Happy Valley Dairies Locks Barn Door

Happy Valley Dairies (Tuatapere, NZ) has recalled 2L bottles of pasteurized milk after a "high E. coli count" was found in a sample of the milk, according to a notice posted by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority. The recall includes all 2L bottles identified with Batch 151008 and "Use by" 28 October, onwards.

The milk was sold in supermarkets and retail stores in the Invercargill region of New Zealand's South Island. Consumers who purchased the milk are urged to return it to the store for a refund.

Happy Valley Dairies, a family-owned and operated business, began production about 16 months ago as a vertically integrated boutique dairy. In a departure from usual hygiene requirements, the New Zealand authorities permitted the dairy to maintain its milking shed and processing facility under a common roof. The dairy's owners, Frans and Jeanine Venekamp, prided themselves on the quality and flavor of their dairy products, which included yogurts and cheeses in addition to pasteurized milk. 

The milk recall was Happy Valley's second brush with microbiological reality. Earlier this month, the dairy recalled two varieties of yogurt, due to Listeria monocytogenes contamination. According to Jeanine Venekamp, the Listeria finding spurred the couple to increase their testing frequency. She gave the following explanation for the E. coli result to the Otago Daily Times.

"We have been doing so much testing of our milk and that is why the samples were still warm and that in turn maybe why the E. coli bacteria bug was present."

It's clear from this statement that Ms. Venekamp lacks a basic understanding of the significance of E. coli in pasteurized milk. This microbe, a normal inhabitant of the intestinal tract, is destroyed by pasteurization. There are only three possible explanations for the presence of E. coli in a pasteurized milk sample:

1. Inadequate pasteurization time or temperature (i.e., equipment failure)
   
2. Contamination of the pasteurized milk after it leaves the pasteurizer (i.e., defective equipment, environmental contamination or poor sanitation)
   
3. Improper sampling technique (i.e., operator error)
   

All of these are preventable in a well designed, well maintained, and well run dairy facility. And there is no excuse for a sample to still be warm, as Ms. Venekamp described, when it reaches the lab. A fundamental rule of microbiological sampling is to cool a sample immediately in order to preserve the "snapshot" of its bacterial load.

Ms. Venekamp also complained, during that same interview, that the government was overzealous in the way it disseminated information about the E. coli contamination – broadcasting the information on TV and radio, and publishing the notice in newspapers and online, rather than simply printing a public notice in newspapers. 

The Venekamps have decided to close down Happy Valley Dairies as a result of this incident. It's unfortunate that their boutique dairy experiment ended badly. But there are lessons to be learned. In hindsight, NZFSA should have insisted on a complete physical separation of the milking barn from the processing facility.

And all food processing facilities should be required to have at least one person on staff who has at least a basic understanding of microbiology, sanitation and sampling procedures.

Happy Valley Dairies (New Zealand) Recalls Milk

This morning, the New Zealand Food Safety Authority advised consumers not to drink milk produced by Happy Valley Dairies on or after October 15th, as the milk may be contaminated with E. coli, a normal inhabitant of the large intestine. Most E. coli are innocuous, but a few serotypes – E. coli O157:H7 and E. coli O111, among others – may cause serious gastrointestinal illnesses.

NZDSA has directed the dairy to recall all milk produced on or after October 15th, and is investigating the dairy's other products to determine whether the contamination is more widespread. Consumers who purchased the recalled milk – identified by batch dates of 151008 and later, and use by dates on or after 28 October 2008 – should return it to the place of purchase for a refund.

Happy Vally Dairies is a small, vertically integrated dairy company, owned and operated by Frans and Jeanine Venekamp. The couple owns and milks their own dairy herd, and processes the milk right next door to the milking shed. In fact, the milking shed and processing areas, while physically separated from each other, are both under the same roof. The Venekamp's received approval from NZFSA for this unusual physical arrangement in May 2007. 

As it is killed easily by pasteurization, the presence of E. coli in pasteurized milk indicates either contamination of the milk after pasteurization, or a breakdown in pasteurization controls. It's easy to imagine contamination being carried from the milking shed into a processing area that is located in the same structure.

The Venekamp's take great pride in the quality of their dairy products. Five of their butter and yogurt products were short-listed for the prestigious 2008 Massey University Food Awards. But quality – taste, texture, aroma, etc. – and safety are not synonymous. Safety requires assiduous attention to critical control points (pasteurization time and temperature), equipment maintenance, and proper sanitation.

In the face of two different recalls in the space of a week, NZFSA can be expected to review all aspects of the Happy Valley operation very carefully. I would expect that the dairy will be "asked" to shut down temporarily while the review is carried out. NZFSA probably will allow Happy Valley to resume operations under more stringent conditions – perhaps requiring that the milking shed be located in a completely separate structure, for example.

Encouraging boutique food processing operations such as the Happy Valley Dairies is commendable. But a small operation has the same responsibility to produce a safe food item as a large processor. Let's hope the Venekamp's and NZFSA learn the appropriate lessons from this recall.

China's Adulterated Milk - How Far Did It Travel?

China's melamine-adulterated milk scandal keeps growing larger. The chemical adulterant has been detected in fluid milk, ice cream and yogurt, in addition to milk powder. 

Countries that have imported dairy products from China are scrambling to determine whether those products are adulterated.

• Hong Kong found melamine in eight dairy products manufactured by Yili – one of the two largest dairies in China, and one of the 22 dairies implicated in the melamine investigation – and has ordered a recall of all Yili dairy products in the Territory. The Centre for Food Safety announced that it was testing infant milk powder available for sale in the former British Crown Colony even though government authorities had been assured that the milk powder sold in Hong Kong contained no ingredients from the mainland.
  
• Singapore's Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority has ordered all Yili dairy products removed from store shelves, and is testing samples of Yili products and those from another Chinese dairy company.
  
• Bangladesh has initiated testing of milk powder imported from China. The government indicated that it would impose a ban milk imports from China if melamine is found in any of the samples.
  
• The UK Food Standards Agency issued an advisory to consumers, stating that there is "... currently no evidence that any of the affected milk, milk powder or powdered infant formula has been imported into the UK." The Agency added that it would continue to monitor the situation.
  
• CFIA issued an advisory to Canadians to avoid purchasing infant formula manufactured in China, which may be found in some ethnic food stores. Canadian inspectors are checking retail stores for the imported baby formula, and CFIA has initiated a border watch. The advisory also indicated that Health Canada had contacted Canada's four major infant formula manufacturers to confirm that none of them had used ingredients from China. T&T Supermarket, a major Chinese supermarket chain, announced that it was removing two yogurt drinks manufactured by Mengniu – one of the large Chinese dairy companies implicated in the melamine probe – from its store shelves. T&T has stores in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario. 
  
• FDA issued a Health Advisory to US consumers, warning that infant milk powder formula available in some ethnic stores might contain melamine. The federal agency urged consumers to avoid using the imported infant formula. Milk powder from China is not an approved ingredient for infant formula produced in the United States. 
  
• New Zealand has begun a random sampling of milk-containing products from China sold in Asian supermarkets.
  

There's bound to be more repercussions as the scope of China's adulterated dairy scandal becomes more clearly defined.

Got Campylobacter?

Campylobacter, year after year, is one of the two most common foodborne bacterial causes of gastroenteritis in the United States, with Salmonella being the other. No other species of bacteria – not E. coli O157:H7, not Listeria monocytogenes – even comes close.

Campylobacter, which can be carried in the intestines of birds and mammals, usually is spread through fecal contamination of food or water. Most human infections result from the drinking contaminated water, eating raw or undercooked contaminated meat or poultry, or consuming contaminated raw milk.

The World Health Organization has this to say about Campylobacter and raw milk:

"There are no proven intervention methods to reduce Campylobacter in cattle farms. Prevention of the contamination of raw milk on the farm is not consistently possible; therefore, consumption of raw milk should be avoided."

This statement on the part of WHO is reinforced regularly by the detection of Campylobacter in raw milk sold to retail consumers – in stores, where legal, or through cow-share programs – in the United States. And that message is further underscored by the periodic cases of Campylobacter gastroenteritis that are traced back to contaminated raw milk. Here are just a few recent examples.

• On December 17, 2007, the State of Washington warned consumers against consuming raw milk with a 12/20 "sell by" date from the Pleasant Valley Dairy, after detecting Campylobacter in a sample of the milk. The milk was linked to five cases of Campylobacter gastroenteritis.
  
• In April 2007, New York State issued a recall of raw milk from the Phil Stauderman farm after finding Campylobacter in the milk. There were no illnesses specifically associated with that recall.
  
• In April 2007, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture warned consumers about Campylobacter-contaminated raw milk from the Amos B. King dairy farm in that state.
  
• In August 2008, an outbreak of Campylobacter gastroenteritis that caused 15 people to fall sick, convinced Alexandre Family EcoDairy Farms, a northern California dairy, to end its raw milk program. One of the victims was hospitalized with Guillain-Barré syndrome, a form of paralysis that occasionally results from Campylobacter infections.
  

And today, the California Department of Food and Agriculture advised consumers that it had detected Campylobacter in Grade A raw cream from Organic Pastures of Fresno County. The contaminated cream, which bears a code date of Sep 12, is the subject of a statewide recall and quarantine.

This is not the first time that Organic Pastures has been the subject of a recall or regulatory action. The company's raw dairy products have been linked in the past to an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7, and have also been the subject of a recall due to Listeria monocytogenes. And the owner of Organic Pastures also has crossed swords with FDA for attempting to contravene the federal regulation against interstate transport of raw milk for retail sale.

As we've pointed out several times, consuming raw milk exposes individuals to an unnecessary risk of infection with Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella, Campylobacter and E. coli O157:H7. Young children are especially susceptible to severe – sometimes life-threatening – illnesses when infected by one of these pathogens. 

Think before you drink.

E. coli O157:H7 Infections Linked to Raw Milk – Again

You can't keep a bad bug down!

No sooner does one E. coli O157:H7 outbreak (Nebraska Beef) wind down, than another one begins.

Barfblog and Bill Marler carried reports this morning of an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 in Connecticut. Yesterday evening, Marler also mentioned a separate – and we hope isolated – incident of E. coli O157:H7 in Missouri. Both the Missouri and the Connecticut cases appear to be linked to consumption of raw milk.

According to an article in this morning's Hartford Courant, four people have been diagnosed with E. coli. All four drank unpasteurized milk supplied by Town Farm Dairy of Simsbury, CT. The milk was bottled on three separate dates, as indicated by "sell-by" dates of June 24, July 4 and July 16 on the containers.

Town Farm Dairy is a non-profit business, which is owned and operated by Friends of Town Farm Dairy. Until July 1st, the organization employed farmers to assist in Town Farm's day-to-day operation. When the farmers left, members of the "Friends" board and volunteers took over the milking and farming operation.

The Connecticut outbreak is just one in a long and ever-expanding list of illnesses associated with drinking raw milk or consuming food – cheese, for example – made from unpasteurized milk. Raw milk contaminated with Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter or E. coli O157:H7 has caused serious illness to – AND HAS KILLED – the very young, the elderly, pregnant women (and the babies they carried), and immuno-compromised individuals. All in the name of "healthy eating."

Ironically, one of the favorite arguments of raw milk advocates is that pasteurization destroys the enzymes that keep milk safe from bacteria. How, then, can these people explain the steady stream of outbreaks and infections traced unequivocally back to the consumption of unpasteurized milk? They can't!

The retail sale of raw milk for human consumption is legal in a number of states. Elsewhere, dairy farmers and their customers circumvent the law by adopting "cow share" programs. A customer buys a share of a cow from a farmer and, in theory, is entitled to a proportional share of the milk from that cow. In practice, the customer receives a share of pooled milk from however many producing dairy cows comprise the cow share herd. Some of the reported raw milk outbreaks have been traced back to cow share programs.

In an era of mega farms and multinational food processors, the psychological appeal of drinking locally produced, unpasteurized milk is understandable. But understandable behavior isn't necessarily safe behavior. Consumers who are drawn to the idea of drinking unpasteurized milk should examine the risks carefully before taking that first sip.

Caveat vorador – let the consumer beware – should be the raw milk watchword.

Russia's Time Bomb

There's been a third food poisoning outbreak this month among school children in Siberia. In all three cases, the culprit has been Yersinia enterocolitica.

In the most recent outbreak, 11 children, between 3 and 6 years old, were hospitalized in Krasnoyarsk (eastern Siberia) with symptoms of yersiniosis. A few days before, 65 children from a summer camp in Solnechny also were hospitalized in Krasnoyarsk with similar symptoms. And an outbreak of yersiniosis in Shaktyor sent 21 children from a summer camp to hospital.

While authorities suspect contaminated cabbage salad to be the source of these outbreaks, Yersinia enterocolitica infections most often result from consuming contaminated water, raw or undercooked meats, raw milk, or improperly pasteurized milk.

Rospotreb­nadzora, described by the Moscow News Weekly as Russia's consumer rights agency, recently inspected 2,409 of the country's dairies. Fewer than 58% of the dairies were satisfactory; 19% needed immediate structural renovations, according to the Rospotreb­nadzora report.

The inspections uncovered instances of lack of temperature control during pasteurization and delivery, as well as evidence of unsanitary conditions. The problems were especially severe in Far-Eastern, Siberian, and Ural federal regions, where 12.5% of milk samples failed to meet sanitary standards.

These major lapses in the safety of dairy processing and products translate into frequent, large outbreaks of food poisoning. Last year, several hundred children in the Stavropol region (in southern Russia) were hospitalized in two food poisoning outbreaks that were traced to contaminated kefir, a fermented dairy product. Several dairies in the region had allowed employees suffering from dysentery to continue working, and had fallen short of sanitation requirements in other respects as well.

Gennadiy Onishchenko, Russia's chief sanitarian, has suggested that the dairy industry return to an older method for delivering fresh, clean milk to consumers. He is advocating that consumers be allowed to fill milk jugs directly from parked trucks that haul milk in large refrigerated vats. Pilot projects to test this approach in North Osetia and Krasnodar proved successful, according to Onishchenko.

It's unclear how this "Back to the Future" approach would solve the problems of poor sanitation and lack of pasteurization temperature control that were reported by Rospotreb­nadzora. I suspect that it would simply substitute a different set of control problems, shifting the onus to the Russian consumer to keep their milk jugs clean and to maintain correct storage temperatures.

Until Russia solves the structural and sanitation problems in its dairy industry, its people can expect a regular diet of news articles about yersiniosis, as well as other food poisoning outbreaks.

Liquid Infant Milk Recalled In UK

The Food Standards Agency is advising consumers that SMA Nutrition has recalled a single batch of its "SMA Gold ready to use liquid infant milk" due to curdling.

The 1-litre containers are labeled with batch code 06033G and a best before date of 12 March 2009. No other liquid or powdered products or production batches are affected by this recall.

SMA announced the recall after receiving reports that the contents of some containers had curdled. Customers who purchased the recalled batch are asked to call the SMA toll-free Careline at 0800 089 0075.

China's Latest Food Poisoning Outbreak

USA Today reported yesterday morning that more than 100 children in southeast China were sickened by milk that was contaminated with staphylococcal enterotoxin. According to the Xinhua news agency release, Chinese food safety authorities have issued a public warning and have seized more than 4,100 boxes of milk from the dairy. In addition, the Zhuhai Weiwei Daheng Dairy Co. in Guangdong has recalled more than 2,700 boxes of milk that were not seized by the government.

It's interesting that none of this information appeared during the weekend on "People's Daily Online", "Shanghai Daily.com" or "english.eastday.com", all of which are China-based English-language news web sites. This is not for lack of interest in food-safety related stories on the part of these news sites. A search of the People's Daily Online archives, using the key words "food" and "Salmonella", produced four pages of links to stories about food safety – all pointing to food problems in other countries.

China is trying very hard to present a positive image to the world in advance of the Olympic games. Let's hope – for the sake of Chinese citizens and visitors alike – that there is substance behind the image.

It's Not Always The Raw Milk

I am not a booster of raw milk. As I have posted in the past (click on the "raw milk" topic to access those posts), drinking raw milk can be a very risky business. But I am the first to acknowledge that pasteurized milk – and dairy products made from pasteurized milk – can also be the source of food-borne disease.

This past week's issue of Eurosurveillance reports on an outbreak of hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) in Belgium that has been traced to ice cream made from pasteurized milk. Five children contracted HUS and seven other people suffered severe diarrhea. The ice cream was consumed at the farm where it was produced, and at two birthday parties.

Identical strains of E. coli O145 and E. coli O25 were isolated from the leftover ice cream, fecal samples from patients, fecal samples from calves and soiled straw from the farm. Investigators have determined that the milk used to produce the ice cream had been pasteurized correctly, and that none of the victims had come into direct contact with the farm animals.

The report concludes that the most likely cause of the outbreak was cross-contamination, perhaps as a result of a dairy worker having contact with the farm animals and then accidentally transferring the pathogens from the animals to the ice cream.

This outbreak underscores the need for constant vigilance and for attention to proper hygiene and sanitation in all food processing operations, regardless of size. It is also a reminder that pasteurization is just a preventative – not a panacea.

Milk - The Next Biofuel?

Hot news flash out of Sweden. Wapnö castle, which maintains a dairy herd of 1,000 cows, has found a new use for their milk. Or at least for the energy that is released when the milk is cooled.

Milk leaves a cow's udder at a temperature of 37ºC, and must be cooled quickly to 3ºC in order to prevent it from spoiling. The Swedes are using the warm milk to heat water for the castle (presumably using a heat-exchanger) and plan to replace the castle's entire boiler-based heating system with heat obtained from the milk.

Now that's energy efficiency!

Listeria Outbreak in Massachusetts Milk

It’s not always raw milk that's at fault.

Yesterday, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health announced that four cases of listeriosis (infection due to Listeria monocytogenes) had been traced to pasteurized milk produced by Whittier Farms of Shrewsbury, MA. The 4 victims included 3 elderly people and one pregnant woman. Two of the four have died.

Whittier Farms has voluntarily suspended all operations until the source of the Listeria contamination can be found and removed.

In an earlier post, I stated that one of the reasons to avoid drinking raw milk or eating dairy products made from unpasteurized milk was the risk of contracting Listeria monocytogenes. But what, you might well ask, is this heat-sensitive pathogen doing in pasteurized milk? There are several possibilities, all of which I am sure will be thoroughly checked by the State inspectors and by the company.

1. Faulty pasteurization. An equipment malfunction could result in underpasteurization, either by reducing the length of time the raw milk is heated, or by lowering the temperature at which it is pasteurized. This could allow Listeria monocytogenes to survive, along with other bacteria. But, according to a report in yesterday’s Boston Globe, the pasteurizer was working correctly.

2. Ingredients added after pasteurization. Adding an ingredient, such as a vitamin supplement or a flavoring, to the milk after it has been pasteurized could be a source of the Listeria monocytogenes.

3. Cross-contamination. A faulty pipe connection or a leak in a valve, a heat exchanger, or a pipe might allow raw milk to re-contaminate the pasteurized milk before the milk is bottled.

4. Inadequate sanitizing of processing and packaging equipment. Inadequate cleaning and sanitizing of the pipes and valves through which the pasteurized milk travels could allow Listeria monocytogenes to build up in the system and contaminate the pasteurized milk.

5. Inadequate cleaning and sanitizing of bottles. Whittier Farms is one of the few dairies that still use glass bottles. These bottles must be washed and sanitized before filling.

Listeria monocytogenes usually causes nothing more than mild symptoms in healthy adults, but can produce a severe, even deadly, illness in young children, the elderly, the immunocompromised, pregnant women and their unborn children.

When Clean is Overdone

A dairy in Queensland, Australia has recalled milk that may have been contaminated with a sanitizing solution.

The "PhysiCAL No Fat Milk", sold in 2-liter plastic bottles is from the end of a production run and has a "use-by" date of January 5, 2008. The processor, Parmalat Australia Limited, warns that this milk could cause nausea or vomiting if consumed.

Headline News

It’s interesting how a headline can lead someone astray. A headline in Saturday’s “Japan News Review” announced, “Dutch milk suspected behind Japanese mad cow outbreaks.”

Not waiting to read the article, I immediately dove into the scientific literature to see what I had missed. Was it really possible for mad cow to be transmitted through milk? I couldn’t find a single research article to support this theory.

When I went back and read the original article, I discovered that the cattle hadn’t been fed milk, but rather a milk substitute that contained powdered animal fat. That didn’t make a lot more sense. Tallow (a rendered animal fat) has long been considered a low risk animal by-product by the World Health Organization.

The theory that Japanese cattle were infected with mad cow prions by being fed milk substitute containing Dutch animal fat is an old one. A very similar story appeared on CNN in 2001.

There are other possible explanations for the Japanese mad cow outbreak. The milk substitute was actually processed in Japan, using animal fat from the Netherlands as one ingredient. The powder might have been contaminated by meat and bone meal - a high-risk material for mad cow transmission - during mixing. Another source might have been dried cattle blood, which is sometimes used as an ingredient in mild substitute for feeding cattle.

There’s only one thing I’m sure of. Dutch milk did NOT transmit mad cow disease, in Japan or anywhere else.