Tag Archives: contamination

Olga Pawluczyk, P&P Optica

Ask the Expert: Olga Pawluczyk Discusses Hyperspectral Imaging

No Comments
Olga Pawluczyk, P&P Optica

Can you explain, in simple terms, what hyperspectral imaging is?

Olga Pawluczyk: Hyperspectral imaging is a form of spectroscopy, which is the science of how wavelengths of light (or really, electromagnetic spectrum) interact with substances. As different wavelengths are absorbed by atomic and molecular bonds, we can measure that interaction and determine the chemistry of the substance under investigation. Essentially, your eyes and brain form a simple 3 color spectrometer: since you see grass as green, you can guess that it contains chlorophyll. Now, hyperspectral images include full 2D spatial information (like a regular camera image) but split the light into hundreds of continuous colors (or wavelengths). Compare this to the three colors (red, green, blue) used by cameras like the one in your cell-phone. Hyperspectral imaging allows much greater precision than other types of spectroscopy.

Why is hyperspectral imaging so effective for finding foreign (FM) materials in food products?

Pawluczyk: Using hyperspectral imaging, a system can see full images of objects and chemical signatures of different materials within those images. That’s what makes this technology so much better than other forms of vision or spectroscopy for distinguishing materials such as clear plastics, rubber and bone that are often hard to see on the line. Not only do we see the chemistry, but can also distinguish very small objects that differ in their chemistry from their surroundings. We can do this on line, at line speeds. PPO’s hyperspectral imaging system has been developed specifically for food processing, with rigorous testing and unique spectrometer design that allows us to see a lot of chemical information, while still enabling producers to run their lines at full speeds.Combining this with our powerful artificial intelligence (AI) engine makes our system uniquely effective at line speed, meaning contaminants can be identified and removed immediately.

What are the advantages of hyperspectral imaging over other types of detection systems?

Pawluczyk: In addition to being highly effective at finding FM, an important advantage of hyperspectral imaging is that it also enables us to see the composition of food products. Since food is chemistry, we can use hyperspectral imaging to assess different chemical properties of food products. For example, our testing has shown that spinach grown in different parts of the same field will have slightly different chemistry. Hyperspectral imaging can see those differences, so we can identify many different quality issues such as woody breast in chicken, fat/lean ratios, freshness and moisture content.

How can food processors use this information on composition and quality?

Pawluczyk: PPO’s Smart Imaging System uses an AI engine to collect and process the data from our imaging system; It ‘learns’ over time and gets even better at detection of FM or quality issues. It also means that PPO’s system can spot trends in your production. For example, using PPO’s technology, one of our clients was able to identify and correct an issue with their de-boning process, which helped them reduce customer charge-backs by 40%.

How confident can processors be that the system will catch the FM and quality issues they care about?

Pawluczyk: Part of PPO’s installation process with a new client is a very thorough testing process. Our team of experts works closely with our client to configure each system to the precise conditions of the plant and the products that are being processed. Using AI, our Smart Imaging System gathers and stores all this information, so it learns over time and is continuously improving.

What makes PPO’s Smart Imaging System different from other visual inspection systems on the market?

Pawluczyk: PPO’s is the only hyperspectral imaging system that is operating on the line in multiple plants across North America. It is being used in a variety of poultry and pork processing facilities and has proven to be highly effective in finding a wide range of foreign materials.

Ultimately, we think happy clients are the greatest proof that our system is working. We’re seeing repeat orders starting to come in from existing clients as they reap the cost benefits of improved detection in their plants.

Learn how food processors can leverage hyperspectral imaging on P&P Optica.

Content sponsored by P&P Optica.

Olga Pawluczyk, P&P OpticaAbout Olga Pawluczyk
President, CEO and Co-Founder
P&P Optica

Olga Pawluczyk is the co-founder and CEO of P&P Optica (PPO), based in Waterloo, Ontario, part of Canada’s largest and fastest growing tech community. Pawluczyk is an expert in medical imaging, with a technical background in systems engineering and deep knowledge of the science of spectroscopy. Under the leadership of Pawluczyk and her co-founder, her father Romek Pawluczyk, PPO launched in 2004 as a research company focused on developing high-end spectrometers. The company has evolved over the past eight years to focus on building solutions to the issues of safety and quality in the food processing industry. Pawluczyk is driven by the opportunity to combine emerging technologies to significantly improve the nutritional quality, safety, and sustainability of our food.

As a leader, Pawluczyk focuses on providing an engaging working environment to like-minded people who are excited to explore new challenges as part of the PPO team. Outside of PPO, She is active in the local tech community in Waterloo Region; is an avid reader who loves to discuss pretty much any topic over coffee (or wine); and enjoys spending time walking and biking.

Alert

Family Dollar Recall Highlights Need for Sound Pest Management Plan

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Alert

After finding evidence of rodent infestation during an inspection of a Family Dollar distribution facility in Arkansas, the FDA warned the public of usage and consumption of products purchased at certain stores from January 1 through present time. The affected products, which include food, were distributed to Family Dollar stores in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee.

“Families rely on stores like Family Dollar for products such as food and medicine. They deserve products that are safe,” said Associate Commissioner for Regulatory Affairs, FDA, Judith McMeekin, Pharm.D. in an agency press release. “No one should be subjected to products stored in the kind of unacceptable conditions that we found in this Family Dollar distribution facility. These conditions appear to be violations of federal law that could put families’ health at risk. We will continue to work to protect consumers.”

The FDA inspection followed a consumer complaint and found both live and dead rodents, rodent feces and urine, and evidence of rodent presence, along with dead birds and bird droppings, throughout the facility in West Memphis, Arkansas. After fumigating the facility, 1100 dead rodents were recovered. FDA’s review of company records also revealed a history of infestation, with more than 2300 rodents collected between March 29 and September 17, 2021.

Among the range of hazards associated with rodents include Salmonella.

Family Dollar, Inc. initiated a voluntary recall of the FDA-regulated products that were stored and shipped from the infested facility. The company states that it is unaware of any reports of illnesses related to the recall.

COVID-19 has not slowed down pests, and the last thing a company needs is a failed audit due to preventable pest issues.

 

Alert

FDA Tells Consumers to Throw out Certain Powdered Infant Formulas due to Contamination

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Alert

–UPDATE–March 14, 2022 — In an agency update, the FDA stated that it has removed the Salmonella Newport illness that was previously noted in the investigation. “In the early stages of this investigation, FDA included all consumer complaints of illness with exposure to products from the Sturgis, MI, facility. After further investigation, the FDA has determined that there is not enough information to definitively link this illness to powdered infant formula. CDC confirmed that this single Salmonella illness is not linked to an outbreak. The FDA and CDC are continuing to monitor for Salmonella cases and consumer complaints that may be related to this incident,” the FDA stated.

–END UPDATE–

Earlier this week Abbott issued a recall of infant powdered formulas (including Similac, Alimentum and EleCare) that were manufactured at the company’s Sturgis, Michigan plant. The company received consumer complaints in infants who had consumed powdered infant formula manufactured in this facility—specifically, three reports of Cronobacter sakazakii and one report of Salmonella Newport. All cases resulted in hospitalization, and one death was reported.

FDA began onsite inspection at the facility and thus far has found several positive Cronobacter results from environmental samples and reported adverse inspectional observations. “A review of the firm’s internal records also indicate environmental contamination with Cronobacter sakazakii and the firm’s destruction of product due to the presence of Cronobacter,” FDA stated in a CFSAN update.

The recalled Similac, Alimentum and EleCare products can be identified by their 7-to-9 digit code and expiration date:

  • First two digits of the code are 22 through 37 and
  • Code on the container contains K8, SH, or Z2, and
  • Expiration date of 4-1-2022 (APR 2022) or later.

In a company announcement published on FDA’s website, Abbott stated, during testing in our Sturgis, Mich., facility, we found evidence of Cronobacter sakazakii in the plant in non-product contact areas. We found no evidence of Salmonella Newport. This investigation is ongoing.” It added that “no distributed product has tested positive for the presence of either of these bacteria” but that the company will continue to conduct testing.

Parents and caregivers can find out whether the product they have is included in the recall by visiting the Similac recall website.

ASI Food Safety
FST Soapbox

The Costs Of Food Safety: Correction vs. Prevention

By Matt Regusci
1 Comment
ASI Food Safety

Every company that grows, produces, packs, processes, distributes and serves food has a food safety culture. In the food industry, when looking at food safety culture there are essentially two groups: The correction and the prevention groups. Basically, the prevention group is constantly improving their food safety practices to minimize foodborne illness while the correction group waits until there is an outbreak to make changes.

The correction group isn’t proactive and has a number of excuses that keep them from implementing a food safety program. Oftentimes owners or managers think, “The chances of my company being involved in a food safety outbreak are so rare, I just won’t worry about it.” Or they think, “The cost of having a food safety program is so prohibitive that I’d rather handle the consequences of an outbreak if it were to arise.” Also, sometimes there’s a lack of knowledge and some producers don’t even know about food safety programs and don’t have or want to take the time to learn about them.

If your food company is in the corrective group, you are not alone. Three years ago a private study was done to see how many food facilities could pass a basic Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) and/or Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) audit. It was discovered that less than 20% of these companies would be able to pass the most basic food safety audit. This number is staggering and unfortunately the correction group is much larger than anyone thinks—it equals a majority of the facilities at around 80% of the food industry. This statistic is frightening and needs to be addressed to help reduce outbreaks.

What does the preventative group look like? Well it is more of an investment up front, but in the end helps reduce risk and costs. Companies that take on this responsibility go through an audit and implement procedures that prevent outbreaks. That is level one. The next level of protection involves applying and gaining a certification. All of these procedures help to give your organization a barrier against costs such as crisis management with a PR firm, a recall that leads to lost product and sales, and a thorough clean-up process.

Food safety prevention is an ongoing journey of understanding your many risks and implementing procedures and processes to minimize these risks. Prevention is not a one person job, but rather the whole company needs to join the common cause of protecting the brand and more importantly customers lives.

The cost though is always a huge consideration and can become a deterrent to implementation. Oftentimes owners or managers of facilities will say, “The cost of food safety prevention is so prohibitive that we can’t implement a program.” Yes, there is a cost to building, implementing, and maintaining a preventative food safety program. However, this cost pales in comparison to a corrective program.

Overall Cost of Correction: FDA – Lives – Individual Companies (Restaurants and Farms)

Just recently CDC posted that the economic impact of pathogenic food safety outbreaks is $17.6 billion which is $2 billion higher than 2013. The CDC calculates this based on medical expenses, productive decreases in wages, and ultimately loss of American lives. This large number and massive increase in economic cost has made headlines recently as a huge problem, but few in the media understand this number is small compared to the true cost of foodborne illness.

So what is the true cost annually of the collective in the corrective group to the food industry and America as a whole? To come up with that number we need to look at all the costs of an outbreak: Legal costs, fines, bankruptcies, decrease of overall commodity market share, decrease in public trust, and jail time. And let’s not forget, the real cost is that lives were lost due to lack of prevention.

To understand the cost, let’s look at a few examples, starting with Chipotle. Last year the company agreed to pay the largest fine in history of $25 million for its part in multiple outbreaks from 2015–1018 sickening more than 1,000 people. This fine is tiny in comparison to the stock market loss. In 2015 the stock went from $740 a share to a low of $250, and in fact Chipotle’s stock did not get back to $740 until July of 2019. That is billions of market opportunities lost.

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health did a study and concluded that foodborne illness costs the American food service industry $55.5 billion annually. On average each food safety outbreak costs the establishment between $6,330 to $2.1 million, depending on size of the operation and how widespread the outbreak is. Chipotle has a lot of resources to manage and recover from a crisis; many small and/or over-extended companies go bankrupt and are forced to close down.

There are plenty of examples on the supply chain side. The first example is the Salmonella outbreak of Peanut Corporation of America. The largest part of this tragedy is that 714 people got sick, about half of whom were kids, and nine people lost their lives. Due to this, three executives went to jail, not for a few months for decades. The economic cost is astounding; Peanut Corp of America had an annual revenue of around $25 million, but the cost of the outbreak was over $1 billion. This may seem like a very large number, but don’t forget peanuts are an ingredient in many other products. Kellogg’s estimates they lost $65–70 million in products they needed to recall from this one outbreak, and Kellogg’s is just one of many Peanut Corp of America customers.

Another example is the Jensen Farms Listeria outbreak that sickened 147 people and of those 33 died. The brothers, of this multiple generation farm, Eric and Ryan Jenson, went bankrupt and were sentenced to five years probation and six months of home detention; each had to pay a $150,000 fine. Again, this small family’s operations outbreak had massive ramifications for the cantaloupe industry, which suffered significant damage as a result. Walmart reached a settlement for an undisclosed amount in 23 lawsuits involving the Listeria outbreak linked to the cantaloupes

Overall Cost of Prevention: Internal Programs, Supplier Programs, Testing and Audits

The FDA has conducted a few studies on the industry cost of the many leafy greens outbreaks. One study showed the spinach industry alone lost more than $200 million just in retail sales and many more millions in opportunity sales from the 2006 E. coli outbreak. And a recent leafy green outbreak in 2018 cost the industry an estimated $350 million. With staggering numbers like these, the LGMA was created in 2007 to help raise the bar for food safety prevention in this high-risk product. The LGMA study found that their members, which are large leafy green marketers, including Dole, Taylor Farms and Ready Pack, increased their spending three times for true prevention measures.

What does it look like to go from the corrective group to the preventative group? First you have to make the decision of implementation and get buy-in from your entire team. If you are starting from zero, asking your clients and competitors what standards they are utilizing and being audited to, or should be audited to, is a good starting point. This will help in developing a plan of action.

Once you have the checklist, audit human resources. Do you have a Food Safety and/or QA person or team? Are they capable of guiding the executives on this journey? If not, hire a consultant to help you get started.

Once they are on the journey of prevention, people see their entire operation in a different way. They see risks where they never previously saw them—risks with people, equipment, products, building, and the surrounding area. This can get super overwhelming, but if they don’t panic they will be excited about the future. The paradigm will change and they can build, implement and maintain practices to minimize risks one by one, starting with the biggest risks.

In accounting for the physical costs of prevention, the largest will come from the human resources component. Hiring people to build, implement and manage your food safety program will be your largest expense. Another human resources cost is the continued training for the entire staff on food safety expectations. After that cost drops significantly, annual audits and microbiological testing come into play, and the cost will vary on the size of your operation and the risk of your products. For instance the LGMA study showed on average the cost of their members went from $200,000 to about $600,000 annually for prevention, but these are very large multiregional organizations with a very high risk product.

The most important things in life come with hard work and at a price. Every person who has climbed Mount Everest did so one step at a time. Food safety prevention is no different. Is there a cost in money, time, and stress? Yes. Is that cost less than sitting on the beach with your head in the sand of the correction camp? No doubt. But the choice of leaving the majority that are wrong to the minority that are right is yours. Hopefully, you make the right decision.

Kroger Ground Beef, recall

14 Tons of Ground Beef Recalled Due to Possible E. Coli Contamination

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Kroger Ground Beef, recall

Following third-party lab testing that revealed a positive E. coli O157:H7 sample, Oregon-based Interstate Meat Dist, Inc. is recalling 28,356 pounds of ground beef products. The products were shipped to retail locations in Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming, according to a USDA FSIS announcement, and have bear establishment number “EST. 965” inside the USDA mark of inspection.

“The issue was reported to FSIS after a retail package of ground beef was purchased and submitted to a third-party laboratory for microbiological analysis and the sample tested positive for E. coli O157:H7. FSIS conducted an assessment of the third-party laboratory’s accreditation and methodologies and determined the results were actionable.” – FSIS, USDA

The USDA posted images of labels and product details related to the Class I recall, which have been distributed to Wal-Mart, WinCo, Kroger and Albertsons.

Recall

FDA Continues Investigation of Listeria Outbreak in Packaged Salad

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Recall

— UPDATE — January 12, 2022

Dole Fresh Vegetables, Inc. has now issued a voluntary recall of Dole-branded and private label packaged salads processed at its Springfield, OH (product ID lot code “W” and “Best if Used By” date December 22, 2021–January 9, 2022) and Soledad, CA production facilities containing iceberg lettuce.

–END UPDATE —

The FDA and CDC are investigating a multistate outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes illnesses linked to Fresh Express Packaged Salad and Dole Packaged Salad.

Last month Dole Fresh Vegetables issued a voluntary recall for salads processed at its facilities in Bessemer City, NC and Yuma, AZ due to the health risk. The company also temporarily suspended operations at both facilities. The brand names in which the salads were sold under include Dole, Kroger, Lidl, Little Salad Bar, Marketside, Naturally Better, Nature’s Promise and Simply Nature. The products have “Best if Used By” dates between November 30, 2021 and January 8, 2022.

The agencies’ investigation of Fresh Express Packaged Salad resulted in the company stopping production at its Streamwood, IL facility. It also initiated a recall of certain varieties of its branded and private-label salads that were produced at this facility.

The FDA’s investigation into the Listeria monocytogenes outbreak linked to both Dole and Fresh Express is ongoing. Thus far, no deaths linked to the outbreak have been reported.

FDA

FDA’s Foodborne Outbreak Response Improvement Plan Seeks to Expedite Investigations

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
FDA

Today FDA released a plan to help the agency and its partners improve the “speed, effectiveness, coordination and communication” of investigations surrounding foodborne illness outbreaks.

“We know that the 21st century has brought new challenges in identifying, investigating and controlling outbreaks of foodborne disease, but it has also brought new tools to meet those challenges,” stated Frank Yiannas, FDA Deputy Commissioner for Food Policy and Response, and Stic Harris, D.V.M. director of the FDA’s Coordinated Outbreak Response and Evaluation Network in an agency news release. “We also recognize that today’s U.S. food system is large and decentralized, with a broad array of widely distributed products, which we must adapt to in order to help ensure the safety of these products. That is why we are taking steps through this improvement plan to evolve our outbreak investigations to meet modern-day needs using the most modern-day tools available. Our investigations must be faster, more streamlined and more effective to identify, pinpoint and remove contaminated food from the market and identify root-cause factors in the food system to prevent similar outbreaks in the future.”

The Foodborne Outbreak Response Improvement Plan targets four areas that, if improved, will have the greatest effect on foodborne illness outbreaks:

  • Tech-enabled product traceback: Being smarter about using digital technology, regularly, to streamline traceback investigations
  • Root-cause investigations: Adapting and strengthening procedures for conducting root-cause investigations
  • Working with the CDC, USDA’s FSIS and other partners to improve the analysis and distribution of outbreak data (including identifying recurring, emerging and persistent strains of pathogens)
  • Enhancing performance measures across the agency’s food programs to enable better evaluation of the timeless and effectiveness of outbreak and regulatory investigation activities

In addition to this improvement plan, the agency also released “An Independent Review of FDA’s Foodborne Outbreak Response Processes”, which was contracted with the University of Minnesota’s School of Public Health. The independent report played an important role in the development of FDA’s improvement plan.

FDA

FDA Wants to Change Agricultural Water Requirements in Produce Safety Rule

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
FDA

After years of foodborne illness outbreaks that have been suspected to originate in pre-harvest agricultural water, FDA is proposing changes to the FSMA Produce Safety Rule. The proposed rule would revise subpart E, changing certain pre-harvest agricultural water requirements for covered produce other than sprouts.

“There have been far too many foodborne illness outbreaks possibly linked to pre-harvest agricultural water in recent years, including water coming from lands nearby produce farms. As a federal government agency charged with protecting public health, the FDA is committed to implementing effective modern, science-based measures designed to prevent these outbreaks from occurring in the future,” said Frank Yiannas, FDA Deputy Commissioner for Food Policy and Response in an agency update. “The proposed rule is the latest action taken by the FDA to continue working towards implementation of key provisions of FSMA. If finalized, we’re confident this proposal would result in fewer outbreaks in the U.S. related to produce, protecting public health and saving lives. This proposed rule is a monumental step towards further improving the safety of the fruits and vegetables Americans serve their families every day, and the FDA looks forward to engaging with stakeholders on the proposed changes.”

Under the proposed rule, farms would be required to conduct yearly systems-based agricultural water assessments to assess and guide measures that would reduce risks related to pre-harvest agricultural water. According to the FDA, the assessment would consist of evaluating the water system, agricultural water use practices, crop characteristics, environmental conditions, potential impacts on source water by activities conducted on adjacent and nearby land.

With the current agricultural water compliance dates for covered produce other than sprouts set to begin in January 2022, the FDA plans to exercise enforcement discretion for those requirements while also proposing another rule that extends the compliance dates for all agricultural water requirements under the Produce Safety Rule.

The full details of the FSMA Proposed Rule on Agricultural Water are available on FDA’s website.

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Coffee That’s Not Just Full of Beans

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Coffee fraud
Find records of fraud such as those discussed in this column and more in the Food Fraud Database, owned and operated by Decernis, a Food Safety Tech advertiser. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

Fraudulent food and beverage products can sometimes have serious health implications. A fake soluble coffee product made its way to some small retailers in Germany and contains dangerous glass and plastic shards. The public is requested to report the counterfeit product. The investigation of this very serious, hazardous fraud is ongoing.

Resource

  1. Von Redaktion, B. (October 22, 2021). “Warnung: Erhebliche Gesundheitsgefahr durch gefährliche Produktfälschung von löslichem Kaffee”. ProductWarnung D-A-CH.

Learn more about foreign matter contamination in food during the upcoming Food Safety Tech complimentary virtual event, “Food Safety Hazards Series: Physical Hazards“, on Thursday, December 16 at 12 pm ET.

ASI Food Safety
In the Food Lab

Planning Is Key Component of Listeria Prevention

By Matt Regusci
No Comments
ASI Food Safety

Reading the news in recent months, it seems like there is a new outbreak every week or at least a new recall of various food products contaminated with Listeria, specifically Listeria monocytogenes. Companies have recalled broccoli, kale, cantaloupes, smoked salmon (lox), mushrooms, soft cheese, sprouts, frozen chicken, and even hot dog buns in the last several months.

Listeria monocytogenes is a species of pathogenic bacteria that is very unique. Unlike many pathogens that are mainly fecal bacteria, like E. Coli and Salmonella, Listeria can be found just about anywhere including soil, water, dust and animal feces, to name a few.

We are around Listeria all the time. For example, when moms encourage their children to play outside to enhance their immune systems, one of the bacteria kids are likely exposed to is Listeria. This kind of exposure is generally acceptable, as the vast majority of people that get sick from Listeria exposure typically ingest quite a bit of it. That’s why it is essential to get in front of Listeria to avoid ready-to-eat products from becoming contaminated.

Listeria is one of the few bacteria to survive freezing temperatures and grow, albeit slowly, in a refrigerator. The exact range for growth of Listeria is 39.2°F (4 °C) to 98.6°F (37°C). To successfully kill Listeria using temperature controls, it must be cooked at least at 165°F (73°C). Left at room temperature, the pathogen grows rapidly. If you have ready-to-eat food contaminated with Listeria and it is taken out of the fridge, left on the counter for a couple of hours, then eaten, it’s a recipe for disaster.

If you are healthy, the vast majority of the Listeria bacteria will be attacked and killed by the immune system, preventing the ability for infection to take hold. If the immune system is compromised by conditions such as cancer, AIDS, pregnancy, geriatrics, etc., then Listeria becomes an infection called Listeriosis—an invasive infection.

The FDA and the CDC published some facts about Listeriosis and foodborne illness in general, and the diagnosis is stark. The FDA estimates that 1 in 6 Americans or 43 million people will get a foodborne illness annually. Of those that get sick, the FDA estimates 128,000 will be hospitalized, and about 3,000 die.

In the United States, the CDC estimates that about 1,600 people will get Listeriosis each year, and of those cases, 1,500 will be hospitalized (94%), and 260 will likely die. Listeriosis has a mortality rate of 20-30%, according to the FDA. Unfortunately, these numbers indicate that if the doctor diagnoses you with Listeriosis, the chances of survival are low.

According to FDA research, you are 18 times more likely to contract a Listeriosis infection if you are pregnant, and 16–27% of all Listeriosis infections are in pregnant women. While most other adults show signs of gastrointestinal symptoms once contracting Listeriosis, the FDA says a pregnant woman experiences a fever for a few days, and about 20–30% will ultimately miscarry.

The unique thing about Listeria is the incubation period could last up to 70 days. A possible scenario could be a person eating cantaloupe from a farm with a known Listeria outbreak and then 70 days later showing signs of Listeriosis. This was a reality during the Jensen Farms outbreak, where people were terrified that they may have been infected from Listeriosis after eating cantaloupe. Still, they had to wait for six weeks for assurance they were safe.

What Steps Should Industry Take to Prevent or Mitigate the Presence of Listeria?

The first step is to kill Listeria and prevent it from contaminating food. To kill this particular pathogen, heat and/or sanitization is necessary. The best way to avoid contamination is by cooking food, but cleaning and sanitizing regularly is the next best measure if you can’t cook the product.

All food manufacturing facilities need a cleaning and sanitizing routine. Typically, when a Listeria outbreak occurs, it is because of a series of unfortunate errors in quick succession. Facilities need to practice regularly on finding the potential errors in a cleaning/sanitizing system and fix them immediately. This attention to detail and strategy help correct the problem before an issue arises.

The same is important for the kitchen of a restaurant. Keep raw products away from cooked products. Utilize different sections within the kitchen to prep food in various stages, use separate cutting boards and be sure to use different utensils on raw vs. cooked food. Also, have a solid cleaning and sanitizing routine to kill lingering Listeria in the facility.

The second step is a solid continual testing regimen. A testing rotation is an effective tool in the pathogen prevention arsenal. Every facility should utilize an environmental testing program that regularly looks for Listeria in the facility. While all use outside certified labs, some also have in-house labs looking, more frequently, for pathogens. For instance, few fresh produce companies test the wash water for pathogens in every lot. If they find even the smallest trace of any pathogen, including Listeria, they trash it.

Another effective testing technique is “search and destroy”. In the “Search” process your team swabs everything in the facility looking for Listeria in the facility. When you do find an area with Listeria then you swab everything within a radius starting with one foot, expanding to three feet, then even wider to six feet, etc. until you find every major contamination point. Flag those areas as hot spots for continual checks in your future testing rotation.

The extremely important step three is the cold chain. Cold chain systems help reduce the growth of foodborne pathogens. To minimize the growth of pathogens, including Listeria, it is important to keep products cold at all times possible. This includes harvesting, packaging, storing, distributing, and especially. Also, consumers can play a role in helping reduce contamination by keeping food cold and putting it in the refrigerator or freezer as soon as possible. Every minute a product is left at room temperature can mean massive bacteria growth.

Step four is knowing where your food comes from. In the food industry, we call this supply chain compliance and traceability. A relationship of trust between food producers, suppliers and consumers is vital for the food industry. Raw and finished food products are moving through the supply chain rapidly, so good communication is crucial so that contaminated products are removed quickly to contain an outbreak and save lives.

With these practices in place, we can keep the Listeria outbreaks to a minimum. However, extra care is recommended if you are pregnant, immunocompromised, or over the age of 65. In fact, the FDA has a list of foods to avoid or at least cook very thoroughly. These include deli meat, raw vegetables, and unpasteurized milk products, to name a few.