Safety alert: Broil King Signet 90 judged 'Not Acceptable'

Most dangers with gas grills are obvious. Our own analysis of data collected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission didn’t reveal many surprises. Almost all of the estimated 11,000 grill injuries treated in hospitals each year are due to burns of the hands, arms and face. About a dozen people are killed each year. Young children are particularly at risk. The U.S Fire Administration  reports that in 2005 gas grills caused approximately 7,200 home-related fires. Grill fires go up during warm-weather months, and have also climbed with the increasing popularity of gas grills. None of this is unexpected.

What is surprising is the type of failure Consumer Reports found with a Broil King grill we tested for our June 2008 issue.  In one of our routine tests to determine how well each grill handles flare ups from fatty foods, the firebox of the Broil King Signet 90 986784LP melted. The result: molten metal dripped down from the firebox onto the area beneath the grill, just missing one tester’s hand. The space beneath the grill is where the propane tank is stored. We subsequently tested two other samples of this grill: in one the firebox again melted and in the other the firebox had begun to crack and deform by the end of the test.

Because we believe that the Broil King Signet 90 is dangerous and poses a serious safety risk, we judged it “Not Acceptable.” We reported our findings to the company that makes the grill, Onward Manufacturing of Canada, the  Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada, a government safety agency in that country. Onward told us that they are developing a retrofit kit to resolve this problem and will soon make it available to owners and Onward dealers. We hope to test the kit when it becomes available. (For more information on the retrofit kit contact 866-434-7455, or send an e-mail to kit@omcbbq.com.)

We’ve been testing gas grills for more than 30 years and have never before seen this type of failure. We do not know why the grill deformed and melted. Our flare-up test for a mid-sized grill such as the Broil King Signet 90 involves putting six steaks on the grill and cooking them with the lid down. We do not believe this test to be particularly severe and it is intended to mimic how the grill is likely to be used by consumers. Our article notes that the grill carries two safety certification marks issued by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA), indicating that it complies with applicable safety standards. But those safety standards don’t involve grilling real food. We will lobby CSA to have those standards re-examined and strengthened in the near future.

If you’ve experienced a melting firebox or any other safety hazard with your gas grill, please let us know. Also be sure to report the problem to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.—Don Mays

Puffed cereal recalled after 23 people sickened in 14 states

At least 23 people in 14 states have been sickened with salmonellosis caused by the same strain of Salmonella found in unsweetened puffed rice and puffed wheat cereal recalled on April 5 by Malt-O-Meal, the Food and Drug Administration has announced. The Salmonella contamination was found during routine testing at a Minnesota plant that produces and packages dry cereals. Malt-O-Meal, based in Minnesota, is the nation's fourth largest ready-to-eat cereal manufacturer.

The recalled cereal was distributed nationally under the Malt-O-Meal brand name, as well as under private label brands including:

• Acme, America's Choice, Food Club, Giant
• Hannaford, Jewel, Laura Lynn, Pathmark
• Shaw's, ShopRite, Tops, Weis Quality

The cereals have "Best If Used By" dates from April 8, 2008 (coded as "APR0808") through March 18, 2009 (coded as "MAR1809"). A full list of affected brands can be found on the Malt-O-Meal Web site.

Salmonellosis is an infection caused by the bacteria Salmonella. Most of those infected develop diarrhea, fever and abdominal cramps 12 to 72 hours after infection. The illness usually lasts 4 to 7 days, and most people recover without treatment. However, in some the diarrhea may be so severe that the patient needs to be hospitalized. In these patients, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control, the Salmonella infection may spread from the intestines to the blood stream, and then to other body sites and can cause death unless the person is treated promptly with antibiotics. The elderly, infants, and those with impaired immune systems are more likely to have a severe illness.

Malt-O-Meal on its Web site advises consumers who have purchased any cereal covered by the recall to return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-877-665-9331. Information regarding the recall, including images of the Malt-O-Meal and store brand product packaging, can be found on the company's Web site at www.malt-o-meal.com/recallinfo.

The FDA said it is working with Malt-O-Meal to determine the cause of the contamination and also with the states and with the CDC to identify and prevent additional illnesses. Stores have been advised to remove the recalled cereal from their shelves but in case they haven't, consumers should be sure to check the "Best if Used By" codes (see image above) to ensure they are not buying a recalled product.

FDA recalls cantaloupes grown in Honduras

Over the past two weeks the Food and Drug Administration has made 11 separate recalls of cantaloupes produced by a Honduran grower and packer, which have been linked to cases of Salmonella. According to the agency, there have been reports of 50 illnesses in 16 states (and a further nine cases in Canada), which are linked to consumption of the cantaloupes. The melons are from Agropecuaria Montelibano, a grower that produces 2.5 million boxes of cantaloupes each year for the United States.

The recalls involve whole as well as cut fruit from a variety of companies including Fresh Express, Chiquita, Tropifresh, Bounty Fresh and Simply Fresh, among others.  If you have recently bought cantaloupe, the FDA advises you to check with the place of purchase to determine if the fruit came from this Honduran grower. If so, throw it out immediately.

Find seven tips for safer cantaloupe consumption on Consumer Reports' health blog.

Report finds FDA lax in spinach inspections

Popeye would probably think twice about eating his favorite food if he got a chance to read a report recently released by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform called “FDA and Fresh Spinach Safety.”

The findings paint a most unappetizing picture of food safety and once again underscore the need to give the Food and Drug Administration more resources to oversee the safety of the nation’s food supply.

The committee’s investigation was prompted by the September 2006 outbreak of E. coli 0157:H7 that caused hundreds of reported injuries and several deaths—an outbreak that was ultimately traced to packaged fresh spinach.

Among the findings:

• Packaged fresh spinach facilities were inspected only once every 2.4 years, less than half of the FDA’s stated once-a-year goal.
• FDA observed objectionable conditions during 47 percent of the packaged fresh spinach facility inspections; the most common involved plant sanitation, plant construction and worker sanitation. For example, more than 60 percent of the inspections with “objectionable conditions” revealed problems related to facility sanitation, such as inadequate restroom cleanliness or accumulations of litter.
• Despite observing objectionable conditions in packaged fresh spinach facilities, FDA took no meaningful enforcement action. Although the FDA did refer one inspection to the state for further action, it did not issue warning letters or pursue more aggressive steps such as seizures or injunctions.
• In 38 cases, FDA observed repeated violations by packaged fresh spinach facilities but did nothing to force correction.
• FDA found repeated problems at multiple facilities operated by the firm implicated in the 2006 E. coli outbreak but took no enforcement actions. The records show that in the years prior to the outbreak, FDA conducted multiple inspections of several packaged fresh spinach facilities operated by Natural Selection Food and repeatedly found problematic conditions at a number of their facilities. According to the inspection records, however, FDA at no time required the firm to correct these conditions at any of its facilities, even after laboratory tests indicated the presence of microbial contamination at the exact site later implicated in the 2006 outbreak.
• In eight cases, packaged fresh spinach facilities denied FDA inspectors access to records or other relevant material. Under current law, FDA lacks the authority to compel production of firm records. On one occasion, inspectors were denied access to written records by the facility that was the site of the 2006 outbreak.

What’s more, even if the FDA had been conscientiously inspecting these plants, the investigation found that the scope of the agency’s inspections “appears too narrow to capture the sources of an E. coli outbreak."  After all, the source of the 2006 spinach-related outbreak probably did not originate in the facilities that are inspected by FDA but rather outside the plants and most likely was due to contamination of the water by cattle feces, pig feces, or river water.

Yet FDA does not routinely inspect the fields except in outbreak investigations: “Laboratory sampling can detect some microbial contaminations, but cannot prevent many outbreaks. The outdated statutory sanitation standard severely limits the scope of FDA’s ability to adequately prevent many outbreaks.”

Samantha Cabaluna, spokeswoman for Natural Selection Foods, said in an e-mail that her company does “agree with the committee’s findings that there is a need for strong federal oversight of food safety and a better-funded FDA. We have, in fact, been working with several coalitions to support stronger food safety standards."

The FDA, in a statement, said the agency is working on a food-protection bill to deal with high-risk food, including produce, and urges Congress to enact its proposed legislation by Memorial Day. "Despite recent concerns," the statement said, "the food supply in the U.S. continues to be one of the safest in the world and this includes fresh produce."

Given the number of recalls in recent years, consumers may beg to differ. As the congressional report shows, the FDA is very clearly an agency in need of immediate help. Consumers Union expects congress to address food safety in the coming months. Faith in our food system would be a welcome change for all of us.

A funny take on a serious issue
In case you missed it, editorial cartoonist Tom Toles, featured a funny face-off between Popeye and the FDA in a strip earlier this week.

Study: Artificial butter flavor in popcorn can damage lungs

A new study released recently found that exposure to an artificial butter flavor used in popcorn and other foods can damage the noses and airways of mice. The tests showed that diacetyl, a component of artificial butter flavor, can cause a serious condition that can lead to obliterative bronchiolitis or "popcorn lung."

In the tests, conducted by scientists at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), part of the National Institutes of Health, mice that inhaled diacetyl vapors for three months developed lymphocytic bronchiolitis—a potential precursor of obliterative bronchiolitis. None of the mice, however, were diagnosed with the more-serious disorder.

Obliterative bronchiolitis is a life-threatening lung disease that has been detected in workers who inhale significant concentrations of the flavoring in microwave popcorn packaging plants. "This is one of the first studies to evaluate the respiratory toxicity of diacetyl at levels relevant to human health. Mice were exposed to diacetyl at concentrations and durations comparable to what may be inhaled at some microwave popcorn packaging plants," said Daniel L. Morgan, Ph.D., head of the Respiratory Toxicology Group at the NIEHS and co-author in a release on the study. It appears online in the journal, Toxicological Sciences.

The authors conclude that these findings suggest that workplace exposure to diacetyl contributes to the development of obliterative bronchiolitis in humans, but said more research is needed.

At the end of last year, four leading popcorn manufacturers—Weaver Popcorn Company, ConAgra Foods (maker of Orville Redenbacher's and ACT II), General Mills (Pop Secret) and American Pop Corn Company (Jolly Time)—announced plans to voluntarily eliminate diacetyl from their products. To address consumer concerns, some companies indicate that their product s are diacetyl-free on the packaging. Still, a number of consumer groups are calling for stronger measures regulating diacetyl.

Largest meat recall results in related food recalls

Tracking down products that contain some of the recently recalled 143 million pounds of beef has not been an easy matter. The meat was used in a wide variety of packaged foods and we’re gradually learning which ones. As food companies comb through records of suppliers, some are finding that the Westland/Hallmark beef that was recalled on February 17 was used in one or more of their products, and they’re doing the right thing: pulling the food from store shelves.

General Mills has traced the beef in 35,000 cases of Progresso Italian Wedding Soup to Westland; Nestle has found it was used in Hot Pockets Philly Steak & Cheese and Croissant Crust Philly Steak & Cheese; and ConAgra is pulling certain lots of Slim Jims, Pemmican Tender Beef Jerky, Hunt’s Meat-Flavored spaghetti sauce, Hunt's ManWich Original Sloppy Joe sauce and Banquet Macaroni and Beef. Heinz has issued a recall of 40,000 cases of Boston Market Lasagna with Meat Sauce.

It’s important to note that, in each case, the Westland beef made up only a small portion of the ingredients and was often used in producing the food for just a few days. ConAgra, for example, e-mailed us that, “a tiny amount of Pemmican is impacted: only 0.00017 percent of total cases sold of all Pemmican for 2007 contains beef sourced from Westland/Hallmark.” And Nestle wrote in an e-mail that the recalled beef represents just “two days of production on one line in one facility.”

The recalls are labeled by the federal government as Class II—meaning there’s a remote probability of adverse health consequences from eating the food. The producers are asking retailers to pull the products from their shelves. Consumers who have purchased the processed food may opt to discard it. Each company said that consumers with concerns about products containing the meat can call their respective toll-free numbers for more information. General Mills’ (Progresso) number is (800) 200-9377; Nestle’s (Hot Pockets) is (800) 350-5016; ConAgra's (Hunt's, Banquet, Pemmican, Slim Jim) number is (800) 858-6372. And Heinz's Boston Market queries should go to (800) 488-0050.

We expect that as time goes on other manufacturers will similarly trace ingredients in their products to the recalled beef, and more items will be removed from stores. Unfortunately, because the original recall was so large and the meat distributed so widely, this process may take a while.

Where's the recalled beef?

Four days after the nation's largest-ever beef recall, U.S. consumers still have no way of knowing whether they ate—or might have in their freezers—some of the potentially suspect meat, food safety experts at Consumers Union said Thursday.

On Sunday the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced the recall of 143 million pounds of beef after the Humane Society of the United States released troubling videos of cattle that were too weak to walk apparently being prodded to slaughter.

The USDA has not yet specified where that meat was distributed and sold, prompting CU and other groups to call on U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer to make that information public. In a letter sent late Wednesday, the groups also asked Schafer to enact a rule proposed two years ago that would open such information to consumers in the future.

"There's no law that requires the USDA to keep information on stores that sold recalled meat confidential," said Jean Halloran, director of the food policy initiatives at the national consumer advocacy group. "That's their own internal policy, and they can change it. In fact, they have been talking about changing it for the past two years—but they just haven't acted yet."

Traditionally, the USDA has kept information about schools, nursing homes, and retail outlets that receive meat involved in a recall secret from consumers and even from state health officials, unless the state agreed not to release the information to the public.

Two years ago, Consumers Union led a successful fight to circumvent USDA's secrecy policy, at least in California, by requiring producers and distributors of meat sold there to notify the state's Department of Public Health if their meat is recalled by USDA. California law now allows state health officials to release that information to the public. The law took effect July 1, 2007; the current huge recall is viewed as the first test of whether the new policy is actually working.

Early reviews are not promising. Elisa Odabashian, director of Consumers Union’s West Coast Office in San Francisco, said her inquiries suggest that state health officials still do not have detailed information on retail sales, and she expressed concern that some of the recalled beef might still be in the freezers of California schools.

"It does not appear that the new state law is working," said Odabashian, "and there's no excuse for that, particularly because this was a California meat producer that was subject to inspections by the California Department of Food and Agriculture."

The recalled meat was processed at Westland/Hallmark Meat in Chino, CA. Perhaps one-third of it went to federal food and nutrition programs—most of which probably wound up in school lunches.

The incident is the latest in a series of food safety failures, the CU advocates said. The current issue of Consumer Reports, which is published by the consumer group, carries an article on a recent rise in beef contaminated with E. coli. And a January 2007 report on bacterial contamination of chicken revealed that the chance of buying chicken carrying campylobacter or salmonella had jumped sharply from CR's  analysis four years earlier.

There are no reports of illness linked to the latest recall, federal health officials emphasized. But the Consumers Union experts said that the incident highlights a gaping hole in the food safety net. "In this case, for over two years the inspectors at this plant failed to notice that 'downer' cows [those that could not stand and thus might be sick] were being sent into the food supply, which is not supposed to happen," says Halloran.

She and Odabashian say they hope the immense publicity surrounding the episode will force the government to change its policy. Says Odabashian: "This is a travesty. It's unfortunate that only this kind of incident gets people fired up enough to demand change."

Would you like some tuna with that mercury?

Some months ago we reported on a new study that found high mercury levels in blood samples from New Yorkers who eat a lot of fish—particularly affluent consumers, who presumably eat more expensive high-mercury varieties like tuna and swordfish. In January, results of new tests commissioned by The New York Times showed how concentrated mercury has become in one of the most popular kinds of sushi.

The newspaper purchased tuna sushi samples from 20 restaurants and stores in New York City and tested them for mercury. Levels detected in some samples  exceeded the Food and Drug Administration's action level of 1 part per million, a threshold for which the FDA can remove fish from sale. The Times then calculated how many pieces of sushi it would take to deliver a dose of mercury greater than what the federal government considers acceptable. Those numbers ranged from 2 to 10 for restaurant sushi and 4 to 72 for gourmet/grocery story sushi. In general, the samples from restaurants showed higher levels of mercury than those from markets.

Expensive grades of tuna tend to come from larger, older fish that are more prone to accumulating high levels of mercury. Mercury exposure from fish has been linked to a range of neurological and developmental damage in young children as well as cardiovascular disease in adults. So sushi-lovers, particularly women of childbearing age should get to know the fish in their favorite selections and choose pieces known to be lowest in mercury. To learn which species have been found in past FDA tests to carry the lowest levels of mercury, see our June 2006 story on mercury in tuna.

Unfortunately, the FDA does not routinely test seafood for mercury, or fish used specifically for sushi, which could be different from fish fillets sold in the store.

Consumers Union has long advocated for stricter standards for mercury in fish and stronger consumption advice for consumers, which FDA officials say they are in the process of reviewing.  Hopefully they won’t rely on the fish industry to craft their policies, as some other organizations have in recent months.

Related reporting

• More testing of tuna to address mercury concerns (NY Times)
• Taking worry off the plate (NY Times)
• Making sense out of mercury in fish (NPR)

Pennsylvania reverses decision on milk labeling

On January 17, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture issued new rules allowing milk producers to inform consumers if they don't use recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH) on their cows.  This is good news.  In October, the state had published regulations that prohibited dairies from indicating anything on milk labels about their use or non-use of hormones.  The rules were supposed to go into effect on February 1, 2008, but the October regulation has been withdrawn and replaced with the new rule.

This is a victory for free speech, free markets, sustainable farming and the consumer's right to know.  Consumers increasingly want to know more about how their food is produced, and particularly whether it is produced in a natural and sustainable manner.  Indeed, a poll by Consumer Reports National Research Center, conducted in June 2007, found that 88 percent of those polled thought that milk from cows not treated with rbGH should be allowed to be labeled as such.  There is no justification for prohibiting information about rbGH use on a milk label.  Pennsylvania deserves credit for realizing that its initial regulation prohibiting such labeling was flawed, and for reversing its position.

RbGH is a drug product marketed by Monsanto (as Posilac) that raises a cow's milk output.  However consumers have increasingly turned to organic milk and other milk brands that require their farmers to eschew use of the hormone on their cows.  The number of cows treated with the drug has dropped from 22.3 percent of all dairy cows in 2002 to 17.2 percent in 2007, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

While the USDA has ruled that that rbGH use is safe, it has been prohibited in Canada and the European Union.  Consumers Union questions its safety.

Many Pennsylvania dairy farmers have pledged not to use rbGH, and are advertising this fact on milk labels.  The new rules will allow them to continue to do so.  Other states including Indiana, Missouri and Ohio have been considering regulations similar to those that Pennsylvania abandoned.  New Jersey had until recently taken the matter under consideration but has since determined not to take action.

One new requirement in the Pennsylvania regulations is that dairies must maintain procedures to verify any production methods claimed on their labels, including keeping a paper audit trail.  The new requirements about verification are valuable.  It is important that these claims be truthful and that there are safeguards in place to prevent cheating.

The new regulations bring Pennsylvania label requirements in line with the recommendations of the FDA. 

A broad coalition of groups including consumers, dairies, farming groups, and environmental organizations requested the changes.   Their letter is available online.

—Michael Hansen

Local news highlights some universal hazards

A few items in the local news caught our attention recently. They could have been articles from any newspaper in the country, but that they happened in the same week in our area made us reflect on the safety challenges we face every day.

The first was a fatal house fire in Yonkers, N.Y. that killed a couple in their eighties. Police say the fire started when a space heater placed too close to the bed ignited the linens. The fire had plenty of fuel in the cluttered house. (In addition, fireman had to break through the front door, which had been bolted shut by the couple to prevent intruders.)

Next there was a report from the Westchester County Department of Consumer Protection on its two-month investigation into local grocery stores. In November and December, the county sent inspectors into 59 grocery stores to look for expired foods. They found an average of 88 out-of-date items per store and removed 433 items from shelves at one store. Among the stomach-turners: cheddar cheese that was eight months past its sell-by date and four-month-old coffee creamer. Officials noted that grocery items most likely to be out-of-date were cheese (including cottage cheese and cream cheese) and yogurt, and vacuum-packed deli meat, hot dogs, and bacon. The report said that contrary to what some shoppers think, the back of the display case isn’t always where the freshest goods are, and that the top and bottom shelves of the dairy case held the most problems.

And in a sad (and sadly ironic) clash of timing and technology, an out-of-state computer technician focusing his attention on the GPS in his rental car found himself on the rails instead of the road in Bedford Hills. After the driver made a wrong turn, the car became stuck on the train tracks; the driver was able to escape before the car was hit by a commuter train leaving New York. More than 500 passengers were stranded for two hours and subsequent trains were canceled or postponed.

Perhaps we took special note of these news items because they involve issues we've covered in the past—space heater safety, food safety and GPS safety. Still, it's good to be mindful of such hazards when we're at home, on the road or at the grocery store.

A banner year for product safety

We can’t remember a year when product safety garnered so much public attention.  Consumer confidence was shaken as we saw recall after recall on toys, tires, toothpaste, and more. We dubbed 2007 “The Year of the Recall.”

Here are some of the more prominent safety recalls and related issues that we highlighted in this blog:

• Peanut butter: possible salmonella contamination.
• Easy -Bake Ovens: burn and hand entrapment hazards.
• Millions of Maytag, Jenn-Air and GE dishwashers: fire hazards.
• Millions of popular toys: excessive levels of lead paint.
• Millions of pieces of children's jewelry: high lead content.
• Millions of toys containing small magnets: risk of internal injuries.
• Pet food containing a toxic chemical.
• Chinese farm-raised shrimp, catfish, eel, and other fish were banned by the FDA because they contained banned hazardous chemicals.
• Chinese-made tires: catastrophic tread separation causing at least one fatal accident.
• Toothpaste containing an ingredient used to make antifreeze was recalled. Some was counterfeit Colgate.
• Millions of pounds of chopped meat and chili: e-coli contamination and botulism, respectively..
• Cribs     and play yards were recalled after children strangled.
• A popular arts and crafts toy, Aqua Dots, was recalled after its glue was found to be toxic.

And, of course, there are more. 

Clearly, the system for ensuring the safety of products prior to their appearance on store shelves is broken.  Perhaps this year has been a wake-up call for industry, which has let its guard down, and for our government agencies, which are ill-equipped to prevent unsafe products from entering the marketplace.  We are encouraged that all the media and political attention given to these issues is likely to result in stronger laws and more enforcement authority for our government watchdog agencies.   

We hope the worst is behind us now that new laws and better industry vigilance are on the horizon.  We are looking forward to safer 2008. We will continue to provide you with the information you need to protect yourself in the marketplace while giving our opinion and analysis of the product safety that affect all consumers.

We wish you a happy and safe New Year!

The Consumer Reports Safety Blog Team

Don Mays
Caroline Mayer
Marc Perton
Mary Farrell
Jonea Gurwitt
Carolyn Cairns

Santa's safety list

The very nature of this blog means that most of the time, we are writing about things not to buy—the latest recalled toy or unsafe gadget. So today, we want to take a different approach and give you some ideas of things you could buy as gifts to help your loved ones and friends stay safe. Consider treating yourself as well.

For the car owner

• A tire pressure gauge;
• A roadside emergency kit with flares and a compact thermal blanket (if you live in a cold climate) in case the car breaks down;
• A backup system (top photo) to see what's behind the car, so you don't back over anything or anyone in that troublesome blind spot.

For the homeowner or renter

• Smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors;
• Fire extinguishers—there are some stylish ones on the market;
• Metal ash bin and heavy gloves for the fireplace or wood stove;
• A fully-stocked first aid kit;
• Flashlight and batteries or, better still a hand-cranked radio and flashlight so you don't need to search for batteries or worry that they will run out;
• UL or ETL listed power strips and extension cords.

For the handyman or do-it-yourself woman

• A good, sturdy Type 1A step ladder that opens and closes easily;
• Hearing protectors;
• Safety glasses;
• Steel-toe work shoes.   

For the host or hostess

• An instant-read meat thermometer to know if your meat or poultry dishes are cooked to a safe temperature;
• Different colored cutting boards—one for poultry and meat, another for fruit and vegetables;
• LED candles that look like real candles to decorate your home without worries about fires.

For grandma or grandpa

• A new tub mat to replace the worn-out one that has lost its sticking power;
• A snug-fitting robe; styles with loose sleeves can catch fire easily;
• Socks or slippers with rubber anti-slip grips on the soles;
• Safety grips you can add to your shoes or boots to make walking on ice less treacherous.

For the active child or adult

• An updated, certified life jacket to replace the 30-year-old version at the summer cabin;
• A new—and better fitting—helmet for the cyclist, skier or snowboarder;
• A snug helmet and protective pads for the rollerblader, skateboarder or scooter rider;
• A reflective vest for the runner or walker.

For everyone
There are special tools available for anyone who has to open a gift that's been wrapped in a plastic shell to make the job easier—and safer.

Missing: Truth in milk labeling

In late October, without warning or any public discussion, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) notified 19 dairies that “their labels are false or misleading and need to be changed.”  So, what kinds of labels were so terrible that the PDA felt they had to be removed from milk cartons immediately?  Labels that told the consumer that the cows that produced the milk had not been given any artificial hormones.  Examples of some of the supposedly “misleading” labels include, “Our farmers’ pledge:  no artificial growth hormones;” “From cows not treated with the growth hormone rBST;” and “Free of artificial growth hormones.”  As of February 1, 2008, these labels will be illegal.  The PDA says that such labels confuse consumers, “making it hard for consumers to make informed decisions.”

Some cows are in fact given an artificial hormone, produced by Monsanto.  Called recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH) or recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), it is a genetically engineered drug designed to increase milk production.  However, farmers who don't use the drug have discovered that many consumers actually prefer their milk produced the natural way, and those producers are using their non-use of the hormone as a selling point.

We find the PDA's sudden prohibition against farmers telling consumers they are not using hormones to be surprising, to say the least.  Some 13 years ago, shortly after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) made its controversial decision to approve the use of hormones, it also issued guidance specifically saying that dairies whose farmers didn’t use the artificial hormone could label their milk as “from cows not treated with rbST/rbGH.”

During the years since then, consumers have increasingly sought out milk from untreated cows.  A significant number of stores and chains, including Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, Krogers and Publix, now offer milk and other dairy products labeled as coming from cows not treated with rbGH or rbST.

In late 2002, Monsanto asked the Maine Attorney General to declare "Our Farmer’s Pledge:  No Artificial Growth Hormones" labels “misleading” but he refused.  (Read our letter to the Maine Attorney General, asking that he not grant Monsanto’s request.  In 2007, Monsanto asked the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to take action against such labels, but they refused as well.  In late August, the FTC wrote to Monsanto: “The FTC staff agrees with FDA that food companies may inform consumers in advertising, as in labeling, that they do not use rBST.”  However, in the Secretary of Agriculture of the state of Pennsylvania, Monsanto has apparently found a sympathetic ear.

Questions also remain about the safety of rbGH use, which FDA approved in 1993, but which has been rejected in Canada and the European Union (Read our op-ed on this issue here.)

—Michael Hansen

Feast your eyes on these safe turkey-prep tips

A video from our testing labs shows how quickly Thanksgiving plans can go up in flames when things go awry with a propane-powered deep fryer. As we reported around this time last year, Underwriters Laboratories has refused to put its UL mark on any propane fryer to certify its safety—a rare move for the nonprofit safety testing organization that certifies almost every kind of electrical or gas-powered product sold in the U.S. "Based on our test findings, the fryers used to produce those great-tasting birds are not worth the risks," says John Drengenberg, UL consumer affairs manager.

The dangers are many. Units can easily tip over, spilling the hot oil. Oil that sometimes overflows when a turkey is placed in the pot can hit the burner and burst into flames. The units have no thermostat controls and the sides, lid and handles can get very hot posing burn hazards.

A few years ago, we tested one of the electric fryers on the market, and it proved safer than propane models. The deep-fryer—designed strictly for indoor use—cooks a turkey up to 14 pounds.  And it has some safety features including a built-in safety switch, a temperature sensor, an outer shield and six legs to  give it more stability.

While such Food Network favorites as Paula Deen and Alton Brown feature recipes for deep-fried turkey, if you are tempted to try it this year with a propane fryer, do so with extreme caution and constant vigilance.  Check out these safety tips from UL.

No matter how you plan to cook your turkey, take the time to review Let's Talk Turkey, safety tips from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  Some of their advice has changed. For example, the USDA recommends against washing a turkey before cooking it and says doing so can actually spread bacteria to other foods and utensils and surfaces. Another change is in testing the turkey for doneness. The USDA says a turkey is safe when all of it is cooked to a minimum internal temperature of 165 degrees F. (Previously, the agency recommended different temperatures for various parts of the bird.) And don't rely on a pop-up thermometer—check the temperature yourself with a reliable meat thermometer. 

Check your freezers: One million pounds of supermarket beef recalled

The Cargill Meat Solutions company recalled more than one million pounds of ground beef Saturday because of possible E. coli contamination just five weeks after another huge beef recall by the Topps Meat Company for the same reason. The recall involves various weights and varieties of ground beef sold under such supermarket labels as Century Farm, Giant, Shop Rite, Stop & Shop, Wegman's and Weis. The recall also involves several meatloaf mixes of beef, pork and veal. Cargill has a full list of brands on its Web site.

Each package or label bears the establishment number EST 9400 inside the USDA mark of inspection. Because the use/freeze-by dates for the recalled products have expired, consumers are urged to look in their freezers for these products and, if found, discard them or return them to the place of purchase.

The ground beef products were produced at the company's Wyalusing, PA plant between Oct. 8 and 11 and were distributed to retailers in Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Cargill learned of the possibile contamination by E. coli after the U.S. Department of Agriculture returned a confirmed positive on a sample of meat produced Oct. 8. “No illnesses have been associated with this product,” said John Keating, president, Cargill Regional Beef. “We are working closely with the USDA to remove the product from the marketplace.”

Beginning in August, at least 27 people in eight states were sickened after reportedly eating meat produced by Topps Meat in New Jersey causing the company to recall 21.7 million pounds of beef and, soon after, to close its doors. That recall involved beef, mostly frozen hamburger patties, manufactured over the last year and bearing a “sell by” or “best used” date between Sept. 25, 2007 and Sept. 25, 2008 along with the USDA designation EST 9748.

E. coli O157:H7, the strain identified, is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea and dehydration. The very young, seniors and persons with compromised immune systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness. Consumers with questions about the Cargill recall can contact the company’s food safety line at 877-455-1034.

As we emphasized earlier, such recalls have caused Consumers Union to reiterate its call for the creation of a single agency to ensure the safety of the nation's food supply. CU, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports, also calls for mandatory recall authority for both the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), power that is currently lacking.

Millions of Totino's and Jeno's pizzas recalled due to E. coli fears

General Mills announced the recall of 5 million frozen pizzas sold under the Jeno's and Totino's labels because of possible contamination of the pepperoni topping with E. coli. The recall includes six varieties of Totino's pizza and three kinds of Jeno's pies, all with pepperoni toppings. The company is asking consumers to search their freezers for the pizzas and discard them and has directed stores to remove them from their freezers.

According to the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the USDA, the recall follows a multi-state outbreak in which 21 illnesses were reported in 10 states: Illinois (1), Kentucky (3), Missouri (2), New York (2), Ohio (1), Pennsylvania (1), South Dakota (1), Tennessee (8), Virginia (1), and Wisconsin (1). Half of the individuals who became ill were hospitalized as a result. The onset of symptoms ranged between July 20 and Oct. 10. No deaths have been reported and various state and federal health agencies are continuing to investigate.

E. coli O157:H7m, the strain involved, is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea and dehydration.  Seniors, the very young, and persons with compromised immune systems are most susceptible to foodborne illness.

The frozen pizzas were produced in the company’s Wellston, Ohio, plant and sold nationwide. General Mills said the pepperoni came from a supplier. Each package bears the establishment number "EST. 7750" inside the USDA mark of inspection as well as a "best if used by" date on or before "02 APR 08 WS." The following products are subject to the recall: 

• 10.2-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza Pepperoni."
• 10.2-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza, Classic Pepperoni."
• 10.2-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza, Pepperoni Trio."
• 10.7-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza, Combination Sausage & Pepperoni Pizza."
• 10.5-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza, Three Meat Sausage, Canadian Style Bacon & Pepperoni Pizza."
• 10.9-ounce packages of "Totino's The Original Crisp Crust Party Pizza, Supreme Sausage & Pepperoni Pizza with Green Peppers & Onions."
• 6.8-ounce packages of "Jeno's Crisp 'n Tasty Pizza, Pepperoni."
• 7.0-ounce packages of "Jeno's Crisp 'n Tasty Pizza, Combination Sausage and Pepperoni Pizza."
• 7.2-ounce packages of "Jeno's Crisp 'n Tasty Pizza, Supreme Sausage and Pepperoni Pizza with Green Peppers and Onions."

Consumers can contact Totino’s  or Jeno’s for product replacement by clipping the UPC (bar code) symbol from each pizza box and sending the UPC's, along with their name and address to:
    Totino's / Jeno’s
    P.O. Box 200 - Pizza
    Minneapolis, MN  55440-0200

The product itself should be thrown away.  Consumers with additional questions about the recall can contact the company at (800) 949-9055. 

Is there something fishy about new advice on fish?

Since 2004, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recommended that because of the potential for mercury to harm a developing fetus, women of childbearing age should eat no more than 12 ounces of fish per week, avoid such high-mercury fish as shark, swordfish, king mackerel and tilefish altogether, and limit intake of white albacore tuna to 6 ounces per week.   

Consumer Reports, in July 2006, took a look at some new FDA data and concluded that the agency's advice on tuna was not sufficiently stringent.  We recommended that to be on the safe side, women who are pregnant should avoid canned tuna in addition to the other four types of high-mercury fish during their pregnancy.  At the same time, however, we noted that there are quite a number of fish that are so low in mercury that even pregnant women can safely eat them every day.  We urged pregnant women to choose these very low mercury fish, which include fresh wild caught and canned salmon, shrimp, sardines, clams, tilapia and pollock.

But a recent announcement from the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition flies in the face of that advice. The organization recommended that women of childbearing age, including pregnant women, “should eat a minimum of 12 ounces per week of fish like salmon, tuna, sardines and mackerel, and can do so safely.”  Consumer Reports would agree that pregnant women can safely consume salmon (as long as it is wild caught, which minimizes exposure to other pollutants) and sardines. But more than 12 ounces a week of tuna? Neither the EPA nor the FDA's expert panels, nor Consumers Union regard such amounts of tuna as safe for pregnant women.

Almost immediately, questions began to arise about this new advice.  While it had been put forward as the position of the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies coalition, which includes the March of Dimes and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it turns out that the members do not determine its positions; the group's Board of Directors does.  Indeed, a disclaimer on the HMHB Web site says, “Any statement that is supported by the HMHB Board in no way implies that it has been endorsed by our member organizations.”  And the March of Dimes, for one, does not endorse the new advice on eating fish.

Even the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Web site is inconsistent about the coalition's position.  On the site, Professor James A. McGregor, of the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, endorses the more conservative FDA advice. However, he was one of the 14 panelists who developed the new HMHB advice, and he now supports it on a linked blog.

According to the HMHB Web site, the National Fisheries Institute, an industry trade association, provided honoraria of $1,000 each to the 14 members of the panel who came up with this new advice, and also covered travel, hotel bills and food for a meeting attended by the panelists. In addition, the four-person Executive Committee received an additional $500 each for the time spent in planning the meeting. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post reported that the NFI also gave the Coalition $60,000 for its education campaign on seafood consumption. 

Consumer Reports stands by its original position: Pregnant women and their babies can and should get the nutritional benefits of seafood by consuming low-mercury fish. They can avoid the risks of mercury exposure by not eating high mercury fish, especially shark, swordfish, king mackerel, tilefish and tuna.

CU repeats call for single food safety agency in wake of huge beef recall

As more illnesses have been linked to a strain of the E. coli bacteria found in beef produced by the Topps Meat Company, Consumers Union is reiterating its call for the creation of a single agency to ensure the safety of our nation's food supply. CU, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports, also calls for mandatory recall authority for both the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), power which is currently lacking.

At least 27 people in eight states have been sickened after reportedly eating meat produced by the New Jersey company. On Saturday, Topps  recalled 21.7 million pounds of beef manufactured over the last year and bearing a “sell by” or “best used” date between Sept. 25, 2007 and Sept. 25, 2008, along with the USDA designation EST 9748. The beef -– mostly frozen hamburger patties -- was sold under a variety of brand names (see list below).

E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea and dehydration. The very young, seniors and persons with compromised immune systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness.

In August, people began to get sick from the beef in question, yet it took nearly six weeks before the first recall was issued.  “Both the FDA and USDA need mandatory recall authority.  The safety of our food should not be dependent on voluntary action by companies,” said Jean Halloran, CU’s Director of Food Policy Initiatives. 

“The system is broken. Recalls and inspections have failed miserably,” said Halloran.  “Clearly we need a single food agency with the tools, resources and leadership to focus on one clear mission -- food safety.”

Topps advises consumers to look for these products in their freezers immediately. If you have a product marked with the above information remove the sell-by date and UPC code and send it to: Attn: Recall Coordinator, Topps Meat Company LLC, P.O. Box 219, 1161 E. Broad Street, Elizabeth, NJ 07207 for a full refund. It is important to dispose of the remaining product immediately.

Topps has established a toll-free hotline (888-734-0451) to answer questions concerning this recall. Consumers may also visit www.toppsmeat.com

The recalled meat was sold in two-pound to 10-pound boxes under the following brand names: Butcher’s Best, Kohler Foods, Mike's, Pathmark, Rastelli's Fine Foods, Roma–Topps, Sam's Choice Backyard Gourmet, Sand Castle Fine Meat, Shop Rite, Topps and West Side.

In a national Consumers Union poll in 2004, 97 percent of respondents agreed that the government should have mandatory recall authority for contaminated meat. This latest recall shows that the food safety system needs a drastic overhaul.

Elevated blood mercury levels found in those who eat more fish

What do fish, fluorescent light bulbs and coal-fired power plants have in common? The answer is mercury – the toxic heavy metal that’s been linked to neurological and developmental disorders in children, and cardiovascular disease, neurological and other problems in adults.

Consumer Reports has long analyzed mercury levels in fish to provide consumers with the best advice for avoiding  species of fish with  high levels of the heavy metal. A new study of mercury exposure in New York City  confirms the importance of making wise choices.

The New York City Health Department recently analyzed blood samples for mercury and other heavy metals and found significantly higher levels in people who ate more fish. Levels were also notably higher among wealthy New Yorkers, presumably those who eat more expensive fish such as that found in sushi.

A non-profit environmental group known as the Turtle Island Restoration Network, also analyzed samples of tuna purchased from New York City sushi restaurants, finding nearly half of the 13 samples analyzed contained levels of mercury that exceeded the levels that the FDA considers safe for some women and young children. Some samples even exceeded 1.0 ppm, the level that FDA considers unsafe for human consumption.

Fish is an important part of a healthy diet, but studies suggest that frequently eating species with high mercury levels may interfere with the health benefits that the omega fatty acids found in fish would otherwise provide. Avoiding high mercury fish is especially important for pregnant and breastfeeding women, those who may become pregnant and young children.

When we look at how mercury gets into fish in the first place, we find that protecting the safety of our fish supply depends on manufacturers and consumers making wise decisions about other products as well, not just which fish to eat. Mercury doesn’t just float into the fish supply by itself. It gets there in large measure from manufacturing processes and from use and disposal practices that have pumped mercury into the air and water for centuries.

Mercury has been used in a wide range of products including dental fillings, electrical switches, thermometers and batteries. Mining metals and the burning of fossil fuels, primarily coal, are among the greatest causes of mercury releases in the environment. Disposal of mercury-bearing consumer products also releases a substantial amount of mercury. While there’s little that can be done to clear the oceans and fish stocks of mercury that’s already out there, cutting back on energy consumption, finding alternative energy sources, and getting mercury out of consumer products are all important ways to help keep the problem from getting much worse.

Ironically, careful use of a modern product that contains trace amounts of mercury, the compact fluorescent bulb, is one strategy for achieving net reductions in environmental mercury releases. As our recent story on compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) explains, the trace amount of mercury present in these long-lasting energy-saving bulbs is an unfortunate but worthwhile trade-off to cut energy use that contributes to the much larger amounts of environmental mercury that come from coal-fired power plants.

Because health officials have not been able to identify a level of mercury exposure that’s safe, it’s especially important to keep as much mercury out of the environment as possible and to lower your own exposure to mercury. That means limiting or eliminating your intake of high mercury fish species, reducing energy consumption and avoiding or carefully managing mercury-bearing products as they are used and discarded. For CFLs, that means careful clean-up if they break and recycling them when they reach the end of their useful life. Sylvania, for example, sells a mail-back recycling package.

FDA expands recall of chili and other products linked to botulism cases

Toss the chili sauce and trash the hash and other canned meat products and pet foods from Castleberry's ... that's the latest message from officials at the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture, who aren't getting much of a summer break with the steady stream of food-poisoning outbreaks that have occurred recently. This contamination was home grown, after meat and meatless chili products and a variety of other canned-meat products from Castleberry's Food Company, based in Augusta, Georgia, were found to contain botulinum toxin, the agent that causes botulism, a potentially fatal form of food poisoning. Officials are urging consumers to immediately discard any of the recalled products or any foods made with these products, placing them in tightly-closed doubled plastic bags before putting them in the trash.

The contamination was discovered after two people in Texas and two in Indiana were hospitalized after eating Castleberry's Hot Dog Chili Sauce. Telltale symptoms of botulism are serious and can begin 6 to 12 hours after eating contaminated foods. Symptoms can include double or blurred vision, drooping eyelids, slurred speech, difficulty swallowing, and muscle weakness that gradually affects the whole body moving from the shoulders through the legs. Paralysis can affect breathing and quickly become fatal, so seeking prompt medical attention is imperative.

There are also some pet foods included in the recall. Dogs and ferrets are vulnerable to botulinum toxin and should get prompt treatment if they show symptoms such as progressive paralysis, difficulty breathing or chewing, or general weakness, which can occur as soon as two hours or as late as two weeks after eating contaminated food.

Food poisoning from botulism is normally rare, with about 30 cases occurring each year, often attributed to home canning. It occurs when the bacteria known as Clostridium botulinum, widely present as harmless spores in normal garden soil and the general environment, grow and produce a potent nerve toxin when contaminated foods are stored in airtight containers. Heating the foods to the proper temperature before storage is key to killing the spores and any harmful toxins that may be present. However, once food is contaminated it's impossible to be sure that all the toxins are eliminated. That's why it's important to throw away all contaminated products.

The recall affects many different products and Castleberry's voluntarily took the commendable step of expanding the recall to cover all products that may have been made on the defective production line over the past two years, which could include millions of cans. Consumers should heed the warnings and discard any products that may be affected by the recall. You can find a full list of the recalled products on Castleberry's Web site at: www.castleberrys.com or call the company's hotline at 1-800-203-4412.

The FDA's report on the recall can be found on the agency's web site and the federal Centers for Disease Control has a helpful Q&A on botulism on its site.

 

Food safety hearing exposes lack of oversight

Three investigators working for the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation revealed some alarming findings about the government’s ability to conduct food safety oversight in a hearing last week. The day-long hearing, entitled "Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of Our Nation’s Food Supply?," featured testimony from the subcommittee investigators as well as consumer advocates, scientists from five FDA laboratories slated for closing and Andrew von Eschenbach, the head of the FDA, and three of his department heads.

David Nelson, Senior Investigator for the full Committee kicked off the hearing by describing how the number of FDA investigators has dwindled since 2003 while the number of food imports has nearly doubled. He said the FDA inspects less than one percent of all imported foods and samples only a fraction of those it inspects. On a typical day in the San Francisco office, he said, a reviewer may examine 600 food entries, 300 medical device entries, 25 reagent entries and 25 drug entries on a computer screen. This is one entry every 30 seconds, giving the reviewer little time to take action. “A single entry of Chinese herbs can take more than an hour to review,” he said.

The FDA also “permits importers to take possession of even highly suspect goods and arrange for their testing by private laboratories,” Nelson said. These tests are then used as evidence that food is safe to enter the U.S. However, the laboratories are not certified by the FDA, despite the congressional investigators’ findings that they often use incorrect methods or report incorrect results. FDA staff told investigators that certain independent labs were “scary” and others “shoddy,” arriving at results that are driven by financial rather than scientific concerns.

While the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which inspects meat and poultry, allows these products to come into only 10 ports, the FDA must oversee imports coming into 326 ports, Nelson said. Unfortunately, the FDA has inspectors at only 91 of those ports. Importers know where their chances of avoiding inspections are greatest and work the system accordingly, the investigators said.

Nelson described a disturbing finding related to Country of Origin Labeling: "The true country of origin of imported wheat gluten and of vegetable protein is also a matter of some controversy. Committee staff was told that Europe generally, and the Netherlands specifically, is the principal source of wheat gluten imports. Staff witnessed, however, the unloading of wheat gluten declared as coming from China in 50-pound bags marked with the 'Wind Mill' brand of a Dutch firm, Meelunie. The bags gave no indication that the product was from China, but indicated the supplier was in 'Amsterdam, Holland.'"

Seven of the 13 FDA labs are slated for closure and the investigators visited all but one of them. In the process, investigators testified that they had tried repeatedly but were unable to get the FDA to provide analysis justifying what the investigators called a "radical reorganization" of the FDA.

Representatives of five of the seven labs slated for closure came to the hearing to describe their work, which included testing for poisons in pet food, evaluating bioterrorism threats, checking for antibiotic contamination, and inspecting medical devices. They testified that they were being kept in the dark about the details of and the reasons for the proposed closings.

Testifying last, FDA Administrator von Eschenbach argued that the FDA was working hard to improve its inspection system. The lab closings, he said, were part of an effort to consolidate resources and bring the FDA "into the 21st Century." Von Eschenbach resisted the call from some members for mandatory standards for food safety practices, saying he preferred "guidances."

Several members of Congress have introduced legislation to overhaul the FDA's food inspection system, among them Senator Richard Durbin (D-Il), whose bill calls for fees on importers to be used for more and better inspections.

Consumers Union is analyzing such proposals and will be weighing in on them in the near future.

CR Survey: Consumers want country-of-origin labeling

With all of the recent concerns about tainted food additives and products from China, the results of a new Consumer Reports survey shouldn't be surprising: According to the poll, 92 percent of consumers agree that imported foods should be labeled by their country of origin. While the federal government mandated country of origin labeling, or COOL, back in 2002 for nearly all food products, implementation has been delayed until October 2008, with the exception of seafood. Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, has called for immediate implementation of COOL.

The poll also found that foods labeled as “natural,” or “organic" are highly popular among consumers, whereas “irradiated” foods are not. At the same time, consumers indicated that they expect more from natural labels than current standards dictate for processed food and meat. Eighty-six percent said they expect the natural label to mean that processed food does not contain any artificial ingredients. But current standards only prohibit artificial colorings and additives. Artificial sugars and oils like high fructose corn syrup or partially hydrogenated oils can still be used in natural foods. 

The Consumer Reports poll was conducted via telephone from June 7 to 10, 2007. 

For more info:

• Consumer Reports food-labeling poll 
• Eco-labels.org

Previously:

• FDA warning on Chinese fish highlights problems with inspections
• Can you trust Chinese-made products?
• Thomas & Friends recall: 1.5 million trains and accessories for lead
• Toothpaste trouble: what you need to know now
• Tainted animal feed: Why the government's approach isn't working

Don't cook your goose when eating outdoors

Maybe it's the surroundings, but food seems to taste better when it’s eaten outside. We want your picnics and barbeques to stay delightful, so here are some tips on handling food safely at outdoor repasts from the Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Dept. of Agriculture:

• First, as we all learned in preschool, good food safety practices begin with hand-washing. If you won’t have access to water, think ahead and bring soap and a jug of water. If that’s not feasible, an alcohol-based hand sanitizer is an effective alternative.  
•  Because the bacteria that can cause food poisoning multiply faster at temperatures between 40 and 140 degrees, keep cold food cold and hot food hot in separate insulated carriers. Avoid opening the coolers more than necessary to maintain the temperature. 
• Cold food subject to spoilage should be held at or below 40 degrees Fahrenheit. To keep the cooler food cold longer, you can pack the meat, poultry, and seafood still slightly frozen and well insulated from other foods to avoid contamination. When you cook it, use a thermometer to ensure that it's reached a safe minimum internal temperature. Beef, veal, and lamb steaks, roasts, and chops can be cooked to 145 degrees. Hamburgers made of ground beef should reach 160 degrees. All cuts of pork should reach 160 degrees . All poultry should reach a minimum of 165 degrees.
• Hot food should be kept hot, at or above 140 degrees. Wrap the hot food well and place in an insulated container. Eat it within two hours of cooking or purchase. 
• Rinse all fresh fruits and vegetables thoroughly under running tap water before you pack it. Do that even if the skins and rinds are not eaten, since cutting through the outer layer can contaminate the inner fruit. That includes melons, whose nooks and crannies, we have unfortunately learned, are great hiding places for such uninvited germs as salmonella.
•  Don’t let perishable foods sit out longer than 2 hours — and only one hour if air temperature is hotter than 90 degrees.
• If you’re grilling out, marinate the foods in the refrigerator, not on the counter or outdoors. If the marinade is to be used as a sauce on the cooked food, reserve a portion separately before adding the raw meat, poultry, or seafood. Don’t reuse a marinade that’s been in contact with raw food. Similarly, don’t use the same platter and utensils that previously held the raw meat to serve the cooked foods, unless the platter and utensils have been washed in hot soapy water.
• If you want to partially cook food in the microwave, oven, or stove to reduce grilling time, do so immediately before the food goes on the hot grill.
• Be aware that the grill can brown foods quickly and make them look done, even when they're not, so be sure to check with a food thermometer. 

And one last tip to pass on from one of our own staffers (who admits he should know better): Make sure to clean your grill’s drip pan frequently. He didn’t, and the result was a flaming and dangerous mess.

See also:

• Quiz: Summer safety truths and half-truths
• Safe Food Handling (USDA)
• Barbecue Basics: Tips to Prevent Foodborne Illness (FDA)
• Outdoor Eating Food Safety Tips (FDA)

FDA warning on Chinese fish highlights problems with inspections

Another day, another disturbing announcement about Chinese products. The latest is a big kettle of fish — literally. On June 28, the Food and Drug Administration announced a ban on all farm-raised shrimp, catfish, eel, basa (which is similar to catfish) and dace (which is similar to carp) from China. 

The reason: “Current and continuing evidence that certain Chinese aquaculture products imported into the United States contain illegal substances that are not permitted in seafood sold in the United States,” is how the agency’s assistant commissioner for food protection, Dr. David Acheson, succinctly announced it. 

Specifically, through targeted sampling from October 2006 through May 2007, the FDA repeatedly found that farm-raised seafood from China contained antimicrobial agents not approved for use here: nitrofuran, malachite green, gentian violet and fluoroquinolone. The first three have been linked to cancer in laboratory animals; the last may increase antibiotic resistance. 

The FDA is taking the action because it said it was concerned about long-term exposure to these antimicrobials. Thus, it is not seeking a recall or advising consumers to destroy or return any of these products.  The federal watchdog agency couldn't summarily recall the fish even if it wanted to; with the exception of infant formula, the FDA doesn't have mandatory recall authority over food products; only the company can. The agency will only allow future imports if companies prove their products are free of these chemical residues. 

Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, commends the FDA for taking this action.  “Strong action is clearly warranted based on the FDA’s alarming findings of broad-based contamination problems with antimicrobial agents and harmful additives that aren’t approved for fish production in the U.S.,” said Urvashi Rangan, senior scientist and policy analyst with Consumers Union. 

Unfortunately — and we’re beginning to sound like a broken record here since we’ve said this before and know we’ll be saying this again — the latest FDA announcement also highlights the problems involved in policing a nation’s food supply, especially as food imports increase. 

The FDA says it is currently inspecting only about one percent of all food imports and about five percent of fish imported from China, due to stepped-up monitoring. Needless to say, the FDA needs to do more. And it “needs to do far more testing, including testing of farmed fish from other Asian countries such as Vietnam, India, and Indonesia,” said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives for CU. 

We urge Congress and the White House to give FDA the funding it needs to beef up its inspections — as well as the power to issue mandatory recalls. 

In the meantime, the FDA action serves as a bold reminder that consumers have to become ever more vigilant about the food they eat. Rangan said. “Consumers should not buy the fish if they have any questions about its country of origin.” We agree with the FDA that the use of the antimicrobials poses a long-term health risk, but there certainly is no need to expose yourself to even small quantities of such chemicals for even a short period of time. 

Previously: 

• Can you trust Chinese-made products?
• Thomas & Friends recall: 1.5 million trains and accessories for lead
• Toothpaste trouble: what you need to know now
• Tainted animal feed: Why the government's approach isn't working

Benzene in beverages: still a risk?

Last year, amid lawsuits against beverage companies and reports that the Food and Drug Administration had found benzene (a known carcinogen) in some soft drinks, we ran our own tests on several drinks and found levels ranging from 7 to 30 parts-per-billion (ppb) in some samples of four products: Crystal Light Sunrise Classic Orange, Fanta Orange and Pineapple sodas, and Sunkist Orange soda (the federal standard calls for 5 ppb or less in drinking water; there is no standard for soft drinks). 

What's changed since then? For one thing, supermarket market chain Safeway Inc. has agreed to reformulate soft drinks made with ingredients that can potentially form benzene, according to a recent settlement.  Coca-Cola, a former defendant, agreed to settle last month. Other companies including PepsiCo, Sunny Delight, Shasta and Polar have not, and remain defendants in similar lawsuits.

We continue to call on the FDA to restrict benzene in all beverages to the limit set for drinking water and require manufacturers to take steps to prevent benzene formation by changing the products’ formulation or manufacturing process. Until that happens, consumers should avoid beverages that combine benzoate salts (listed as sodium benzoate or potassium benzoate) with vitamin C (ascorbic acid), which can set the stage for benzene formation. If you do buy beverages with that combination of ingredients, store them in a cool place and out of direct light.

Previously:

• Greener Choices: Safeway settles benzene soft drink suit 
• Benzene in soft drinks: Lawsuits highlight possible presence of carcinogen in beverages

Stay safe when using gas grills

Each year people are burned using grills and injured in liquid-propane (LP) and natural-gas fires and explosions associated with gas grills. Many of these fires and explosions occur when consumers first use a grill that has been left idle for a period of time or just after refilling and reattaching the gas container to the grill. Defective grills can also pose a danger. See information on recalls at www.recalls.gov to see if your model been recalled.

All LP tanks must now comply with upgraded National Fire Protection Association standards for overfill protection. Noncompliant tanks have a circular or five-lobed valve and aren't refillable, although they can be retrofitted with a three-lobed valve or swapped for a new tank at a hardware store or other refilling facility.

To reduce the risk of fire or explosion, you should routinely perform the following safety checks:

• Replace cracked or brittle propane hoses.
• Check hoses for gas leaks by applying dishwashing soap and water; bubbles indicate a leak. Replace as needed.
• Regularly empty grease pans, trays, or receptacles to minimize fire hazards.
• Never start a charcoal fire with gasoline.
• Never add lighter fluid to a charcoal fire after the fire has started; the flame can follow the stream of fluid to its source.
• Never use an outdoor grill indoors or in a garage, breezeway, carport, porch, or under a surface that can catch fire. Also, keep the grill at least 10 feet away from your house or other structure.
• Do not attempt to repair the valve on a gas tank or the grill yourself. See an LP dealer or a qualified appliance-repair service.

If you're in the market for a new grill, keep these safety checks in mind when shopping:

Case the cart. Give the grill a gentle bump from several angles to see if it tips. The more stable the grill, the safer. Carts with a sliding drawer to hold the fuel tank make it easier to use and change the tank. Also inspect the cart, firebox, and shelves