Your Bakery Merchandising and Marketing Specialists
The largest nonprofit resource site for professional pastry chefs and bakers
.
Research Reports - Page 1
|
Date: 7/17/2001
In response to the Walkerton crisis: We still have not learned our lessons Editorial by Fritz Bliedung -- www.caima.net
With considerable interest, we have been following the news describing the Walkerton crisis that could have been avoided if the government and people in charge would have acted responsibly. It is difficult to comprehend the degree of irresponsibility, incompetence, and negligence portrayed by all levels of government and the individuals responsible for the delivery of safe water in Walkerton and other public utilities in Ontario. Further, I want to draw your attention to the fact that food safety does not only apply to water but also to the entire food industry. Water is a basic ingredient and is not always boiled to reduce potential health risks. Finally, it may also interest you that there are existing government programs that are designed to improve food safety. Unfortunately, the funding criteria and government bureaucracy has made it difficult for businesses to apply. Government actions demonstrate a disregard for food safety.
What we know from experience We know from experience that the food industry has problems because resources such as technical know-how, time commitment, and funds are not readily available. That is true for public utilities as well as for private industry. The government knows that problems exist: They know from their own reports, research conducted by scientists, their experience in Walkerton, and the closings of food establishments. The industry is well aware that standards need to be improved; however, sometimes the means to implement these standards are lacking. The tools and systems are available but the human and financial resources, in most cases, prevent businesses from implementing the programs. For instance, the implementation of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) and Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point Systems (HACCP) are programs that can virtually eliminate any health hazard in food processing. Yes, the implementation of such programs could have prevented the Walkerton tragedy.
The experience of Walkerton: Lack of know-how and lack of responsibility at all levels of government. Over a time period of more than 20 years, the Ontario government assured the public that ther water quality was fine, while in reality the water quality was unacceptable and a health hazard. As early as 1978, well tests revealed the presence of fecal coliform, bacteria from human or animal waste. What is even more disturbing is the fact that a ministry environmental officer noted that the water was safe if properly chlorinated. In 1983, a technician found that agricultural contaminants were flooding one of the wells and in 1987, the environment ministry approved a new well on land that was labelled as high risk for contamination. Irresponsible actions were not only taken in Walkerton but also in other municipal water treatment plants. Apparently, in 1992, an internal review indicated that out of 490 plants, 120 were not properly testing or keeping harmful bacteria from consumers. This ministry report was kept from the consumer. In the case of Walkerton, we could cite even more examples of incompetence and negligence. The bottom line is that, although various levels of government knew of the contaminated water problems, nobody cared about the safety of the public. Now, after the death of seven people and illness of 2,300 people from E. coli poisoning, nobody has the courage to take full responsibility for the tragedy. What makes the matter worse is that we may not have learned much from the Walkerton tragedy.
Food safety is not only restricted to contaminated water Food safety problems also exist in food processing plants, restaurants, bakeries, and other food operations. Every consumer would agree that food safety is a priority and that food safety standards need to be increased. The recent warnings (in a few cases closings) issued to restaurants and bakeries are a reminder that standards need to be improved and that "business as usual" is not acceptable. The crisis in Walkerton, is an example of what can happen when standards are lacking or are not fully implemented.
Solutions are offered but lack government commitment The government has had the bright idea to offer a solution by introducing programs that would help food processors to develop modern food safety standards, quality assurance training, and hire food safety experts. These are great ideas that would drastically increase the degree of food safety. In reality, government bureaucracy has become more important than food safety. Smaller businesses, the backbone of this economy, have been denied equal access to food safety programs. The actions of public officials tell us that they are a not totally committed to food safety and the well-being of the Canadian consumer. Their actions have eroded the trust of the consumer and eliminated their integrity.
Existing funding program could offer solutions In 1999, the government designed a program called Healthy Futures for Ontario Agriculture to promote safe water, safe food, and develop new markets. The existence of such a program clearly demonstrates that they are aware of the need for food safety programs. At first sight, the intent of the program appears to be good; but without government commitment the program is worthless. The $90-million program, (as per their own criteria) among other objectives, is to accomplish the following:
In the introduction, the guidelines state: "Ontario takes pride in the fact that it leads the country in producing safe, high quality agri-food products … Maintaining and building on this success means constantly improving products. … It means ensuring that our farms and processing plants produce food in a safe environmentally sustainable way." The launch of the $90-million Healthy Futures for Ontario Agriculture program by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs could have been the answer to the industry's need for human and financial resources. According to a December 16th, 1999 news release: "Healthy Futures demonstrates the Mike Harris government's commitment to ensuring that Ontario's dynamic agri-food industry will continue to generate jobs and economic growth, maintain the safety and quality of our food production system, and safeguard the environment on which it depends," Hardeman said. No doubt, the intent is good but can this program be accessed by businesses who actually need it? Further, the criteria specifically states that the program would "… provide funding and access to technical expertise to assist the agri-food sector in maintaining and expanding its capacity to meet domestic and export market demands with regard to food safety and quality." Recent events have shown that the government again lacks (as one may expect) the commitment to support businesses with the implementation of food safety programs.
Businesses are denied access to funding to improve food safety for Canadian consumers In the last year at least 15 companies, consisting of bakeries and food suppliers, intended to make their food processing and warehouses safer for the Canadian and export consumers. All businesses were supported and endorsed by the Baking Association of Canada (BAC). Two other projects received the endorsement and support from a farmers co-operative (with over 160 members), customers, and suppliers. In all cases the applications were carefully written. Government employees acted as consultants. All projects dealt with food safety and were clearly designed to make food safer for the Canadian consumer - yet all projects were rejected. Collectively, company staff and government employees must have spent thousands of hours preparing funding applications that, in the end, were simply rejected. In many cases, no reasons for the rejections are given. In a few cases, ministry staff explained that the benefits to the agricultural sector were not sufficiently large enough to warrant funding. Is it not logical to conclude that one human casualty prevented is worth the effort of a food safety program? Would it not have been worthwhile to save the seven lives in Walkerton? How many lives do we have to save before a project becomes beneficial to the agricultural sector and the Canadian consumer?
It is quite clear that the government process, consisting of red tape, lack of commitment, and complex funding applications have become more important than food safety. The initial goals have disappeared. This can clearly be seen in the case of Walkerton and recent rejection of food safety programs.
The $90-million program has become a job creation program for government employees The Healthy Futures for Ontario program has created jobs for government employees and has served as good publicity for the government. It gives the public the illusion that government is actually doing something about food safety. The funding criteria for this program is so vague, however, that not even the ministry's field staff, assisting in the application process, can predict if the applications will actually be accepted. If applications are rejected even under the guidance of field staff, then what are they getting paid for? Why do they even exist? In addition to the vague funding criteria, the government requests unnecessary detailed and complex funding applications. Often companies do not have the staff, the time, and the funds (unlike governments) to develop these applications - particularly if they find that, in the end, the application will be rejected anyway. A funding application consists of various plans that require human resources and time. The cost for small businesses to develop a marketing plan, a work plan, a human resources plan, and a financial plan are estimated at a minimum of $15,000 per project. Resources are not only wasted by businesses but also by the Ministry's staff. Ministry staff should be directed in which projects are acceptable and which projects do not qualify for funding. This direction must come from the Minister's office, not from senior bureaucrats. By establishing more specific guidelines and providing a more reliable input from field staff, resources could be used more productively.
If the government is truly sincere about food safety, public utilities and businesses should be fully supported in their efforts to improve food safety and food quality. We do not need the red tape, the lack of commitment, and complex funding applications. We surely all agree that we don't need another Walkerton.
If you have questions in regard to the content of this letter or need any further information regarding the subject of food safety, please contact 905-528-8371 or at info@caima.net
Date:
7/23/2001 Press Releases For Immediate Release May 16, 2001
Contact: Stacey Kollmeyer 209.343.3225 Almond Board of California Michael DeAngelis, MS, MPH, RD 202.973.5891 Porter Novelli
101 MILLION AMERICANS WAKE UP NEEDING TREATMENT FOR ELEVATED CHOLESTEROL LEVELS
MODESTO, Calif—The National Institutes of Health (NIH) just released new guidelines that redefine risk levels for cholesterol and reclassify nearly 101 million Americans with high cholesterol. Based on the dietary treatment guidelines, almonds can be a part of a diet that promotes a healthy cholesterol level.
Reduction in Saturated Fat Intake Heart disease is the No. 1 killer among all Americans, with more than 60 million affected by this disease. In order to prevent and effectively treat heart disease, the new NIH guidelines recommend that consumers reduce their intake of saturated fat and cholesterol, and keep their total fat intake in a range from 25 percent to 35 percent of calories.
Almonds have long been appreciated for their special package of nutrients. Almonds supply little saturated fat, have no cholesterol and are an excellent source of vitamin E. Research also shows that one ounce of almonds can be a part of a daily diet without weight gain. In the context of a healthy diet with regular physical activity, consumers can enjoy the versatility and healthfulness of almonds. Many studies published in the last 10 years point to the positive effect of almonds and other nuts on cholesterol levels.
“The new NIH cholesterol guidelines are consistent with epidemiological and clinical studies that show a decrease in cholesterol levels with regular consumption of almonds and other nuts,” said Joan Sabate, M.D., Ph.D., professor and chair, department of nutrition at Loma Linda University. “For example, studies show that people who ate at least one ounce of almonds a day reduced their cholesterol levels significantly.” Metabolic Syndrome and Unsaturated Fat Guidance The NIH recommendations also include specific guidance for a condition called “metabolic syndrome” in which a person has a combination of conditions such as abdominal obesity, high blood pressure, insulin resistance and a risk of forming blood clots. To treat metabolic syndrome the NIH guidelines state that “a higher intake of total fat, mostly in the form of unsaturated fat, can help reduce triglycerides and raise HDL cholesterol in persons with metabolic syndrome.” About 70 percent of the fat in almonds is monounsaturated fat
Focus on Fiber The guidelines include new approaches to dietary treatment of LDL, the “bad” cholesterol, by using plant sterols and by adding 10 to 25 grams of soluble fiber. Almonds supply a mix of soluble and insoluble fiber as well as phytosterols, which research shows may reduce cholesterol levels.
For more information about the new cholesterol guidelines, visit the NIH Web site at www.nhlbi.nih.gov.
The Almond Board of California administers a grower-enacted Federal Marketing Order under the supervision of the United States Department of Agriculture. Established in 1950, the Board’s charge is to promote the best quality almonds, California’s largest tree nut crop. ###
Date:
11/14/2000 News FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 14, 2000
Food Biotechnology: A New Brochure to Enhance Consumer Understanding (Washington, D.C. November 14, 2000) With all the buzz surrounding food biotechnology, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation today released a new consumer brochure titled, Food Biotechnology: Enhancing Our Food Supply.
Reviewed favorably by the American Academy of Family Physicians Foundation, the brochure contains information concerning the benefits, safety and future of biotechnology in our food supply. Several credible websites are also included for additional information.
Food biotechnology uses what is known about plant science and the tools of modern genetics to enhance beneficial traits of plants for food production. However, despite many benefits, some question the safety of food biotechnology. "This brochure introduces the consumer to the science surrounding biotechnology. It will serve as a valuable resource in helping consumers understand the facts concerning food biotechnology. . .not just the hype," reports Sylvia Rowe, IFIC Foundation President and CEO. "It is important that consumers fully understand the benefits and potential risks of foods enhanced through biotechnology and the processes by which they are tested and regulated."
The IFIC Foundation provides many food biotechnology resources, including the views of credible scientific, culinary and regulatory experts. In addition to the brochure being released today, many of these resources are available from the IFIC Foundation Web site, www.ific.org.
You can receive a free, single copy of this new brochure by sending a self-addressed, stamped envelope to Food Biotechnology, P.O. Box 65708, Washington, D.C. 20035; the contents of the brochure are also available online at www.ific.org. ###
Date: 8/31/00 NewsInternational pulse crop quality standards under development Winnipeg, August 25, 2000—Pulse crop quality researchers from four countries met in Winnipeg last week to begin to develop international standards for the identification and testing of such pulse crops as peas, beans, lentils and chickpeas. The four-day meeting of the International Pulse Quality Committee (IPQC), held at the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC), was the first of its kind in the world. It was chaired by James Daun, who heads the CGC's oilseeds and pulses research program, and attended by delegates from Pulse Australia, the United States Dry Pea and Lentil Council, Pulse Canada and the European Association for Grain Legume Research. These organizations represent the growers and marketers of the world's leading pulse exporting countries.
"Pulse exporting countries face two major problems worldwide," said Daun. "We lackagreement on nomenclature, or what to call various types and market classes of pulses; and we don’t have common approaches to measuring quality. Both of these create trade difficulties that I’m confident we will overcome, if the positive spirit evident at our meeting is anything to go by." The initiative to form the IPQC was taken in January, when Pulse Canada officials met with representatives of Pulse Australia and the U.S. Dry Pea and Lentil Council during Saskatchewan Pulse Growers’ annual Pulse Days Conference in Saskatoon. "The three organizations concluded that an international approach was in the interest of all," said Pulse Canada president, Les Rankin. "I’m encouraged that we were later joined by the pulse industry in the European Union. With this kind of momentum building, we are optimistic that we can find much common ground." Participants in the meeting were upbeat about prospects for the future, confident that the meeting was an important step in strengthening the pulse industry in all of their countries. "This process will benefit growers, marketers, producers and consumers because it will raise quality levels," said Lakshmi Iyer, representing Pulse Australia. Kevin McPhee, representing the U.S. Dry Pea and Lentil Council agreed, adding that "this international effort is a sign the industry is maturing." Frederick Muel of the European Association for Grain Legume Research was pleased with the cooperative approach taken by all participants, and quipped that "it should have been harder" to reach consensus on a range of quality issues. "This cooperative approach could be a model for other parts of the grain industry," said Bill Scowcroft, director of the CGC’s Grain Research Laboratory. Scowcroft added that "the CGC welcomes the opportunity to facilitate such initiatives."
By the end of the meeting, the participants had identified eighteen important quality parameters for pulses. As well, the committee identified 15 projects which would lead to better, internationally accepted methodologies for assessing such quality parameters as colour, size and shape, dehulling efficiency and cooking and canning quality. In addition, the committee initiated a project to develop a standardized market class nomenclature (or naming) system. The need for this project became evident when the committee looked at samples of pulses from the four participating areas and noted where various national nomenclature systems overlapped; for example green peas in Canada are referred to as blue peas in Britain. The participants resolved to work within standards writing organizations, including ISO and relevant professional associations to increase the profile of pulses and the development of pulse standards.
Les Rankin said the IPQC hopes to have draft standards ready for presentation to the International Pulse Trade Industry Confederation conference in Vancouver next June. Headquartered in Winnipeg, Pulse Canada represents provincial pulse grower groups from Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and the pulse trade from across Canada.
The Canadian Grain Commission is the federal agency responsible for establishing and maintaining Canada’s grain quality standards. Its programs result in shipments of grain that consistently meet contract specifications for quality, safety and quantity. The CGC regulates the grain industry to protect producers’ rights and ensure the integrity of grain transactions.
Date:
8/31/00 NewsNew Canadian Grain Commission policy for storage of grain on the ground WINNIPEG, Aug. 3, 2000—Primary elevator operators in western Canada will be permitted to store non Canadian Wheat Board grain on the ground provided they ask the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) for an exemption from the Canada Grain Regulations which stipulate that companies must store all grain in an elevator building. If primary elevator operators store grain on the ground without asking for an exemption, their licences will be suspended for up to five days.
The new policy is the result of consultation with 22 grain producer and industry organizations over the past two months. The review was prompted by a dramatic increase in the practice of storing grain on the ground at primary elevators last year. Traditionally, this form of storage has been prohibited or strictly regulated as a means of maintaining grain quality. However, for many stakeholders, the policy was not achieving its objective and therefore, the CGC conducted a review. "Based on this consultation, we devised a policy that gives primary elevator operators more flexibility in how they receive grain, specifies penalties for those who store grain on the ground without permission and provides the CGC with the information it needs to monitor shipments of ground stored grain," said CGC Chief Commissioner Barry Senft. "This policy benefits grain producers by increasing their delivery opportunities," Senft added. The CGC is the federal agency responsible for establishing and maintaining Canada’s grain quality standards. Its programs result in shipments of grain that consistently meet contract specifications for quality, safety and quantity. The CGC regulates the grain industry to protect producers’ rights and ensure the integrity of grain transactions.
For more information
Discussion paper. Grain on the ground, June 30, 2000. Memorandum No. 2000-05. Storage of Grain on the Ground. August 15, 2000 Contact: Paul Graham (204) 983-2749 pgraham@cgc.ca Catherine Jaworski (204) 984-7268 cjaworski@cgc.ca
Date:
4/12/2001 News
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Timothy Willard (202/637-8060) April 5, 2001
NFPA ANNOUNCES INDUSTRY “CODE OF PRACTICE” FOR MANAGING FOOD ALLERGENS
(Washington, D.C.) – The National Food Processors Association (NFPA) has released an industry “Code of Practice” for managing food allergens. The purpose of the Code is to delineate the general practices used by food companies that can ensure effective strategies for the management of food allergens.
“This Code is an important step forward by the food industry in addressing the issue of food allergens,” said Dr. Rhona Applebaum, NFPA’s Executive Vice President of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs. “The Code – which has taken more than a year to finalize – was developed with input not only from NFPA member companies but also from the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, the leading consumer group addressing this issue.”
Dr. Applebaum stated “Food processors must be diligent in informing consumers about the presence of allergens in their products. Appropriate measures also must be taken to minimize the risk to allergic consumers of coming in contact with food allergens that – despite the use of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) – are inadvertently present in a product and consequently not declared on the label.”
The Code states that NFPA members subscribe to the following practices: NFPA members label, in terms commonly understood by consumers, the major food allergens in their ingredient declarations, including those that are part of natural and artificial flavors, and other food components.
NFPA members use GMPs and other allergen control strategies to manage and minimize the potential cross contact of the major food allergens. These strategies include, but are not limited to, training, separation, sanitation and scheduling. In those instances where GMPs and other allergen control strategies are being followed but are not reliable in sufficiently minimizing the risk of allergen cross contact, then ingredient declarations or supplementary information, such as allergen labeling or inclusion of addition food allergen information, would be appropriate.
NFPA members will take an active role in education employees, business partners, ingredient suppliers, food service customers and consumers about food allergens.
NFPA and its members continue to develop processing, analytical and operational strategies to further reduce the risk to allergic consumers of ingesting food allergens.
Allergenic proteins in and derived from the following foods are the major food allergens in the United States: egg, fish, milk, peanuts, shellfish, including crustacea (e.g., crab, crawfish, lobster and shrimp) and mollusks (e.g., claims, mussels and oysters), soy, tree nuts (e.g., almonds, Brazil nuts, cashews, hazelnuts/filberts, macadamia nuts, pecans, pine nuts, pistachios and walnuts) and wheat. Ingredients made from these foods that do not contain protein are not allergenic.
“The food industry takes the issue of food allergens very seriously,” Dr. Applebaum noted. “This Code clearly demonstrates the commitment of NFPA members to ensure that all potential allergens are clearly labeled on food packages, and that no inadvertent allergens are contained in food products.” ### NFPA is the voice of the $460 billion food processing industry on scientific and public policy issues involving food safety, nutrition, technical and regulatory matters and consumer affairs. For more information on this issue, contact Timothy Willard, NFPA's Vice President of Communications, at (202) 637-8060, or visit NFPA's Website at www.nfpa-food.org .
Date:
5/16/2001 NewsFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Timothy Willard (202/637-8060) May 3, 2001
NFPA CALLS FOR SWIFTER IMPLEMENTATION OF FDA MODERNIZATION ACT REFORMS
(Washington, D.C.) – In testimony delivered at a hearing by Congress on the Food and Drug Modernization Act (FDAMA), a representative of the National Food Processors Association (NFPA) called for swifter implementation of reforms of the Agency’s health claims and irradiation labeling policies.
“FDA needs to move more swiftly to permit certain types of food labeling that would give consumers important health and safety-related information,” said Dr. Rhona Applebaum, NFPA’s Executive Vice President of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs.
NFPA, representing the food industry, testified on May 3 to the Health Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, at a hearing on “Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act.”
Dr. Applebaum noted “The food labeling provisions of FDAMA were a reaction to decades of overly restrictive policies that inhibited truthful and nonmisleading label statements. Unfortunately, FDA has taken great pains in its implementation of these provisions to exclude as many claims as possible. FDA turned down the first nine health claims submitted under new FDAMA provisions. Two FDAMA claims were authorized – for whole grain foods and heart disease and cancer, and for potassium and reduced risk of hypertension – but these small achievements are not adequate proof that FDA has abandoned its restrictive policies on health claims.”
“In the key case on health claims, Pearson v. Shalala, the Court held that FDA must consider whether appropriate disclosures could render a health claim on dietary supplements truthful and non-misleading, even if it was based on preliminary scientific findings,” Dr. Applebaum pointed out. “The Court also held that FDA’s failure to consider authorizing health claims accompanied by a disclaimer violated the First Amendment. On December 1, 1999, FDA announced its plan to implement the Pearson holding – referred to by the agency as the ‘Ten Year Plan’ because of its estimated decade-long timetable for implementation. With all due respect, NFPA maintains that it is unacceptable for conventional foods to wait until 2010 for relief from restrictive health claims policies.”
Dr. Applebaum stated, “FDA’s labeling policy also discourages important food safety technologies, such as irradiation, from coming to market. In report language accompanying FDAMA, Congress called for amendment of the existing irradiation disclosure regulation, and instructed FDA to explore alternative labeling for irradiated food, noting any required disclosure should not be perceived as a warning or give rise to inappropriate consumer anxiety. But despite this Congressional directive, FDA has been slow to act. NFPA is encouraged that FDA is now seeking to undertake consumer research on irradiation labeling, but we wonder why this important reform of food safety information is taking so long.”
In her remarks, Dr. Applebaum noted NFPA’s appreciation of the Committee’s work to address many of the problems in the foods area that food companies experienced prior to FDAMA, and cited the efforts of Congressmen Ed Towns of New York and Ed Whitfield of Kentucky, who authored the bulk of the FDAMA food provisions.
In the regulation of foods, FDAMA resulted in the approval of irradiation for use on red meats; a streamlined process for approving food contact substances, which are primarily used in food packaging; and a reduction in label clutter through the elimination of the requirement of a statement referring consumers to the nutrition label on food products. ### NFPA is the voice of the $460 billion food processing industry on scientific and public policy issues involving food safety, nutrition, technical and regulatory matters and consumer affairs. For more information on this issue, contact Timothy Willard, NFPA's Vice President of Communications, at (202) 637-8060, or visit NFPA's Website at www.nfpa-food.org.
Date:
5/16/2001 News
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 30, 2001 Contact: Timothy Willard (202/637-8060), or Libby Mikesell (202/639-5919)
NFPA STRESSES NEED FOR COOPERATIVE EFFORTS ON FOOD ALLERGEN LABELING, RATHER THAN NEW LEGISLATION
(Washington, D.C.) – In response to the announcement by Rep. Nita Lowey of New York that she will introduce legislation on the labeling of allergens in food products, Dr. Rhona Applebaum, Executive Vice President of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs for the National Food Processors Association (NFPA), made the following comments:
“The food industry takes the issue of food allergens very seriously. Food companies have taken the lead in developing manufacturing practices to help avoid the inclusion of any unlabeled allergens in food products, as well as in ensuring the accuracy of food labeling when it comes to the presence of allergens in food products.
“While Congressional interest in the important topics of food safety and food allergens is understandable, we believe that legislation is not necessary. Existing regulations clearly require that all ingredients be listed on food labels in order to protect consumers with food allergies, and FDA has ample authority to enforce those regulations. The food industry is now working with FDA and with consumer groups on new guidelines to ensure that industry practices are truly effective in providing accurate labeling for the presence of allergens in food.
“In April, NFPA released an industry ‘Code of Practice’ for managing food allergens, which specifically addresses allergen labeling. The Code was developed with input not only from NFPA’s member companies but also from the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, the leading consumer group addressing this issue. It is the food industry’s position that food processors must be diligent in informing consumers about the presence of allergens in products.
“Equally important, our industry continues to work with government and consumer groups on education efforts to provide consumers with the information they need on the important issue of food allergies. We believe that education is critical for consumers with food allergies to ensure that they know how to read food labels and get the information they need on these products.”
###
NFPA is the voice of the $460 billion food processing industry on scientific and public policy issues involving food safety, nutrition, technical and regulatory matters and consumer affairs. For more information on this issue, contact Timothy Willard, NFPA's Vice President of Communications, at (202) 637-8060; Libby Mikesell, Senior Director of Communications, at (202) 639-5919; or visit NFPA's Website at www.nfpa-food.org .
Date:
4/12/2001
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tim Willard (202/637-8060) Libby Mikesell (202/639-5919)
NFPA SUPPORTS VOLUNTARY BIOTECH LABELING GUIDANCE
(Washington, D.C.) - In comments submitted to the Food and Drug Administration, the National Food Processors Association has commended FDA for its draft guidance on voluntary labeling for foods that have or have not been derived through biotechnology.
"It is very important that FDA has affirmed its 1992 statement, reiterating there are limited circumstances in which labeling of changes introduced to biotechnology food products would be required, and explaining that process-based labeling is not required. Equally important, the agency has set forth guidance for companies that wish to offer consumers additional information through voluntary labeling," said Regina Hildwine, NFPA Senior Director of Food Labeling and Standards.
"Consumers will benefit only if voluntary biotechnology labeling conforms to standards assuring the information is truthful and not misleading. In this regard, the FDA has provided appropriate and much needed guidance to the food industry through its authority under the misbranding provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act," Hildwine said.
Among NFPA's specific comments: NFPA supports FDA's preference for the terms "biotechnology" and "genetically engineered" to describe plants derived through recombinant DNA technology. NFPA recommends they be used consistently in label claims to clarify that it is the plant sources of foods and food ingredients that are developed through biotechnology and not the ingredients themselves.
For example, FDA cites a sample biotechnology presence claim, "This product contains cornmeal that was produced using biotechnology." NFPA believes this example should be worded, "This product contains cornmeal from corn that was produced using biotechnology." NFPA agrees with FDA that claims such as "GMO free" may be inaccurate, misleading and not well understood by consumers. NFPA supports FDA's conclusion that terms such as "GMO free," "not genetically modified" and "free of genetically modified organisms," which include the word modified, are not technically accurate since traditional techniques of plant development also result in products that are "genetically modified."
Further, NFPA agrees that use of the term "free" of bioengineered materials may be potentially misleading because consumers will assume the food contains zero adventitious bioengineered material. NFPA agrees with FDA that currently there is insufficient scientific information to establish a threshold for use of the term "free." NFPA supports FDA's advice that a statement that a food was not bioengineered, or does not contain bioengineered ingredients, may be misleading if it implies that the labeled food is superior to foods that are not so labeled. Likewise, NFPA believes that such statements would be misleading if they state or imply any type of warning regarding foods developed through biotechnology. NFPA agrees with FDA's advice that a "certified organic" statement in compliance with the recently promulgated National Organic Program standard likely would be sufficient to substantiate a claim that a food was not produced through biotechnology, since biotechnology is a method excluded from "organic" production and handling. NFPA also urged FDA to be vigilant that "organic" foods comply with the guidance on food biotechnology claims.
NFPA's comments are in reference to Docket No. 00D-1598, Draft Guidance for Industry: Voluntary Labeling Indicating Whether Foods Have or Have Not Been Developed Using Bioengineering; Availability, 66 Federal Register 4839, January 18, 2001. A complete copy of NFPA's comments.
###
NFPA is the voice of the $460 billion food processing industry on scientific and public policy issues involving food safety, nutrition, technical and regulatory matters and consumer affairs. For more information on this issue, contact Tim Willard, NFPA's Vice President for Communications, at (202) 637-8060, or visit NFPA's Website at www.nfpa-food.org.
Date:
6/11/00 NewsPrairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration Fact sheet
What is E. coli and where does it come from?
Prepared by the Lethbridge District Office
E. coli is a type of bacteria commonly found in the intestines of animals and humans. E. coli is short for Escherichia coli. According to the Health Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the presence of E. coli in water is a strong indication of recent sewage or animal waste contamination. There are different kinds of E. coli, some harmful to humans and some not harmful. How does E. coli get in the water?
E. coli comes from human and animal wastes. During precipitation, E. coli may be washed into creeks, rivers, streams, lakes, or groundwater. When these are used as sources of drinking water and the water is not treated or inadequately treated, E. coli may end up in drinking water.
What are the health effects of E. coli O157:H7? E. coli O157:H7 is one of hundreds of strains of the bacterium E. coli. Although most strains are harmless and live in the intestines of healthy humans and animals, this strain produces a powerful toxin and can cause severe illness. Infection often causes severe bloody diarrhea and abdominal cramps; sometimes the infection causes non-bloody diarrhea. Frequently, no fever is present. How does it spread?
Infections spread by many food sources such as undercooked ground beef, unpasteurized milk and apple cider, ham, turkey, roast beef, sandwich meats, raw vegetables, cheese and contaminated water. Once someone has eaten contaminated food, the infection can be passed person-to-person, by hand-to-mouth contact.
Stopping the Spread There are several simple ways to stop the spread of E. coli bacteria: Wash your hands well with soap and a nail brush before preparing foods and after handling raw meat, working with cattle, tending an infected person and using the toilet. Drink only pasteurized milk. Never let children sample raw milk from an animal. Drink water from a supply known to be safe. If you have a private water supply (well) it should be tested several times a year. Never drink water from a lake, river or open spring unless you know it is safe. Refrigerate or freeze meat as soon as possible after buying it and then thaw frozen meat in the refrigerator, not on the counter. Prepare raw hamburger patties or other meat quickly, then cook them right away, or put them in the refrigerator.
Don't let raw meat sit out. Wash and sanitize counter tops, cutting boards and utensils after contact with raw meats and poultry, especially before using these areas for preparation of ready-to-eat foods. Use hot soapy water to wash, rinse with water, and then sanitize with household bleach. When barbecuing or cooking meat such as hamburger, pork or chicken, the meat should be thoroughly cooked at the centre. Meat and juices should be brown, not pink or red -- check to make sure.
Place cooked meat on clean plates. Don't re-use dishes that have been in contact with raw meat. Serve cooked meat immediately or keep it hot (60 C or 140 F). Don't let cooked meat sit out. Refrigerate leftover meat as soon as possible after the meal. Anyone known to be infected with E. coli -- suffering from "hamburger disease" -- should not share dishes, cutlery or glasses with anyone else. Their towels, face cloths and bedding should be washed separately in hot water and bleach. Sources: Health Canada & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Date:
4/28/00 News Release
More choices coming for processors of Eastern Canadian wheat WINNIPEG -- The Eastern Standards Committee (ESC) has supported a Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) proposal that would give processors using Eastern red wheat more precise information on the end-use characteristics of wheat classes used in their operations.
On April 13, the ESC voted in favor of a move to reinstate grading Eastern red wheat according to three classes: Canada Eastern Hard Red Spring, Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter, and Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter. Because each of these classes of wheat has different end-use and processing qualities, identifying them in this way will give processors more precision and flexibility. The CGC will grade samples by class, provided that documentation indicating the class accompanies each sample. Samples without signed documents to identify the class or samples containing several classes will be graded Canada Eastern Red wheat.
"If approved by the regulatory process, this proposal will contribute to the marketability of red wheat grown in Eastern Canada," said Douglas Stow, CGC assistant chief commissioner and ESC chairperson.
Grade specifications for Canada Eastern Hard Red Spring wheat would be the same as those for Canada Eastern Red wheat. All factors for Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter and Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter would be the same except for the following increases in test weight in grade Nos. 1 and 2. These increases will bring the two classes of red winter wheat in line with both western hard red winter wheat and eastern soft white winter wheat.
• In No. 1 grades of Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter and Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter, test weight would increase from 75 kg/hl to 76 kg/hl. • In No. 2 grades of Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter and Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter, test weight would increase from 72 kg/hl to 74kg/hl.
In the 1980s, kernel visual distinguishability was dropped from quality criteria for Eastern red wheat. Because new red wheat varieties could not be positively identified by class, the CGC began grading them as Canada Eastern Red wheat. The three classes are expected to come into effect July 1, 2000.
NEW MILDEW GUIDE SAMPLE FOR NO. 1 CANADA EASTERN RED WHEAT The CGC will distribute a new mildew guide sample for No. 1 Canada Eastern Red wheat for use by the CGC and the industry. The sample will come into effect July 1, 2000 and will be used until the ESC deems it non-representative.
The change means that mildew guide samples will be available at the beginning of each harvest. In response to requests from the industry, the CGC prepared the new sample to replace samples developed annually for that grade. The CGC prepares standard or guide samples each crop year to show the main grading characteristics of the crop. Mildew is one of the main visual degrading factors in red wheat in Eastern Canada.
TIGHTENING ERGOT TOLERANCE LEVELS IN FEED WHEAT The ESC supported a lower tolerance for ergot in Canada Eastern Feed wheat. Pending the regulatory approval process, the tolerance level will be tightened from 0.25 to 0.1 per cent per 500-gram sample. Research by the CGC’s Grain Research Laboratory (GRL) shows that feeding and health problems could develop in animals fed wheat containing ergot at the current level. Producer, grain dealer and marketing associations in Ontario, Quebec, and the Maritimes were consulted on the proposal and supported it.
NEW MOISTURE TABLES FOR THREE WHEAT CLASSES In response to red wheat growers, processors and marketers, the CGC will provide moisture tables for Canada Eastern Hard Red Spring, Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter, and Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter wheat. The new tables will be used when there is documentation identifying the wheat class. If there is no documentation identifying the class, Table 1, Eastern Red Wheat, will be used. Research by the GRL shows that Table 1 underestimates moisture content in Canada Eastern Red Spring wheat and overestimates it in both hard and soft classes of red winter wheat. The CGC and the red wheat industry currently use correction factors for each wheat class. The three new tables will come into effect July 1, 2000.
THREE NEW CORN MOISTURE TABLES New corn moisture tables will replace Nos. 5, 10a and 10b on July 1, 2000. The tables will result in more accurate readings. Corn grower and marketing organizations in Eastern Canada support the change.
The ESC consists of four grain producers; a CGC commissioner, a grain inspector and scientist; one member nominated by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; four processors and exporters; and not more than three others appointed by the CGC. The committee recommends specifications for grades of grain, selects and recommends standard samples to the CGC.
The CCG is the federal agency responsible for establishing and maintaining Canada’s grain quality standards. Its programs result in shipments of grain that consistently meet contract specifications for quality, safety and quantity. The CGC regulates the grain industry to protect producers’ rights and ensure the integrity of grain transactions.
Date:
4/13/00 HACCP: Space Technology Applied to Food Safety Space-age technology, developed 30 years ago for astronauts designed to keep food safe in outer space, is gradually becoming a standard for the food industry.
The Food and Drug Administration intends to eventually use it for much of the U.S. food supply. The program for the astronauts focuses on preventing hazards that could cause food-borne illnesses by applying science-based controls, from raw material to finished products. FDA's new system will do the same.
Traditionally, industry and regulators have depended on spot-checks of manufacturing conditions and random sampling of final products to ensure safe food. This approach, however, tends to be reactive, rather than preventive, and is less efficient than the new system.
The new system is known as Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) - pronounced hassip. Many of its principles already are in place in the FDA-regulated low-acid canned food industry. Moreover, in a 1995 final rule that took effect in December 1997, FDA established HACCP for the seafood industry. Also, FDA has incorporated HACCP into its Food Code, a document that gives guidance to and serves as model legislation for state and territorial agencies that license and inspect food service establishments, retail food stores, and food vending operations in the United States.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has established HACCP for meat and poultry processing plants, as well. Most of these establishments were required to start using HACCP by January 1999. Very small plants have until Jan. 25, 2000. (USDA regulates meat and poultry; FDA all other foods.)
In April 1998, FDA proposed requiring HACCP controls for fruit and vegetable juices. FDA now is considering developing regulations that would establish HACCP as the food safety standard throughout other areas of the food industry, including both domestic and imported food products.
To help determine the degree to which such regulations would be feasible, the agency is conducting pilot HACCP programs with volunteer food companies. The programs have involved cheese, frozen dough, breakfast cereals, salad dressing, fresh and pasteurised juices, bread, flour and other products.
HACCP has been endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences, the Codex Alimentarius Commission (an international food standard-setting organisation), and the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods.
A number of U.S. food companies already use the system in their manufacturing processes and it is in use in other countries, including Canada.
What is HACCP?
HACCP involves seven principles:
1. Analyse hazards: Potential hazards associated with a food and measures to control those hazards are identified. The hazard could be biological, such as a microbe; chemical, such as a toxin; or physical, such as ground glass or metal fragments.
2. Identify critical control points: These are points in a food's production - from its raw state through processing and shipping to consumption by the consumer - at which the potential hazard can be controlled or eliminated. Examples are cooking, cooling, packaging, and metal detection.
3. Establish preventive measures with critical limits for each control point: For a cooked food, for example, this might include setting the minimum cooking temperature and time required to ensure the elimination of any harmful microbes.
4. Establish procedures to monitor the critical control points: Such procedures might include determining how and by whom cooking time and temperature should be monitored.
5. Establish corrective actions: Actions to be taken when monitoring shows that a critical limit has not been me - for example, reprocessing or disposing of food if the minimum cooking temperature is not met.
6. Establish procedures to verify that the system is working properly: For example, testing time and temperature recording devices to verify that a cooking unit is working properly.
7. Establish effective record keeping documenting the HACCP system: This would include records of hazards and their control methods, the monitoring of safety requirements and action taken to correct potential problems. Each of these principles must be backed by sound scientific knowledge: for example, published microbiological studies on time and temperature factors for controlling food borne pathogens.
Need for HACCP
New challenges to the U.S. food supply have prompted FDA to consider adopting a HACCP-based food safety system on a wider basis. One of the most important challenges is the increasing number of new food pathogens. For example, between 1973 and 1988, bacteria not previously recognised as important causes of food-borne illness - such as Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis - became more widespread. There also is increasing public health concern about chemical contamination of food: for example, the effects of lead in food on the nervous system. Another important factor is that the size of the food industry and the diversity of products and processes have grown tremendously--in the amount of domestic food manufactured and the number and kinds of foods imported. At the same time, FDA, state, and local agencies have the same limited level of resources to ensure food safety. The need for HACCP in the United States, particularly in the seafood industry, is further fuelled by the growing trend in international trade for world-wide equivalence of food products and the Codex Alimentarious Commission's adoption of HACCP as the international standard for food safety.
Advantages
HACCP offers a number of advantages over the current system. Most importantly, HACCP: focuses on identifying and preventing hazards from contaminating food is based on sound science permits more efficient and effective government oversight, primarily because the record keeping allows investigators to see how well a firm is complying with food safety laws over a period rather than how well it is doing on any given day places responsibility for ensuring food safety appropriately on the food manufacturer or distributor helps food companies compete more effectively in the world market reduces barriers to international trade.
Date:
3/16/00 NewsThere's a New Reason for Eatin 'Raisins Each year, nearly 100,000 new cases of colon cancer are likely to be diagnosed. A healthy diet is important in the colon cancer battle, and California Raisins may be an important weapon. New research sponsored by the California Raisin Marketing Board (CRMB) shows that California Raisins are a good source of inulin, a naturally occurring fiber-like carbohydrate that helps keep the colon healthy.
"When inulin from raisins ferments in the colon, beneficial bacteria grow, and harmful bacterial growth is limited," explains Julie Jones, Ph.D., licensed nutritionist and college professor of nutrition. "Thus, inulin fermentation creates conditions that promote healthy colon cell growth and that help prevent growth of abnormal cells that may lead to disease."
According to recent independent laboratory analysis sponsored by the CRMB, a standard ¼-cup serving of California Raisins contains 1.5 grams of inulin. Recommended daily intake levels of inulin have yet to be established. The amount of inulin in a serving of California Raisins is about 58 percent of what USDA surveys show the average American eats daily. Only a few other commonly eaten foods, such as onions, garlic and wheat, are known to be good sources of inulin.
Inulin and other substances, including some fibers, are part of a class of compounds called prebiotics. Prebiotics favor growth of beneficial bacteria, such as lactobacilli and bifidobacteria found in some yogurts. This can be helpful after taking antibiotics when both beneficial and harmful bacteria may be killed. Prebiotics also slow growth of harmful bacteria.
Multiple research studies published in the July 1999 supplement to the Journal of Nutrition describe how inulin and other prebiotics affect colon health. A study by D.J. Jenkins and colleagues showed that inulin fermentation increased the amount of beneficial bacteria in the colon. These bacteria inhibit the growth of organisms that cause food-borne disease, such as E. coli. Another study by H.S. Taper and M. Roberfroid, conducted on animals, showed that short chain fatty acids were produced when inulin ferments. These acids favor the growth of healthy colon cells and inhibit the growth of tumors.
"Acids resulting from inulin fermentation also reduce high colonic pH produced by high-meat diets," explains Jones, consultant to the CRMB. "High colonic pH is a risk factor for colon cancer."
Many nutrition experts believe adults should be eating 8 to 10 servings of fruits and vegetables each day, and various national surveys report that most Americans consume about half of the recommended 25 grams of fiber daily. Adding California Raisins - with naturally-occurring inulin - to the diet can be an easy way to protect the colon while helping to meet daily fruit and dietary fiber goals. -30-
Contacts: Kathy Moulthorp Carlifornia Raisin Marketing Board 559-248-0287 or Beth Witherspoon, M.P.H., R.D. Morgan & Myers, Inc. 612-825-0050
Date:
1/7/00
WASHINGTON, November 22, 1999 -- According to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service (ERS), the more a mother knows about health and nutrition, the better the diet quality is for her preschool children, but not necessarily for her school-age children. Maternal Nutrition Knowledge and Children's Diet Quality and Nutrient Intakes analyzed data from two national surveys, one that studied the diets of households and another that studied diet and health knowledge of the same households' meal planners.
"Understanding the relationship between a mother's nutrition knowledge and her children's diets is essential to effectively target health and nutrition information to groups most in need," says ERS Administrator Susan Offutt.
Among the report's key findings are:
maternal knowledge of health and nutrition influence children's nutrient and food component intakes and that such influence decreases as children grow older; the health habits of individual family members can strongly affect the entire family's diet; targeting non-White and Hispanic mothers for nutrition education is likely to increase diet quality of preschoolers; preschool children of mothers who smoke have significantly lower diet quality, although the mothers are as informed about nutrition and diet-health links as nonsmoking mothers; and, having a member in the household who is on a vegetarian diet appears to significantly improve preschoolers' diet quality.
"Our results suggest that if we want long term diet improvements in the U.S., nutrition education programs would do well to address the nutrition knowledge and lifestyle choices of our mothers," adds Betsey Kuhn, Director of ERS's Food and Rural Economics Division.
USDA encourages consumers to make healthful food choices through a variety of its programs. USDA has three research facilities dedicated to the study of children's nutritional health. New studies and findings will help parents, teachers, and child care providers supply children with foods to stimulate learning minds and growing bodies. USDA links the scientific research to consumer education to improve the nutritional status of Americans through training and education programs and tools like the Food Guide Pyramid for young children. USDA's Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program helps people acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and changed behavior necessary for nutritionally sound diets, and improvement of the total family diet and nutritional well being.
Media Contact: John Snyder, 202-694-5138, jsnyder@econ.ag.gov Public Contact: James R. Blaylock, 202-694-5402, jblayloc@econ.ag.gov
Date:
1/7/00 NewsHigh-efficient dough cooling system during mixing
Common techniques in controlling the dough-temperature are mostly not succesful in every case and in addition not specific enough. For this underlying reason we developed a new, process-controlled modul for direct production of CO2-snow, which is used to cool the dough directly during the mixing operation. At the same time the CO2-gas will be separated and removed from the mixing vessel. The communication of this CO2-injector with a temperature - sensor, like an infrared-sensor, enables the bakers to reach the wanted dough-temperature exactly.
It has been shown that there are a lot of advantages: -exact dough-cooling system which is independent from recipe and the mixing- process -optimization of dough development with all related connections like the quality of baked goods -optmization of process-hygiene -cost-saving and easy handling -others Contact: loesche@ttz-bremerhaven.de
Date:
12/13/99 News
Consumer website survey: Should nutrition labeling be mandatory?
Health Canada has undertaken a major review of nutrition labeling policy. The goals of the review are to improve the usefulness of nutrition labeling, increase its availability and broaden public education on its use. The views and perspectives of consumers is a key step in the policy review process.
Respondents were overwhelmingly in favor of mandatory nutrition labeling and voiced their frustration with the current lack of or partial nutrient information available on food. A number also claimed to not buy products without labels. Many respondents commented that, "Consumers have a right to know what is in the food they are eating and the nutritional value of that food."
"If it is mandatory to indicate the composition of the clothes we put on our skin, it's even more essential to know the composition of what enters our body." Mandatory labeling was also seen as a way of facilitating: comparison shopping - recognizing that "products without nutrition labeling are often automatically assumed to be poor choices." Typically, respondents said, "I feel that it is important that the labeling be mandatory to permit comparison shopping. I think manufacturers would put it on some products to have a competitive edge, but would not put it on products where the information might discourage consumption (because the product is so unhealthy)."
Date:
3/13/00 News
Why is hand washing important?
Remember Ignaz Semmelweis? Of course you don't. But you're in his debt nonetheless, because it was Dr. Semmelweis who first demonstrated over a hundred years ago that routine hand washing can prevent the spread of disease.
"Dr. Semmelweis worked in a hospital in Vienna whose maternity patients were dying at such an alarming rate that they begged to be sent home," said Julie Gerberding, M.D., director of CDC's Hospital Infections Program. "Most of those dying had been treated by student physicians who worked on cadavers during an anatomy class before beginning their rounds in the maternity ward." Because the students didn't wash their hands between touching the dead and the living--hand washing was an unrecognized hygienic practice at the time--pathogenic bacteria from the cadavers regularly were transmitted to the mothers via the students' hands.
"The result was a death rate five times higher for mothers who delivered in the hospital than for mothers who delivered at home" said Dr. Gerberding.
In an experiment considered quaint at best by his colleagues, Dr. Semmelweis insisted that his students wash their hands before treating the mothers--and deaths on the maternity ward fell fivefold. "This was the beginning of infection control," Dr. Gerberding said. "It was really a landmark achievement, not just in healthcare settings, but in public health in general because today the value of hand washing in preventing disease is recognized in the community, in schools, in child care settings, and in eating establishments."
Healthcare specialists generally cite hand washing as the single most effective way to prevent the transmission of disease. "This is one healthcare infection control measure that has successfully spread throughout the community," she said. "Good hygiene in general, and sterilization and disinfection in particular, are other standards that began largely in hospitals and have become widely used elsewhere. And we're always looking for others."
She cited the ongoing 4th Decennial International Conference on Nosocomial and Healthcare-associated Infections in Atlanta as an example of the concerted effort worldwide to prevent and control infections. Sponsored by CDC, the conference has brought together over 2,000 international experts in disease prevention to share information and develop strategies for infection control.
"It's an astonishing amount of knowledge and expertise gathered in a single building," she said. "But for all our expertise and the tremendous advances we've made in technology and new treatments, we constantly remind ourselves of the basic in infection control...wash your hands!"
In the healthcare setting, hand washing can prevent potentially fatal infections from spreading from patient to patient, and from patient to healthcare worker and vice-versa. In the home, it can prevent infectious diseases such as diarrhea and hepatitis A from spreading from family member to family member and, sometimes, throughout a community.
"The basic rule in the hospital is wash your hands between patients," said Dr. Gerberding. "In the home, it's wash them before preparing food, after changing diapers, and after using the bathroom." Unquestioned today as the most important tool in the healthcare worker's arsenal for preventing infection, hand washing was not readily accepted in Dr. Semmelweis's era. Indeed, his pleas to make hand washing a routine practice throughout the hospital were largely met with derision. Another 50 years would pass before the importance of hand washing as a preventive measure would be widely accepted by the medical profession.
"But it's the standard now," said Dr. Gerberding. "And we can't begin to count the thousands upon thousands of lives that have been saved because of Dr. Semmelweis's discovery." Unrecognized for the most part by the general public, Dr. Semmelweis is firmly entrenched in medical lore as a pioneer who made one of the greatest contributions in the history of public health. In hospitals and homes throughout the world, the simple and inexpensive measure of hand washing continues to serve as a bulwark against disease.
CDC Says "Prevent Contamination" by Hand CDC cites five common household scenarios in which disease-causing germs can be transmitted by contaminated hands.
Hands to food: germs are transmitted from unclean hands to food, usually by an infected food preparer who didn't hand wash after using the toilet. The germs are then passed to those who eat the food.
Infected infant to hands to other children: during diaper changing, germs are passed from an infant with diarrhea to the hands of a parent; if the parent doesn't immediately wash his or her hands before handling another child, the germs that cause diarrhea are passed to the second child.
Food to hands to food: germs are transmitted from r |