Health and Medical News and Resources

General interest items edited by Janice Flahiff

[Pew Report] Fixing the Oversight of Chemicals Added to Our Food

From the 7 November 2013 report summary

Overview

From 2010 to 2013, The Pew Charitable Trusts conducted a comprehensive assessment of the federal food additives regulatory program. Relying on a transparent process that engaged stakeholders, Pew examined food additive issues in partnership with the food industry, the public interest community, and the federal government, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. We held five expert workshops and published six reports in peer-reviewed journals. This report summarizes our findings and provides recommendations to address the problems that we identified.

With more than 10,000 additives allowed in food, Pew’s research found that the FDA regulatory system is plagued with systemic problems, which prevent the agency from ensuring that their use is safe. The cause of this breakdown in our food safety regulatory process is an outdated law with two significant problems:

First, the law contains an exemption intended for common food ingredients; manufacturers have used this exception to go to market without agency review on the grounds that the additive used is “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS, in regulatory parlance. FDA has interpreted the law as imposing no obligation on firms to tell the agency of any GRAS decisions. As a result, companies have determined that an estimated 1,000 chemicals are generally recognized as safe and have used them without notifying the agency. The firms usually use their own employees, consultants, or experts whom they select and pay to make the safety decision with no disclosure or apparent efforts to minimize the inherent conflicts of interest.

Second, the law does not give FDA the authority it needs to efficiently obtain the information necessary to identify chemicals of concern that are already on the market; set priorities to reassess these chemicals; and then complete a review of their safety. Moreover, the agency has not been given the resources it needs to effectively implement the original 1958 law. As a result, FDA has not reevaluated the safety of many chemicals originally approved decades ago, generally rechecking safety only when requested by a company to do so, or when presented with allegations of serious adverse health effects.


What FDA says today about the safety of additives

“It’s perhaps a time to look at what the legal framework looks like and what opportunities there are now to ask and answer questions in new ways because of advances in science and technology.”

— FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, (Reuters, May 2013)

“We’re not driven by a sense that there is a pressing public health emergency. But there are decisions being made based on data that we don’t have access to, and that creates a question about the basis on which those decisions are made.”

— FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor, (Associated Press, March 2013)

“FDA plans to issue guidance to industry on meeting the GRAS criteria established under the Act.”

— FDA spokeswoman Theresa Eisenman, (USA Today, August 2013)


To remedy these problems, Pew’s report recommends that Congress update the Food Additives Amendment of 1958 to ensure that FDA:

  • Approves the first use of all new chemicals added to food.
  • Reviews new uses or changes to existing uses of previously approved additives.
  • Streamlines its decision-making process so it is timely and efficient.
  • Upgrades its science to determine safety.
  • Uses the scientific tools and data it needs to set priorities to reassess the safety of chemicals already allowed in food and to take action where necessary.

– See more at: http://www.pewhealth.org/reports-analysis/reports/fixing-the-oversight-of-chemicals-added-to-our-food-85899518122#sthash.cQHyqL0p.dpuf

 

December 4, 2013 Posted by | Consumer Health | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

[Repost] Small Changes in Agricultural Practices Could Reduce Produce-Borne Illness

English: Stages in the intracellular life-cycl...

English: Stages in the intracellular life-cycle of Listeria monocytogenes. (Center) Cartoon depicting entry, escape from a vacuole, actin nucleation, actin-based motility, and cell-to-cell spread. (Outside) Representative electron micrographs from which the cartoon was derived. LLO, PLCs, and ActA are all described in the text. The cartoon and micrographs were adapted from Tilney and Portnoy (1989). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

From the 21 October 2013 ScienceDaily report

 

Researchers from Cornell University have identified some agricultural management practices in the field that can either boost or reduce the risk of contamination in produce from two major foodborne pathogens: salmonella, the biggest single killer among the foodborne microbes, and Listeria monocytogenes. Their findings are published ahead of print in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

“This is going to help make produce safer,” says Laura Strawn, a researcher on the study. “We could significantly reduce risk of contamination through changes that occur a few days before the harvest.”

Many of the risk factors were influenced by when they were applied to fields which suggests that adjustments to current practices may reduce the potential for contamination with minimal cost to growers, says Strawn.

Foodborne illness sickens an estimated 9.4 million, and kills around 1,300 annually in the US, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Produce accounts for nearly half the illnesses, and 23 percent of the deaths.

“The research is the first to use field collected data to show the association between certain management practices and an increased or decreased likelihood of salmonella and L. monocytogenes,” says Strawn.

For salmonella, manure application within the year prior to the researchers’ sampling boosted the odds of a contaminated field, while the presence of a buffer zone between the fields and potential pathogen reservoirs such as livestock operations or waterways was protective.

Irrigation within three days before sample collection raised the risk of listeria contamination six-fold. Soil cultivation within the week before sampling also increased the chances of contamination.

“These findings will assist growers in evaluating their current on-farm food safety plans (e.g. “Good Agricultural Practices”), implementing preventive controls that reduce the risk of pre-harvest contamination, and making more informed decisions related to field practices prior to harvest,” says Strawn. “Small changes in how produce is grown and managed could result in a large reduction of food safety risks.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 22, 2013 Posted by | Consumer Health | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Food Allergics Beware: Herbal Products May Contain Surprise Ingredients Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2013/10/12/food-allergics-beware-herbal-products-may-contain-surprise-ingredients/#ixzz2hge0IfdB

From the 12 October 2013 article at Time- Health and Family

New research for the University of Guelph shows that the majority of herbal products on the market contain ingredients that are not listed on their labels.

The study, published in the journal BMC Medicine, used DNA barcoding technology to assess the components of 44 herbal products from 12 companies. They found that 60% of the products contained plant species that were not listed on the label, and 20% used fillers like rice, soybeans, and wheat which were also not divulged on the bottles.

For instance, products sold as St. John’s wort supplement, which is sometimes used to treat depression, contained Senna alexandrina, which is a plant that spurs laxative symptoms. Other products contained Parthenium hysterophorus (feverfew), which is known to cause swelling and mouth numbness. One ginkgo product contained Juglans nigra (black walnut), which should not be consumed by people with nut allergies — but this warning was not noted on the label.

“It’s common practice in natural products to use fillers such as these, which are mixed with active ingredients. But a consumer has a right to see all of the plant species used in producing a natural product on the list of ingredients,” lead author Steven Newmaster, an integrative biology professor at the Guelph-based Biodiversity Institute of Ontario said in a statement.

Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2013/10/12/food-allergics-beware-herbal-products-may-contain-surprise-ingredients/#ixzz2hgeN2Srs

 

 

October 14, 2013 Posted by | Consumer Health, Consumer Safety | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Future of Food?

FOOD, FACTS and FADS

 “What we eat has changed more in the past forty years than in previous forty thousand”.  Eric Schosser, Fast Food Nation

In the beginning of the 19th century, the vast majority of Americans were farmers.  In the beginning of the 20th century, most worked in factories. In the beginning of the 21st century, the fastest growing segment of the economy was service jobs, especially in the food service industry. About fifty cents of every dollar Americans spent on food was spent in a restaurant, predominantly fast food.  Food preparation changed dramatically from home cooking to processed food, in other words, we relied on others more and more to cook our food for us.

 We evolved our sense of taste to help us survive – edible plants generally taste sweet – deadly ones bitter.  With the rise of processed and fast food, a new industry was born, the…

View original post 560 more words

July 14, 2013 Posted by | Nutrition | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Environmental health news from the CDC – Food and water safety

 

 

Public Health--Research & Library News

EHS-Net Restaurant Food Safety Studies: What Have We Learned? – Laura Green Brown discusses the latest Environmental Health Specialists Network findings in restaurant food safety. This article is published in the March 2013 issue of the Journal of Environmental Health.

Restaurant Food Cooling Practices – EHS-Net article includes quantitative data on restaurants’ food cooling processes and practices such as whether cooling processes are tested and proven to be safe; temperature monitoring practices; refrigeration cooling practices, and cooling food temperatures.

EHS-Net Water Safety Projects – EHS-Net water safety projects include developing multisite projects with our funded partners. EHS-Net’s current multisite project looks at the seasonality of noncommunity water systems to understand how they provide safe drinking water and about vulnerabilities of those systems. Learn about EHS-Net partners’ individual projects to improve the practice of environmental health.

Read more about the Environmental Health Specialists Network in EHS-Net: Improving Restaurant Food Safety…

View original post 6 more words

March 22, 2013 Posted by | environmental health, Uncategorized | , , , | Leave a comment

Got Food Allergies? You Can Now Test Your Meal On the Spot Using a Cell Phone

Looking for a good place that reviews medical apps? Try iMedicalApps. The reviews are largely for health care professionals, but patient centered apps are also included.  The forums section includes a section for medical librarians (which often includes discussions on apps for all of us).

 

From the 12 December 2012 article at Science News Daily

Left: The iTube platform, which utilizes colorimetric assays and a smart phone-based digital reader. Right: A screen capture of the iTube App. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of California – Los Angeles)

Are you allergic to peanuts and worried there might be some in that cookie? Now you can find out using a rather unlikely source: your cell phone.

A team of researchers from the UCLA Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science has developed a lightweight device called the iTube, which attaches to a common cell phone to detect allergens in food samples. The iTube attachment uses the cell phone’s built-in camera, along with an accompanying smart-phone application that runs a test with the same high level of sensitivity a laboratory would….

To test for allergens, food samples are initially ground up and mixed in a test tube with hot water and an extraction solvent; this mixture is allowed to set for several minutes. Then, following a step-by-step procedure, the prepared sample is mixed with a series of other reactive testing liquids. The entire preparation takes roughly 20 minutes. When the sample is ready, it is measured optically for allergen concentration through the iTube platform, using the cell phone’s camera and a smart application running on the phone.

The kit digitally converts raw images from the cell-phone camera into concentration measurements detected in the food samples. And beyond just a “yes” or “no” answer as to whether allergens are present, the test can also quantify how much of an allergen is in a sample, in parts per million.

The iTube platform can test for a variety of allergens, including peanuts, almonds, eggs, gluten and hazelnuts, Ozcan said.

The UCLA team successfully tested the iTube using commercially available cookies, analyzing the samples to determine if they had any harmful amount of peanuts, a potential allergen. Their research was recently published online in the peer-reviewed journal Lab on a Chip and will be featured in a forthcoming print issue of the journal….

 

 

December 15, 2012 Posted by | Consumer Safety | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Move for Food Freedom!

One Mover's Blog

“Food Safety Now!”

Who wouldn’t rally behind such a cause?

This has been the battle cry of those in the uppermost echelons of our food regulatory bodies and public health departments for years now. With each widely-publicized food-borne disease outbreak comes more proposed controls on who, where, when, why and how we can put food on our tables. With such names as The Food Safety Modernization Act, it’s hard to argue against the proposals…at least until you peel away the layers.

The vast majority of these bills are simply means to control the food supply; and thereby control the citizenry. Sure there are some well-intentioned, pure-hearted advocates of food safety out there. You’ll always see some grieving mother who’s child fell victim to a tainted chicken finger but the legislation seldom addresses the source of the problem. The majority of the food-related regulations that are proposed (these bills are chock…

View original post 396 more words

July 6, 2012 Posted by | Nutrition | , , , | Leave a comment

Migrant Health Clinics Caught In Crossfire Of Immigration Debate

THE CHILDREN OF MIGRANT WORKERS PLAY MARBLES W...

THE CHILDREN OF MIGRANT WORKERS PLAY MARBLES WHILE THEIR PARENTS WORK IN FIELDS – NARA – 543855 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

From a 6 June 2012 article at Kaiser Health

..clinics [which are] part of a 50-year-old federally funded program to treat migrant and seasonal farmworkers, have become the latest flash points in the national immigration debate. Health center officials across the country describe how local, state and national law enforcement authorities have staked out migrant clinics, detained staff members transporting patients to medical appointments and set up roadblocks near their facilities and health fairs as part of immigration crackdowns…

“We are looking at a growing climate of fear where folks really think long and hard about accessing basic services,” says Milton Butterworth, who oversees outreach migrant health services for Blue Ridge Community Health Services in Hendersonville, N.C.

Even many legal workers do not seek care at the health centers because they are fearful of exposing family members who are not legal residents, says Tara Plese, a spokeswoman for the Arizona Association of Community Health Centers. “There is a big fear factor and it’s a big concern from a public health perspective.”

Those concerns include making sure farmworkers’ children are vaccinated, stopping the spread of infectious diseases like AIDS and treating those with chronic problems such as diabetes, officials say. Many farmworkers avoid seeking care except in emergencies.

Federal Aid Opposed

Supporters of the nation’s 156 migrant clinics, which are typically part of community health centers, say caring for all farmworkers helps protect them as well as the public — and is a humane way to treat three million people toiling at the heart of the nation’s food supply. About half of those are illegal immigrants, according to the latest federal survey of agricultural workers conducted in 2009.

“Migrant health centers continue to help ensure the safety of the nation’s food supply by keeping those who harvest it healthy,” …

June 7, 2012 Posted by | Consumer Health | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Releasing Inspection and Testing Data on Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities With Care Could Have “Substantial Benefits”

From the 30 November 2011 press release by the US National Academy of Sciences

WASHINGTON — 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 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 food borne 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) [Flahiff’s emphasis]..

…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.  [Flahiff’s emphasis]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.

December 7, 2011 Posted by | Consumer Health, Public Health | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Unwashable Places In Produce May Harbor E. coli, Salmonella

Escherichia coli: Scanning electron micrograph...

Image via Wikipedia

From the 17 August 2011 Health News Today article

Sanitizing the outside of produce may not be enough to remove harmful food pathogens, according to a Purdue University study that demonstrated that Salmonella and E. coli can live inside plant tissues.

E. coli 0157:H7 was present in tissues of mung bean sprouts and Salmonella in peanut seedlings after the plants’ seeds were contaminated with the pathogens prior to planting. Amanda Deering, a postdoctoral researcher in food science, said seeds could be contaminated in such a manner before or after planting through tainted soil or water.

“The pathogens were in every major tissue, including the tissue that transports nutrients in plants,” said Deering, whose results were published in separate papers in the Journal of Food Protection and Food Research International….


Proper sanitization would eliminate Salmonella and E. coli from the surface of foods, but not inner tissues, Deering and Pruitt said. Cooking those foods to temperatures known to kill the pathogens would eliminate them from inner tissues. …

Read the article 

August 17, 2011 Posted by | Consumer Health, Public Health | , , , , | 1 Comment

   

%d bloggers like this: