Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time.

Wrong lede.

“Publicly posting enforcement and testing data corresponding to specific meat, poultry, and egg products' processing plants on the Internet could have "substantial benefits," including the potential to favorably impact public health, says a new report from the National Research Council. The report adds that the release of such data could contribute to increased transparency and yield valuable insights that go beyond the regulatory uses for which the data are collected.”

The report gets a lot of things right, especially the decades-long move to more transparency in U.S. regulatory functions, whether it’s food safety, environmental pollution or energy generation. No one wants to be on the wrong side of history, the democratization of institutions, so best to provide taxpayer-funded information, and figure out the most effective way to provide such information, rather than being the politician or group that says, “no.”

The committee notes that, just like restaurant inspection disclosure, “releasing these data could potentially motivate individual companies, and sectors of the food industry, to improve their overall food safety efforts,” and that such publicly available date could, “provide incentives to food processing establishments to protect brand reputation in food safety in order to protect and enhance customer base and profitability.”

If only consumers could choose at retail.

The press release announcing the report’s findings is below.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is responsible for ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, and properly labeled. It collects voluminous amounts of data at thousands of processing facilities in support of its regulatory functions and is considering the release of two types of collected data on its website. These include inspection and enforcement data and sampling and testing data -- such as testing for the presence of foodborne pathogens like salmonella, pathogenic E. coli, and Listeria monocytogenes. Some of this information is already available to the public via the Internet but is aggregated and does not contain names of specific processing facilities. However, most of the data FSIS collects, with the exception of information that is considered proprietary, can currently be obtained by the public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The committee that wrote the report examined a substantial body of literature documenting the impacts of disclosing establishment-specific regulatory information similar to that collected by FSIS. Based on this information, the committee believed there are strong arguments supporting the public release of FSIS data that contains the names of processing facilities on the Internet, especially data that are subject to release under FOIA, unless there is compelling evidence that it is not in the public interest to release them. Several potential benefits of releasing such data include enabling users to make more informed choices, motivating facilities to improve their performance, and allowing research studies of regulatory effectiveness and other performance-related issues. More specific benefits might include better understanding on the part of the public relative to the kinds of information that have been collected, such as a greater appreciation for the quality, complexity, and potential usability of the data for specific purposes. Even if individual firms do not change their behavior in response to data posting, overall food safety could improve if information about performance leads consumers to favor high-performing facilities, effectively resulting in a shift in the composition of the market.

The benefits of releasing FSIS data must be balanced against potential unintended adverse consequences, the report says. These could include impacts on facilities' profitability, possible misinterpretation of the data, pressure on inspector performance, and unintentional release of proprietary or confidential information. However, the committee concluded that while adverse impacts are possible, there is limited systematic evidence documenting their likelihood.
Because of the complexity of issues associated with public release of data with facility names and the potential for adverse effects, the report suggests the need for an effective disclosure plan to inform the process. For example, potential adverse effects could be minimized if FSIS ensures the data's integrity, provides definitions of what is being quantified, and is careful to protect confidential information associated with particular facilities. To help make sure that the public release of the data will be useful, the committee suggested that FSIS define a timetable for its release and commit the resources necessary to allow the data's accessibility, quality, and timeliness.

Additionally, the report recommends that FSIS consult with other agencies that have released detailed regulatory data on the performance of individual facilities or firms, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO), the U.S. Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration, and several states and local public health departments that have released data on restaurant hygiene and inspection grading.

Below is one of our contributions to providing such public information.

So it goes.

Filion, K. and Powell, D.A. 2009. The use of restaurant inspection disclosure systems as a means of communicating food safety information. Journal of Foodservice 20: 287-297.
The World Health Organization estimates that up to 30% of individuals in developed countries become ill from food or water each year. Up to 70% of these illnesses are estimated to be linked to food prepared at foodservice establishments. Consumer confidence in the safety of food prepared in restaurants is fragile, varying significantly from year to year, with many consumers attributing foodborne illness to foodservice. One of the key drivers of restaurant choice is consumer perception of the hygiene of a restaurant. Restaurant hygiene information is something consumers desire, and when available, may use to make dining decisions.

An instant-read thermometer is the best gift for the cook who has everything. Here’s what some folks told Elizabeth Weiss of USA Today.

William Keene, senior epidemiologist at Oregon's Public Health Service, gives instant-read thermometers as wedding presents. "They save people's lives."

The thermometer also makes Keene's food taste a lot better. That's because after spending a long day talking to people who've gotten sick from eating undercooked food, he found he had a tendency to overcook everything. Food "would get all dried out." But when he used the thermometer he actually stopped when it was done, rather than overdone. Though don't forget to wash the tip with soapy water after you use it, "to avoid cross-contamination.”

Kathy Bernard of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Meat and Poultry Hotline gives them out as bridal shower presents. At the holidays they're especially useful when people pull out recipes they don't often make, like eggnog. "Since it contains raw eggs, if you're going to make it from scratch you start cooking the egg base, stirring it over low heat until the mixture reaches 160," to kill any possible salmonella.

Jack Bishop of America's Test Kitchen, a popular cooking show on PBS, said, "It's something you can be pretty sure most people don't own, or if they do own one, they don't own a very good one.”

And they're not just for meat, says Bishop. The old-fashioned method of knocking on the bottom of the loaf pan to see if the bread's done only works if you've spent enough years baking bread that you know what you're listening for. With a thermometer there's no guessing. Plain bread is done at between 200 and 210, a sweet loaf between 190 and 200.

And for cheesecake, a thermometer is the key to avoiding cracks across the top. "The magic temperature is 150," Bishop says

Old-fashioned meat thermometers rely on metal actually expanding and turning the temperature dial. Digital instant-read thermometers use electronics and are faster and generally more accurate. The instant-read digitals use slightly different technology than a regular digital thermometer, so be sure to look for ones that say they are instant-read.

Our favorite is the Comark PDT 300 (right, exactly as shown, about $30).

I started using my thermometer on homemade bread a couple of years ago; big improvement.

Research published today by the Food Standards Agency shows that a significant proportion (76%) of oysters tested from UK oyster growing beds contained norovirus. The virus was detected at low levels in more than half of the positive samples (52%).

Dr Andrew Wadge, the FSA's chief scientist, told the BBC the research has not identified any new food safety risk.

"If you are someone who enjoys eating raw oysters and you want to continue there is nothing here to say that you are at more risk or less risk. What we do say is that there is some risk."

It is difficult to assess the potential health impact of these findings, as the available research techniques are not able to differentiate between infectious and non-infectious norovirus material within the oysters. Furthermore, a safe limit for norovirus has not been established.

Between 2009 and 2011, scientists from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), on behalf of the Food Standards Agency, took samples from 39 oyster harvesting areas across the UK. More than 800 samples of 10 oysters each were tested.

Oysters filter large volumes of water to get their food, and any bacteria and viruses in the water can build up within the oyster. Controls before and after commercial harvesting of oysters, such as re-laying and depuration, provide good protection against harmful bacteria, but are less effective at removing viruses from live shellfish.

Re-laying is a purification process used to treat bivalve shellfish. Shellfish are harvested from a contaminated area and moved to clean areas, where they are placed on the ocean floor or into containers laid on the ocean floor, or suspended in racks. Re-laying will generally be for at least two months.

Depuration is a purification process used commercially and regulated by the Food Standards Agency. It is commonly used by producers to reduce or eliminate microbiological contamination in oysters and other shellfish. Shellfish are placed in tanks of clean re-circulating seawater, treated by UV irradiation, and allowed to purge their contaminants over several days. In the UK a minimum purification time of 42 hours is required.

A UK man who found a tooth - complete with fillings - in a tub of supermarket brand yogurt was given a 68p (US$1.05) refund when he took it back to the store to complain.

David Casey, from Bedworth, about 163km northwest of London, said he bit down on what he thought was a piece of fudge in the Tesco's Devonshire-style fudge yogurt, only to find it was a tooth.

Angered by the unappetizing discovery - a picture of which was published by the Coventry Telegraph yesterday (right) - he drove to the store where he bought the product to complain, and was given a refund.

"They've said sorry for the inconvenience, but it's not inconvenient - it's disgusting," said Casey, a 43-year-old former corporal in the Royal Infantry who is currently having treatment for a tumor in his stomach.

"I could have someone's scabby tooth in my stomach right now and that would not have been nice."

Since his complaint the supermarket giant has twice sent Casey a £15 Tesco voucher - which he has returned both times labeling it an "insult" after the company's report into the matter suggested there was a chance it could have been his tooth.

"I'm furious, you don't expect to be treated like this," Casey said.

A Tesco spokesman said, "We take matters of this kind very seriously and we are looking into it."

About 90 percent of the 184 inmates at the Cass County Jail in North Dakota became ill Sunday night and early Monday morning with a potential foodborne illness, Sheriff Paul Laney said.

None of the inmates had to be taken to a hospital for medical treatment, though nurses from Fargo Cass Public Health did treat those whose symptoms were most severe, the jail’s Chief Nurse Heidi McLean said.

Doug Jensen, a registered sanitarian with Fargo Cass Public Health said all aspects of food supply, storage and preparation will be examined to determine where the illness came from.

There have been no reports of illnesses among staff, Laney said, though many of those who had been on duty overnight were at home.

Inmates were served a chili macaroni casserole, corn and cornbread for supper Sunday, Laney said.

The jail has contracted its food services for nearly five years with CBM Food Service of Sioux Falls, S.D., Laney said.

 Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was admitted to hospital Tuesday morning due to diarrhea caused by food poisoning, the Thai government said.

Yingluck now stays in Rama 9 hospital in downtown Bangkok and she has not canceled any schedule yet, an official at the Government House told Xinhua.

On Nov. 21, The Packer conducted an exclusive question-and-answer interview with Will Steele, president and CEO of Frontera Produce, Edinburg, Texas, the marketer of the listeria-tainted cantaloupes shipped by Jensen Farms, Holly, Colo. Below are some edited highlights from that interview.

Q. Please explain Frontera Produce’s business relationship with Jensen Farms.

Our role was that of a marketing agent, providing our expertise to find buyers and manage the sales paperwork and logistics for cantaloupe grown and packed by Jensen Farms.

As part of our marketing services, we utilized our inventory control system in which every pallet of Jensen Farms cantaloupe marketed by Frontera was remotely entered into our database when it was harvested and shipped. This proved to be important in tracking the product to customers in our database because we had records of where each pallet came from and where Jensen Farms shipped it.

Q. What are Frontera Produce’s food safety requirements and traceability systems? Have any changed since this outbreak?

In the wake of this experience, we are examining, among other things, the role of audits. Third-party audits are an important and useful tool, but they are obviously not fail-safe. Audits provide baseline information on conditions at the time they are conducted. So we are looking at possible changes that might further enhance food safety. One area of focus is whether additional steps are needed to validate the audit findings regarding food safety protocols that are in place. Validation could be in the form of a follow-up audit, or perhaps other measures that will help provide additional assurance of food safety compliance.
This is an industry-wide issue that all of us must deal with, so we are also talking with others in the produce industry and sharing our experience so that we can further our collective knowledge and understanding.

Q. What’s your view on the lawsuits that have named Frontera as a defendant?

First, it is important to remember that the greatest tragedy in all of this is the human one. And it is this human tragedy that drives us to continue to analyze every aspect of this unprecedented event in an attempt to prevent it from ever happening again.

That there is litigation is not surprising; almost anytime there is an injury, a lawsuit will follow. In fact, it is to be expected. We have seen this again and again, where even companies that never saw or touched the product were drawn into litigation based on association or something other than actual wrong-doing. It is an unfortunate reality.

The Duluth News Tribune reports that when Gloria Dei Lutheran Church in Duluth served free breakfast to its Hillside neighbors on Saturday, it had all the needed ingredients: eggs, milk, bread, cereal … and food-safety training.

The latter is the result of the so-called “church lady law” that went into effect Aug. 1. The law exempts faith-based organizations that serve food to groups of people from routine health inspections. But the people who prepare the food must have state-approved training.

That requirement doesn’t apply to funeral dinners, wedding dinners and potlucks as long as they are on the church’s property, said Deborah Durkin of the Minnesota Department of Health.

It does apply to Gloria Dei’s breakfasts, your Boy Scout troop’s meatball fundraiser and Our Savior’s Lutheran Church’s lutefisk dinner. In the case of the latter, the law is fine with Christina Kadelbach, youth minister and small group coordinator at the Cloquet church.

“Working in a church and also being a mother, I think it’s important that we pay attention to the safety of food preparation and serving it,” Kadelbach said.

“We are also the state of 10,000 churches,” Durkin said. “It takes a long time to get down to the 30-member church in Yellow Medicine River.”

Fr. Timothy Sas, priest of Twelve Holy Apostles Greek Orthodox Church in the Hillside neighborhood, said he hadn’t dealt with the law. But he was confident that the church, whose parishioners include several restaurant professionals, meets all requirements for its fundraising meals and its annual Taste of Greece Festival.

Faith-based food safety.

 Woe is the California lettuce and spinach grower.

"It was just more regulations. More inspections. More paperwork. More filings. More fees," said Chris Bunn, part of a four-generation Salinas Valley farming family. Now in his 60s, he quit two years after the 2006 outbreak. "I miss it terribly," Bunn said. "It was a wonderful business."

Deborah Schoch, a senior writer at the California HealthCare Foundation Center for Health Reporting, writes in the Mercury News today that five years after their healthy-looking green fields became the epicenter of a national food disaster, farmers in the Salinas Valley are still working to regain something even the most bountiful harvest can't ensure: the public's trust.

They are doing their best to rebound after investigators linked spinach grown and bagged here to a deadly E. coli strain that would kill three people, sicken 206 more and shake the nation's faith in California leafy greens. So far, they have succeeded in avoiding another major outbreak.

Last year, Monterey County produced spinach worth $127.5 million, down from $188.2 million in 2005, according to reports from the county agricultural commissioner's office.

Salinas Valley growers and processors have retooled nearly every step in their industry -- from planting seedlings to harvesting and washing greens. They have rallied to create a state-industry pact on how to protect 14 types of leafy greens that is being held up as a national model.

"It was the watershed moment for the produce industry," said Joe Pezzini, chief operating officer of Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville.

Too bad it didn’t happen 10 years earlier.

In October, 1996, a 16-month-old Denver girl drank Smoothie juice manufactured by Odwalla Inc. of Half Moon Bay, California. She died several weeks later; 64 others became ill in several western U.S. states and British Columbia after drinking the same juices, which contained unpasteurized apple cider -- and E. coli O157:H7. Investigators believed that some of the apples used to make the cider might have been insufficiently washed after falling to the ground and coming into contact with deer feces.

Almost 10 years later, on Sept. 14, 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced that an outbreak of E. coli O157: H7 had killed a 77-year-old woman and sickened 49 others (United States Food and Drug Administration, 2006). The FDA learned from the Centers for Disease Control and Wisconsin health officials that the outbreak may have been linked to the consumption of produce and identified bagged fresh spinach as a possible cause.

In the decade between these two watershed outbreaks, almost 500 outbreaks of foodborne illness involving fresh produce were documented, publicized and led to some changes within the industry, yet what author Malcolm Gladwell would call a tipping point -- "a point at which a slow gradual change becomes irreversible and then proceeds with gathering pace"(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_Point) -- in public awareness about produce-associated risks did not happen until the spinach E. coli O157:H7 outbreak in the fall of 2006. At what point did sufficient evidence exist to compel the fresh produce industry to embrace the kind of change the sector has heralded since 2007? And at what point will future evidence be deemed sufficient to initiate change within an industry?

In 1996, following extensive public and political discussions about microbial food safety in meat, the focus shifted to fresh fruits and vegetables, following an outbreak of Cyclospora cayetanesis ultimately linked to Guatemalan raspberries that sickened 1,465 in 21 U.S. states and two Canadian provinces (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1997), and subsequently Odwalla. That same year, Beuchat (1996) published a review on pathogenic microorganisms in fresh fruits and vegetables and identified numerous pathways of contamination.

By 1997, researchers at CDC were stating that pathogens could contaminate at any point along the fresh produce food chain -- at the farm, processing plant, transportation vehicle, retail store or foodservice operation and the home -- and that by understanding where potential problems existed, it was possible to develop strategies to reduce risks of contamination. Researchers also reported that the use of pathogen-free water for washing would minimize risk of contamination.

Yet it would take a decade and some 29 leafy green-related outbreaks before spinach in 2006 became a tipping point.

What was absent in this decade of outbreaks, letters from regulators, plans from industry associations and media accounts, was verification that farmers and others in the farm-to-fork food safety system were seriously internalizing the messages about risk, the numbers of sick people, and translating such information into front-line food safety behavioral change.

Today, according to  Schoch, major food and retail chains, from McDonald's to Walmart, want proof that their lettuce is as clean as any natural product can be.

That means no cattle grazing uphill from a spinach farm, no roaming wild pigs, no farm crews without hairnets or gloves, no missing reports.

Some food chains even send inspectors unannounced.

"They'll be the Toyota Camry with the Hertz sticker on the edge of the field, looking with binoculars," said Mike Dobler, 50, a third-generation grower who works with his family on a large-scale vegetable farm based in Watsonville.

"They're looking to see if you're doing what you say you're doing," Dobler said.

Before September 2006, he said, "we were taken at our word, and nobody asked."

Actually, lots of people asked, including FDA, state public health types, journalists, lawyers and academics. Growers apparently just didn’t pay attention.

A table of leafy green related outbreaks is available at http://bites.ksu.edu/leafy-greens-related-outbreaks (they didn’t all originate with California produce, but lots did).