A post comparing airlines and food safety got me to thinking: In general, is large-scale-produced food more safe than smaller-scale production?

One factor that is often not considered when we evaluate small-scale production food safety is “assessment bias”. If Joe’s 2 bushels of homegrown tomatoes from the farmer’s market are tainted with Salmonella, it is likely to go undetected or reported. Even if people got sick and reported the illness it is unlikely his tomatoes would be identified as the source and even less likely it would make national headlines.

I don’t think we have good statistics on real safety measures of small versus large production. Yet, food safety, especially for meat, ranked above quality and price in a survey of local food purchasers in the upper midwest.

There are some things “small food” has going for it with regard to food safety:

• Accountability. All producers, large and small are accountable. Small producers are usually directly accountable to the consumer. We put our livelihoods on the line each time we sell an inferior or unsafe product.
• Known source (sometimes). I say sometimes here, because many farmer’s markets sell produce obtained at large terminal produce hubs. Here in Texas, that means that unless you know that your market vendor is growing their own, you may be buying jalapenos and tomatoes from the Rio Grande valley or Mexico (one of the sources for the recent salmonella outbreak).
• Direct relationship with consumer. Having to look my customers in the eye when they buy my beef or ask me questions about my production, quality and safety practices is more effective than a whole slew of federal regulations.

On the other hand, “big food” is often under more rigorous scrutiny and regulation to ensure food safety. Many types of food have mandatory testing not requred for small and local producers. Many of the regulations and production practices in use were put in place to ensure food safety. Small producers often do not have food safety training or food safety plans.

So, don’t presume that local = safe. Ask questions of your local producer about productions practices, food safety, etc. Ask about sources for produce, handling and refrigeration practices for meat and eggs. When purchasing from a small producer it is up to you to be your own “food safety authority”.

We are pleased to present this guest post from Terry Etherton, who normally blogs here.

In the first peer-reviewed study of its kind, a paper*** published in the July issue of the prestigious Journal of the American Dietetic Association (JADA) reports the results of an in-depth survey study comparing retail milk for quality, nutritional value and levels of different milk hormones, including bovine somatotropin (bST).

The study looked specifically at three label claims related to dairy-cow management: conventional milk, recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST)-free milk and organic milk. The recent trend in misleading food labeling based on agricultural management prompted the study.

While minor differences were observed for the three labels, the differences were not “biologically meaningful.” The authors of the study (including me) concluded that label claims “were not related to any meaningful differences in the milk compositional variables measured.” The only difference among conventional, rbST-free and organic milk is price, according to the study, with milk labeled rbST-free or organic selling for anywhere from $1 to $4 more per gallon than conventional milk.

The study will help food and nutritional professionals respond effectively to consumer questions and perceptions about confusing and deceptive milk-label claims that are designed to differentiate rbST-free and organic milk from conventional milk. The objective of these marketing campaigns it to have consumers pay a whole lot for rbST-free or organic milk when, in fact, they are compositionally the same as conventional milk.

***Vicini, J, T.D. Etherton, P. Kris-Etherton, J. Ballam, S. Denham, R. Staub, D. Goldstein, R. Cady, M. McGrath and M. Lucy. 2008. Survey of retail milk composition as affected by label claims regarding farm-management practices. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 108:1198-1203.

WARNING: Take the headline with a grain of salt.

I came across a blog post claiming organic milk is worse than regular milk, and is in fact dangerous. The blog editor has posted liberally elsewhere about dioxins in organic milk: As background to the quote below, the author states that 80% of organic milk worldwide is Ultra-High Temperature processed.

You get far more dioxins with UHT milk than you do with regular pasteurized milk because more dioxins gets digested instead of being flushed out of the body. This occurs because the micronized fat globules in UHT milk are much smaller. As a result, significantly more dioxins from organic UHT milk get into the bloodstream.

This “news” even made it into the mainstream ag news service to which I subscribe.

BUT-being the skeptic I am, I followed up… The bottom line is that I don’t trust the author. His posts claim milk is responsible for acne, death, global warming and is the biggest cause of illness in the world. He is selling a book called “Organic Milk Myth”, among several other books, all of which seem to be aimed at eliminating milk consumption altogether (to be substituted by the “milks” he’ll gladly sell you the recipes to make). Anyone with that clear an agenda is not going to weigh the often conflicting scientific data. In my book, if you don’t consider the validity of the other side’s viewpoint, your arguments don’t hold much water.

There are some valid points in his posts, however. The main thing of value I see in his writing is a point that I have made here many times. Often people buy organic thinking they are getting something they are not. Most organic milk is produced in very similar ways to regular milk. Many organic milk products are UHT pasteurized where their regular counterparts may not be.

There was a good study published recently in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association (JADA) on nutrient and hormone composition of conventional, rbST-free and organic milk.    More on that soon.

There is a post on What to Eat discussing a suite of lawsuits between a meat packing company and a church regarding responsibility for sickening people who ate meatballs at a church fundraiser.

I raise beef to sell at local farmer’s markets. Concern about food safety is one of the reasons my customers buy my beef. Even though my beef is 100% pasture-raised, any beef can still contain e-coli (and even the 0157 strain), because it is present in most environments to some degree. Is my beef safer? Maybe.

There are several reasons we have more ground beef recalls now than in the “good old days” that have nothing to do with whether the animal is grain or grass-fed;

1) we have better surveillance and identification systems. Tainted beef is sometimes identified by random testing and illnesses can be definitively determined to be caused by specific strains associated with ground beef.

2) beef is often ground before it hits the grocery store, giving the organisms time to spread through the product. In the “old days” when grocery stores employed butchers, ground beef was often or usually ground at the store, giving less time for the organisms on the surface of relatively large cuts of beef to be mixed throughout the product.

3) the grind is a mix of several or many animals, sometimes from different processing batches or sources. This increases the chance that one animal carried a pathogen. [theoretically, this would result in diluting the contaminant as well, but the bugs can multiply pretty quickly].

So what’s the bottom line for local beef?

On the plus side for food safety; Local ground beef usually comes from a single animal and is typically ground and frozen within 24 hours of when the beef is processed into individual cuts. It also usually stays frozen until it is purchased. In most localities, beef for resale must be processed under the supervision of a state-licensed inspector, similar to inspectors at larger plants. There is also direct (or at least more direct) accountability between the producer and the customer.

BUT, local producers/vendors are not required to (and usually don’t) have an approved or professional food safety plan. Locally processed beef does not undergo random testing for contamination. Food safety regulations for storing and selling beef vary greatly by location–from the ridiculously restrictive to absent. In our own case, we are concerned enough to monitor our freezers daily and to sell from freezers rather than coolers. We also eat beef from each animal before we sell it.

Nevertheless, there are no guarantees. You can provide the best insurance on ground beef safety. Cooking to 160 degrees, being aware of (and not consuming) beef that smells off or is past the “use by” date, keeping meat preparation areas and utensils separate from other utensils and areas (especially serving) and proper hand-washing before and after handling raw meat are your best assurances of safe ground beef. The American Meat Institute has a handy site for safe handling of all types of meat.

I believe that our meat supply is currently safer than it was 40 or 50 years ago, whether you buy your meat locally produced or at the grocery store.

10 Tips for Homemade Ice Cream Success: From Serious Eats. What would the 4th of July be without icecream? And I staunchly maintain that if you make it yourself, you can consider it a “local food”!

The Small Screen With a Big Impact: from Blogher. Some scary statistics. The average child in the US sees 15,000 commercials annually that promote candy, highly sweetened and processed food and fast food. One more reason to get the kids off their duff and out into the garden!

Best and Safest Sunscreens: Just in time for the long weekend, Environmental Working Group has released a comprehensive review of sunscreens based on UVA and UVB protection, as well as presence or absence of harmful chemicals.

Cow Fat Motor Oil: from EcoGeek. Another cool green-geek find from one of my favorite sites. This motor oil is made from animal fat, biodegrades sufficiently that it can be safely poured on the ground and is non-toxic!

Common livestock production practices coming under fire. from Advocates for Agriculture. Procedures such as castration are coming under fire as being “mutilations”. Being a big proponent of preventing unwanted pregnancies (in any species), this seems like a slippery slope to me.

WIC-ensuring buying power through prohibiting organic: From US Food Policy. There’s no arguing that organic foods are generally higher priced. The Michigan WIC program has placed limits on foods in an effort to increase the nutritive buying power of food stamps. Along with many convenience items, organics are specifically prohibited on many foods.

Nourishing Frugal Food: found via the Nourished Kitchen . The Nourishing Gourmet is having a frugal food festival. July 11th is main dishes and July 18th is sides and salads. Hmm, I’ll have to post a recipe from here to contribute. With two growing boys, I sure know about stretching the grocery dollar!

A recent research study of conventional and outdoor antimicrobial-free (no antibiotics) production systems showed pigs raised outdoors without the use of routine antibiotics carried more bacteria and parasites, according to Feedstuffs newspaper. The research sampled pigs from three states (WI, NC, OH) and compared “niche-market, outdoor and antimicrobial-free (no antibiotics)” to “intensive indoor (conventional)” rearing systems.

Blood tests showed the outdoor pigs had significantly more exposure to Salmonella and Toxoplasma. Two pigs from different outdoor farms had antibodies to Trichinella. Trichinella is the parasite that infests muscles, and is the primary reason we have all been conditioned to cook pork thoroughly. The parasite has been virtually eliminated from conventional rearing systems.

I admit to being a little surprised by the research. In keeping with my science-geek image, I tracked down the authors, who very kindly sent me a copy of the original research paper. The research seems solid, and the stats are supported by other research in this country and in Europe.

So why the higher infection rate in outdoor pigs? The reasons given by the authors include exposure to wild and domestic animals (i.e. cats can carry trichinella), and access to soil and moisture which are viable environments for pathogens.

The skeptic in me can’t help wondering exactly what the outdoor systems studied were? Were they just raised in outdoor pens, or were they “pasture-raised” where they were foraging for a significant part of their diet? It is common in the chicken industry, where “free-range, vegetarian-fed” chicken and eggs abound, for such chickens to have access to the outdoors, but be no more pasture-raised than if they were confined indoors.

It is important to remember that many production practices that come under fire, such as indoor rearing and antibiotics, were put into place to increase food safety and/or animal welfare in response to increasingly intensive animal production. Merely removing these practices without addressing the reasons they were implemented in the first place does not necessarily bring about the benefits to humans or animals envisioned by consumers who purchase based on a “free-range” label.

Since April, there have been 613 people identified as infected with Salmonella St. Paul in this country. For the most part, consumers have embraced the warnings and precautions put out by the FDA. (btw, Barfblog has an excellent collection of posts on this subject, including suggestions for ensuring safety of farmer’s market tomatoes).

From 1998-2005 there were 831 illnesses reported from unpasturized (raw) milk and cheese. Considering the number of people eating tomatoes vs. consuming raw milk, the per-consumer illness rate has got to be much higher for milk. Yet, government intervention in raw milk sales is not met with nearly the same attitude as seen in the case of tomatoes. Why?

For one thing, milk is probably the most emotion-charged food there is. It is so closely associated with children and wholesomeness that is it literally a “sacred cow” when it comes to safety, adulteration, regulation, hormones, antibiotics…. I’ve seen more conflicting statistics quoted about raw milk than almost any other food topic I’ve researched. (What’s that saying about lies, damned lies and statistics?). It’s hard to find a balanced piece of reporting on this topic, but there was one in the Seattle PI recently.

Raw milk advocates abound, and have some valid, or at least interesting points. For one thing, it DOES taste better (IMHO). There are claims of it being less of an allergen, easier to digest, and more healthful in a number of ways. There are a number of sites promoting raw milk. Sadly, most of them seem so fanatical, that I find it hard have faith in their statements and facts. If any of you know of good, sound, science-based raw milk sites or references, please let me know!

So, I’m not going to give you a pat yes or no answer on raw milk. If you choose to go raw, I will advise you to at least be sure of the following:

• purchase from a state-certified dairy (this is one reason I hate to see states outlaw raw milk-it turns it into an unregulated black-market item)
• be absolutely certain the milk is chilled immediately (this is not just stuck in the refrigerator, it is chilled in the equivalent of a circulating ice bath)
• drink your raw milk before it is a week old (the sooner the better). This means a week from when it was milked, NOT purchased!
• Be sure your dairy is testing routinely for coliform and other bacterial contaminants
• visit the dairy, if possible, before you trust their product. i.e. know your producer

I grew up on the raw milk produced by my family’s traditional dairy farm. We drank the milk from our bulk milk tank; it was not pasteurized until it got to the processing plant. BUT, I’m not even tempted to buy raw milk now. The primary reason is that without pasteurization, I am completely reliant on the producer to ensure that my milk is safe. In addition, the raw milk I grew up on was consumed within 24-48 hours of milking. I find it extremely difficult to trust raw milk from a dairy shelf in the health food store. I do know some local, certified raw milk dairies from which I would be comfortable purchasing. They all have waiting lists for customers.

Hi everyone, I’m out in San Diego to attend BIO 2008, the Bio International Convention which runs Tuesday-Friday.  This is the world’s largest biotech conference and more than 20,000 people from around the globe will be here.  The attendees are executives, scientists and researchers who are working, as BIO says, to “feed, fuel and heal” the world.  That’s because biotech applications are used for human health (know anyone who uses insulin?  or is treated for MS?  Those are biotech drugs); used to produce biofuels which will be a hot topic here, and used to modify crops grown for food (corn, soy, cotton, squash, canola to name the most common).

So I’m really excited to be here and learn and mingle.  I was thrilled this morning, when on my way to the gym, I ran into Dr. Florence Wambugu and her associate Daniel Kamanga.  You may recall I’ve written about Florence before.  She’s CEO of Africa Harvest and is based in Nairobi and Johannesburg.  She has a grant from the Gates Foundation to improve the solubility of sorghum which is a food staple in Africa.  Anyway, we had a lovely reunion on the street and will be seeing each other again this week.  Maybe I can even get her to do a guest blog post for us.  In any event, if you have any questions about biotech and agriculture, send them to me and I’ll try to find someone here who can answer them — I mean with 20,000+ experts, it should be easy, right?  I’ll be blogging from here all week — so check back often  to see what’s new.  You can also go to the BIO web site to see the type of programming available in the food and ag track

A Labor of Love: From What’s Fresh. I couldn’t express better myself the philosophy and motivation behind growing and selling local food. Be sure to check out the double chocolate zucchini cake recipe, too.

Jumping on the Healthy Food Bandwagon: from Marketing Profs Daily Fix. Food companies (i.e. Kraft, General Mills, Sara Lee) are answering consumer demands for “Less” everything and the perception of healthier product. Along with this is usually a higher price tag. Is this a good thing?

Ecogeek’s Guide to Saying Thanks to Dad: A green giving guide for Father’s Day. This entry begs the question: Can one buy one’s way to environmental responsibility?

Cloned Meat: A logical next step: From Word of Mouth. An unusually non-emotional discourse on the place of cloning in our selective breeding practices. Here is someone who gets that this is more of a non-issue than one worth “media hand-wringing and deep moral debate about Frankenstein Friesians”.

Food Safety During an Emergency: From Momify. Loss of power during an emergency can endanger the food in your refrigerator or freezer. The USDA has published a Guide that includes tips on what to do in floods, power outages and removing odors from freezers and refrigerators. I wish I had seen that last bit last Thanksgiving, when I forgot to turn my frig back on after cleaning it out and then left for a week out at the ranch!

Safe vs. Organic Personal Care Products:  from BlogHer’s Green and Ecoconscious section.  We touched on this in last week’s Earthlinks.  The author (who also blogs on greenLAgirl) points out there is safety and eco-friendly on both sides of the organic fence in this excellent review.

Celebrating Extinction: From Ethicurean. This is a spoof on bluefin tuna extinction so well written that I took it seriously. After my recent mistaking of the “Obesity Causes Global Warming” for a spoof, I’m convinced that it is hard to tell in today’s world what is outrageous and real and what is outrageous and fictional.

I definitely believe in not taking myself to seriously (except when I am, of course). That’s why the first two sheepI raised for meat were named “Racko” and “Leggo”.

Lest we fall into that trap here, I am adding a new link to our blogroll: the Devil’s Food Dictionary. An unashamed effort on the part of the author to get his book published, here is a hilarious lexicon consisting entirely of lies about food. They are so well written, even science geeks like me get sucked in when he writes an occasional guest essay on the blogs I track.