F O O D S a F E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
F O O D S A F E T Y Current Status and Future Needs ? ?? ?? Stephanie Doores, Ph.D. A report from AMERIC AN ACADEMY OF MICR OBIOLOGY 1 2 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF MICROBIOLOGY Peter Feng, Ph.D., Division of Microbiology, U.S. Food and BOARD OF GOVERNORS Drug Administration Eugene W. Nester, Ph.D. (Chair), University of Washington Cliff Gabriel, Ph.D., National Security and International Affairs Division, White House Office of Science and Joseph M. Campos, Ph.D., Children’s National Medical Technology Policy Center, Washington, D.C. David Gombas, National Food Processors Association R. John Collier, Ph.D., Harvard Medical School Charles N. Haas, Ph.D., Environmental Science, Engineer- James E. Dahlberg, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, Madison ing, and Policy, Drexel University Julian E. Davies, Ph.D., University of British Columbia James M. Jay, Ph.D., University of Nevada, Las Vegas Mary E. Lidstrom, Ph.D., University of Washington Roger P. Johnson, Ph.D., Health Canada Mary Jane Osborn, Ph.D., University of Connecticut Health Dennis Lang, Ph.D., National Institute of Allergy and Center Infectious Disease, National Institutes of Health Moselio Schaechter, Ph.D., San Diego State University J. Glenn Morris, Jr., M.D., University of Maryland School of Anna Marie Skalka, Ph.D., Fox Chase Cancer Center Medicine Abraham L. Sonenshein, Ph.D., Tufts University Medical Alison O’Brien, Ph.D., Uniformed Services University of the Center Health Sciences Tanya Roberts, Ph.D., Economic Research Service, COLLOQUIUM U.S. Department of Agriculture STEERING COMMITTEE Joan B. Rose, Ph.D., University of South Florida Stephanie Doores, Ph.D. (Chair), Pennsylvania State Abigail A. Salyers, Ph.D., University of Illinois University Skip Seward, Ph.D., McDonald’s Corporation Douglas L. Archer, Jr., Ph.D., University of Florida Leora A. Shelef, D.Sc., Wayne State University James M. Jay, Ph.D., University of Nevada, Las Vegas John N. Sofos, Ph.D., Colorado State University Dennis Lang, Ph.D., National Institutes of Health William H. Sperber, Ph.D., Cargill, Inc. Alison O’Brien, Ph.D., Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences David A. Stahl, Ph.D., Northwestern University Abigail A. Salyers, Ph.D., University of Illinois Norman J. Stern, Ph.D., Poultry Microbiology Safety Unit, U.S. Department of Agriculture I. Kaye Wachsmuth, Ph.D., U.S. Department of Agriculture Phillip Tarr, M.D., University of Washington COLLOQUIUM PARTICIPANTS Robert V. Tauxe, M.D., Centers for Disease Control and Larry Beuchat, Ph.D., Center for Food Safety and Prevention Quality Enhancement, University of Georgia I. Kaye Wachsmuth, Ph.D., Office of Public Health and Robert L. Buchanan, Ph.D., President’s National Food Science, Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Science Initiative, U.S. Food and Drug Administration Department of Agriculture Rita R. Colwell, Ph.D., Sc.D., University of Maryland STAFF Karen L. Dodds, Ph.D., Health Canada Carol A. Colgan, Director, American Academy of Microbiology Stephanie Doores, Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University Peggy McNult, Manager, American College of Microbiology Michael Doyle, Ph.D., Center for Food Safety and Quality Enhancement, University of Georgia 3 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY colloquium was convened by the American Academy of Microbiology to discuss is- A sues relating to the safety of the food supply in the United States and to chart direc- tions for future research. The colloquium was held in Nashville, Tennessee, August 14-16, 1998. The principal findings of the colloquium are summarized below. There is no widely accepted definition of safe food. Food safety is evaluated relative to acceptable levels of risk. Food safety problems evolve with changes in society, economy, lifestyle, and eating habits. Many of the foodborne pathogens themselves are evolving, and new pathogens and strains are emerging that are adapted to new environmental niches. The process of improving the safety of the food supply must recognize and respond to these new challenges. Until recently, surveillance efforts to track the incidence of foodborne disease in the United States have been uneven. Typically, more information is collected and available for epidemic outbreaks than for sporadic cases of foodborne illnesses. Estimates by the Centers for Dis- ease Control and Prevention of the annual incidence of foodborne disease in this country range from 6.5 million to 76 million cases. Annual mortality has been estimated to be as high as 5,000 to 9,000. With the establishment of the FoodNet surveillance system in early 1996, more and better quality data are now being collected. There is growing recognition of the importance of applying advances in the field of micro- bial ecology to the analysis of problems relating to food safety. The focus on particular patho- genic microorganisms is being broadened to include the normal microbiota of foods. The interactions among microbes, plants, animals, and humans must be analyzed at each step along the farm-to-table colloquium. Given the plasticity of microbial evolution, it is important to determine if particular food processing practices are exerting selective pressures for the emergence of resistant pathogenic strains. The increasing refinement of risk assessment techniques presents new opportunities for systematically evaluating challenges to food safety and developing targeted interventions for resolving them. Risk assessment can be used to set research priorities and provide a frame- work for interdisciplinary efforts to improve food safety. 5 INTRODUCTION ood safety is evaluated in terms of ac- such as Cyclospora sp. Acquisition of antibiotic resis- ceptable levels of risk. Given the scope tance and/or increased virulence by strains of older and magnitude of the food supply in pathogens also presents new challenges to ensuring F modern societies, there is no way the safety of the food supply. In addition, increased to ensure that all food is kept free from centralization of food processing presents new risks potential sources of contamination. Instead, food of larger-scale contamination events. safety is enhanced by systematically concentrating In earlier decades, diseases such as tuberculosis upon minimizing opportunities for contamination at and typhoid fever were the focus of food safety con- every point from food production and processing to cerns. Trichinosis and cholera were also more com- distribution, preparation, and consumption. Although mon then. Public health requirements and improve- previous advances, such as pasteurization and refrig- ments in food processing greatly reduced the incidence eration, and contemporary improvements in hazard of many of these foodborne illnesses. The use of ther- analysis and control have significantly improved the mal processes to can food and pasteurize milk sig- safety of the food supply, foodborne disease remains nificantly lessened the incidence of botulism and dis- a major cause of morbidity and mortality. eases commonly transmitted by dairy products The Centers for Disease Control and Pre- (Foster, 1989). Today Clostridium botulinum, Staphy- Although previous vention (CDC) estimates that at least 6.5 lococcus aureus, and Salmonella spp. remain among advances...have million and as many as 76 million cases the major foodborne pathogens, but during the last significantly of foodborne disease occur in the United two decades food-borne diseases such as shigellosis, improved the States each year, with 325,000 hopitali- listeriosis, campylobacteriosis, and diseases caused by safety of the food zations (Bennett, et al., 1987; CAST, 1994; pathogenic strains of Escherichia coli have become in- supply, foodborne Mead, et al.). Estimates of the annual creasingly salient. These new concerns necessitate disease remains a number of deaths caused by foodborne continued investment in research and technology de- major cause of disease in this country range as high as velopment to improve the safety of the food supply. morbidity and 5,000 to 9,000 (Bennett, et al., 1987; Mead, A better understanding of the genetics, physiol- mortality. et al.). Due to differences in data collec- ogy, and virulence of foodborne pathogens, as well tion procedures and methods of analysis, as how microbes, humans, and animals interact, has however, estimates of the annual incidence of provided an intellectual and technological foundation foodborne disease vary widely. Therefore, it is more upon which new pathogen control programs and dis- accurate to judge food safety relative to defined sub- ease prevention strategies are being built. These populations, such as the immunocompromised, than strategies incorporate the latest developments in mo- for the general population as a whole. lecular microbiology and make use of new ap- The process of ensuring the safety of the food proaches for the diagnosis and prevention of disease. supply is dynamic. Changes in the types of food con- More sensitive technologies for detecting and “fin- sumed, the geographic origins of food products, and gerprinting” foodborne pathogens and more highly the ways in which different foods are processed af- advanced information technology systems for en- fect both the potential for contamination and the ad- hanced surveillance allow investigators to detect and equacy of safety measures. For example, a greater trace outbreaks of foodborne illness more rapidly and reliance on prepackaged convenience foods has low- accurately. Advances in risk assessment methodol- ered overall consumer knowledge of safe food prepa- ogy now make