|
Kraft At Crux Of Pistachio Recall; Hasn’t Fully Audited
Supplier In Almost Four Years April 3, 2009 Source of
Article: http://www.perishablepundit.com/#33 Kraft occupies an odd
position in this pistachio matter. It didn’t grow or process the pistachios;
it didn’t even receive them or, initially, test them. Yet its policies on
food safety and contacting government agencies have really been the catalyst
for the whole matter. We asked Pundit
Investigator and Special Projects Editor Mira Slott to find out more:
Q: How did Kraft identify
the source of the contamination to be pistachios from Setton Pistachio? A: During the testing of
ingredients, the external manufacturer, Georgia Nut Company,
discovered there was a small potential for Salmonella in a batch of
pistachios supplied by Setton. Georgia Nut informed us that a spot test
revealed Salmonella. They notified Kraft and together we contacted FDA. We’re proud of the
comprehensive programs we have in place. Our quality control systems were
effective in this instance. Q: Did Kraft conduct its
own independent testing to confirm these results? A: We dispatched our own
auditors out to Setton Pistachio. They were there for several days. Q: What did Kraft learn
during the audit? A: We did our own
observations and testing at Setton facilities… lots of environmental testing,
ingredient and product testing. Auditors went over the entire facility to be
sure food safety systems were in place. Kraft did a comprehensive audit. Q: Did Kraft find
Salmonella contamination in its testing at the Setton plant? Were you able to
link the four Salmonella serotypes found during the Georgia Nut testing to
the Setton facilities? A: Georgia Nut Company
discovered the Salmonella. I’m not sure what Kraft’s test results revealed.
In their testing, Georgia Nut found Salmonella, called Kraft and then reached
out to Setton, the supplier. In my understanding of how
product testing for pathogens works, you could have a whole batch of nuts and
one little spot test comes back positive for Salmonella and the rest of the
batch could be fine. Q: How does Kraft know
definitively that the contamination occurred at the Setton plant and not some
time after it left the facility? A: At Setton
Pistachio, our auditors observed situations where raw and roasted pistachios
were not properly segregated. This could explain the sporadic contamination.
We saw raw and roasted product processed on the same line without proper
sanitation in between the raw and the roasted products. It wasn’t up to what
we would want them to do. Then the FDA did their own
investigation and also determined potential risk for contamination. Q: If March was the first
time samples from Setton product came back positive for Salmonella, why are
products from months earlier being recalled? And why is FDA telling
consumers not to eat any pistachios period? A: Setton Pistachio is not
the only supplier out there, and not every code date is affected. We wanted
to move as quickly as possible to remove any potentially contaminated product
from store shelves. We didn’t want to take any risks. Q: Does Kraft conduct
routine audits of its suppliers? Why wasn’t Setton Pistachio operating up to
Kraft’s food safety standards? A: We regularly do audits
and conduct testing. We do audit our manufacturers and their suppliers.
We share with them what processes we would like them to implement in their plants.
Q: So to clarify, Kraft
did do audits of the Setton plant before this most recent visit? A: We conducted a full
audit of the Setton plant in December 2005, and visited the plant in December
2008 for a technical audit. It’s important to know an
inspection is a one-point-in-time event. What becomes critical is consistent
food safety processes in place during the manufacturing at all times. Audits do not guarantee
food safety. What makes it safer is larger protocols in place and
comprehensive checks to insure the food safety system is working. We’ll be
evaluating frequency of audits. We have an audit program
to verify compliance. We require an external manufacturer to have a food
safety plan in place; none is perfect, but when we have a situation like this
we review it and learn how we can do it better. Q: Did Setton Pistachio
supply raw or roasted product to Georgia Nut Company? In what form did it
arrive? A: Setton supplied bulk
roasted shelled pistachios processed and ready to go into products Georgia
Nut Company manufactures. Q: Is Kraft working with
Setton Pistachio to address the problems? A: Setton Pistachio is
very committed to resolving this, and is a very solidly managed company.
They’re not by any means trying to shirk any of their role in this. They want
to get this right. There is always a
temptation to clam up at a time like this. So we appreciate very much that
Adrienne Dimopoulos and Kraft Foods are trying to provide some needed
transparency in this very murky subject. We note eight key points from the
discussion: 1) “We’re proud of the
comprehensive programs we have in place. Our quality control systems were
effective in this instance.” Actually we are not really
sure about that. So a test found one little spot of 2) “I’m not sure what
Kraft’s test results revealed.” If Kraft’s tests had shown
positive results, it would have told the FDA, which would have included that
in its statement. It is a safe bet that, so far, at least, no other
confirmations have been found. 3) “In my understanding of
how product testing for pathogens works, you could have a whole batch of nuts
and one little spot test comes back positive for Salmonella and the rest of
the batch could be fine.” We did a very thorough interview with
Dr. Mansour Samadpour, an advocate for finished product testing. Much of it
went to discussion of whether the testing was being done enough to be
statistically meaningful. If, as Ms. Dimopoulos explains, one tiny spot on
one pistachio could be positive while the thousands of pistachios surrounding
that one are fine, how is it plausible that anyone is doing enough testing to
get meaningful results? And if the results are not meaningful, isn’t shutting
down an industry a ridiculous overreaction? 4) “At Setton
Pistachio, our auditors observed situations where raw and roasted pistachios
were not properly segregated. This could explain the sporadic contamination.
We saw raw and roasted product processed on the same line without proper
sanitation in between the raw and the roasted products. It wasn’t up to what
we would want them to do. Then the FDA did their own
investigation and also determined potential risk for contamination.” This is a little unfair.
Finding a plausible route for contamination is neither proof nor evidence
that the contamination occurred that way. Perhaps it “could explain”
something but it doesn’t preclude alternative explanations. 5) “Setton Pistachio is
not the only supplier out there, and not every code date is affected. We
wanted to move as quickly as possible to remove any potentially contaminated
product from store shelves. We didn’t want to take any risks.” Kraft is not responsible
for the decisions of the FDA. But the FDA did not simply choose to pressure
this one supplier for a recall; it decided to issue a recommendation not to
consume. It intentionally did not choose to exonerate states such as Arizona
and New Mexico — as it did with tomatoes in the Salmonella Saintpaul outbreak
this summer. It also didn’t distinguish
between processed products, where consumers might have trouble identifying
the source of the pistachios, and jars or bags of pistachios that are easy to
identify. Finally it is treating a
finding by one producer as statistically meaningful, when it is not. We also question the FDA’s
reliance on a private company in this matter. Who is to say that a private
citizen with a grudge couldn’t one day implicate a person or company with the
goal of ruining the company or a whole industry? 6) “We conducted a full
audit of the Setton plant in December 2005, and visited the plant in December
2008 for a technical audit.” Gadzooks! 2005 for the
last full audit?? Even the companies that have great reputations for food
safety, such as Kraft, really don’t do the job. Three-plus years is an
eternity in the life of a factory. 7) “It’s important to
know an inspection is a one-point-in-time event. What becomes critical is
consistent food safety processes in place during the manufacturing at all
times. Audits do not guarantee
food safety. What makes it safer is larger protocols in place and
comprehensive checks to insure the food safety system is working. We’ll
be evaluating frequency of audits.” Bottom line: If one wants
“consistent food safety processes in place during…all times” and “larger
protocols in place and comprehensive checks,” one probably needs a
comprehensive audit more frequently than every three years — and who knows
when Kraft would have come back were it not for this situation. We thank Adrienne
Dimopoulos and Kraft Foods for helping the trade to understand better what
really has happened in this pistachio situation. |
Copyright (C) All rights reserved under FoodHACCP.com
If you have any comments, please send your email to
info@foodhaccp.com
