770 likes | 935 Views
Outbreaks of foodborne illness associated with fresh produce are becoming more apparent. . Outbreaks. Seen an increase in the number of reported outbreaks of foodborne illnesses from fresh produceE. coli O157:H7 outbreaksFrom spinach ? 204 cases in 26 StatesFrom lettuce at Taco John's ? 81 cases
E N D
1. The impact of pre-harvest practices on the microbial safety of produce—the US experienceIAFP Latin America Symposium on Food SafetyCampinas, SP, BrazilMay 26, 2008 Robert E. Brackett, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President and
Chief Science and Regulatory Affairs Officer
Grocery Manufacturer’s Association
2. Outbreaks of foodborne illness associated with fresh produce are becoming more apparent.
3. Outbreaks Seen an increase in the number of reported outbreaks of foodborne illnesses from fresh produce
E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks
From spinach – 204 cases in 26 States
From lettuce at Taco John’s – 81 cases in 3 States
From lettuce at Taco Bell – 71 cases in 5 States
4. Outbreaks Seen an increase in the number of reported outbreaks of foodborne illnesses from fresh produce
E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks
Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak from tomatoes
186 cases in 21 States
5. Outbreaks Seen an increase in the number of reported outbreaks of foodborne illnesses from fresh produce
E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks
Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak from tomatoes
Salmonella Newport from tomatoes
98 cases 19 States
6. Recent Outbreaks Seen an increase in the number of reported outbreaks of foodborne illnesses from fresh produce
There are several possible explanations for the apparent increase
Better and more rapid detection of outbreaks
Increase in sale of fresh-cut produce
Globalization of the produce supply
Increase in the numbers of consumers at high risk for foodborne illnesses “Globalization” is to mean wide-spread production/distribution as well as receiving product from other countries and not to overlook the fact that recent outbreaks have been domestic, not import-related.
“Globalization” is to mean wide-spread production/distribution as well as receiving product from other countries and not to overlook the fact that recent outbreaks have been domestic, not import-related.
7. Increase in Outbreaks Data reported to CDC indicate that between 1973 and 1997 reported outbreaks associated with fresh produce increased.
From 0.7% in the 1970s to 6% of all outbreaks in the 1990s. A total of 90 produce-associated outbreaks were reported, associated with 16,058 illnesses, 598 hospitalizations and 8 deaths.A total of 90 produce-associated outbreaks were reported, associated with 16,058 illnesses, 598 hospitalizations and 8 deaths.
8. Average annual number of produce-associated outbreaks by decade, USA,1973-2002* Since 1973, there has been a continuous increase in the number of fresh produce associated outbreaks. This and the next few slides show data collected via CDC’s foodborne diseases outbreak surveillance system, a passive reporting system in which State Health Departments send CDC reports of investigated foodborne disease outbreaks. Since this is a passive reporting system these data are not all inclusive. Since our database contains information from 1973-79, 1980 through 89 and 1990 through 97 for the rest of this talk I will refer to these time periods as the 70’s 80’s and 90’s. This graph shows the number of fresh-produce associated outbreaks per year by decade. The number of outbreaks per year increased from 3.7 in the 70’s to 10.5 in the 90’sSince 1973, there has been a continuous increase in the number of fresh produce associated outbreaks. This and the next few slides show data collected via CDC’s foodborne diseases outbreak surveillance system, a passive reporting system in which State Health Departments send CDC reports of investigated foodborne disease outbreaks. Since this is a passive reporting system these data are not all inclusive. Since our database contains information from 1973-79, 1980 through 89 and 1990 through 97 for the rest of this talk I will refer to these time periods as the 70’s 80’s and 90’s. This graph shows the number of fresh-produce associated outbreaks per year by decade. The number of outbreaks per year increased from 3.7 in the 70’s to 10.5 in the 90’s
9. Increase in Outbreaks Data reported to CDC indicate that between 1973 and 1997 reported outbreaks associated with fresh produce increased.
Unpublished data compiled by FDA indicate that from 1996 to 2006 there were approximately 71 reported outbreaks associated with fresh produce.
10. Vehicle Categories 1996 - 2006
11. Opportunities for Contamination Before and During Harvest
12. Contamination Opportunities Animal Management Issues
13. Animal Management Wild animals in the field
Domestic animals in the field
Animal manure in the field
Animal Management issues:
Animal manure in field Chicken/seabird manure used in field
Manure pellets observed in field
Avian fecal droppings
Cattle manure
Wild animals in field Rodents, rabbits, snakes, lizards
Deer, rats, birds, raccoons, frogs
Domestic animals in field Horses
Farm fowl
Cattle
Dogs
Chickens
Fencing Fencing to prevent large animalsAnimal Management issues:
Animal manure in field Chicken/seabird manure used in field
Manure pellets observed in field
Avian fecal droppings
Cattle manure
Wild animals in field Rodents, rabbits, snakes, lizards
Deer, rats, birds, raccoons, frogs
Domestic animals in field Horses
Farm fowl
Cattle
Dogs
Chickens
Fencing Fencing to prevent large animals
14. Contamination Opportunities Animal Management Issues
Processing/Packing Operations
15. Processing and Packing Operations Unsanitary conditions
Produce not cleaned
Packing in the field
Vermin
Processing/Packing Operations:
Produce not cleaned No washing of cabbage
Shed not enclosed
Vermin Rodents on floor of shed
Numerous flies in shed
Bird droppings throughout entire facility
Birds in shed
Unsanitary Sewage drain uncovered
No light shields, corroding ceiling
Human trash on floor/in boxes
Packing labels stored on pesticide
Feces near trays at nursery facility
Packing in field Cut and delivered to distributor
Processing/Packing Operations:
Produce not cleaned No washing of cabbage
Shed not enclosed
Vermin Rodents on floor of shed
Numerous flies in shed
Bird droppings throughout entire facility
Birds in shed
Unsanitary Sewage drain uncovered
No light shields, corroding ceiling
Human trash on floor/in boxes
Packing labels stored on pesticide
Feces near trays at nursery facility
Packing in field Cut and delivered to distributor
16. Contamination Opportunities Animal Management Issues
Processing/Packing Operations
Worker Health/Hygiene
17. Work Health and Hygiene Inadequate handwashing
Inadequate hygiene training
Unsanitary worker facilities
Unexplained worker absences
Community illnesses Worker Health and Hygiene:
Inadequate hygiene training No formal hygiene training
Unknown hygiene training
Inadequate handwashing No handwashing observed
Unknown handwashing
Minimal handwashing facilities provided
No hot water, paper towels, soap
Unexplained absence Illnesses noted at on-site clinic
Unknown worker absences
Unsanitary worker facilities No toilets available
Toilets not working
Human feces and toilet paper on grounds of plant
Community illness Cases of Hepatitis A noted at health
departmentWorker Health and Hygiene:
Inadequate hygiene training No formal hygiene training
Unknown hygiene training
Inadequate handwashing No handwashing observed
Unknown handwashing
Minimal handwashing facilities provided
No hot water, paper towels, soap
Unexplained absence Illnesses noted at on-site clinic
Unknown worker absences
Unsanitary worker facilities No toilets available
Toilets not working
Human feces and toilet paper on grounds of plant
Community illness Cases of Hepatitis A noted at health
department
18. Contamination Opportunities Animal Management Issues
Processing/Packing Operations
Worker Health/Hygiene
Harvest Tools/Equipment
19. Bare hand or unknown glove use
Cross contamination issues
Non-sanitized tools
Non-cleanable tools Harvest Tools and Equipment Harvest tools/equipment:
Bare hand or unknown glove Bare hand harvesting
Unknown glove use
No gloves used
Gloves only used in packing shed
Non-sanitized tools Tools stored soiled
Harvest buckets not cleaned
Tools stored near pesticides
Muddy cotton/leather gloves re-used
Farming equipment not washed
Non-cleanable tools Non-cleanable wood cart for transport
Wood handled tools
Cross-contamination issues Dirty boxes used for transport
Human feces under waxer brushes
Boots not cleaned or controlled by firm
No drainage of rain water, just pits
Wooden boxes used for cuttingHarvest tools/equipment:
Bare hand or unknown glove Bare hand harvesting
Unknown glove use
No gloves used
Gloves only used in packing shed
Non-sanitized tools Tools stored soiled
Harvest buckets not cleaned
Tools stored near pesticides
Muddy cotton/leather gloves re-used
Farming equipment not washed
Non-cleanable tools Non-cleanable wood cart for transport
Wood handled tools
Cross-contamination issues Dirty boxes used for transport
Human feces under waxer brushes
Boots not cleaned or controlled by firm
No drainage of rain water, just pits
Wooden boxes used for cutting
20. Contamination Opportunities Animal Management Issues
Processing/Packing Operations
Worker Health/Hygiene
Harvest Tools/Equipment
Water Issues
21. Water Issues Inadequate chlorination
Hydrocooler Issues
Storage tank issues
Ice issues
Cross connection issues Water Issues:
Inadequate chlorination Water not chlorinated
Inadequate chlorination
Unknown chlorination
Lack of chlorine monitoring
Inability of workers to interpret water
chlorination measurements
Hydrocooler issues Water re-circulated w/o chlorination
Hydrocooler chlorine not monitored
Animal feces in hydrocooler
Cross connections Lack of well cross connection controls
Well hoses not protected from back-siphonage
Ice Recycled water from well used
(unknown chlorination)
Trash and rodents under the ice
Manufacturing area
Storage tank issues Open access covers to tanks
Open pits used for water storage
Oil leak in wellWater Issues:
Inadequate chlorination Water not chlorinated
Inadequate chlorination
Unknown chlorination
Lack of chlorine monitoring
Inability of workers to interpret water
chlorination measurements
Hydrocooler issues Water re-circulated w/o chlorination
Hydrocooler chlorine not monitored
Animal feces in hydrocooler
Cross connections Lack of well cross connection controls
Well hoses not protected from back-siphonage
Ice Recycled water from well used
(unknown chlorination)
Trash and rodents under the ice
Manufacturing area
Storage tank issues Open access covers to tanks
Open pits used for water storage
Oil leak in well
22. E. coli O157:H7 Outbreak Associated with Pre-Packaged Spinach Findings
23. Findings Related to Growing E. coli O157:H7 found in environmental samples collected near the fields that provided the spinach
River water
Cattle feces
Wild pig feces
24. Investigation Findings Related to Growing E. coli O157:H7 found in environmental samples collected near the fields that provided the spinach
Ready-to-eat crops are being grown in close proximity to livestock or livestock waste
25. Investigation Findings Related to Growing E. coli O157:H7 found in environmental samples collected near the fields that provided the spinach
Ready-to-eat crops are being grown in close proximity to livestock or livestock waste
Evidence of wildlife activity in proximity to fields where ready-to-eat crops are grown
Riparian habitats
26. Investigation Findings Related to Growing E. coli O157:H7 found in environmental samples collected near the fields that provided the spinach
Ready-to-eat crops are being grown in close proximity to livestock or livestock waste
Evidence of wildlife activity in proximity to fields where ready-to-eat crops are grown
Irrigation wells used for ready-to-eat produce exposed to feces from cattle and wildlife via surface waterways
Irrigated acreage accounts for more than half of all U.S. fruit and vegetable production. According to the Census, irrigated acreage represented about 69% of total vegetable acreage in 2002, 82% of the land in orchards, and 77% of berry area. Irrigation is critical to agriculture in most Western and Southwestern States, including California. In 2002, California irrigated over 99% of its vegetable crops and all of its tree fruit, tree nuts, and berries.Irrigated acreage accounts for more than half of all U.S. fruit and vegetable production. According to the Census, irrigated acreage represented about 69% of total vegetable acreage in 2002, 82% of the land in orchards, and 77% of berry area. Irrigation is critical to agriculture in most Western and Southwestern States, including California. In 2002, California irrigated over 99% of its vegetable crops and all of its tree fruit, tree nuts, and berries.
27. Other Investigation Findings E. coli O157:H7 was not found in the samples taken from the processor.
28. Other Investigation Findings E. coli O157:H7 was not found in the samples taken from the processor.
Number of other conditions observed that may provide opportunities for spread of pathogens, if pathogens arrived on incoming products.
Harvesting
Cooling
Processing
29. E. coli O157:H7 in the Salinas Valley Watershed Study* January 2005 – August 2006
30. Salinas Valley Watershed Study Prompted by identification of a farm that supplied leafy vegetables associated with 3 separate outbreaks
31. Salinas Valley Watershed Study Prompted by identification of a farm that supplied leafy vegetables associated with 3 separate outbreaks
“Farm” investigation: soil, water, plants, feces tested
32. Salinas Valley Watershed Study Prompted by identification of a farm that supplied leafy vegetables associated with 3 separate outbreaks
“Farm” investigation: soil, water, plants, feces tested
E. coli O157:H7 isolated from samples obtained from 15 of 22 different Salinas Valley (California) watershed locations
Highest incidence occurred after heavy rainfall
33. Salinas Valley Watershed Study E. coli strains representing at least 203 different genetic fingerprint types (MLVA) were identified for all isolates tested
34. Salinas Valley Watershed Study E. coli strains representing at least 203 different genetic fingerprint types (MLVA) were identified for all isolates tested
Sets of strains with identical MLVA types were isolated from watershed samples up to eight months apart, and samples collected at, near, and up to 20 miles away from, a point source on same and different days
35. Salinas Valley Watershed Study E. coli strains representing at least 203 different genetic fingerprint types (MLVA) were identified for all isolates tested
Sets of strains with identical MLVA types were isolated from watershed samples up to eight months apart, and samples collected at, near, and up to 20 miles away from, a point source on same and different days
Strains with nearly identical MLVA types were isolated from 3 farm/ranches separated approximately 18 to 45 miles apart
36. Salinas Valley Watershed Study Results from the Salinas watershed study and the spinach outbreak investigation indicate that E. coli O157 was isolated more frequently from samples obtained near or on grazing land compared to other locations
37. Salinas Valley Watershed Study Results from the Salinas watershed study and the spinach outbreak investigation indicate that E. coli O157 was isolated more frequently from samples obtained near or on grazing land compared to other locations
Results are consistent with the frequent incidence of E. coli O157 reported in numerous surveys of incidence in cattle in other locations of the country and incidence in water
38. Time for a More Holistic View “Balancing Agriculture, Food Safety, and Environmental Concerns” For many years, outbreaks have been considered as isolated events with regards to agricultural production. We need to take a larger view of the effects of food safety on all agriculture and the environment. It is time for a more holistic view of the agriculture system.For many years, outbreaks have been considered as isolated events with regards to agricultural production. We need to take a larger view of the effects of food safety on all agriculture and the environment. It is time for a more holistic view of the agriculture system.
39. Potential Conflict with Environmental and Wildlife Preservation Efforts Concern about the potential conflict between food safety, environmental and wildlife preservation efforts Letter from The Ocean Conservancy – express concerns regarding potential conflicts between actions taken with the goal of improving food safety and policies designed to improve water quality by address the serious problems associated with polluted agricultural runoff.
Letter from California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region – expresses concerns about the minimization or removal of vegetation that will result in water quality impacts and likely increase violations of water quality standards.
Letter from United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service – concerned with potential impacts from food safety practices occurring along the Salinas River, Monterey County, California. Reduced or removal of riparian vegetation or non-crop vegetation may harm steelhead or adversely affect their habitat.
Letter from United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service – concerned that removing the Riparian buffers, grassed waterways, filter strips and other forms of non-crop vegetation will adversely impact long-term efforts to reduce agricultural pollutants draining to the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Letter from United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX – Concerned that new food safety measures may require or motivate changes in resources and wildlife management practices that result in the removal of water quality protections and other stewardship measures.Letter from The Ocean Conservancy – express concerns regarding potential conflicts between actions taken with the goal of improving food safety and policies designed to improve water quality by address the serious problems associated with polluted agricultural runoff.
Letter from California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region – expresses concerns about the minimization or removal of vegetation that will result in water quality impacts and likely increase violations of water quality standards.
Letter from United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service – concerned with potential impacts from food safety practices occurring along the Salinas River, Monterey County, California. Reduced or removal of riparian vegetation or non-crop vegetation may harm steelhead or adversely affect their habitat.
Letter from United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service – concerned that removing the Riparian buffers, grassed waterways, filter strips and other forms of non-crop vegetation will adversely impact long-term efforts to reduce agricultural pollutants draining to the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Letter from United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX – Concerned that new food safety measures may require or motivate changes in resources and wildlife management practices that result in the removal of water quality protections and other stewardship measures.
40. Potential Effect of Food Safety Practices Concerns about the effects of food safety practices on water quality
Riparian buffers, grassed waterways, filter strips and other forms of non-crop vegetation are critical conservation measures for reduction of sedimentation and filtering of other pollutants
41. Potential Effect of Food Safety Practices Concerns about the effects of food safety practices on habitats
Riparian vegetation provides important substrates for aquatic invertebrates, cover for predator avoidance, and resting habitats
Removal of non-crop vegetation may increase sedimentation and lead to habitat degradation
Increased suspended solids from runoff have damaging physical and biological effects
42. Where Do We Go From Here? “Working Together with the Agricultural and Environmental Communities To Find Solutions”
43. We Are In This Together Must work TOGETHER to solve the problem instead of each of us solving our piece of the problem
44. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
45. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
We know cattle are a principal source of E. coli because the organism lives in the intestines of healthy cattle
46. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
We know cattle are a principal source of E. coli because the organism lives in the intestines of healthy cattle
We know cattle manure is an important source of E. coli infection and can contaminate the environment, including streams that flow through produce fields and are used for irrigation, pesticide application, or washing
47. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
Need to identify and better understand the “stumbling blocks” so that we can work together to develop and implement solutions
48. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
Need to identify and better understand the “stumbling blocks” so that we can work together to develop and implement solutions
Are vertebrate populations sources of E. coli O157:H7 contamination of watersheds?
49. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
Need to identify and better understand the “stumbling blocks” so that we can work together to develop and implement solutions
Are vertebrate populations sources of E. coli O157:H7 contamination of watersheds?
Do climate, landscape attributes and irrigation management practices correlate with an increased risk of contamination?
50. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
Need to identify and better understand the “stumbling blocks” so that we can work together to develop and implement solutions
Are vertebrate populations sources of E. coli O157:H7 contamination of watersheds?
Do climate, landscape attributes and irrigation management practices correlate with an increased risk of contamination?
Is in-field contamination associated with management production practices and environmental risk factors?
51. Best Practices Need to better understand the dynamics of agriculture, food safety practices, and the environment
Need to identify and better understand the “stumbling blocks” so that we can work together to develop and implement solutions
Use of guidance to identify the best practices and solutions
52. Next Steps “Future Strategies and Activities for Produce Safety”
54. Potential Interventions Identify risk factors for contamination of fresh produce associated with agricultural and manufacturing practices
55. Potential Interventions Identify risk factors for contamination of fresh produce associated with agricultural and manufacturing practices
Leafy Green Safety Initiative
56. Leafy Green Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2006, between U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and State of California’s Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture
57. Leafy Green Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2006, between FDA and State of California’s Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture
Part of a risk-based strategy intended to reduce public health risks by heightening the focus of preventative food safety efforts on specific products, practices, pathogens, and growing areas of concern
58. Leafy Green Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2006, between FDA and State of California’s Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture
Part of a risk-based strategy intended to reduce public health risks by heightening the focus of preventative food safety efforts on specific products, practices, pathogens, and growing areas of concern
In 2007, FDA, State of California Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture, with the cooperation of industry began visiting farms:
to assess the prevalence of factors in and near the field environment which may contribute to potential contamination
59. Leafy Green Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2006, between FDA and State of California’s Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture
Part of a risk-based strategy intended to reduce public health risks by heightening the focus of preventative food safety efforts on specific products, practices, pathogens, and growing areas of concern
In 2007, FDA, State of California Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture, with the cooperation of industry began visiting farms:
to assess the prevalence of factors in and near the field environment which may contribute to potential contamination
to assess the extent to which Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and other preventative controls are being implemented
60. Potential Interventions Identify risk factors for contamination of fresh produce associated with agricultural and manufacturing practices
Leafy Green Safety Initiative
Tomato Safety Initiative
61. Tomato Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2007, between FDA and state health and agriculture departments in Virginia and Florida, in cooperation with several universities and members of the produce industry
62. Tomato Safety Initiative Collaborative effort, initiated in 2007, between FDA and state health and agriculture departments in Virginia and Florida, in cooperation with several universities and members of the produce industry
Part of a risk-based strategy to reduce foodborne illness by focusing efforts on specific products, practices, and growing areas found to be problematic in the past
63. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
64. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
65. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
66. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
Irrigation water
67. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
Irrigation water
Wells
68. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
Irrigation water
Wells
Procedures for mixing chemicals
69. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
Irrigation water
Wells
Procedures for mixing chemicals
Drought and flooding events
70. Tomato Safety Initiative Virginia based tomato farms and packing facilities were visited:
To assess food safety practices
To assess what degree Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are implemented
To assess a variety of environmental factors including:
Irrigation water
Wells
Procedures for mixing chemicals
Drought and flooding events
Animal proximity to growing fields
71. Potential Interventions Identify risk factors for contamination of fresh produce associated with agricultural and manufacturing practices
Identify possible measures to improve safety
72. Potential Interventions Identify risk factors for contamination of fresh produce associated with agricultural and manufacturing practices
Identify possible measures to improve safety
Develop additional guidance
Refine Good Agricultural Practices
Commodity and/or Region Specific
73. Summary Fruit and vegetables are major components of a healthy diet, but eating fresh uncooked produce is not risk free.
74. Summary Fruit and vegetables are major components of a healthy diet, but eating fresh uncooked produce is not risk free.
Greater application and implementation of good agricultural practices and good manufacturing practices are key to minimizing the microbial hazards and associated risks.
75. Summary Fruit and vegetables are major components of a healthy diet, but eating fresh uncooked produce is not risk free.
Greater application and implementation of good agricultural practices and good manufacturing practices are key to minimizing the microbial hazards and associated risks.
Solutions must balance agricultural, food safety, and environmental needs.
76. Summary Fruit and vegetables are major components of a healthy diet, but eating fresh uncooked produce is not risk free.
Greater application and implementation of good agricultural practices and good manufacturing practices are key to minimizing the microbial hazards and associated risks.
Solutions must balance agricultural, food safety, and environmental needs.
Increasing scientific knowledge and understanding of the risk factors are key to development and implementation of effective risk management strategies.
77. Summary Fruit and vegetables are major components of a healthy diet, but eating fresh uncooked produce is not risk free.
Greater application and implementation of good agricultural practices and good manufacturing practices are key to minimizing the microbial hazards and associated risks.
Solutions must balance agricultural, food safety, and environmental needs.
Increasing scientific knowledge and understanding of the risk factors are key to development and implementation of effective risk management strategies.
Success in improving the safety of fresh produce requires collaboration and cooperation.