IN THE UNITED STATES
Posted on December 31, 2007 by Bill Marler
Source of Article: http://www.marlerblog.com/
Winston Churchill once said, ¡°There is no finer investment for any community
than putting milk into babies.¡± Perhaps he was right, but at the turn
of the 20th century, the process of pasteurizing milk was still in its
infancy, and the safety of milk was a preeminent public health challenge.
As people in the United States moved from the countryside into cities,
their milk supply became increasingly unhealthy. Milk from cows in the
country was transported further and stored at higher temperatures than
in the past. Milk produced closer to cities came from cows kept under
crowded and unsanitary conditions, and as a result, many city residents,
especially children, were increasingly getting sick and dying after consuming
contaminated milk. (1)
Public health reformers and activists of the late 19th century put milk
at the top of their agenda, and the safety of the milk supply increasingly
became a matter of regular public concern, discussed in newspapers, medical
journals, public health circles, and the legal system. In a 1914 decision,
the Illinois Supreme Court described the importance of the question, saying,
"There is no article of food in more general use than milk; none
whose impurity or unwholesomeness may more quickly, more widely, and more
seriously affect the health of those who use it" Koy v. City of Chicago
, 104 N.E. 1104 (1914).
Urban areas were first to act, but by 1920, milk regulations had reached
every part of the country, with regulations beginning to appear in state
statutes. The U.S. Public Health Service considered milk health to be
such a high priority that it drafted the Model Milk Health Ordinance and
promoted it actively for adoption at the local level (U.S. Public Health
Service, 1939). (1)
Milk producers and sellers
attacked the first regulations as unconstitutional and unwarranted governmental
limitations on their rights to produce and sell their products as they
wished. In response, local and state authorities relied on their intrinsic
legal police power duty and authority to protect the public¡¯s welfare.
Presented with growing evidence of the potential danger created by the
sale of raw milk, most courts found these regulations to be valid, as
a legitimate exercise of the government¡¯s police power.
In the representative case of Pfeffer v. Milwaukee, 171 Wis. 514 (1920),
milk dealers claimed that a Milwaukee ordinance requiring that all milk
sold within the city be pasteurized would hurt their business, and that
the ordinance was an invalid exercise of the police power because it did
not promote the public health. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, however, disagreed.
¡°Public health demands that milk and all milk products should be pure
and wholesome. It is also common knowledge that milk containing deleterious
organisms is an unsuitable article of food. Milk is known to be a product
easily infected with germ life and to require special attention and treatment
in its production and distribution for consumption as an article of food.
Scientific knowledge concerning these facts and the best method of pasteurizing
milk for human use in course of production and distribution as a pure
and wholesome food is so generally understood and known that courts take
judicial notice of these facts.¡±
The regulation of raw milk
sales in the first half of the 20th century proved to be a major public
health success in this country. In 1938, milk-borne outbreaks constituted
approximately 25% of all disease-outbreaks from contaminated food and
water. As of 2005, that figure was down to about 1%.
Outbreaks of illness linked to the consumption of contaminated milk did
continue, however. The ban on the sale of raw milk was not universal because
at the time no federal law or regulation prohibited the sale of raw milk
on a national level. The regulatory scheme controlling the sale of raw
milk on a state and local level was spotty; some states banned the sale
of milk that was not pasteurized, some states did not. In states that
did not ban the sale of raw milk, some cities and counties did. The ability
to sell and purchase raw milk was thus determined more by the social and
political nature of the individual jurisdiction than by scientific knowledge.
The impact of regulations was clear: forty (87%) of the forty-six raw
milk outbreaks reported by the CDC during the period from 1973 through
1992 occurred in states in which the intrastate sale of raw milk was legal.
(2)
Efforts to comprehensively ban the sale of raw milk continued. In 1973, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed and adopted a regulation requiring that all milk moving in interstate commerce be pasteurized; but ¡°certified¡± raw milk became exempt from the regulation after FDA received an objection from a producer of certified raw milk. Between 1974 and 1982, FDA accumulated evidence of the association of certified raw milk with human disease, and in 1982, began drafting a proposed regulation to ban all interstate sales of raw milk and raw milk products. In an attached memorandum supporting the regulation, FDA concluded that consumption of raw milk "presents a significant public health problem" and that pasteurization was the only feasible way to assure the safety of milk. The proposed regulation, however, was again not adopted. (3)
Public Citizen v. Heckler, 602 F. Supp. 611 (1985) was filed on September 19, 1984. Public Citizen, a public service organization, the American Public Health Association, and others brought the suit to compel the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to ban all domestic sales of raw milk and raw milk products. Claiming that federal officials had long known of serious risks to human health from consumption of raw milk, plaintiffs contended that the Secretary had unreasonably delayed her decision, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Court¡¯s opinion was explicitly direct, and its ruling simple. ¡°The facts here speak for themselves and need little elaboration. Officials at the highest levels of the Department of Health and Human Services have concluded that certified raw milk poses a serious threat to the public health. Leading health organizations are unanimous in proposing that sales of any raw milk should be banned. ¡¦ The Department's justification for its continued delay is lame at best and irresponsible at worst. ¡®When the public health may be at stake, the agency must move expeditiously to consider and resolve the issues before it.¡¯ Public Citizen Health Research Group v. Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 740 F.2d at 34. The Department has wholly failed to meet that mandate here.¡± The court then ordered that the Department publish a proposed regulation within 60 days of its order.
On August 10, 1987, the FDA published in 21 CFR Part 1240.61, a final regulation mandating the pasteurization of all milk and milk products in final package form for direct human consumption. This regulation banned the shipping of raw milk in interstate commerce, and became effective September 9, 1987. In the Federal Register notification for the final rule to 21 CFR Part 1240.61, the FDA made a number of findings, including the following: "Raw milk, no matter how carefully produced, may be unsafe." (3)
Today, it is a violation of federal law to sell raw milk packaged for consumer use across state lines (interstate commerce), but each state regulates the sale of raw milk within the state (intrastate), and some states allow it to be sold. Nationally, the distinctions between applicable laws in individual states are bewildering. In 2006, 25 states had laws making the sale of raw milk for human consumption illegal. In the remaining states, dairy operations may sell raw milk to local retail food stores or to consumers directly from the farm, or at agricultural fairs or other community events, depending on the state law. Restrictions vary from specific labeling requirements, to requirements that milk only be bought with personal bottles, to purchase of raw milk through cow shares exclusively, to permitting a sale only with a written prescription from a doctor, to sales of raw goat milk only, and to sales of a limited daily quantity only if made without advertising. Even in states that prohibit intrastate sales of raw milk, some people have tried to circumvent the law by "cow sharing¡± or "cow leasing."
Because raw milk sales have not been outlawed altogether, outbreaks associated with raw milk continue to occur. There have been numerous documented outbreaks of E. coli, Salmonella, and Campylobacter infections directly linked to the consumption of unpasteurized milk in the past 20 years. During 1998--2005, a total of 45 outbreaks of foodborne illness were reported to CDC in which unpasteurized milk (or cheese suspected to have been made from unpasteurized milk) was implicated. These outbreaks accounted for 1,007 illnesses, 104 hospitalizations, and two deaths (CDC, unpublished data, 2007). (4) Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with unpasteurized milk likely is greater. In December 2005, following an outbreak that sickened at least nineteen people in Washington State, the FDA again publicly warned consumers to avoid drinking raw milk. (5)
Government regulation of the food industry is commonly accepted as a means both to protect public health and to maintain public confidence in the food supply. Despite its great success in reducing raw milk outbreaks during the past hundred years, government regulation and enforcement has not yet succeeded in wholly eradicating the sale of raw milk. The sale of raw milk continues to be legal, in some form or another, in almost half of our states, and the attendant risk of raw milk-related outbreaks therefore also continues to be present.
REFERENCES:
(1) R. Wright, P. Huck, ¡°Counting Cases About Milk, Our ¡°Most Nearly perfect
Food,¡± 36 Law & Soc¡¯y Rev 51 (2002).
(2) M L Headrick, et al,¡± The epidemiology of raw milk-associated foodborne
disease outbreaks reported in the United States, 1973 through 1992¡±, Am
J Public Health. 1998 August; 88(: 1219?1221.
(3) ¡°Sale/Consumption of Raw Milk-Position Statement,¡± U. S. Food and
Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, March
19, 2003.
(4) ¡°Salmonella Typhimurium Infection Associated with Raw Milk and Cheese
Consumption --- Pennsylvania, 2007¡±, MMWR, (CDC), November 9, 2007 / 56(44);1161-1164.
(5) ¡°FDA Warns Consumers to Avoid Drinking Raw Milk¡±, FDA NEWS, December
16, 2005.
Thanks to Andy Weisbecker in my office.
Even More
on the Raw Milk Debate - Dee Creek Farms
Posted on December 31, 2007 by Bill Marler
Source of Article: http://www.marlerblog.com/
Here is another installment giving some background on another case where
we have brought claims on behalf of children sickened by raw milk. In
both this case and Grace Harbor Farms, confidential settlements were reached
with the owners and insurance carriers. For more information on outbreaks
related to raw milk, please see attached from my friends at www.barfblog.com
In early December 2005 public health officials in Clark County, Washington
became aware of four children who resided in the county who had been diagnosed
with E. coli O157:H7. Clark County Public Health (CCPH) notified the Washington
State Department of Health (WDOH) of a possible outbreak on December 8.
By December 9 county officials suspected that all four children had acquired
their infection by consuming unpasteurized milk obtained from Dee Creek
Farm, a small, unlicensed dairy located in neighboring Cowlitz County.
The following Monday, December 12 health officers at the Cowlitz County
Health Department (CCHD) issued a health advisory to area health care
practitioners and clinics alerting them to the outbreak. By December 14
the number of ill persons had risen to 11 persons, including 9 children
between the ages of 5 and 13. Of the five children who had required hospitalization,
four remained hospitalized and were in serious condition after developing
HUS (acute kidney failure). All 11 individuals had consumed unpasteurized
milk provided by Dee Creek Farm.
The Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) conducted three
on-site visits to the farm. Numerous samples were collected and tested
for E. coli O157:H7 at the WSDA laboratory. E. coli O157:H7 was detected
in 7 samples. Two milk samples were positive for the bacteria. Four environmental
swabs were positive. These were taken from a mat in the milking area,
the muddy area at the entrance to the milking area, and mud on the ground
just inside of the door to the milking area. PFGE analysis was conducted
on the 7 isolates obtained from culture of the environmental samples and
compared to PFGE results of isolates obtained from ill humans. Test results
of human and environmental samples were indistinguishable by analysis
with two restriction enzymes.
FDA looks
to NC in developing plan to better protect U.S.'s food
The Associated Press
Related Content
http://www.newsobserver.com
Source of Article: http://www.charlotte.com/204/story/426465.html
RALEIGH, N.C. --North Carolina food safety officials check store shelves
each week to test for contaminated foods, and emergency plans are drafted
in case of a widespread contaminated food supply.
The process, which continues to find problems that lead to recalls, has
caught the attention of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which is
now working with North Carolina officials to develop a system to better
protect the nation's food supply.
The North Carolina Department of Agriculture launched its food monitoring
program in 2005, responding to concerns that terrorists could contaminate
food. Now the program has a heavy focus on routinely catching food products
- both imported and produced domestically - that may have bacteria, pesticides
and other potentially harmful contaminants. The testing has been successful,
but concerning. In two years, the state has found staphylococcus, E.coli
and salmonella bacteria in soft cheeses, undeclared allergens in imported
raisins and illegal antibiotics in foreign-raised fish. In each case,
the state's tests led to recalls. "We want consumers, when they visit
stores, to have confidence that the products they are purchasing are safe,"
said Joe Reardon, director of the state agriculture department's food
and drug safety division. "If we wait until the consumer reports
a problem, we have missed an opportunity to recall the product before
there is a public health consequence." The FDA tests only about 1
percent of imported foods, according to the agency, so states are left
to do much of the work. Food safety officers in North Carolina make weekly
trips to grocery stores and other food markets to buy food most prone
to contamination, such as soft cheeses and seafood. The products are then
tested in a Raleigh laboratory. The state has also developed an emergency
defense system, which was used in August when an outbreak of botulism
triggered a nationwide recall of canned chili and beef stew manufactured
by Castleberry Food Co.
State officials were immediately sent into the field to recover the items.
Reardon said the effort recovered about 35,000 cans of food, including
products that would have been sent to day cares and schools or packed
for Boy Scout camping trips.
North Carolina collected more cans than the FDA recovered in all other
49 states, Reardon said.
But industry observers note that surveillance won't ever completely protect
consumers from unsafe imports. "There's no way we can test all products,"
said David Green, an associate professor of food safety at North Carolina
State University.
Byron Dorgan
and Mike Enzi: New rule is a threat to beef safety in U.S.
The USDA is going to allow imports that may increase the risk
of mad cow disease, undoing years of efforts to ensure quality.
By BYRON DORGAN and MIKE ENZI
Last update: January 1, 2008 - 5:42 PM
Source of Article: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/12900391.html
From hamburgers at lunch to steaks at dinner, many Americans consume some
form of beef every week. Millions around the world do the same.
American livestock producers work hard to ensure that the beef they produce
is the best and safest in the world, and it is. As a result, consumers
worldwide buy American beef with confidence. However, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) could harm the work of American livestock producers
with its recent approval of a rule that allows imported beef from Canada
with higher risk for mad cow disease into our country.
That rule change threatens the American beef "brand" because
of Canada's ongoing experience with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE),
otherwise known as mad cow disease. Twelve cases of BSE have been detected
in Canadian-born cattle, eight since the beginning of last year, the latest
of which was announced on Dec. 18. Resuming unrestricted imports for this
higher-risk beef means that when consumers -- in America or around the
globe -- buy our beef, they won't know for certain that they are getting
the product that U.S. producers worked so hard to keep safe.
Clearly, that will cause some consumers to look elsewhere, with considerable
harm to the U.S. beef industry.
The USDA previously allowed cattle younger than 30 months of age to be
imported from Canada. This age restriction was important, because younger
animals are less likely to be at risk for BSE infection. The new rule,
adopted Nov. 19, allows all animals born after March 1, 1999, to enter
the United States, and it also allows beef from animals that were slaughtered
in Canada to be imported into the United States without an age restriction.
In recent months, American consumers have come face to face with the reality
that food products from other nations can be tainted and diseased. Our
food-safety procedures need more scrutiny, not less.
American ranchers have worked hard to earn the confidence that consumers
in America and around the globe rightfully have in the quality and safety
of American beef. Government policies should do nothing to diminish that.
Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and Mike Enzi, R-Wy., have introduced a resolution
in the Senate that would halt implementation of the USDA rule.
Botulism
in Duck Foie Gras
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
FRANCE - French authorities are investigating a case of botulism contamination
in a batch of Foie Gras.
Source of Article: http://www.thepoultrysite.com/
The French agriculture ministry said that Clostridium botulinum, the pathogen
responsible for botulism, had been found by the national laboratory in
a batch of duck foie gras under the Monfort label. The product has been
recalled from the market and a warning has been issued by the manufacturers.
ThePoultrySite News Desk
Food safety
certifications dangerously lag industry activity
22:40' 01/01/2008 (GMT+7)
Source of Article: http://english.vietnamnet.vn/social/2008/01/762090/
VietNamNet Bridge - To improve food quality and safety, HCMC People¡¯s
Committee regulations now require all food producers and distributors
have food hygiene and safety certifications as less than 35% of such operations
currently have the papers required.
The HCMC Office for Food Hygiene and Safety reported only some 8,300 of
over 24,000 food producers and distribution citywide have food hygiene
and safety certification.
An unnamed Tan Binh District Medical Office representative blamed limited
public awareness of the importance of the food hygiene and safety, insufficient
funding of medical bureaucracies and the amount of paperwork they must
handle.
Only some 700 of almost 1,650 food seller in the district had obtained
certifications.
A delegate from Thu Duc district explained that only 385 out of 2,000
food sellers in Thu Duc were certified because most of them are sidewalk
eateries, canteens and street vendors that can hardly afford VND200,000
for certification.
Department of Health Deputy Director Le Truong Gian noted on December
31 that the deadline for food seller to obtain the papers required had
already been extended twice since June this year. Now, the city has little
choice but to enforce the regulations more strictly.
Gian emphasized the Department of Health will work the People¡¯s Committee
to resolve related internal urban administration problems before city
health inspectors move on to unchecked food processing sites, shops and
restaurants.
Fines of VND10-15 million are to be imposed on violators, added Gian.
Yet, several questions about the program¡¯s effectiveness remain. How long
will it take to inspect the 13,800 shops that have not yet registered
for safety certification? Who will take responsibility for related public
health problems in the meantime? How can mobile vendors be covered? More
could be listed.
Food Safety and Quality Related Job Openings
NIR/Analytical Services Manager ? Land O¡¯Lakes, Inc.
- Shoreview, MN
Sanitation Manager ? Malt-O-Meal - Northfield,
MN
Food Safety Consultant - Agricultural Consulting Services, Inc. ? Rochester,
NY
Quality Control Supervisor - Channel Fish Co. ? Boston, MA
Food Safety Programs Director ? Food Marketing Institute - Crystal City,
VA
Food Chemist/ Nutritional Chemist ? EMSL Analytical, Inc. - Indianapolis,
IN
QA/QC Manager - Carl Buddig and Company ? South Holland, IL
Food Safety
and Quality Related Job Openings
Food safety
center on cards (China Daily)
Updated: 2008-01-03 09:28
Source of Article: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/
The capital will establish a food safety command center for this year's
Olympic ., a senior official from the city's industry and commerce authority
said yesterday.
The Beijing Municipal Food Safety Supervision and Coordination Office
will set up the food safety center with support from the Organizing Committee
of the Beijing Olympics, the Olympic Security Command Center and staff
at major . venues.
The center will be responsible for overseeing food safety during the .
and issue alerts should any risks arise, Zhang Zhikuan, chief of the Beijing
municipal administration for industry and commerce, said at a work conference
yesterday.
Officials at the conference said food for the . will be classified into
345 items in 10 categories, with each item checked against specific technical
standards.
"Precautions must be taken to avert any trace of terrorist attacks
on our food supply chain," Zhang told the meeting
Officials will also be mobilized to ensure the protection of intellectual
property rights, consumer rights and assist the many foreigners expected
to visit the capital during the event.
Authorities will focus their inspections on Olympic venues, hotels and
restaurants to ensure food quality, Zhang, who is also head of the city's
office for food safety coordination, said.
Food quality will be closely monitored and systems are in place to enable
city authorities to trace suspect food back to its source, he said.
The move is part of the commitment Beijing made to the International Olympic
Committee to guarantee food safety during the ..
Truck With
Possible E. Coli Tainted Beef Stolen, Consumers Warned
Featured Article
Main Category: Nutrition / Diet News
Article Date: 29 Dec 2007 - 0:00 PST
Source of Article: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/92787.php
American Fresh Foods has announced that a truck loaded with 14,800 pounds
of ground beef, some of it possibly infected with E. coli O157:H7, was
stolen last Thursday. People have been advised to refrain from buying
ground beef from dubious vendors. The refrigerated truck had been parked
in the company's car park when it was stolen.
The company stressed that its regular meat products that are sold through
normal retail outlets are safe. A company spokesman said there is concern
for public safety regarding the stolen truck, because apart from their
being possibly tainted produce inside, the truck was carrying a limited
supply of refrigeration fuel, raising the chances that the produce could
go rotten very quickly.
The company added that it is working closely with the USDA (US Department
of Agriculture) and local authorities.
Below is a description of the products to look out for, they form part
of this alert:
-- 73/27 Ground Beef
2 lbs approx weight packages
sell-by date 12.30.07
production times 14:27 - 15:28
-- 80/20 Ground Beef Chuck
2 lbs approx weight packages
sell-by date12.31.07
production times between 13:40 - 14:27
-- 85/15 Ground Beef Round
1 lb approx weight packages
sell-by date of 12.31.07
production times between 13:51 - 17:01
-- 90/10 Ground Beef Sirloin
1 lb approx weight packages
sell-by date of 12.31.07
production times between 13:49 - 15:35
-- 96/04 Extra Lean Ground
Beef 4% Fat
1 lb approx weight packages
sell-by date of 12.31.07
production times 14:25 - 17:22
-- 73/27 100% Ground Beef;
Rework Map
40 lbs net wt. box
-- Chuck 100% Ground Beef;
Rework Map
260 lbs net wt. combo bin
-- Sirloin 100% Ground Beef;
Rework
370 lbs net wt. combo bin
All the produce listed above was produced on 19th December.
about E. coli O157:H7 (Escherichia
coli O157:H7)
E. coli O157:H7 is a strain (enterohemorrhagic) of Escherichia coli, a
bacterium. It is a cause of foodborne illness. About 73,000 people are
infected and 61 people die each year in the USA.
Infected young children and elderly people are the most susceptible to
complications, such as bloody diarrhea, occasionally kidney failure, and
hemolytic uremic syndrome (red blood cells are destroyed).
In most cases, however, the infected person will just experience abdominal
pains, usually no fever, and diarrhea - the illness resolves within a
week or so. In some cases the infected person will have no symptoms at
all and never knew he/she had been infected.
The most common cause of human infection is the consumption of undercooked,
contaminated ground beef, unpasteurized milk, swimming in contaminated
water, drinking contaminated water, and eating contaminated vegetables.
Cooking any contaminated foods thoroughly will destroy the E. coli.
Preparing ground beef for safe consumption (USDA)
-- Before and after you handle it wash your hands with warm soapy water
for at least 20 seconds.
-- Wash cutting boards, utensils and dishes with hot soapy water.
-- Do not use the same cutting board for raw meat and other foods you
are going to eat.
-- Clean spills immediately.
-- Do not let the raw meat near any foods that you are not going to cook.
-- Make sure ground meat patties have been cooked to a safe internal temperature
of 160 F.
-- Do not rely on the meat's color to tell you whether it has been cooked
to a high enough temperature. Color is not a reliable indicator.
-- The only way you can be really sure your meat has been cooked well
enough to kill the bacteria is to use a thermometer to measure the internal
temperature.
-- On a hot day (over 90 F) refrigerate the meat within one hour of purchasing
it. On non-hot days do this within two hours of purchasing it.
-- Any meat you do not consume after cooking has to be refrigerated within
two hours after cooking.
Norovirus
Stomach Bug Sweeping UK
Article Date: 03 Jan 2008 - 11:00 PST
Source of Article: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/92974.php
Reports are coming in of a seasonal stomach bug that is sweeping the UK
and infecting some 100,000 people a week, a figure that may rise to 200,000
a week, according to health experts.
In a bid to contain the spread of the norovirus, sometimes called winter
vomiting disease, the Royal College of General Practitioners (RGCP) is
urging people are not to return to work until 48 hours after the symptoms
have stopped, according to a Guardian news report.
They are especially being asked not to go near places holding vulnerable
people in large numbers such as care homes, clinics and hospitals.
According to BBC News, the Health Protection Agency (HPA) said the number
of cases this season is the highest they have seen since 2002.
A spokesperson for NHS Direct, the online and telephone based public health
service told the Guardian that 5 per cent of the 270,000 calls received
between 21st December and 1st January were about the illness, which is
the most common cause of gastroenteritis in the UK.
Norovirus is an infectious illness that can be passed from person to person
and also by touching surfaces like door handles, light switches, table
tops and toilets that have been frequently touched by infected people.
Infection by norovirus is usually mild, with symptoms developing up to
48 hours after infection. Most people make a full recovery within 2 to
3 days and don't need treatment, but vulnerable groups like small children
and the elderly are at risk of dehydration and may need hospital care.
Anyone can get norovirus but it is more common in enclosed spaces where
lots of potentially vulnerable people congregate for long periods such
as hospitals, schools, nurseries and care homes.
RGCP chairman, professor Steve Field told the Guardian that hospitals
have been "inundated" by people referred by their GP or going
direct to the emergency department.
While the currently infected numbers are about 100,00 people a week, this
could go up to 200,000 a week when UK children go back to school next
week and start bringing the virus home and infecting their parents said
Field.
He advised people to "stay at home, take paracetamol and drink plenty
of fluids".
Washing your hands regularly and staying at home until you are clear of
symptoms for 48 hours should help to considerably reduce the chance of
you passing the virus onto others.
Professor Peter Borriello, Director of the HPA's Centre for Infections
said in a press release issued by the Agency who anticipated this surge
in cases two months ago that:
"Good hygiene is important in preventing yourself or others from
becoming infected; this includes thorough hand washing especially after
using the toilet, and any contaminated surface should be thoroughly disinfected
after an episode of illness."
"Food preparation should also be avoided until three days after symptoms
have disappeared. Unfortunately there is no specific treatment for norovirus
apart from letting the illness run its course, therefore it is important
to drink plenty of fluids to prevent dehydration especially in the very
young or elderly," he added.
The HPA said experts estimate that norovirus affects about 1 million people
in the UK each year, but "the figures for both outbreaks and sporadic
cases is likely to be an underestimate".
Sources: BBC News, Guardian, HPA website, NHS Direct.
Written by: Catharine Paddock
Eco-Safe
Receives R-1000 Product Approval From the National Sanitation Foundation
Market Wire Comtex Source of Article: http://www.foxbusiness.com/
LOS ANGELES, CA, Jan 07, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- Eco-Safe Systems
USA, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: ESFS) is pleased to announce receipt of Product
Approval for Registration of its R-1000 Ozone Disinfection System for
Restaurants, from the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF International),
a continuation of the USDA product approval program.
This Registration in NSF International's "White Book" is the
culmination of interaction between Eco-Safe's technical staff and NSF
International, resulting in the certification that the Eco-Safe R-1000
System meets all federal regulatory requirements for food disinfection.
Registration in the Federal "White Book" is routinely required
by municipal and county inspectors in establishments where food is prepared
for the public.
Michael Elliot, President of Eco-Safe Systems USA, Inc., said, "This
restaurant unit registration now opens the door for Eco-Safe to proceed
beyond the 'testing stage' with potential customers, and begin selling
in the huge US restaurant market, which should significantly add to Eco-Safe's
annual gross sales. To this end, the R-1000 has just been installed for
testing at two restaurant chains with over 100 restaurants, in addition
to the continuing tests with the fast-food chains with over 4000 locations."
A copy of the NSF International registration certificate for theR-1000
may be viewed at: www.ecosafeusa.com/restaurant/nsfregistration.pdf
Eco-Safe Systems, a publicly traded company, is a leader in Ozone food-safety
and water-disinfection systems with services ranging from food disinfection
to water reclamation and water desalinization. Eco-Safe's patent-pending
process raises the bar on food safety and environmental sustain ability
while decreasing costs and risks to businesses, the public and the planet.
The foregoing contains forward-looking information within the meaning
of The Private Securities Litigation Act of 1995. Such forward-looking
statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. The actual results
may differ materially from such forward-looking statements. The company
does not undertake to publicly update or revise its forward-looking statements
even if experience or future changes make it clear that any projected
results (expressed or implied) will not be realized.
Seair being
used to eliminate E. coli from California irrigation water
Source of Article: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2008/07/c6872.html
EDMONTON, Jan. 7 /CNW/ - Seair Inc. (SDS:TSX Venture Exchange) is pleased
to announce it has selected Ozone Science Design ("OSD") of
Paso Robles, California to distribute and integrate Seair products with
its ozone-based sanitation systems. OSD has recently commenced testing
of a Seair ozone diffusion system to eliminate E. coli from irrigation
water used on vegetable crops. The test is being conducted with a California
based spinach grower. Harold Kinasewich, President and CEO of Seair states,
"We are delighted to have OSD as part of our distributor network.
Their many years of experience
and expertise in working with ozone matches well with Seair's ability
to efficiently diffuse large quantities of ozone into fluid. That combination
should be a cost effective means to eliminate potentially harmful bacteria,
such as from E. coli contamination, from water used to irrigate field
crops, including strawberries, onions, spinach, lettuce and many other
crops." Ozone is a powerful natural sterilant that, if properly diffused
into
water, can safely be used to oxidize unwanted contaminants, including
harmful bacteria such as E. coli, and to produce enriched aerobic water.
About Seair
Seair is a leading developer of patent protected diffusion and sterilization
technologies which allow for the efficient diffusion of gases into a liquid,
thereby facilitating numerous applications in a wide variety of industries
including wastewater treatment, pulp and paper, food processing, aquaculture,
agriculture/horticulture, sterilization, golf course irrigation
and pond treatment, animal enhancement and oil and gas. Seair's primary
focus is developing and selling equipment that diffuses gases, such as
oxygen, ozone or carbon dioxide, into a liquid, resulting in a supersaturate
solution. The major difference between Seair and other diffusion technologies
is Seair's ability to achieve extremely small bubble size, which in turn
allows for the mass transfer of gas to fluid. The result is a stable condition
where gases remain in solution for extended periods of time, leading to
increased
productivity and lower operating costs. Seair provides diffusion-enhanced
portable wastewater treatment plants through its subsidiary, Seair Septic.
Parties interested in obtaining further information or receiving news
releases and corporate documents from Seair may email such request to
seair@telus.net or visit the Seair website at www.seair.ca.
This news release may contain certain forward-looking statements that
reflect the current views and/or expectations of Seair Inc. with respect
to its performance, business or future events. Such statements are subject
to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Actual results and
events may vary.
Main
Page
Sponsorship Qustions
List of Newsletters
To subscribe this Food Safety Newsletter
Copyright (C). All rights reserved FoodHACCP.com.