Best practices to keep Salmonella at bay

If you’ve been keeping your eyes on the food safety news of the last few months, you’ll have noticed that an outbreak of Salmonella is ongoing in the United States. As of Oct. 28, 2021, 37 states have been affected and more than 650 people have been reported sick, with 129 hospitalizations. No deaths have been recorded as of that date. Although the number of illnesses attributed to this outbreak is high, it is possible the actual number is much higher in that some people did not report their symptoms.

The outbreak is being traced back to whole, raw, red, white and yellow onions from ProSource Produce LLC and Keeler Family Farms. These onions were imported to the United States from Chihuahua, Mexico. Since onions typically feature a shelf life of up to three months, there is a possibility of product still being in commerce. The contaminated product is being sold in mesh sacks ranging from 50 to 2 lbs.; and cartons ranging from 50 to 5 lbs.

Salmonella infection causes an illness called salmonellosis. The symptoms can show up anywhere between six hours and six days after infection. Symptoms typically last between 4-7 days and usually can be resolved without medical treatment. Thus, it’s particularly difficult to track and accurately count the number of people affected. Salmonella lives in the intestines of humans and animals. People can become infected by eating contaminated food or drinking contaminated water, or via direct contact with infected animals.

How do processors help consumers from becoming infected? First, it is important for both processors and consumers to be aware of pathogen growth and have controls in place to prevent growth from occurring.

Things processors can do include: meeting lethality requirements, receiving COAs, maintaining storage conditions, have pest control plans in place, monitor air quality, have an employee health policy, and ensure proper water drainage.

We all know raw poultry and eggs are known sources of Salmonella, and that reaching lethality during processing will destroy it. However, Salmonella is also common in dry conditions. and difficult to detect there. It can be killed by heat, but that won’t help prevent contamination if it is present in ingredients applied to already cooked product. Therefore, it’s crucial that processors know their dry-goods suppliers and receive COAs, to prevent contamination of already cooked product.

Another thing to be aware of is pest control. Pigeons, rats and mice are known carriers of Salmonella in the food industry. Even if you don’t have these pests in your facility, be aware that Salmonella can still enter the plant via employees’ boots or forklifts that drive outside and back inside. Use of boot wash stations and cleaning of forklift tires can help maintain sanitary conditions and keep pathogens like Salmonella from infiltrating the facility.

The environment of the facility is also a big factory. Plants located in rural areas may need to monitor air quality at a higher level and change filters more often. This is particularly important if the plant is near a farm, as contaminants could enter the plant via the ventilation system.

Humans can also be a source of Salmonella entering the plant if they are infected and continue to work. All employees should be washing their hands properly and staying home if they are sick. Facilities should log employee health, and if an employee went home sick, the reason they went home should be recorded. This is confidential information that should not be shared, but it may turn out to be helpful should a recall happen.

Water is not a source of Salmonella, but it can aid in the survival of the pathogen in the plant environment. Proper drainage that prevents water from pooling decreases the chances that Salmonella will survive and grow.

For consumers there are a few key things to do to help prevent getting sick. Processors should always remind their consumers to follow these guidelines. Consumers should clean, separate, cook and chill.

Washing hands, utensils, and any produce reduces the risk of cross-contamination. All produce should be washed prior to cutting or peeling to reduce pathogens. Hands and utensils should be washed in between contact with raw and cooked foods.

Separating food that won’t be cooked from raw meat, poultry and seafood limits chances of cross-contamination. Not only is this important during meal preparation, but it should be considered when putting groceries away. Raw products should be kept on the bottom shelf of the refrigerator to prevent any leakage from dripping on to ready-to-eat foods.

Cooking food thoroughly eliminates the chances of obtaining Salmonella from raw product.

Chilling perishable foods within two hours of being out, and thawing food in the fridge instead of at room temperature, both limit the possibility of pathogen growth.

Salmonella is a common, pesky pathogen that is difficult to eliminate should it enter your plant. It is easier to be aware of how Salmonella can enter your facility and have controls in place to limit the ability for it to grow. By instituting and installing as many of the preventative measures mentioned above, processors and consumers can safely enjoy foods without as much concern for getting sick from Salmonella.

— Sam Bibbs, food safety consultant, sam@werfoodsafety.com

Product claims: Common sense, education must prevail

As a 22-year-old who spends her fair share of time on the Internet and is employed in the food industry, I have come to notice a lack of knowledge the average consumer has about food. Indeed, I’ve noticed that consumers are in the dark about what some ingredients are, how things are processed, and which health claims actually hold value.

But is this gap in knowledge due to the secrecy that often comes with the food industry, or is it ignorance on both sides of the aisle, i.e., consumers think they shouldn’t have to take the time to understand how things are made and what different claims mean, while processors might not believe it is their responsibility to inform consumers? This gap causes a lot of confusion and misinformation to be spread.

One common problem that comes from this gap are consumers who get worked up over the ingredient lists and nutrition labels on so-called health foods. Labeling requirements as they are, these so-called health foods do contain quite a lengthy list of ingredients. Compounding matters, when companies utilize ingredients fortified with other ingredients, they must all be listed in order, creating long labels with ingredients that can sound mysterious or be difficult to pronounce.

Recently, I came across a tweet about a surprise finding in a box of cereal. The post was tweeted by a comedian who claimed to have found shrimp tails in his Cinnamon Toast Crunch.

Based on how cereal is produced and the assumption that General Mills’ quality-management strategies aren’t in question, I didn’t believe it. Furthermore, anyone who fell for it must not have thought through this very much. It had to be a joke, I thought.

Unfortunately, consumers who post social-media messages like this — maliciously or not — often have little idea the serious ramifications of their claims. Doing an entire recall for a social-media practical joke would be a nightmare! The fact that some consumers truly believed this comedian found shrimp tails in cereal, even for a second, is one scary thought. Because of a select few consumers who didn’t do their own research and/or use common sense, General Mills had to expend effort to manage a phony crisis.

Even with external groups creating misleading claims about products, it doesn’t mean processors aren’t always innocent of making unsubstantiated claims. It amazes me the product claims a processor can make that have little backing or value, even. I have friends who have been misled as to what a “healthy” product is because of many of these nonsense claims, and such labels have become a pet peeve of mine. The most annoying claim so far has been the term “natural.”

For meat and poultry products to be labeled “natural,” the USDA states they must be minimally processed and contain no added artificial ingredients. If that wasn’t vague enough for you, for other foods, the term has no clear meaning and is not even regulated by a government agency! Because of that wide-reaching definition, there’s no perfect way for science to even show that “natural” products are better for you (or not). Thus, they are marketing tactics processors use to convince consumers they are being healthy, a deception that increases the knowledge gap and mistrust the average consumer has with the food processing industry.

All is not lost, however. There are TikTok, Facebook, YouTube users who are bringing the science of food production to the forefront for those consumers who will listen. Although I believe it is the consumer’s duty to be more in the know about food processing, as a food industry employee, I feel a sense of responsibility to debunk some of these myths and add transparency wherever possible. Do you feel the same about educating your consumers? Maybe you should …

— Sam Bibbs, Food Safety Consultant, sam@werfoodsafety.com

The challenges of beef production/processing from the eyes of a family farmer

Hello, my name is Nancee Emmerich, and I am relatively new to the We R Food Safety! team, having started in November as Food Safety and Quality Program Coordinator. My business career has revolved around customer service and client relations, but my life skills have been honed by helping my husband, Steve, with the ownership and operation of our Wisconsin family farm. In my contribution to this blog, I’d like to tell you about our family farm and how the daily focus on details, quality assurance and food safety parallel the vision and mission at We R Food Safety. I may not always write about the farm, but I hope the insights I can bring to you from the producer side of the equation will help you perform better in your business.

Steve Emmerich (Nancee's husband) displays a small 
gold calf gift that was sent to the family by a visitor 
from India who was impressed with the cattle operation 
at Emmerich Family Farms.

Emmerich Family Farms, Inc. was founded in 1873 by my husband’s great-great-great-grandfather, who came to the U.S. from Germany, like so many in this area of central Wisconsin. Our youngest son is the 6th generation of Emmerichs who learned many life lessons on the farm and as a member of our local 4-H club by showing steers and goats at the county fair.

Through the years, our farm has evolved from a dairy farm to a significantly diversified operation featuring a 500-head cattle feedlot, a purebred Angus herd, corn and soybean acreage and also a maple syrup sugar bush with 5,000 trees.

Of course, animal welfare and quality assurance are crucial to our operation and ultimately the meat and food we produce. For us, food safety begins on the farm with proper animal-welfare practices. We keep our animals clean and calm, and always use veterinarian-prescribed vaccinations and treatments; and we administer these products at the correct sites on the animal.

Once the animals are ready for processing, however, we face additional challenges. Finding custom-processing plants — let alone facilities that do a high-quality job we can trust — to handle our direct-to-consumer beef sales is a big challenge, because a very large number of custom processors have gone out of business or been acquired in the last five years. As a result, we currently have to schedule animals for harvest at least 12 to 18 months in advance.

The maple syrup processing operation at Emmerich Family Farms.

There are always challenges to be met on the farm. High capital and labor costs, market uncertainty and low profit margins along with unpredictable weather all add up to a high-risk adventure. But it is an adventure that we love!

By paying attention to the details and always striving for the highest quality product, whether it be market steers or maple syrup, we hope to sustain the farm for the next generation.

— Nancee Emmerich, Food Safety and Quality Program Coordinator, nancee@werfoodsafety.com

Sundae surprise: How a puppy has tested my trust in certain brands

This weekend, I had my own personal revelation about my inherent trust in the safety of the U.S. food supply, and the very real feelings and beliefs that come from that trust being challenged. This epic story revolves not around the humans living in our house and their food, but instead around our beloved family dog, Sundae.

Sundae at roughly five months old

Sundae just turned eight months old on Jan. 25. We rescued him from an organization when he was just two months old, back in August. Sundae has been your typical nose-oriented puppy: sniffing around, rambunctious, curious, vocal, stubborn, and super-quick at picking things up, running away from us and eating them. Sundae has been on a figurative (and frequently literal) short leash because of his puppy mischievousness.

Last Thursday evening, Sundae started to show signs of lethargy and his eyelids looked a little puffy — I thought he was having a small allergic episode to a new treat I gave him that morning (more on that below) or maybe was developing a “doggie cold,” so I began monitoring him. His condition was worsening, so I took him to our veterinarian Saturday morning. By then, he was drooling and shivering a bit, and vomited at the vet’s office. The vet took a blood test, and then told me Sundae needed to go to the emergency vet’s office, as his liver enzyme levels were as much as nine times higher than they should have been.

After a stressful weekend with Sundae hospitalized (made worse by COVID preventing us from being able to see him), I can tell you that Sundae is much better today; his liver values have crept back down; and we will be able to bring him home today. He’ll still be working whatever it is out of his system, but we’ve at least ruled out a foreign body and much more serious diseases.

Some of you smart readers will have already figured out where I’m going with this. Sundae’s ordeal has basically been settled to: “It was something he ate.” That’s where my trust has been tested, and I have responded in what I would call a “typical consumer” fashion.

I didn’t suspect his dog food, made by a major-brand manufacturer. My default belief was, “I will check, but I bet it isn’t the food. They’re a legacy company with a good record.” Even the vet said to me what I was thinking: That manufacturer does a great job and has a great, clean history, but let’s check just in case. All that based on the brand alone.

We moved to the treats, focused on one particular bag of treats, because it was the only new type of treat he’d received in the last month or two. The brand? Don’t know that brand from Adam — I’d never heard of it, and I’d only bought the treats because Sundae seemed to love them during our puppy training sessions weeks ago.

I dug around for recall information, and so did the vet, and we didn’t see anything.

On request from my colleague here at We R Food Safety!, I sent photos of the packaging and treats to him, and he had issues with the labeling, description of the treats, and the actual formulation of the treats as well. Upon looking at the package myself, I was able to find some confusing wording, some misleading phrases and such — things that I didn’t notice when I bought them because I trusted the store that sold them to me.

And here’s the revelation. Despite 15 years around this industry, I’ve reacted as a standard consumer might. Here are some “typical” feelings and beliefs I’ve gone through this weekend:

1. I trust the heck out of that major international dog food brand, because I’ve never had or heard of an issue with them before.
2. I don’t know that treat manufacturer’s brand, so I suspect them as the issue, since they’re the newest experience I’ve had.
3. I had doubts about the actual treats, so now I’m going to take it out on that entire treat segment for the potential outcome of one experience.
4. I also had doubts about the big-box retailer who sold me those treats, and I will likely avoid shopping at that big-box retailer for the time being, whenever possible.
5. Even if I should be able to somehow prove that Sundae maybe picked up a wayward pill or piece of chocolate or sugar-free gum, I’m still down on those treats and that brand. The damage is done and will be difficult to repair.

Are these feelings and beliefs fair? Nope, many of them likely are not.

However, they are REAL, and they are likely a very good example of what any consumer goes through when their inherent trust is challenged or broken.

Our food supply is the safest in the world because of processors and producers like you.  You legitimately care and take the time to keep it safe. Whether you’re a big, multi-national brand or a small-town shop, you have dedicated customers who trust you and your brand. Don’t ever do anything to jeopardize that trust!

I recommend that you take it a step further and let your customers know what you are doing around food safety that helps assure them and their families that you are selling them safe and wholesome food.

While you may not have a lot of time on your schedule to do these types of things it is critical to make time to communicate with your customers about how you are keeping them safe.  If you don’t, you may find yourself in a spot where you have nothing but free time because you have a shuttered business.

— Andy Hanacek, vice president of Communications, andyh@werfoodsafety.com