The suave and sassy Roy Costa showed up on Tampa television last night, walking viewers through a couple of home kitchen food safety inspections, including the kitchen of ABC Action News Dirty Dining reporter, Wendy Ryan.

(I can’t actually confirm the broadcast date, but the clip showed up on the web last night.)

The story says that Gretchen Barnes is a busy new mom with twin 7-month-old boys, Beckett and Eli, and has much less time to do things like clean the kitchen.

Gretchen was a trooper to allow former health inspector Roy Costa to come to her house and do a mock inspection on her kitchen.

Right away, Roy found a critical violation: Eggs over five months old in her refrigerator. The package had a printed expiration date of September 17, 2010.

Roy said one of the most contaminated areas of the kitchen is the sink drain, because of the disposal and waste spewing up from the bottom.

Roy says it's a good idea to disinfect the sink drain once a week. So how do you do that?

"Make about a 200-part-per-million dilution of this bleach. Because we know if you have the proper water to bleach, the activity of the chlorine that's in there is going to be a lot more effective," Roy explained.

So in a bucket of room temperature water, less than a capful of clorox would be enough to create the right level of disinfectant.

And Roy says sanitizing the baby's toys with that same diluted solution is a good idea.

Sophie the giraffe, a previous favorite of our 2-year-old Sorenne, was somewhat dirty in the twins’ house, so Roy recommended a soap and water wash before sterilizing the twins' Sophie in the solution for at least 5 minutes. 

Amy has written before about a student barfing in class, and the policy at Kansas State University is students and faculty are advised to notify the custodial department immediately and to avoid coming into contact with vomit.

Should custodial staff get double pay for cleaning up vomit?

According to KOMO News in Seattle, ferry workers get double pay for cleaning up messy situations in what some call, "the vomit clause."

State Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island says the clause makes her want to barf (not really).

But Haugen did tell the Everett Daily Herald other state workers aren't paid extra for such work, adding, "That's one that really stuck in my craw. We certainly don't give overtime to some prison guard who cleans up after an inmate or even someone who worked caring for a person in their home and had to do an unpleasant task."

Who says ‘craw.’

The ferry workers' union say the clause actually covers broader clean up of hazardous materials and sewage systems, and workers rarely get paid more for vomit situations.

Terri Mast of Inland Boatmen's Union said, "It could be vomit. It could be blood. It could be feces.”
 

Consumer Focus Wales says more than 60 schools, nursing homes and hospitals in Wales have sub-standard food hygiene and is calling for full inspection reports to be made available to the public in order to protect vulnerable groups.

BBC News reports the watchdog has published a map showing public institutions with ratings below the satisfactory score.

Maria Battle, senior director of Consumer Focus Wales, called for the assembly government to use its new direct powers to ensure food hygiene ratings were displayed at business premises.

"It is not acceptable that there are publicly-funded institutions, such as hospitals and schools, serving food to vulnerable people despite failing to meet statutory requirements for food hygiene. The greatest tool for improving food hygiene is openness to public scrutiny by making businesses display their food hygiene ratings on the premises. What greater incentive for food producers than knowing their rating will be public and their failings will no longer be hidden?"

A spokesperson for the Welsh Local Government Agency said, "The idea behind the food hygiene rating system is to promote consumer choice and drive up standards in food businesses. A business with a poor rating is generally one that is found on inspection to need to improve standards. However, the reason for a low score could be that the business does not currently have a written procedure for food hygiene. Whilst the business premises could be spotless, without this written supporting document they could not be scored above a one-star rating. It is important to note that those premises with low ratings are most likely to be in the process of improving."

Food hygiene ratings can vary from zero (urgent improvement necessary) to five (very good).

Sharon Mills, the mother of Mason Jones, the schoolboy from Deri near Bargoed who died in the 2005 E. coli outbreak after eating infected meat, said it was "diabolical" that hygiene was not up to scratch at premises serving vulnerable people.

Frank Yiannas, corporate vice president, food safety for Walmart says the focus of food borne illness prevention has to move earlier in the supply chain — long before processors are testing for it and product is getting into consumers’ hands.

Meatingplace.com reports that Yiannas, told processors at the North American Meat Processors Association’s annual management conference in Chicago on Saturday retailers are willing to work with suppliers on reasonable cost increases related to improved meat product safety.

Yiannas, author of the aptly-titled 2009 book, Food Safety Culture, said the HACCP system is no longer applied in the way it was originally conceived and testing is ineffective, adding, “E. coli is present in such low levels, it can still cause illness but it’s hard to find. Even at N-120, a processor is going to be pretty sure [the tests will be] negative.”

And the industry can’t afford to put safety solely in the hands of the product’s final cook, he warned.

The best way forward is to “test the process, not the product,” he said. That is, if processors (and producers) work with a verifiably high level of safety, then the chances that the product is safe further down the line is exponentially higher.

Overseeing these efforts should be third-party certification programs, such as the Safe Quality Food program overseen by the Food Manufacturers Institute, Yiannas said. Their standards typically are more comprehensive and exacting than those issued by the government, and the third-party assurances carry weight in the market.

In answer to a question about the additional costs these programs and perhaps interventions require, Yiannas said, “Retailers are willing to share (in reasonable additional costs). There are always tradeoffs, but I have hundreds of example in which that made sense.”
 

Posting restaurant inspection scores is the right thing for health departments to do. It's good for transparency of the regulatory system and it's good for opening up dialogue with consumers (especially those who are interested in where their food is coming from). RIsk-based systems are the way to go, but with the shift comes the increasing need to communicate what risks have evidence behind them and which ones might just be gross.

Appearing in today's Raleigh News & Observer is my take on recent coverage of risk-based inspections:

Regarding your March 7 editorial "Unappetizing," which warned of a "high yuck factor ahead":
Food safety is on the menu. And that's a good thing. For restaurant patrons interested in a reality show-style tour of a restaurant's hygiene practices, North Carolina's grading system provides a needed sneak peek.
Estimates suggest up to 70 percent of foodborne illnesses are acquired outside the home. Every week there is at least one restaurant-related outbreak reported in the U.S. news media. Cross-contamination, lack of hand washing and improper cooking or holding temperatures are all common themes.
There are limitations to a grade system because an inspection reflects conditions only at one point in time; however, the information collected by inspectors, no matter how limited, needs to be accessible and clear.
North Carolina's restaurant inspection system works not just because of posting grades, but also because of the regulators' mandate to engage in a dialogue with restaurant operators and, more importantly, the public about food safety risks.
A grade should reflect how restaurant staff behaved while an inspector was present. The challenge is to motivate employees and managers to practice good food safety day-in-day-out, whether an inspector is present or not.

So asks Laura Day in the U.K. Guardian’s Word of Mouth blog in yet another take on the food safety silliness on many TV cooking shows.

Over recent weeks, MasterChef has been pushing contestants through their "toughest challenge yet" (again), which seems to have led to competition-induced amnesia when it comes to basic standards.

"Former Miss Swansea" Alice has been sporting a shock of bright red nail polish before she rustles up the goods. She's taken some flak from viewers online for kneading dough with her chipped nails, with suspicions that some of the polish made it into her miniature lasagnes.

Compulsive hair grabber Polly has attracted ire for her flyaway strands (she should take a cue from bandana-wearing Jackie), and then there are the men, arguably the clammier end of the spectrum, who persist in adding many beads of sweat to their pan-fried cuisines. Not to mention Tom, who consistently creates an epic mess, and this week drew quite the dressing down from John who offered a disparaging shake of the head towards the floured floor at his feet.

This is the kind of behaviour we would more commonly associate with the string of cooks on Come Dine With Me, whose contestants are often to be found scraping crème brûlée off the lino and leaving sushi unguarded to be snacked on by their cat. But it's not just the amateurs, and it's not just recently.

Pudding-fiend and glamour puss Nigella, all boobs and spoon-licking, has always had her hair perfectly coiffed. Sure, her luscious locks look pretty good flowing all over her shoulders (and who wouldn't want a head of hair like that?), I just wouldn't want to admire it in my plate of brownies.

We covered this ground years ago, and while I’d like to redo the study, Food Network ratings have recently flattened, so maybe people are doing less watching and more cooking Thanks to Bobby Krishna in Dubai for sending along the story.

Mathiasen, L.A., Chapman, B.J., Lacroix, B.J. and Powell, D.A. 2004. Spot the mistake: Television cooking shows as a source of food safety information, Food Protection Trends 24(5): 328-334.

Consumers receive information on food preparation from a variety of sources. Numerous studies conducted over the past six years demonstrate that television is one of the primary sources for North Americans. This research reports on an examination and categorization of messages that television food and cooking programs provide to viewers about preparing food safely. During June 2002 and 2003, television food and cooking programs were recorded and reviewed, using a defined list of food safety practices based on criteria established by Food Safety Network researchers. Most surveyed programs were shown on Food Network Canada, a specialty cable channel. On average, 30 percent of the programs viewed were produced in Canada, with the remainder produced in the United States or United Kingdom. Sixty hours of content analysis revealed that the programs contained a total of 916 poor food-handling incidents. When negative food handling behaviors were compared to positive food handling behaviors, it was found that for each positive food handling behavior observed, 13 negative behaviors were observed. Common food safety errors included a lack of hand washing, cross-contamination and time-temperature violations. While television food and cooking programs are an entertainment source, there is an opportunity to improve their content so as to promote safe food handling.

The Canadian government announced yesterday that from now on, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) will now publish information about its compliance and enforcement activities being taken to protect the safety of the Canadian food, animal and plant supply.

The Government of Canada has begun publishing information on its compliance and enforcement activities on its website. The information includes:

• food imports that have been refused entry into Canada;
• federally registered food establishments whose licenses have been suspended, cancelled or reinstated; and
• notices of violations with warning and penalties, including identifying repeat offenders of animal transport regulations.

Why wasn’t CFIA already publishing this information? The U.S. does.

As part of its transparency initiative, CFIA also announced on the same day it is introducing a silver metal badge for its inspection staff.

This inspection badge represents the first of three phases to be implemented as part of the CFIA's Employee Identity Program. This program aims to enhance the identification of Agency staff and easily demonstrate a sign of regulatory authority to inspect and/or enforce CFIA legislation.

Transparency sounds like a funky idea, until there’s nothing to see.

We had some dinner at our favorite local haunt last night, partly because going out tonight on St. Patrick’s Day with a 2-year-old may be dumb.

I had been reading about a New Mexico woman who says a sewing needle pierced her tongue after she bit into a plate of ribs and mashed potatoes at a Chili's restaurant and thought, I wouldn’t want to run a restaurant. Too much vulnerability.

The NM woman says she pulled a needle about 2-inches long from her mouth at the Chili's in Farmington last July. The 23-year-old says Chili's employees quickly took the needle, and a manager refused to give it back when she and her husband returned to request it for testing.

Consumers, if you want to pursue a legitimate claim, do not give the food or item to the restaurant – take it to the local health unit.

Restaurant owners – don’t hesitate to call on the forensic expertise of the state; they often have the expertise to separate accident from extortion.

The NM woman further said she's suing the Chili's chain because the company took 52 days to send the needle to a lab. She says she's since tested clean for HIV, hepatitis and other possible infections, but had to stop nursing her baby in the meantime.

Representatives of Chili's Restaurant and Grill and Chili's Inc. declined to comment.

Ron Ruggless writing in Nation’s Restaurant News, says that restaurateurs who find themselves with customers claiming to have discovered foreign objects in their food face a fine line between hospitable communications and legal cautions.

A public relations professional who asked not to be identified because many clients are restaurant chains, said any foodservice operation can benefit from training staff to deal with complaints immediately as they arise, as well as consulting legal counsel.

Michael Heenan, a corporate crisis consultant and owner of Heenan Communications in Sacramento, Calif., said,

“What I tell clients is that in the midst of a crisis, when everyone’s anxiety is high and everyone’s defensiveness is high and there are personal hurt feelings about the safety of the product or the reputation of your company, that is not the time to find out what the dynamic is within your company.”

For independent operators without a corporate infrastructure, Heenan said the job is much more sensitive. “If you are doing it more or less on your own,” he said, “it’s asking a lot. It’s a very stressful environment.”

“The usual mistakes are of the brittle, defensive and unsympathetic nature. If you do nothing else as an individual owner, remember that you must put aside your anger and remember how poorly that looks to the rest of the world. They need to see how concerned you are.”
 

I’m a fan of performance standards, quality control, continuous improvement – all those things that can measure risk reduction.

(And why zero tolerances sorta suck.)

But keep it real.

“FSIS estimates that approximately 5,000 illnesses will be prevented each year under the new Campylobacter standards, and approximately 20,000 illnesses will be prevented under the revised Salmonella standards each year.”

Standards good, extrapolations based on … who knows what, bad.

Judge for yourselves. The press release is below. Full details have been published in the federal register and are available at
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FRPubs/2009-0029.pdf

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced implementation of revised and new performance standards aimed at reducing the prevalence of Salmonella and Campylobacter in young chickens and turkeys. The improved standards will become effective in July 2011. With the new standards, FSIS is encouraging establishments slaughtering chicken and turkey to make continued reductions in the occurrence of pathogens – namely Salmonella and Campylobacter – in the products they produce.

After two years of enforcing the new standards, FSIS estimates that approximately 5,000 illnesses will be prevented each year under the new Campylobacter standards, and approximately 20,000 illnesses will be prevented under the revised Salmonella standards each year.

"These improved standards are a stronger buffer between foodborne illnesses and our consumers, especially our most vulnerable consumers – children, the elderly and those with weakened immune systems," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "There is no more important mission at USDA than ensuring the safety of our food, and we are working every day to lower the danger of foodborne illness. The new standards announced today mark an important step in our efforts to protect consumers by further reducing the incidence of Salmonella and opening a new front in the fight against Campylobacter."

FSIS developed stricter performance standards using recently completed nationwide studies that measure the baseline prevalence of Salmonella and Campylobacter in young chickens and turkeys prepared for market. The studies indicated that, despite improvements, there was still a risk of consumers being exposed to these pathogens through poultry.

"While the industry has made significant strides in recent years, far too many Americans continue to fall victim to these foodborne illnesses," said Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Elisabeth Hagen. "These improved standards will drive the industry to do better. They are tough but achievable. And when fully implemented, they will prevent tens of thousands of Americans from getting sick."

President Obama's Food Safety Working Group (FSWG) developed three core principles to help guide food safety in the United States: prioritizing prevention, strengthening surveillance and enforcement, and improving response and recovery. In its overall mission to ensure a safe food supply for the public, and in response to the FSWG, FSIS developed the stricter performance standards to cut the Salmonella risk in poultry products.