Salmonella Tomatoes

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Last week I reported my best guess was Mexico as the origin for the latest Salmonella tomato dilemma.

This just in:

Today, Deborah Busemeyer, a spokeswoman for the New Mexico Department of Health stated., "Preliminary information" suggests that to be the case but at this time, the FDA's investigation does not confirm that.


Is it just me or is something wrong with the "system" here?

Besides every retailer and wholesale grocer recalling tomatoes to obviously avoid consumer backlash, just what is the outlined process for protecting the consumer?

I don't see anything that resembles a solution., its an after the fact mess for the FDA to clean up every time.

Thats the "system" currently in place. Totally after the fact and innocent people continue to become very ill. Eating a piece of fruit or vegetable is like playing Russian roulette these days.

Salmonella bacteria lives in the intestinal tracts of humans and other animals. The bacteria are transmitted to humans eating foods contaminated with animal feces.

Salmonella bacteria in tomato's has sickened 79,000 consumers since 1990. You would think something would be done to address vulnerability gaps in the current system and if thats not possible then the best solution is to inspect ALL fresh produce "lots" for pathogens at the receivers warehouse before distribution to the consumer.

All fresh produce packed in the field must have a lot number, so it can be traced back to the field. Currently the USDA inspects produce for grading defects (some of which are insect infestation! Yes...it happens and often the product is still sold to the consumer).......... If a receiver agrees to buy a load of produce for a firm price per carton and for some reason the product arrives in fair or poor condition, (or the receiver just feels like it) the receiver calls the local USDA office and orders an inspection. The USDA inspector pulls cartons from the load, inspects them for defects and documents individual lot numbers from the cartons. If the inspection indicates an excess of defects as per the USDA established tolerances, then its out of grade and the receiver faxes the inspection to the grower. The grower then has the choice to pull the load or have the receiver sell it for 15% commission (in most cases) then return the remaining proceeds to the grower.

Who pays for the inspection?

The receiver does and I have seen often enough where buyers/receivers inspect every load because its their objective to void the contracted price. They then can sell the load for $1 a box opposed to a much higher price. It limits their risk but also alienates the grower...and they no longer have hard money involved, its free!

Its a very irresponsible way to do business. When I worked in the industry I properly projected my usage and just bought the best product I could find most of the time.

My point is the USDA is already there but the inspection process needs lots of updating. Someone has to pay for the the inspections but the industry has to first stop dragging their feet and start inspecting fresh produce for pathogens.

The buddy system between grower and receiver is old, outdated and it leaves the consumer wide open.