A new bill to be introduced in the Senate aims to impose federally mandated E. coli testing for all ground beef produced in the United States.  The bill, announced yesterday by its sponsor Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), addresses a long ignored aspect of ground beef-related illness, namely the use of so-called “trimmings” in beef production.

The proposed measure, the E. Coli Eradication Act of 2009, would require testing for E. coli at both slaughterhouses and grinding facilities.  This is an especially important development, as it closes a key gap in testing of beef.

The USDA has outlawed E. coli contamination in beef since 1994.  However, there is currently no law in place mandating testing of beef for the disease.  The agency has instead relied on producers to do voluntary testing, resulting in widely inconsistent standards.  The new measure would mandate that E. coli testing begin in the earliest stages of the beef production process.

Slaughterhouses have for years resisted testing on their products, and the trade group  the American Meat Institute was yesterday quoted in the New York Times in opposition to the E. Coli Eradication Act.  Many, however, recognize the importance of testing at slaughterhouses.

The key aspect of the legislation is the attention paid to trimmings, miscellaneous bits of meat sliced from various parts of the cow.  Sen. Gillibrand noted in her press release that the trimmings are, “especially vulnerable to E. coli because its source material is not from a single cut of meat, rather, it is a compilation of… many parts, including fat that lies near the surface of possibly contaminated hide.”  A cow’s hide can become contaminated during the slaughtering process from feces and other waste.

The legislation complements the recently introduced FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510), giving food safety advocates hope that the current Congress shares their interest in protecting consumers from tainted products.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has approved a bill similar to a measure passed in the House this summer that gives the Food and Drug Administration sweeping new powers to protect consumers from tainted foods.  The measure was unanimously approved by the 23-member committee, indicating strong bipartisan support.

Like the House bill, the Senate version of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act would give the FDA the power to issue a mandatory recall if there is evidence of food borne illness.  Currently, the FDA only has the authority to suggest voluntary recalls to food producers if it suspects a food product may be contaminated.

While the measure passed out of committee unanimously, there was some degree of controversy over its details.  Some Democrats expressed concerns that the bill could do more to protect consumers.  Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) criticized the bill for its failure to address the use of antibiotics in livestock, which he fears has the potential to produce antibiotic-resistant illnesses.

Perhaps the biggest point of contention was over how to pay for the new regulations.  The House bill called for a $500 fee levied on food producers to help fund the FDA’s new powers.  But both Committee Chairman Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IL) and ranking Republican Mike Enzi (R-WY) have stated that they are uncomfortable with forcing an industry to pay for its own regulation.  Harkin was quoted in the Los Angeles Times, saying, “If this is something for public protection, it’s something we all should pay for.”  Members of both parties anticipate revisions after the Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost of the bill.

Advocates for the supermarket industry praised the bill.  Grocery Manufacturers Association President Pam Bailey praised the measure, calling it, “sensible legislation that will strengthen the foundation of America’s food safety systems.”  Organic Farming groups, on the other hand, qualified their support for the bill with the caveat that it must do more to protect organic farmers in a way that reflects their differing methods of processing.

The bill, S. 510, will now face a vote in the full Senate, though Sen. Harkin cautions that it is unlikely to come up for a vote until early next year because of the Senate’s ongoing consideration of health care reform.

A New York State meat supplier has been linked to an outbreak of E. coli that has killed two and sickened dozens and prompted a wide-reaching recall. Fairbank Farms, an Asheville, NY meat processing firm announced a recall on October 31st of more than half a million pounds of ground beef.

The beef is suspected of being contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, a particularly deadly strain of E. coli bacteria commonly to blame for food-borne illnesses. According to the CDC, the bacterium can cause stomach cramps, bloody diarrhea, and vomiting. Symptoms usually last from five to seven days, and though symptoms are often mild, illness associated with E. coli can be life-threatening in certain cases.

Two individuals, one from Upstate New York and another from New Hampshire, are believed to have died as a result of the tainted beef processed at Fairbank Farms. So far, 28 others are known to have become ill after consuming beef from the same batch, though estimates have ranged as high as 500 illnesses.

The recall, which comes only days after an unrelated E. coli outbreak sickened 20 at a Rhode Island camp, has raised concerns about the practices of American beef suppliers. The New York Times reported yesterday that Fairbank Farms’ parent company, AFA Foods, drastically relaxed their testing procedures in recent years under pressure from slaughterhouses.

Slaughterhouses have pushed back against meat processing facilities’ efforts to test for E. coli because of the potential for widespread recalls. Much of their discomfort over testing during the processing phase is rooted in the fact that beef in a processing plant may come from numerous slaughterhouses, meaning that a recall could affect all of a processor’s suppliers, not just the source of contamination.

While many producers utilize some form of testing for E. coli 0157:H7, the U.S. Department of Agriculture does not require processors to test their beef, resulting in differing standards across the country. Food safety advocates have called for greater accountability in food production, and Congress has taken up the issue, with legislation passed this summer in the House of Representatives.
Fairbank Farms has announced that the beef in question was processed between September 14 and September 16 of this year. By now, Fairbank Farms says that the beef has passed its expiration date, meaning it is unlikely to be on supermarket shelves at this time. But the Department of Health and Human Services remains concerned that consumers still may have some of the product in their freezers.

The packaging for all of the contaminated beef is marked “EST 492,” a label stamp identifying Fairbank Farms as the processor. The tainted beef is known to have been shipped to Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Consumers should visit Fairbank Farms’ website for more details on the recall.

You may want to think twice before your next trip to the raw bar. The Food and Drug Administration announced last month that it plans to require producers of certain raw oysters to begin post-harvest processing of their catch to kill the deadly bacterium vibrio vulnificus. Infection by vibrio vulnificus can result in serious illness and even death in immunocompromised individuals. The government’s plan has pitted public health advocates against oyster producers and their allies in Washington.

The future regulations apply only to oysters harvested in the Gulf Coast region of the United States during the summer months, when warm waters create an ideal environment for vibrio vulnificus growth. According to the CDC, the bacterium can cause a wide range of symptoms. In healthy patients, symptoms may include vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. In patients with weakened immune systems, symptoms can be much more serious, and can include fever, skin lesions and septic shock. In cases where vibrio vulnificus infects the blood, the mortality rate is a staggering 50 percent.

The regulations will require oyster producers to process their catch to kill vibrio vulnificus in a process that has been compared to pasteurization. The FDA says that post-harvest processing can be achieved in one of four ways: quick freezing, mild heating, high hydrostatic pressurization, or low-dose gamma irradiation. The process is said to slightly alter the taste and texture of the oysters, but is extremely effective in killing vibrio vulnificus.

Food and Drug Administration officials see a clear solution to a critical public health issue. Michael Taylor, a top official at the FDA, pointed out concrete results after California instituted a similar ban in 2003. “Between 1991 and 2001,” he said “40 deaths had occurred in the state due to vibrio vulnificus. Once post-harvest processing was required, the number of deaths dropped to zero.”

But the Gulf Coast oyster industry, along with legislators from Gulf Coast states, are raising opposition to the plan. They claim the new regulations will triple their costs while ruining the taste of a local delicacy, and prompt job losses. Senator Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Representative Charlie Melancon (D-La.) have both introduced legislation in an attempt to block the new regulations. In a letter to the FDA, Rep. Melancon wrote, “fresh, live oysters are not only a Louisiana delicacy, they are part of our heritage and our way of life.”

But food safety advocates are undeterred in their support for the FDA regulations. David Plunkett, of the consumer advocacy group the Center for Science in the Public Interest says “Over 250 people have become ill and half of those have died since 2001, and if this industry-supported legislation passes, the toll of preventable death and disease caused by contaminated oysters will continue to rise.” The regulations are scheduled to take effect in 2011.