Unhealthy eating

Rosemary44

Unhealthy eating

Rosemary44

Our gov't did nothing about the last spinach outbreak and here we go again:

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer Tue Sep 18, 6:37 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO - A package of Dole salad mix that tested positive for E. coli has triggered a recall in at least nine states, prompting new produce fears almost exactly a year after a nationwide spinach scare.

ADVERTISEMENT

The tainted bag of Dole's Hearts Delight salad mix was sold at a store in Canada, officials said. Neither Canadian health officials nor Dole Food Co. have received reports of anyone getting sick from the product.

The voluntary recall, issued Monday, affects all packages of Hearts Delight sold in the United States and Canada with a "best if used by" date of September 19, 2007, and a production code of "A24924A" or "A24924B," the company said.

Last year, an E. coli outbreak traced to bagged baby spinach sold under the Dole brand was blamed for the deaths of three people and for sickening hundreds more across the U.S. Authorities ultimately identified a central California cattle ranch next to spinach fields belonging to one of Dole's suppliers as being the source of the bacteria.

The latest recall affects packages sold in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritime Provinces in Canada and in Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee starting around Sept. 8, said Marty Ordman, a Dole spokesman.

Eighty-eight cases - or 528 bags - were distributed in Canada, and 755 cases containing 4,530 bags were distributed in the U.S., he said. FDA spokesman Michael Herndon said the agency was talking with Westlake Village, Calif.-based Dole about the situation.

The romaine, green leaf and butter lettuce hearts that went into the blend were grown in California, Colorado and Ohio, then processed at Dole's plant in Springfield, Ohio, on Sept. 6, according to Ordman.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency said it would be looking to find out at what point the salad blend became contaminated and to see if any other products are affected, spokesman Garfield Balsom said. "We'll go back and find the origins and determine where the product was produced and packaged," Balsom said.

Dole contacted the FDA on Sunday night, as soon as the company got word of the contaminated bag of salad in Canada, said Ordman. "They have been to our plant and they will visit the growers," he said.

The salad mix subject to the recall may have been available in the U.S. in states other than the nine already identified by Dole because in some areas the product was distributed by a wholesaler with clients in overlapping markets, Ordman said.

Food contaminated with this strain of E. coli may not look or smell spoiled but health officials say the bacteria can cause life-threatening illnesses.

Symptoms include severe abdominal pain and bloody diarrhea; some people can have seizures or strokes and some may need blood transfusions and kidney dialysis, while others may live with permanent kidney damage.

Rosemary44

So the spinach outbreak came from the cattle ranch next door.  Why are our cattle infected with E. coli?   How appetizing is that?

leaf

E. coli is a bacteria that is naturally found in guts.



There is an enormous body of science on pathogenic E. coli that provides important clues to where this dangerous organism comes from and further steps that can be taken to keep it out of the food supply. There are over 225 serotypes of E. coli, the majority of which are not dangerous. Indeed, E. coli bacteria are essential to the healthy functioning of human and animal digestive systems. But some serotypes have picked up “pathogenicity islands” – extra genetic material that can turn a harmless bug into a dangerous threat to people and some animals. The E. coli O157:H7 serotype is among the most dangerous and heavily studied. http://www.organic-center.org/science.funded.php?action=view&report_id=61



From the same website:

Where does E. coli O157 come from?



Beef and dairy cattle are by far the major source of pathogenic E. coli bacteria, including E. coli O157:H7, the specific serotype that triggered illness in the recent spinach contamination episode. During the summer in Louisiana dairy herds, 38.5% of herds and 6.5% of animals tested positive (Dunn et al., 2004). LeJeune et al. (2004) reported that 13% of 4,790 bovine faecal samples from cattle feedlots in the U.S. tested positive for E. coli O157.



A study in Louisiana concluded that deer were not a significant reservoir for E. coli O157 for cattle or humans, since only 0.3% of hunter-harvested deer tested positive (Dunn et al., 2004). A similar study in Nebraska found that only 0.25% of 1,608 samples tested positive (Renter et al., 2001).



Is it normal for cattle to have E. coli O157 in their digestive tracts?



Not really. Hancock et al. (1994) found that only 10 out of 3,570 faecal samples of dairy cattle from the Pacific Northwest tested positive for E. coil O157 in a 1994 study. They also found E. coli O157 in 10 of 1,412 samples of manure from beef cattle, just 0.71%. Several of the same scientists conducted a similar survey in 1997 and found E. coli O157 in 1% of faecal samples from beef cattle.



Duncan et al. (2000) point out in a review that “Normally E. coli is greatly outnumbered in the ruminant gut by anaerobic bacteria, producers of weak acids inhibitory to the growth of this [E. coli O157] species.” Gilbert et al. (2005) found that enterohaemorrhagic E. coli [EHEC] levels were 100-times higher in cattle feed a high grain ration, compared to animals on a roughage-based diet. Herriot et al. (1998) reported that dairy heifers feed corn silage were more likely to have E. coli O157, compared to heifers not feed silage.



Dozens of published studies show that animal rations and animal husbandry play direct roles in triggering E. coli O157 colonization of the bovine digestive system (e.g., McSweeney et al., 2004; Russell et al., 2000; Diez-Gonzalez et al., 1998).



There are millions of harmless E. coli bacteria in the digestive systems of all cattle. When cows are fed high-energy, grain-based rations, the pH in their digestive systems changes to favor E. coli O157. Stress and illness can also increase the susceptibility of cattle to E. coli O157, as does holding cattle off feed (Duncan et al., 2000). Sanitary practices on the farm play a direct role in whether and how quickly E. coli O157 infections spread through a cattle herd (LeJeune et al., 2001; Scott et al., 2006; Rice et al., 2000; McGee et al., 2002).



Several studies have shown that between 5% and sometimes over 30% of cows on beef cattle ranches, in feedlots, and on diary farms in the U.S. shed E. coli O157. “Shed” means the bacteria are passed from the animal into the environment via manure.



A study focused on beef calves before they were sent to the feedlot and found that 2.5% of the animals shed E. coli O157 prior to entering the feedlot (Dunn et al., 2004).



Studies in Europe have found very little E. coli O157 in both beef cattle and dairy herds.

A study by Albihn et al. (2003) in Sweden found that just 1.2% of 3,071 faecal samples tested positive. An outbreak of human illness impacting about 100 people in Sweden in 1995 triggered the establishment of a national surveillance program testing for E. coli O157 in all cattle at slaughterhouses. A similar study in Finland found only 1.3% of dairy faecal samples testing positive for E. coli 057 (Lahti et al., 2001).



Buncic et al. (1997) tested 371 cows from 55 dairy farms in New Zealand and found only two animals shedding E. coli O157 positive manure (about one-half of one percent).



E. coli O157 was found in just two of 2,446 samples of pig manure in a Swedish study (Eriksson et al., 2003).



E. coli O157 in Beef and Dairy Cattle



Does E. coli O157 reach cattle through their feed?



Yes. Several studies have found that a few percent to over 10% of feed samples test positive for E. coli O157. In 2003 research, Davis et al. (2003) found E. coli O157 in four of 2,365 feed samples tested. Dodd et al. (2003) found E. coli O157 in 10.3% of feed samples taken from feeding troughs in Midwestern feedlots. Curiously, the Dodd study found no correlation between E. coli O157 numbers and general coliform bacteria counts. In 1998 work, Lynn et al. (1998) found no samples of feed that contained E. coli O157, despite the fact that 30% of the 209 samples tested contained other E. coli serotypes.



Can farmers do anything to reduce E. coli O157 levels in their animals?



Yes, they can do a lot. In 1998, the first study was published by Diez-Gonzalez et al. (1998) reporting that switching beef cattle in a feedlot to a high-roughage diet for the last week before slaughter triggers a dramatic decline in E. coli O157 numbers. This promising finding has been replicated multiple times and is now widely accepted in the animal health community.



Reducing E. coli O157 levels in cattle headed for slaughter significantly reduces the risk of E. coli O157 contamination on meat products, but would do relatively little to prevent the buildup of E. coli O157 in manure and manure storage lagoons. Few beef feeders have adopted the practice because of fear that a switch in diet during the last week in a feedlot may cause a drop in quality grade from Prime to Choice, or Choice to Select, and a significant loss in income. Some organic meat producers and processors encourage, or require that their producers to switch beef animals in feedlots to a high-forage diet in the last week prior to slaughter as an added food safety measure.



Garber et al. (1999) showed that dairy farms using concrete alleys and flushing systems were 8-times more likely to test positive for E. coli O157 than farmers using other manure removal systems. They also showed that E. coli levels tended to be higher in the summer than the winter.



Hutchinson et al. (2005) found that young calves still receiving milk had “significantly lower levels and prevalence of E. coli O157.” E. coli pathogen levels were also reduced on farms that included some sort of bedding. Cattle on diets composed mostly of grass had less likelihood of infection with E. coli O157.



Environmental Fate and Movement



How can E. coli O157 move from cattle farms to crop fields?



Once in the environment, E. coli O157 can move in several ways around agricultural landscapes. The two most common ways are through the land application of raw, uncomposted manure, and through runoff of manure or lagoon water into streams and irrigation ditches.



Wild animals and birds can become infected, serve as a reservoir, and move E. coli O157 bacteria across a landscape, although studies assessing the importance of wildlife in transmitting E. coli O157 infections have generally concluded that wildlife plays a modest, or no role in most regions.



How long does E. coli O157 last in the environment?



This is a complicated question. E. coli O157 environmental fate is driven by many factors. In general, the bacterium lasts longer in warmer, wetter climates.



E. coli O157 is known to survive in soil for between one and six months, and sometimes longer. Many factors can extend or reduce survival in soil. Heat, lack of soil microbial activity, and moisture can extend the time period E. coli O157 survives in soil. Survival times decline in soils that have high levels of microbial activity, in cool or cold soils, and under dry conditions. Jiang et al. (2002) report that E. coli O157 lasted for 77 days in manure-amended soils at 5 degrees C, and longer than 226 days at 15 degrees C.



Incorporating manure into soils and tillage reduces survival times (Boes et al., 2005). Soils on organic farms have also been shown to accelerate the decline in E. coli levels, compared to similar soils under conventional management (Franz et al., 2005).



On the farm, E. coli O157 is known to persist in water troughs for several weeks to a few months. It can last for comparable periods in feed troughs. Transmission through water and feed troughs is considered a major source on on-farm movement from animal to animal. Berry et al. (2005) found that E. coli O157 survives in cattle feedlot soils under a wide range of manure and moisture conditions for up to 133 days.



Fenlon et al. (2000) studied the environmental fate of E. coli O157 following application of dairy slurry (liquid manure) on a clay loam soil in grass pasture. E. coli O157 was detected on the grass for only one week. There was limited transport of bacteria down into the soil (2%), and about 7% drained off the field following a rainfall event. The authors concluded that heavy rains could lead to considerable losses of E. coli O157 to leaching and surface runoff. Silage made from grass containing E. coli O157 led to a significant increase in E. coli O157 counts, under certain conditions.



Cote et al. (2005) applied pig manure to cucumber fields to track the persistence of E. coli and Salmonella bacteria. In sandy loam soils, the bacteria were undetectable after 56 to 70 days.



Entry et al. (2005) applied dairy manure and compost to potato fields and found no increase in coliform or E. coli levels after seven days. Potato skins had higher coliform and Enterococcus spp. levels following application of dairy manure, compared to composted dairy manure.



Gagliardi et al. (2002) found that E. coli persisted for 92 days on alfalfa roots in a soil microcosm study, but disappeared in as few as 25 days in fallow soils and on some crops.



How long does E. coli O157 last in raw cattle manure applied to cropland?



Survival times vary greatly as a result of soil and weather conditions. Avery et al. (2005) found that E. coli O157 bacteria were still viable in 77% of a number of organic wastes two months after land application. They concluded that storage of wastes will help reduce bacteria numbers, but cannot be counted on to totally eliminate E. coli O157.



In a study of organic and conventional lettuce production systems including applications of dairy manure spiked with E. coli O157, Franz et al. (2005) found that E. coli O157 levels declined faster in organic soils than conventional. The level of roughage in the cattle diets significantly influenced E. coli levels (the more the roughage, the lower the level).



How effective are the National Organic Program’s (NOP) animal manure and compost requirements in preventing E. coli O157 contamination of farm crops?



Most scientists who have studied the impacts of manure management and application methods on E. coli survival agree that further research is needed to assure that the NOP restrictions on applying manure and compost are adequate under all conditions. NOP manure and compost restrictions are based in large part on USDA risk assessments conducted to assure the safety of human biosolid applications to conventional cropland.



The NOP rule requires compost made from animal manure to be composted in a manner that results in a temperature in the compost pile between 131 degrees F and 170 degrees F (55 to 77 degrees C) for 3 days when an in-vessel or static aerated pile system is used; or, at temperatures between 131 and 170 degrees F for 15 days using a windrow composting system, during which the rows must be turned at least five times.



Jiang et al. (2003) studied the fate of E. coli O157 during the composting of cow manure spiked with high levels of E. coli O157. They found that the pathogen became undetectable after 7 to 14 days at 50 degrees C. They recommend that compost contaminated with high levels of E. coli O157 should be held for 1 week, and preferably 2 weeks at a minimum temperature of 50 degrees C. Lung et al. (2001) found that E. coli O157 lasted only 72 hours during composting at 45 degrees C.



Ingham et al. (2004) tested the adequacy of the NOP rules in a study in Wisconsin using noncomposted diary cattle manure applied to vegetable production fields.

Within 90 days after application, E. coli levels generally had declined 1,000-fold. Levels remained detectable in enriched soils for up to 168 days. In many plots, E. coli O157 was not detected after about 100 days, leading the authors to conclude “the 120-day limit provided [in NOP rules] provided an even greater likelihood of not detecting E. coli on carrots.” Still, the authors concluded that the 120-day restriction did not absolutely guarantee that all produce would be free of E. coli at harvest, especially short season produce like radishes.



Islam et al. (2004) used dairy manure and several types of compost, and irrigation water that was spiked with E. coli O157 to study persistence in the field under vegetable production systems. E. coli O157 was found to persist for 154 to 217 days and was detected on parsley and lettuce for up to 77 and 177 days after seedlings were planted.



A Norwegian research team fertilized organic lettuce with cow manure, compost, and slurry and found no difference in the bacteriologic quality of the lettuce at harvest (Johannessen et al., 2004).



Work by Mukherjee et al. (2006) in Minnesota found that the use of manure or compost aged more than 12 months on organic vegetables reduced E. coli levels by 19-fold.