Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Don’t chicken out on chicken
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Now tracking the new emerging South Africa Omicron Variant

Don’t chicken out on chicken

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
July View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: May 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote July Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Don’t chicken out on chicken
    Posted: October 23 2006 at 1:37pm

Don't chicken out on chicken

By Joe Stumpe

McClatchy Newspapers

(MCT)

Back before the spinach scare, consumers were worried about a little thing called avian influenza, or "bird flu." Chicken producers are still trying to put your mind at ease about bird flu, which, according to the World Health Organization, has not been detected in any chickens in the Western Hemisphere.

Experts say cooking chicken to the proper temperature - 165 degrees - removes any danger from poultry that is infected by any pathogen.

Here are a few more safety tips to keep in mind when buying and preparing chicken.

---

POULTRY POINTERS

_ Select chicken that is clean, cold, tightly sealed and free of bruising. The clearer the packaging, the surer you can be of the latter. Check the sell-by date.

_ Buy chicken near the end of your shopping trip and refrigerate within a half-hour of purchasing.

_ Wash hands and cooking surfaces with hot, soapy water before and after handling raw poultry and other meat.

_ When a chicken is cooked to at least 165 degrees, its juices will run clear, the meat will no longer be pink, and a fork can be easily inserted into it.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 23 2006 at 7:39pm
MississippMama had asked me about some whole chicken that I ordered that come in the can, I am pasting my reply to that thread here too as this thread is specifically about "chicken" as a food source.
 
MississippMama:  Sure.... I went and got a can.  OK... I'll put everything off the can because I don't know what your particular store will need to get it for you.  Again, I special ordered it through Harris Teeter (at no extra charge.)  From the kitchens of "Sweet Sue" and it's titled, "Canned Whole Chicken without Giblets"  FULLY COOKED, Net weight is 50 oz. or 3 lbs. 2 oz. Manufactured by Sara Lee Foods, Questions call 1-800-633-3294.  Call that number and they can tell you who a supplier is in your area or who can special order for you in your area. 
 
We ordered 100 cans.  They come 6 cans to a case if you're ordering them by the case.  They have been great, and when we went to the beach this summer we took 2 cans and some rice and made chicken and rice two nights in our hotel room (it had a kitchen.)  You can add anything to it or just eat it straight out of the can.  There is enough broth off of it that you can really make two meals out of it, by saving some of the broth and putting it over pasta the next night as a flavoring.  We've done that just to experiment with them and it was great.  :-)
Back to Top
sweetpea View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: March 27 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sweetpea Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 25 2006 at 6:33pm
If you're canning chicken (turkey) ... NOW is the best time to get it processed ... the bird flu that everybody is most worried about is not here yet, so with this "safety net" we still have, get those birds processed into chunks, soups, broths, etc., or freeze them up. 
"When an emergency arises, the time for preparation is past."
Back to Top
Mississipp Mama View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: January 20 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 524
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mississipp Mama Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 25 2006 at 8:00pm
 4Abbie&Maddie, thank you for the info.  I didn't know they sold whole cooked chickens in the can until I learned it from this post.  I'll call them tomorrow. 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 26 2006 at 2:02pm
I was looking for the chicken.....
 
Anyone have a purchase site?   Not looking to buy the company...
 

Connors... a Canadian income fund.
 
 
In January 2005, Connors completed the acquisitions of Castleberry/Snow’s Brands, Inc., which holds leading positions in canned clams, clam juice, chili, beef stew, and clam chowder, and Sara Lee’s shelf-stable meats business, including canned and pouched chicken, beef and pork products sold under the Bryan ® and Sweet Sue ® brands.
....................
 
Connors has become one of the preeminent income funds in Canada,” said Centre Partners Managing Partner Bruce Pollack.
 
........................................
 
Find here...
 
 
Excerpt...
 
Dec. 23, 2004
By Julie Jargon
 
Sara Lee selling shelf meat biz
Sara Lee Corp. is selling its shelf-stable meats business to Bumble Bee Seafoods LLC, according to a news release issued today by Bumble Bee’s parent company, Toronto-based Connors Bros. Income Fund.
 
The $45 million deal includes Sara Lee’s canned and pouched chicken, beef and pork products, as well as a license for the use of Sara Lee’s Sweet Sue and Bryan brand names in canned goods.
Because of tough times in the meat industry – increased consolidation and volatility, to name two challenges -- industry analysts long have been saying Sara Lee should consider getting out.
 
.....................................................
 
Interesting what Sara Lee sells...
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 06 2006 at 11:50pm
But will the chicken ,chicken out on us .
 
 

Amid bird flu fears, fire foam OK for killing fowl

Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- The government has approved the use of firefighting foam to kill chickens quickly if there is an outbreak of deadly bird flu in commercial poul try. OuchThe Agriculture Department says water-based foam can be an alternative to carbon dioxide, which traditionally has been used to quickly kill large quantities of birds.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 08 2006 at 2:57pm

Regular Assessment of Bird Flu in Poultry Needed

Thursday, 9 November 2006, 10:57 am
Press Release: United Nations
Regular Assessment of Bird Flu Vaccine in Poultry Needed After Reported Virus Change - UN

New York, Nov 8 2006 11:00AM

A reported change in the bird flu virus comes as no surprise but underscores the need to assess regularly vaccines currently in use for poultry, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said today.

According to a report in last week’s Proceedings of the United States National Academy of Sciences, a new H5N1 virus sublineage in poultry, called Fujian virus, appears to have become the dominant strain of bird flu in parts of Asia.

In a joint statement with the Paris-based inter-governmental World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) FAO noted that there is a wide variety of avian influenza strains in animals, and influenza viruses in general have a high rate of change from season to season and from year to year.

“OIE Director-General Bernard Vallat and FAO’s Chief Veterinary Officer Joseph Domenech warn that with new antigens developing continually in avian influenza viruses, vaccines currently in use for poultry need to be assessed regularly,” FAO said in a news release.

The two organizations continue to recommend that vaccination control measures need to be accompanied by surveillance and post-vaccination monitoring. They also stressed the need to immediately report to veterinary authorities any unexpected poultry deaths.

More information on control programmes based on vaccination in countries where the virus is endemic or where there is a high risk of introduction of the virus is needed, they said, calling for more research funding to better understand the epidemiology and genetic changes of the H5N1 virus.

It is essential during outbreaks that pathogens, such as highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, be isolated from clinical cases and that any changes in the character of the virus be monitored to ensure that vaccine manufacturers are producing vaccines complying with OIE standards which are effective against virus strains in circulation, FAO’s Chief Veterinary Officer Joseph Domenech warned

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0611/S00137.htm

Back to Top
MississippiMama View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: November 07 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MississippiMama Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 08 2006 at 8:04pm
  $ Addie&Maddie, I have tried calling Sweet Sue several times.  I cannot get a return call from them.  Do you have a website address from the place you ordered?
Mississippi Mama
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 08 2006 at 8:17pm
MississippiMama, I didn't order it online, I went to Harris Teeter, a grocery store, and they special ordered it for me at no extra charge (I didn't have to pay shipping!!)  A lot of the larger chains will do that for you, so take the info in to one in your area and see if they'll help you.  That will help you avoid shipping charges as these cans weigh a lot.  I bought 100 at one time, but they said they'd order them in any quantity.  My mother got half, and I got the other half.  I'm going to need to reorder at the first of the year as we've been eating them up!
And if you've got others in family, etc. that might be interested, you could all go into together on your order, and that way you're all taking advantage of them getting it for you.
Let me know if that works.  We love these chickens!
Back to Top
Neeruam View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: October 07 2006
Location: Orange CO, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 65
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Neeruam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 08 2006 at 9:48pm
Originally posted by 4abbie&maddie 4abbie&maddie wrote:

MississippMama:  Sure.... I went and got a can.  OK... I'll put everything off the can because I don't know what your particular store will need to get it for you.  Again, I special ordered it through Harris Teeter (at no extra charge.)  From the kitchens of "Sweet Sue" and it's titled, "Canned Whole Chicken without Giblets"  FULLY COOKED, Net weight is 50 oz. or 3 lbs. 2 oz. Manufactured by Sara Lee Foods, Questions call 1-800-633-3294.  Call that number and they can tell you who a supplier is in your area or who can special order for you in your area. 

We ordered 100 cans.  They come 6 cans to a case if you're ordering them by the case.  They have been great, and when we went to the beach this summer we took 2 cans and some rice and made chicken and rice two nights in our hotel room (it had a kitchen.)  You can add anything to it or just eat it straight out of the can.  There is enough broth off of it that you can really make two meals out of it, by saving some of the broth and putting it over pasta the next night as a flavoring.  We've done that just to experiment with them and it was great.  :-)


4abbie&maddie, what do you do for canned vegetables? I would really be interested in this bulk buying in veggies and fruit.

I haven't really done a lot of prepping because I am trying to figure out a way where I can make bulk purchases and save money.

I went to the 99cent store which was suggested here and bought a lot of tomatoe soups etc. I went to Costco and bought a few cases of peas and corn. Whenever I see legumes on sale at the grocery store I buy as many as I can. But, I'm really having a difficult time at this.

I've got two large storage closets in my garage all ready to stock with preps. I'm all set to prep, but I just don't know what to do!

I don't know how you do it or get your ideas. I'll probably starve if a disaster happens.
    
   
    
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 09 2006 at 5:23pm
Neeruam:  Don't feel bad about not knowing where to start.  I confess that for me it is a lot easier to think out of the box because my parents are and always have been preppers.  My mother gets excited over bulk items, I never understood it and always thought she was a bit nuts about it until I got into it myself.  Now I'm the one standing in an isle with a cart loaded down and people looking at me sideways; I know they think "that lady has either got ten kids at home or she's completely lost it."
 
Here's how I prep:  I have a list of six areas and I hit every area once a month.  Even if I just buy a little in each area, I'm ensuring that I'm going to have a well-rounded set of preps in place instead of just food, but no heat, etc.
 
1. food and water  (to include pets)
2. medicine and personal hygiene (and I'm trying to cover everything here, but we've got backup prescriptions filled for general broad-spectrum antibiotics, benedryl, motrin, Tylenol, and a whole host of other things as I think of if I didn't have access to this stuff what would I desperately wish I had!
3. security (door alarms, ammo, practicing shooting, if you're not a gun fan, then non-lethal items such as pepper spray, a bat.  Trip wires, noise makers, boat horns, whistles, etc.  Whatever you think will help you feel and be secure.
4. heat and fuel  (to include how to heat my home, how to cook and how to clothe my family with warm enough inside and outside clothing that if we got cold we'd still be comfortable.  We bought additional outdoor cold weather sleeping bags, waterproof pants, etc.  Quilts for beds.)
5. Light sources (to include batteries for working them, liquid fuel if it's a hurricane type lantern, plans for how to light and where to light.  Blackout blankets for windows if you're worried about advertising your lights.)
6. Educational materials to home school my kids and also entertainment materials for us.  Games, books, card sets, coloring books, crayons, etc.
 
 
OK, I'll try to hit some basics:
for canned vegetables, I buy them at Dollar General.  They have a VERY large can of mixed vegetables for $1.00 a can.  Just got some with an expiration in 2009.  I use these as a soup base, or add them to a can of vegetable beef soup to plump it out.  They're a bit on the bland side, but with salt and pepper workable and tasty.  I've also bought the crock pot ready meals, Vegetable beef, and added these and it works great.
 
As for the ordering in bulk, my advice is this:  buy some canned food, eat them and make a list of the ones you like.  We have our favorite beef stew, chicken and dumplings, soups, etc.  Then take those, and five at a time, or a workable number, search the stores for the lowest price on those items.  If you find a store that has them at the lowest price and you want a bunch of them, just go in and tell them what you want:  a case, two cases, whatever.  That will secure you that many (however many) at that lowest price that you've found.  It will save you money, if you're looking to buy them all at once to hunt for this lowest price first.
 
Costco and Sams are good too for some bulk items.  For example, I bought a 25 lb. bag of all-purpose flour at Sams for 4.78.  I was amazed.  How do they even make any money off of selling something that's 25 pounds worth and only charge that little?  I don't know, but I got one, brought it home and chucked it in the freezer downstairs.  (Read online that will kill any bugs in it.)  Then I'll take it out and put it in one of these 5 gallon pickle buckets (food grade buckets) I got for free from our favorite restaurant. (and I got loads from the local grocery store's bakery dept... still had icing in the bottom, which I didn't know until my kids came running up to me with red icing all over their faces.  And those bakery food grade containers are great, you can store soooo much in them!!  Rice, bread mixes, sugar, corn bread mix, etc.  Most of the icing containers are about three gallons (can get the icing out easily by soaking hot water in them), and the pickle containers are 5 gallons.  I bought oxygen absorbers (see recent thread on "oxygen absorbers") and I'm putting two in the larger containers and one in the smaller ones.  That will help keep your food a lot longer, and they're only 5.00 for 100 of them.  Keeping your food free of bugs, mice or loss from oxygen is important.  If you buy all of this and TSHTF food preservation will be VERY important to you.
 
The thing about prices on food is once you start paying attention to how much things cost (and it helps to have your list down to your favorites, then you'll KNOW if you're getting a good deal at these places like Sams, Costco, Wal-mart.  Because sometimes they aren't so great, other times you're wondering how the heck they can sell it so cheap.  It pays to know your prices.
 
Ok, for pasta, here's the short on that... basil leaves.  Look around for dried basil leaves, they'll be in a spice type plastic jar.  Take a container, then pour some of the pasta (elbow macaroni, twists, whatever) and put about half a leaf, then pour more, then add the other half, so on.  Bugs that like pasta hate the smell of basil leaves!!  You can do this for spaghetti too, get a long container and put them in there and add the leaves.  And don't worry, the smell of basil leaves doesn't change the taste of the pasta.
 
I've got the wide mouth mason jars and I'm storing things like granola bars (12 will fit in one jar) and the small space left at the top of each jar I'm putting in some free condiments like salt, sugar, etc. from restaurants.  YOu can store loads of things in these jars, hard candy, macaroni and cheese, whatever.  I put an oxygen absorber in, seal it up, put them all back in the mason jar box and put them on the shelf.  That will ensure two things: proper storage for those foods and that you'll have mason jars when TSHTF.  I've got extra lids and rings for the jars.  It's off season, you can find jars at the thrift stores now, and the rings and such are usually still available at your large local grocery store (or online.)
 
Being able to prep ahead for food is really important, but don't forget to prep ahead for your ABILITY to make your own food.  Buy "non hybrid, open pollinating seeds."  The seeds that are sold today at Lowes, Wal-mart, etc. are hybrid seeds, meaning they look and taste great but won't produce more than one or two seasons.  You need to have seeds on hand that if you can get your family through till spring, you can go out back and prepare your own garden.  Have books onhand to tell you how to cultivate a garden, and one onhand to tell you how to can your garden's bounty (your mason jars.)  You don't need to add the stress of learning how to can on everything else right now, but having the jars, seeds and books onhand will ensure you can figure it out on your own later should you run out of time and TSHTF.  When choosing seeds, get potato seeds as they are a staple food, and look for other vegetable that would staple food items.
 
I'm spending this month learning about a lot of things... I've been putting new threads on here to ask questions about things that I probably "should" know but have no clue, like how to buy good firewood, how to cook in my fireplace, etc.  Take time off when money gets tight or when you've had "enough" of the stores to just learn where your knowledge is blank.
 
OK, last thing is keeping an inventory of your food is important so you don't lose things due to expiration dates.  Everyone has their own system, just figure out what works for you.  You're at a great time right now because you've not really gotten started to work that out.  Go on here and look at previous threads about how to do inventory, if you can't get answers you might need, post a thread on it and everyone can chime in.
 
Good luck.  Smile  The important thing is just to get started.  If you need help choosing your first items, choose staple foods.  Rice, pastas, salt, sugar, flour.  That will give you time to go about tasting and making your lists of canned foods. 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 3:58pm
Time to cancel chicken from the grocery list , been off mine for many years .
Here are the risks without mentioning the news from today , looking in the wrong places ............
Most Chicken Harbors Harmful Bacteria

83% of Chickens Tested for Consumer Reports Had 1 of 2 Sickening Bacteria
By Salynn Boyles
WebMD Medical News
Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD
on Monday, December 04, 2006
< = ="/includes/MYWEBMDinc/templates/email.js">
 

Dec. 4, 2006 -- Even if you go for the more expensive organic or antibiotic-free chicken, the chicken you buy at the grocery store probably contains bacteria that can make you sick.

But safe handling and proper cooking can reduce the risk.

A startling 83% of the chickens tested in a recent Consumer Reports investigation were contaminated with one or both of the leading bacterial causes of food-borne disease -- salmonella and campylobacter.

That is up from 49% in 2003, when the group last reported on contamination in chickens.

However, the results are similar to the contamination found in 1997, when almost three-fourths of the broilers Consumer Reports tested were positive for salmonella or campylobacter.

In their new report, "Dirty Birds," investigators with Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, concluded that paying more for a chicken does not increase your chances of getting one free of illness-causing bacteria.

"Overall, chickens labeled as organic or raised without antibiotics and costing $3 to $5 per pound were more likely to harbor salmonella than were conventionally produced broilers that cost more like $1 a pound," they wrote.

Jean Halloran of Consumers Union tells WebMD that fewer than one if five birds tested (17%) were free of both pathogens, the lowest percentage of clean birds recorded since the group began testing chickens eight years ago.

Antibiotic Resistance High

Investigators for the independent consumer group tested 525 whole broiler chickens from leading brands like Perdue, Tyson, Pilgrim's Pride, and Foster Farms, as well as organic and other brands raised without antibiotics.

The chickens were purchased at supermarkets, mass retailers, gourmet shops, and natural food stores in 23 states last spring.

Among the findings:

  • 15% of chickens tested were contaminated with salmonella, compared to the 12% reported by Consumers Union in 2003.
  • 81% harbored campylobacter, up from 42% in 2003. This bug is the main identified cause of bacterial diarrheadiarrhea illness in the world.
  • 13% of chickens were contaminated with both bacteria, up from 5% in 2003.
  • 84% of the salmonella organisms analyzed and 67% of the campylobacter were resistant to one or more antibiotics. In the 2003 report, 34% of the salmonella and 90% of campylobacter were resistant.

"The problem of antibiotic resistance is related to both the widespread use of antibiotics in animal feed to promote growth and the widespread use in humans," Halloran says.

Major brands tested did not show better results than smaller brands, overall, based on tests of 78 chickens from each brand.

Among major brands, salmonella contamination ranged from a low of 3% in Foster Farms chickens to a high of 17% in chickens processed by Perdue.

But Perdue had the lowest level of campylobacter-contaminated chickens, with 74%; Tyson had the highest, at 89%.

Burning at both ends .
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 4:10pm
I have brought Anharra's post over here from news in hope you see this .
 
Is The poultry Vet around? hello? 
 
I would like to know if they have tested the canned chicken?  Are people much less likely to get diarrhea ?
 
I think 81% for campylobacter is terrible.  :(
 
I would buy it canned if it's "safe" ?
Back to Top
nwprepper View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: August 01 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 78
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nwprepper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 4:26pm
Candles I'm confused - I have pretty much always assumed that chicken contains salmonella & other nasties. Even back on the farm, chicken blood has always been just plain dangerous - isn't that assumed? They die when you cook it, right?

Or is this some new/worse development?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 5:13pm
Originally posted by nwprepper nwprepper wrote:

Candles I'm confused - I have pretty much always assumed that chicken contains salmonella & other nasties. Even back on the farm, chicken blood has always been just plain dangerous - isn't that assumed? They die when you cook it, right?

Or is this some new/worse development?
Hi nwprepper  I am confused too hanging out for more input . My concerns years ago were the vaccines  given to chickens that slowed me down from buying chicken .I knew fresh unfrozen chickens in New Zealand were making folk ill , after reading news . But there is always the getting home from the shop with fresh produce in the car , with our climate . These are medical guys doing the article , thats why I posted it .  I thought all meats once cooked were okay too , like Anharra waiting to hear .
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 7:32pm
That new Dr. that wrote the book, that the link is posted here on our site. He said that if we killed all the ducks, we could pretty much eradicate flue. If we culled all the chickens right now, before this thing mutates, we would eliminate the bird flu. Not only will I not eat it, I am for killing them all. It wont happen of course. AS he says, the reason why, is money. That to me is sad. I would rather never see a chicken again, then risk the lives of all these people and kids. If this thing hits, I hope when society as we know it is gone, we will think that chicken was worth it.
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2006 at 8:02pm
Cooking meat kills salmonella and campylobacter, as does conventional canning, which achieves at least the same temperatures as home cooking, usually under more controlled conditions.  One of the issues that was not mentioned is that detection methodology for both salmonella and campylobacter has significantly improved over the last decade - in other words, we can now detect much lower levels of both bugs, depending on the culture techniques used.  So the number of positive birds may be higher now, because we can detect lower numbers of the bugs per bird, if I've explained that so it makes any sense.

At end of day, though, the key point is that if you cook it and handle it properly, or get it canned, neither the salmonella, nor the campylobacter, nor the antibiotic-resistant bugs, nor whether it's organic or conventional, nor its flu status will harm you.

USDA/FSIS/CDC also report lower levels of food-borne illness recently related to meats, if I remember correctly, which tends to support possibility that difference in percent positives reported may be due to methodology - that's speculation on my part - I have not reviewed the methods used in the articles, but I would be rather surprised if the same techniques were used both now and some years ago.

Hope this helps.

The good Dr. that wants to kill all the ducks needs to include all the chickens, geese, turkeys, and probably a good number of migratory waterfowl/shorebirds, and maybe some cats, dogs, pigs, vultures, occasional humans, stone martins, and who knows what else.  I sincerely hope the recommendation was not made seriously.  And then there's frozen waterfowl-fouled water - should it be boiled, perhaps?  Sorry - been a long day.  However, the idea of cooking the Quinghai Reservoir is a little startling.....


Back to Top
July View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: May 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote July Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2006 at 5:31am
 
January 2007
 
Dirty birds
 
Even ‘premium’ chickens harbor dangerous bacteria

 
Illustration by Stuart Bradford
If you eat undercooked or mishandled chicken, our new tests indicate, you have a good chance of feeling miserable. CR’s analysis of fresh, whole broilers bought nationwide revealed that 83 percent harbored campylobacter or salmonella, the leading bacterial causes of foodborne disease.

That’s a stunning increase from 2003, when we reported finding that 49 percent tested positive for one or both pathogens. Leading chicken producers have stabilized the incidence of salmonella, but spiral-shaped campylobacter has wriggled onto more chickens than ever. And although the U.S. Department of Agriculture tests chickens for salmonella against a federal standard, it has not set a standard for campylobacter.

Our results show there should be. More than ever, it’s up to consumers to make sure they protect themselves by cooking chicken to at least 165° F and guarding against ­cross-contamination.

Think premium brands are safer? Overall, chickens labeled as organic or raised without antibiotics and costing $3 to $5 per pound were more likely to harbor salmonella than were conventionally produced broilers that cost more like $1 per pound.

Moreover, most of the bacteria we tested from all types of contaminated chicken showed resistance to one or more anti­biotics, including some fed to chickens to speed their growth and those prescribed to humans to treat infections. The findings suggest that some people who are sickened by chicken might need to try several antibiotics before finding one that works.

In the largest national analysis of contamination and anti­biotic resistance in store-bought chicken ever published, we tested 525 fresh, whole broilers bought at supermarkets, mass merchandisers, gourmet shops, and ­natural-food stores in 23 states last spring. Represented in our tests were four leading brands (Foster Farms, Perdue, Pilgrim’s Pride, and Tyson) and 10 organic and 12 nonorganic no-antibiotics brands, including three that are “air chilled” in a newer slaughterhouse process designed to re­duce contamination. Among our findings:

  • Campylobacter was present in 81 percent of the chickens, salmonella in 15 percent; both bacteria in 13 percent. Only 17 percent had neither pathogen. That’s the lowest percentage of clean birds in all four of our tests since 1998, and far less than the 51 percent of clean birds we found for our 2003 report.

  • No major brand fared better than others overall. Foster Farms, Pilgrim’s Pride, and Tyson chickens were lower in salmonella incidence than Perdue, but they were higher in campylobacter.

  • There was an exception to the poor showing of most premium chickens. As in our previous tests, Ranger--a no-antibiotics brand sold in the Northwest--was extremely clean. Of the 10 samples we analyzed, none had salmonella, and only two had campylobacter.

  • Among all brands, 84 percent of the salmonella and 67 percent of the campylobacter organisms we analyzed showed resistance to one or more antibiotics.

HOW THE BUGS GET TO YOU

Chickens become contaminated in many ways, among them by pecking at insects that pick up bacteria from the environment, pecking at droppings that carry germs, or drinking contaminated water. Both salmonella and campylobacter colonize the birds’ intestines (usually without harm), but birds typically harbor more campylobacter than salmonella, and it spreads through flocks faster.

Among the measures taken to limit bacteria in chicken houses: disinfecting coops that may hold as many as 30,000 birds, shielding against bacterial carriers such as insects and rodents, ensuring that feed is clean, and using powerful ventilation systems to keep the chickens’ bedding drier and less inviting to germs. But when a chicken is slaughtered, bacteria in its digestive tract can wind up on its carcass, where some hide in feather follicles.

To keep contamination in check, processors follow procedures collectively known as HACCP (pronounced hass-ip). The initials stand for Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point, the consumer’s main protection against contaminated chicken. HACCP requires companies to spell out where contamination could be controlled during processing, then build in procedures--such as scalding carcasses--to prevent it.

But our tests show the current practices aren’t enough. Bell & Evans, producer of ­broilers raised without antibiotics, spent $30 million to modernize its processing plant in 2005, including $9 million for a high-tech air-chill system designed in part to reduce cross-contamination. The system whisks carcasses on two miles of track through chambers in which they’re misted and chilled with air, then submerged in an antimicrobial dip. Tom Stone, the company’s marketing director, says the measures helped reduce the rate of salmonella to less than 3 percent in recent in-house tests of chickens done before packaging. But in our tests of 28 store-bought chickens, 5 of the Bell & Evans samples had salmonella and 19 had campylobacter.

When contaminated chickens arrive at supermarkets, problems can multiply. Just one slip-up in storage, handling, or cooking, and you’re at risk. Both salmonella and campylobacter can cause intestinal distress, and campylobacter can also lead to meningitis, arthritis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome, a neurological disorder. Campylobacter and salmonella from all food sources sickened more than 3.4 million Americans and killed more than 700, according to the latest estimates from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, dating from 1999.

The CDC notes that the rate of ­laboratory-confirmed infections has decreased somewhat since 2001. However, the toll may be far higher than the numbers indicate because only a small percentage of foodborne illnesses are reported to public-health authorities. The CDC said that in 2004, poultry was involved in 24 percent of outbreaks in which a single product was identified, up from 20 percent in 1998. Also in 2004, the CDC noted, 53 percent of campylobacter samples and 18 percent of salmonella samples were resistant to at least one antibiotic.


WHAT THE NUMBERS SHOWED

Contamination. Among the major brands, campylobacter incidence ranged from 74 percent, in Perdue, to 89 percent, in Tyson. Samples from organic and ­no-antibiotics brands, as a group, averaged within that range.

Salmonella incidence in Foster Farms, Tyson, and Pilgrim’s Pride was 3 percent, 5 percent, and 8 percent, respectively--notably lower than in the organic and no-­antibiotics types, which had an overall incidence of roughly 25 percent.

None of Ranger’s 10 samples harbored salmonella. We questioned Rick Koplowitz, chief executive officer of Draper Valley Farms, which raises Ranger chickens, but he revealed no unusual measures to prevent contamination.

Antibiotic resistance. When we took bacteria samples from contaminated broilers and tested for sensitivity to antibiotics, there was evidence of resistance not just to individual drugs but to multiple classes of drugs. That indicates there may be fewer to choose from, and infections may be more stubborn. We didn’t have enough data to assess whether there were differences in resistance among brands.

It’s not surprising that we found ­antibiotic-resistant bacteria even in chickens that were raised without antibiotics: Those germs are widespread and can persist in the environment.

Twenty percent of campylobacter samples were resistant to ciprofloxacin (Cipro), a drug similar to the one the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned chicken producers from using as of September 2005 to protect its effectiveness in people.


HOLES IN THE SAFETY NET

Inspectors for the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) check carcasses in each plant and reject those with visible fecal matter, defects, and signs of illness. They also collect one broiler on each of 51 consecutive days of chicken production and have it tested for salmonella. Asked if the agency has enough funds to inspect chickens adequately, FSIS spokesman Steven Cohen said it did.

Plants that produce more than 12 salmonella-positive samples during that time fail to meet the minimum federal standard. When a plant fails, the USDA can suspend chicken production, but it has no authority to levy fines and can’t close plants by withdrawing inspectors solely because a plant doesn’t meet the federal salmonella standard, a federal court ruled in 2001. To get processors to clean up their act, the USDA threatened in February 2006 to publicly disclose processors’ salmonella test results.

A nonprofit group beat the agency to it. In July 2006, Food & Water Watch, an environmental health organization based in Washington, D.C., published the names of 106 chicken processing plants--including some operated by the four leading brands we tested--that failed federal salmonella standards in at least one test period between 1998 and 2005. When we contacted those four companies for comment, all said they’ve taken steps to reduce salmonella contamination.

In August 2006, the USDA reported that the rate of positive salmonella tests in broilers had jumped to 16.3 percent in 2005, up from 11.5 percent in 2002. Richard Lobb, a spokesman for the National Chicken Council, a trade group, said it’s not clear why the rate went up in 2005, but he cited preliminary government data indicating that it has since declined. Cohen of the FSIS added that the agency has begun an initiative aimed at curbing salmonella by focusing on plants that failed the federal standard or had problems meeting it.

That leaves campylobacter. Now that a test method was recently validated, Cohen said, the USDA has announced it will begin collecting data on campylobacter in broilers in processing plants nationwide. It’s too soon to say whether data collection will lead to a federal limit and routine testing, he added.

Based on our tests, that’s what needs to happen. All indications are that it won’t be easy to banish campylobacter, but the government can start by implementing a realistic standard, then start testing and monitoring in processing plants. Some of the chicken producers we asked said they already target campylobacter in HACCP plans. Others said they assume that what works against salmonella will also work against campylobacter. Clearly, it doesn’t.

“The USDA has moved at glacial speeds on controlling campylobacter in the chicken industry,” says Caroline Smith De Waal, director of food safety for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. For more on how the government can make food safer, see Food safety.


WHAT YOU CAN DO

Make chicken one of the last items you buy before heading to the checkout line. If you choose organic, no-­antibiotics, or air-chilled chicken, do so for reasons other than avoiding bacteria.

  • In the supermarket, choose well-wrapped chicken, and put it in a plastic bag to keep juices from leaking.

  • Store chicken at 40° F or below. If you won’t use it for a couple of days, freeze it.

  • Thaw frozen chicken in a refrigerator (in its packaging and on a plate), or on a plate in a microwave oven. Cook chicken thawed in a microwave oven right away.

  • Separate raw chicken from other foods. Immediately after preparing it, wash your hands with soap and water, and clean anything you or raw chicken touched.

  • To kill harmful bacteria, cook chicken to at least 165° F.

  • Don’t return cooked meat to the plate that held it raw.

  • Refrigerate or freeze leftovers within two hours of cooking.
Back to Top
July View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: May 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote July Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2006 at 5:46am

Chicken

Think the subject of contaminated chicken has been done to death?

Think again.

Find out just how foul eating fowl can be.


Consider these realities:

The average North American eats more than 50 pounds of chicken per year roughly double the amount consumed just 20 years ago.

At least 1,000 US citizens are killed each year by contaminated chicken. As many as 80 million others are sickened.

Inspectors have about two seconds to visually examine the inside and outside of each chicken. At this rate, inspectors may examine 12,000 or more chickens in one day.

There are presently 1,370 unfilled federal meat inspector positions. In 1994 and 1995, more than 1.9 million inspection tasks went unperformed because of these vacancies.

A 3-ounce serving of chicken breast contains 75 mgs of cholesterol. A 3-ounce serving of ground beef contains 72 mgs. No plant foods contain cholesterol.

The owner of the nation's largest chicken producer Don Tyson earns about $5 million in salary, dividends and bonuses each year. Pay for workers on the poultry line are less than for any other manufacturing industry except apparel.

More than 90 percent of US chickens and eggs are produced on factory farms. Roughly 7.5 billion chickens were slaughtered in the US in 1995.

In a single year, US poultry operations use enough water to meet all the domestic needs of nearly 4.5 million North Americans.

Producing one egg takes about 63 gallons of water.

Full citations for this brochure are available upon request or see www.earthsave.org.


Eating chicken is proving to be an especially hazardous enterprise...

For starters, approximately 30 percent of chicken is tainted with Salmonella and 62 percent with its equally virulent cousin, Campylobacter.

Time magazine calls raw chicken "one of the most dangerous items in the American home," and each year in the US alone, contaminated chicken kills at least 1,000 people while sickening as many as 80 million others.

It's no surprise really that chicken is decidedly foul. Desperately crowded factory farms--where more than 90 percent of US chickens and eggs are raised--are fertile breeding grounds for disease. Additionally, slaughterhouses do an excellent job of spreading pathogens from one bird to the next.

Even if chicken was pathogen-free (clearly an unsafe assumption for any shopper to make), it would hardly qualify as wholesome. Not only is chicken nearly devoid of health-promoting compounds found only in plant foods--things like complex carbohydrates, antioxidants, phytochemicals and fiber--it also contains other suspect ingredients rarely recommended as part of a healthy diet.

Cholesterol. You'll find just as much artery-filling cholesterol in chicken as in beef and pork. Cholesterol is found exclusively in muscle tissue and can't be trimmed away.

Protein. People can meet or exceed their protein requirements simply by choosing a varied plant-centered diet and eating ample calories, says the American Dietetic Association. No animal foods are necessary. Many North Americans already eat twice the protein they need, and excessive protein has been linked to osteoporosis, kidney disease and other medical problems.

Antibiotic Residues. Roughly half of all antibiotics used in the US are fed to farm animals. If meat contains drug residues, it's highly unlikely to be detected, as these tests are rarely conducted.

Mystery Feed. Each year billions of pounds of slaughterhouse leftovers are made into animal reed, much of it for chickens. Chickens are also sometimes fed manure, which may contain pesticides, drug residues, pathogens, heavy metals, hormones and microbial toxins.

If you took a raw chicken and dropped it in a cow pile or in a pile of chicken manure, would you pick it up, wash it off and cook it for dinner? That's just about what's happening at these plants.
-- Pat Godfrey, Inspector
Tyson's chicken processing plant, Springdale, Arkansas

Despite millions of people falling ill each year, the US Department of Agriculture (the government agency responsible for meat safety) continues to stamp every thigh, breast and wing with its seal of approval, prompting many to ask, "Who's minding the henhouse?" Sadly, USDA has historically placed the interests of the influential poultry industry ahead of those of the poultry-consuming public. A new, more-scientific governrnent meat inspection system has been agreed upon in principle, but tangible improvements remain years away.

A poultry plant is not a good place to work. When you miss a day they punish you. If you're sick they punish you. The supervisors holler at you, but you can't say anything. They treat you like a child.
-- Wonder Sims, 23, poultry worker.

The horrors found routinely inside chicken slaughterhouses are not limited to grisly scenes of disassembled chickens. They also include treacherous working conditions and dismally low wages. In 1994, a Wall Street Journal writer described the work he experienced first-hand in several slaughterhouses as, "faster than ever before, subject to Orwellian control and electronic surveillance, arid reduced to limited tasks that are numbingly repetitive, potentially crippling and stripped of any meaningful skills or chance to develop them... The work was so fast-paced that it took on a zany chaos, with arms and boxes and poultry flying in every direction."

Chicken production also exacts a steep environmental toll. It takes up to 700 gallons of water, six pounds of grain, and the equivalent of about one-fifth a gallon of gasoline to produce one pound of chicken. In addition, manure from the chicken industry is directly responsible for wide-spread pollution of waterways and groundwater.

Unless we dramatically curb our appetite for chicken, the future seems grim. We can expect more people hospitalized and killed by contaminated chicken, and more families mourning the loss of loved ones. We can look forward to more rivers ;and drinking water fouled with manure, more workers facing perilous tasks and lousy pay, and much more animal suffering. Despite the present horrors and bleak forecast, however, consumers continue to sleepwalk through the checkout line with shopping carts full of fowl. One can only wonder, when will we awaken from this nightmare?

For references and more information on this subject, please see: http://www.earthsave.org/chicken.htm

 
Copyright 1997 Earthsave International
Back to Top
July View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: May 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote July Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2006 at 5:51am


FOOD SAFETY >>  FOODBORNE DISEASE >>  NEWS >> 

Salmonella enteritidis on the rise in chickens

Lisa Schnirring * Contributing Writer

Nov 22, 2006 (CIDRAP News) – Sampling by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) over the last 5 years has shown a fourfold increase in the number of broiler chicken carcasses contaminated with Salmonella enterica serotype enteritidis, a strain previously associated mainly with eggs.

The findings, published yesterday in the December issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID), do not necessarily signal an overall increase in the risk of chicken-related Salmonella infection, but they appear to reinforce other evidence about the emergence of S enteritidis in chicken.

The authors, led by Sean F. Altekruse of the USDA, note that two recent US case-control studies from the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet) associated eating chicken with sporadic human infections with S enteritidis. Though the overall incidence of human salmonellosis was lower in 2005 than in the mid 1990s, FoodNet surveillance indicated the incidence of S enteritidis infections was about 25% higher.

The USDA researchers tested rinse water samples collected from 2000 through 2005 at plants that slaughter broiler chickens. Eligible poultry processors were randomly selected each month for sampling, which involved collecting rinse water used on one chilled broiler chicken carcass per day for 51 days. Samples were sent for analysis to USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) laboratories in Georgia, California, and Missouri.

Over the 6-year study, researchers identified 280 S enteritidis isolates from 51,327 broiler rinses; the annual number of isolates rose from 23 in 10,057 samples in 2000 to 120 in 9,592 samples in 2005. As a proportion of all Salmonella strains found, S enteritidis increased from 2.5% in 2000 to 7.7% in 2005.

The proportion of establishments that had positive tests increased from 17 of 197 (9%) in 2000 to 47 of 187 (25%) in 2005. In addition, the number of states where the strain was found increased from 14 in the 2000-2002 period to 24 in the ensuing 3 years. Two S enteritidis phage types accounted for most isolates from broiler rinse water: PT 8 and PT 13.

The researchers write that the sampling program is not designed to estimate national prevalence of poultry contamination, because it doesn't consider production volume or regional or seasonal effects, but the findings are significant.

"Enteritidis in broilers is noteworthy given the increase in human Salmonella enteritidis infection rates in the United States and recent findings that eating chicken is a new and important risk factor for sporadic infection," they state.

They point to a recent FoodNet report that showed a strong association between infection with S enteritidis phage types 8 and 13 and eating chicken. "The possible emergence of these two phage types in broiler chickens suggests that industry should implement appropriate Salmonella enteritidis controls for broiler chickens," the authors write.

Craig Hedberg, PhD, a foodborne disease expert and associate professor of environmental and occupational health at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, said the identification of a different serotype in broiler chickens by itself doesn't mean that eating or handling chicken is becoming more dangerous.

"The implications are mostly for how we evaluate our surveillance system," he told CIDRAP News. "There are about 50 different serotypes, and the clinical illness is the same [for all serotypes]."

Hedberg said the findings should prompt renewed attention to S enteriditis control programs in egg production and that it's difficult to disentangle the risk factors for the organism in chickens. The egg and broiler industries are very different and their disease-control strategies vary, he said.

Earlier this year, the USDA reported evidence of a steady increase in overall Salmonella contamination in broiler chickens since 2002, with 16.3% of samples testing positive in 2005. The trend prompted the FSIS to announce plans to report test results faster and increase monitoring of processing plants that have high numbers of positive samples. The Salmonella initiative is patterned after a recent FSIS program aimed at ground beef, which the agency says led to a 40% reduction in the number of Escherichia coli O157:H7 illness cases.

Meat and poultry producers that haven't reduced the percentage of positive Salmonella tests to no more than half the FSIS performance standard by July 2007 will face consequences, the USDA authors report. For example, the FSIS may post test results, including processing plant names, on the Web for products that have not made sufficient progress.

However, they say that voluntary quality-assurance programs enacted by the egg industry in the 1990s were enough to control S enteritidis in eggs. Many of the interventions are adaptable to broiler chickens, the authors write, including monitoring and sanitation of breeding flocks, hatcheries, broiler flocks, and slaughtering facilities.

Altekruse SF, Bauer N, Chanlongbutra A, et al. Salmonella enteritidis in broiler chickens, United States, 2000-2005. Emerg Infect Dis 2006;12(12):1848-52 [Full text]

 

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2006 at 6:34am
For what it's worth, I eat chicken almost every day.  BBQ'd, boiled for burritos or tacos, baked in a casserole, saute'd, whatever.  I have never had food poisoning or any sickness from chicken.  I cook it, I eat it.  I'm 50 years old.  Lucky?  No, I cook it right and I wash my hands.  I can't eat beef, pork is too fatty, I don't like fish, and I refuse to become a vegan. 
 
"Oh, what would I do if they take my chicken away!"  Me, Dec 2006
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2006 at 11:16am
The Consumer Reports article was based on a 500-chicken sample - USDA tests tens of thousands each year.

Earthsave is not exactly an unbiased source, and completely capable of factual inaccuracies.  Each pound of chicken produced in the US requires about 2 pounds of feed.  Each pound of feed is about 60% corn - so each pound of chicken requires 1.2 pounds of corn, not 6.  The 700 gallons of water figure is likewise completely over-inflated.  The highest figure I remember is about 50 gallons per 4.5 pound bird, and that was some years ago in an incredibly inefficient operation.  I have no idea where they're getting their figures, and they don't say.

Antibiotic residues - USDA and FDA take samples each day in each plant for arsenic, antibiotic or pesticide residues.  Violations are virtually non-existent - check the USDA website.  Violations occur when levels exceed established thresholds.  Those thresholds were usually derived by using at least a 10-fold safety factor from levels that had any detectable (not harmful, but detectable effect).

The comments from unionized inspectors are particularly intriguing since union negotiations and objections to new inspection procedures have been some of the main delays and stumbling blocks to implementing more effective inspection procedures.  After all, an inspector can't see a salmonella bacteria at one bird every five minutes or one every 12 seconds - inspectors can't see them at all.  But just let a system be proposed that takes inspectors off the line doing poke and sniff and orients inspection assets to more carefully policing plants with problems as opposed to leaving those that have pride in their products alone, and watch the foot-dragging start - union jobs at stake!

Am I defending agriculture?  You bet.  But then agriculture's what I do, and I'll tell you that up front.  CR's gotta sell magazines; Earthsave's gotta sell their position, and again, food-borne illlness from meat is going down, not up (check USDA and CDC websites).

Merry Christmas!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2006 at 5:25am
             Poultryvet thanks for the posts .Thanks for sharing your knowledge . I can't shop before I check your post first.  Cheers . and Merry Xmas to you .Enjoy....
 
Chicken health claims misleadingConfused
December 7th, 2006

Claims that organic chicken may be "not as healthy" for people as non-organic chicken have been questioned by a leading organic body.

OF&G Chief Executive, Richard Jacobs

Some national newspapers have carried reports on research published in the International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition which claims that organic chicken was found to have lower levels of omega-3 fatty acids and anti-oxidants than the non-organic alternative.

Organic Farmers & Growers (OF&G), which inspects and licenses around three quarters of UK organic eggs and poultry, said the reporting of the findings was misleading.

OF&G Chief Executive, Richard Jacobs, said: "The findings of this research flies in the face of all the other research into the properties of organic food. I'm not a scientist, but I would be amazed if more research does not emerge to debunk this report. In fact, the report did not focus on organic chicken and the comparisons highlighted were a minor part of it.

"Some commentators have latched on to this and used it to attack organic farming, but I think they've all missed the crucial point. Organic is not first and foremost about making food healthier, although if that happens it is ideal. Crucially though, organic farming brings huge welfare benefits to animals as well as ensuring that the way they are farmed is environmentally sustainable.

"I would always rather feed my family a chicken that has had plenty of space to move, access to the outdoors and has not been routinely pumped full of antibiotics and fed who knows what. As to whether organic chicken tastes better, well that's for individuals to decide. What we do know is that every blind taste test seems to get a different result, so we can't put too much stock in those."

The authors of the report, from Strathclyde University, have acknowledged in radio interviews that the differences in the chickens tested were not very large and were variable. They have also accepted that it was a small and preliminary study which did not take into account welfare issues or look at antibiotic residues.

Mr Jacobs stressed that organic producers did not make claims about the health benefits of their food unless those claims could be scientifically proven.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2006 at 6:27am
 Which one would you pick home grown or imported ? from where?
 
UK producer looks abroad for Christmas turkey crowns
06/12/2006 09:00:00
Poultry World

A Kent turkey producer has decided to play the supermarkets at their own game by importing turkey meat for the Christmas market.

Turkey farmer and poult supplier, Phil Baxter, from Cottage Farm, Sevenoaks, broke out of a 28-year tradition of only producing dry plucked, farm fresh turkeys this year by offering his retail and wholesale customers cheaper turkey crowns, turkey saddles, and boned and rolled turkey joints from abroad.

"Now, with the growth of the joints and cut-ups and the amount of imported meat on the market, we feel we cannot survive by marketing just our own product. We have to widen our horizons," said Mr Baxter.

His Christmas flock of whole birds has been steady at 2000 for several years and will continue to be traditional farm fresh and retail at Ł8/kg or Ł9/kg unlike the imports, which will be about Ł5/kg. Mr Baxter is confident the imports will capture some of the Christmas turkey trade from the supermarkets.

Speaking to Poultry World at the annual banquet and show of the Anglian Turkey Association, he said: "Up until now we have been producing and marketing a top-of-the-range turkey to 5% of the population. Now we are aiming for the other 95%."

by Poultry World staff (About this Author)

Back to Top
emmajones View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group
Avatar
LOCATION: PENNSYLVANIA

Joined: July 19 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 259
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote emmajones Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2006 at 7:16am
Originally posted by Westy Westy wrote:

I have never had food poisoning or any sickness from chicken.  I cook it right and I wash my hands. 


Same here. We eat a lot of chicken and no one's ever gotten sick. Just keep everything very clean. Although I must add that lately I've been wearing gloves every time I handle raw meat. Once it's cooked though all the bad stuff is dead.    
b4giving
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2006 at 11:08am
Which to buy - very interesting question.  Looking at cost only, and assuming 2.2 US pounds/kg and US$1.91/UK pound sterling, the UK product would be $6.95/pound, and the imported product would be $4.34/pound.

I don't know if it was ever waived, but several years ago, the UK charged a minimum 15% import duty on raw poultry imported to the UK.

Locally, our current price for live birds, which is somewhat down from a record high, is US$0.47 per pound, or 0.54 UK pounds/kg.  That's what we are paid for delivery to the slaughter plant, and we're doing quite well at that.

I'm sure it must cost more to raise turkeys in the UK than here, and we're certainly realizing economies of scale, but the difference is quite striking.

Which cost represents an adequate value to the buyer can only be determined by the buyer, I guess, and comparing raw costs internationally, or even regionally, can be a very confusing exercise.  One can only hope to please one's customers.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2006 at 2:42pm
Poultry Vet... good thought...about boiling water.. UK friend said...
"We all drink bottled water here."
..................................................................................................
 
I don't like what they feed chickens...or the vacs they give them...not so sure that I want to ingest that....or add to the crazy animal farming...and what do we now do with all the poop...industry.
.....................................................................................................
 
And this did not thrill me any...
.....................................................................................................
 
"...Learn about the research being conducted to control and evaluate the risk of avian influenza H5N1 virus being transmitted to humans via poultry products in the food chain...."
 
........................................................................................................
 
Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) Resource List
Provides access to online resources on avian influenza including reports, fact sheets and a RSS feed created from various news sources.
 
 
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2006 at 5:43am
Please do not confused bottled water with disitilled water or sterile water - it is neither unless so labeled.  Standards for this product vary widely and are generally minimal as far as analyses conducted, etc.

I'm a little confused by your concerns about research being done on the risk of influenza from poultry products.  Generally better to know than not know, although this concern in US has been driven primarily by the current FSIS administrator, who is obsessed with the subject, despite the fact that no human cases have been associated with any poultry processed through regular channels - viz., a slaughterhouse - even in Asia, as far as I know.   Despite the lack of cases, this administrator's demands have siphoned federal research dollars from efforts to develop better vaccines to protect birds, better diagnostic tests, etc.  But it does look good in print.  We're being protected - from a risk that has yet to manifest.

What concerns you about what is fed to poultry, or what is done with the manure?   There's a lot of misinformation out there on both - and some problems.




Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 03 2007 at 3:38am
 Anyone for eggs on toast ?
 
January 3, 2007
Food Safety

Mainland eggs with health certificates arrive

The first batch of Mainland eggs with health certificates has arrived in Hong Kong through Man Kam To. The 270,000 eggs, in 750 boxes, came from Hubei. Since January 1, the Mainland has boosted control of poultry eggs, such as by issuing of health certificates for egg products supplied to Hong Kong. The Centre for Food Safety has enhanced liaison with local and Mainland authorities to prevent the import of poultry eggs from improper channels. Imported Mainland eggs without health certificates will be held and tested.

http://www.news.gov.hk/en/category/issues/070103/txt/070103en05005.htm
Back to Top
interested View Drop Down
Experienced Member
Experienced Member


Joined: January 01 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 10
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote interested Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 03 2007 at 4:57am
I keep hearing it said that they haven't seen H5N1 virus in the US but when I was stationed in Dover, DE in 2002 I remember them saying that a couple of farms had the H5N1 virus in Delaware.  Do you not think that it is possible that just like these other countries that said it was no longer there and is now showing up again that it is possible to be here as well.  The US just does not seem to be doing much testing that I have read about on there birds.  Other than Idaho.  These flu viruses going around are not like the flu viruses I've seen in the past.  My two children ran fevers for 2 weeks even on antiobiotics which in the past when taken antiobiotics the fever would be gone with in a day or so of starting them.  This time they ran a fever for 8 out of the 10 days they were on them.  And to top that every test they did to check for flu, strep throat, ear infection, etc all came out negative.  The doctor said they just had some kind of bacteria infection.  They tested for the flu via the nose not the throat.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 04 2007 at 3:08am
Source: RNCOS > 04 January 2007 (IT Market Research)

US to allow Imports of Chinese Processed Chicken
United States has lifted ban it had imposed on imports of processed chicken from China, said Richard Raymond - the Food Safety Undersecretary with U.S. Agriculture Department. 

Richard Raymond – Food Safety Undersecretary with U.S. Agriculture Department – said on 14 December 2006 that he had assured China that U.S. would be moving to grant the request of China about exporting processed poultry to the U.S.

Raymond, who came back after meetings in Beijing revealed in an interview that since China would be required to cook poultry as part of processing, U.S. consumers were at no risk of bird flu.

China has been suffering a lot due to the sudden outbreaks of highly pathogenic & fatal strain of H5NI (Asian bird flu) infecting humans, however it’s never been found in the United States. As per Raymond, Chinese officials had been pressing on him about U.S. progress to alter the restrictions on imports & he assured them that the work was under progress.

As per a Research Analyst’s view at RNCOS, who has recently researched a report on “Process Food Market - Asia Pacific (2006-2007)”, “Chicken its consent to lift the restrictions has always been a significant revenue generator for the country. Now as US has given imposed upon China, the country (China) is anticipating to grow its processed food market further.”

About the Report

This report is an extremely valuable document for investors, businesses, industry analysts and people who are closely monitoring the developments in Asia Pacific Processed Food Market. It helps clients to:

- Get an insight into the trends in market performance.
- Pinpoint sectors of growth and identify the driving factors.
- Find out who are the key players in Asia-Pacific processed food industry.
- Identify market, brand leaders and understand the competitive environment.
- Identify the key Challenges and Strategies in this sector.

The report further provides research and objective analysis on Asia-Pacific Food Processing Industry. It helps clients to analyze the opportunities critical to the success of Food Processing Industry in the region. In Asia-Pacific region, an overall economic growth leads to the rapid industrialization and an increased urbanization. The rising per capita income due to economic growth is shifting the consumer preferences towards value added foods.

About RNCOS:

RNCOS, incorporated in 2002, provides Market Research Reports for your business needs and aims to put an end to your information pursuit. Our expertise in gathering global business information for industry research, corporate training, growth consulting, and business consulting, brings reputed companies and firms to us for business enhancement solutions. We can be your one-stop-shop for Industry research information and niche market analysis.

For more information visit: http://www.rncos.com/Report/IM07721.htm

Current Industry News: http://www.rncos.com/blog
 
Visit  http://www.newsnow.co.uk/newsfeed/?name=Health


Back to Top
nwprepper View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: August 01 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 78
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nwprepper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 04 2007 at 10:54am
Thank you poultryvet for your thoughtful comments. I thought maybe there was some new cooking resistant salmonella out there, with all the news reports.

I have started buying frozen chicken breasts by the bag instead of buying whole birds. And "Better than eggs" too. Less cholesterol, pasturized, & less messy.

It totally grosses me out splashing the bloody turkey wrapper all over the sink area, or dealing with the leaky meat tray... yuk

The frozen breasts go straight from the freezer bag into the pan - no muss no fuss.
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 04 2007 at 4:40pm
the Delaware break was a low-path H7 related to the live bird markets in the Northeast, if I remember correctly.  That particular virus has been circulating in those markets since at least the mid-80's.

There's a lot of testing in poultry going on, and has been for some years.  Trying searching under NPIP or "national poultry improvement plan".

Happy New Year!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 04 2007 at 11:44pm
Chicken to Human 
 
 Human campylobacter infection rates overtake salmonella in EU

NewsOuchOuch

Human campylobacter infection rates overtake salmonella in EU
03/01/2007 15:00:00
FWi

An EU report announced last month that more EU citizens were infected with campylobacter than salmonella in 2005. 

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) stated in its second annual report on infectious diseases transmissible from animals to humans that campylobacter rates increased by 7.8% over one year - amounting to 197,363 cases in 2005.

In contrast, salmonella infection rates decreased by 9.5% in 2005 with 176,395 reported cases.

The EFSA report concludes that the primary source of infection for human cases of campylobacter was fresh poultry meat, with 66% of samples testing positive.  And that 80% of tested campylobacter bacteria was resistant to human antibiotics.

The data for the report was collected from 24 EU Member States and Norway, Iceland and Switzerland.  
 http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2007/01/03/100475/human-campylobacter-infection-rates-overtake-salmonella-in.html

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 19 2007 at 10:50pm
 
 
 
 
 
Foul State of Affairs Found in Feedlots

 


    By Marla Cone
    The Los Angeles Times

    Friday 17 November 2006

Factory farms are harmful to the public and the environment, researchers report.

    Growing so large that they are now called factory farms, livestock feedlots are poorly regulated, pose health and ecological dangers and are responsible for deteriorating quality of life in America's and Europe's farm regions, according to a series of scientific studies published this week.

    Feedlots are contaminating water supplies with pathogens and chemicals, and polluting the air with foul-smelling compounds that can cause respiratory problems, but the health of their neighbors goes largely unmonitored, the reports concluded.

    The international teams of environmental scientists also warned that the livestock operations were contributing to the rise of antibiotic-resistant germs, and that the proximity of poultry to hogs could hasten the spread of avian flu to humans.

    Feedlots are operations in which hundreds - often thousands - of cattle, hogs or poultry are confined, often in very close quarters. About 15,500 medium to large livestock feedlots operate in the United States in what is an approximately $80-billion-a-year industry.

    Although the reports focused largely on Iowa and North Carolina hog and poultry operations, California has more than 2,000 facilities with at least 300 livestock animals each, half of them with more than 1,000, according to a 2002 estimate by the US Environmental Protection Agency. Dairies, most of them in the San Joaquin Valley, dominate the industry in California.

    Led by Peter Thorne, director of the University of Iowa's Environmental Health Sciences Research Center, the researchers outlined the need for more stringent regulations and surveillance of water and air near feedlots.

    "There was general agreement among all [the scientists] that the industrialization of livestock production over the past three decades has not been accompanied by commensurate modernization of regulations to protect the health of the public or natural, public-trust resources, particularly in the US," wrote Thorne, a professor of toxicology and environmental engineering.

    The findings were from a consensus of experts from the United States, Canada and northern Europe who convened in Iowa two years ago for a workshop funded by the federal government to address environmental and health issues related to large livestock operations. Six reports, written by three dozen scientists mostly from the American Midwest and Scandinavia, were published this week in the online version of the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

    Among their recommendations are limits on the population density of animals and mandatory extensive environmental reviews for new feedlots. They also recommended a ban on the use of antibiotics to promote animal growth, and that the drugs be available to farmers only through prescriptions.

    In a new area of concern, the scientists said they were worried about the danger of a flu pandemic spread by feedlots with both hogs and poultry, and recommended new regulations to set minimum distances between the two.

    Farm industry representatives said they were not familiar with the new reports and could not address specific findings or recommendations. But they said that many environmental improvements had already been made, and that some experts at universities had said the health risks were minor.

    "The livestock industry has been under very intense scrutiny over the past 10 years, and as a result, has gone to great lengths and very high expense to try to improve their environmental record, across the board," said Don Parrish, the American Farm Bureau Federation's senior director of regulatory relations.

    "We've definitely improved our game over the past 10 years," Parrish said, and most livestock owners "are being very sensitive to their neighbors and doing the best job they can."

    Many of the risks come from the sheer volume of manure. Livestock excrete 13 times more waste than humans - 133 million tons per year in the United States - and some individual feedlots produce as much waste as entire cities.

    The American Farm Bureau Federation maintains that almost every state regulates the amount of manure applied to the land to protect water supplies.

    But the new reports criticized the current techniques.

    "Generally accepted livestock waste management practices do not adequately or effectively protect water resources from contamination with excessive nutrients, microbial pathogens and pharmaceuticals present in the waste," the scientists reported.

    The number of large livestock operations has surged in the last two decades, and farms with more than 500 hogs now account for three-quarters of the US inventory. In Iowa, the average number of hogs per farm increased from 250 to 1,430 between 1980 and 2000.

    California has more than 2,000 dairies, mostly in Tulare and Merced counties, and many have thousands of cows each. But the health risks to the dairy workers and their neighbors have gone unstudied, said Frank Mitloehner, director of the UC Davis Agricultural Air Emissions Center, who was not involved in the new reports.

    UC Davis is launching a five-year study, led by Mitloehner, at dairies in Tulare and Merced counties, to examine the threat from air pollutants.

 
Among the air pollutants from feedlots are ammonia; fine particles of manure, feed, soil and bacteria that can lodge in lungs; and endotoxin, which can inflame respiratory tissues and trigger asthma, bronchitis and allergies.

    "There is potential for health effects, but in order to find out the intensity of them, we need to conduct these studies," Mitloehner said.

    One of the new reports says a serious impact of feedlots "is their disruption of quality of life for neighboring residents," mostly in low-income and nonwhite communities.

    "More than an unpleasant odor, the smell can have dramatic consequences for rural communities whose lives are rooted in enjoying the outdoors," says the report, compiled by researchers in Iowa, Illinois and North Carolina.

 
"The highly cherished values of freedom and independence associated with life oriented toward the outdoors gives way to feelings of violation and infringement.... Homes become a barrier against the outdoors that must be escaped."

    In water supplies, the biggest problems are nitrates and fecal bacteria, although experts have also recently discovered animal antibiotics and other drugs in waterways. The scientists recommended that private wells, which largely are unregulated, be monitored carefully near the factory farms.

    The EPA was sued in 1989 by an environmental group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, for failing to regulate feedlots under the Clean Water Act. Fewer than 40% have permits for discharging pollutants because of EPA exemptions and lax federal and state enforcement, according to a 2003 report by what was then the General Accounting Office.

    In June, the Bush administration proposed new regulations that would require feedlots to develop plans for controlling manure and obtain Clean Water Act permits.

 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 12:21am
Back to Top
poultryvet View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: July 24 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 96
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote poultryvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 8:45am
Re arsenic in livestock feed - I've got a pdf file of a letter from FDA that they've released to reporters several times in the last year explaining the lack of risk from arsenicals in livestock feed, but can't figure out how to post it here - can someone explain how?   Nub is that there's toxic and non-toxic forms of arsenic.  The ones fed to livestock aren't toxic.

Again, doesn't make a very good news story though.  Use has also declined over the last 10-20 years as ages of animals raised for food has decreased and feed efficiencies have improved.  Less feed used - less arsenic.  Again, not a story most media are interested in.

Regards,


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 1:45pm
 
  In a new area of concern, the scientists said they were worried about the danger of a flu pandemic spread by feedlots with both hogs and poultry, and recommended new regulations to set minimum distances between the two.
..........................................................................
 
 
POULTRY feces....
.......................................
.
.
The natural reservoir for influenza A virus is wild and domestic birds. Humans appear to be incidental hosts in avian influenza A outbreaks.
 
Transmission occurs bird-to-bird and bird-to-human by nasal and respiratory secretions and feces.
 
Human acquisition of the disease is thought to be due to direct contact with poultry or poultry feces, resulting in inoculation of mucous membranes.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 3:37pm

Phttp://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/plants_animals/prions/rion

A prion

(short for proteinaceous infectious particle) is a unique type of infectious agent, as it is made only of protein.
 
It is now commonly accepted that prions are responsible for a number of previously known but little-understood diseases generally classified under
 
transmissible spongiform encephalopathy diseases (TSEs), including scrapie (a disease of sheep), Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), Chronic Wasting Disease, Fatal Familial Insomnia (FFI), Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker syndrome (GSS), and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or mad cow disease).
> read full article at Wikipedia.org
 
............................................

http://www.sonoma.edu/users/h/hanesda/B324/talk/PrionsInPoultry.html

Prions In Poultry Manure

By Robert Harris, on 03/15/2003.

We own and operate a certified organic farm in SW. Ohio.
Poultry Manure from the Industrial Poultry farms is used on some organic farms
and on many conventional farms.
 
I understand the Poultry Industry feeds meat and bone meal
which might contain Prions as a part of the feed. I am
concerned that we might be spreading prions with the
manure. I like to see tests run on this material.I'd
be open to suggestions to getting these tests.
Thank You in Advance RKH.
 
...................................
 
 

Only Half Of Recalled Meat And Poultry Is Recovered, Study Finds

Science Daily COLUMBUS, Ohio Only about half the meat and poultry recalled in the United States because of suspected health hazards between 1998 and 2002 was actually recovered by the manufacturers, according to a new study.

read in full here.....
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 4:12pm

HAS SCIENCE GONE MAD? 

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/avian+leukosis-sarcoma+complex

avian leukosis-sarcoma complex

n.
1. A division of the RNA tumor viruses that causes a group of transmissable diseases of poultry.
Also called avian leukosis-sarcoma virus.
....................................................................................................

 

http://ww.cellscience.com/Reviews5/Transmissible_Agents_Meat.html

 

4. Poultry & Avian Leukosis/Sarcoma Viruses (ALSV)

and Reticuloendotheliosis Viruses (REV)

Potential human exposure to ALSV and REV may occur principally in four ways:

1) exposure of the general population through contact with, and/or consumption of, chickens and turkeys or their products (including eggs).

In one study (Spencer et al, 1976), infectious ALSV were isolated from 45% of commercial eggs that had been previously stored at 8°, for 0 to 6 days, and from 21% of eggs stored for 7 to 34 days;
 
2) occupational - persons involved in the production, i.e. raising, tending, slaughtering, processing, and preparation of, chickens or their products for food consumption; veterinarians, and laboratory workers;
 
3) exposure of the general population, from inoculation with vaccines prepared from chicken embryo cells contaminated with these viruses; and
 
4) potential use of some of these viruses to transport genes into cells, or to activate specific host genes, in future gene therapy.

Human exposure to these viruses is widespread,

and may be virtually universal in all populations which consume chicken and eggs or their products.

The viruses have been shown to be present in commercial eggs in supermarkets at a prevalence rate of at least 14% (Pham et al 1999a; Pham et al, 1999b),
 
 and in otherwise apparently healthy chickens and turkeys destined for human consumption, and their products.
 
In addition, these and related viruses may be present as contaminants in vaccines grown on chicken cells such as measles, mumps and yellow fever vaccines -
 
virtually all the yellow fever vaccines used during World War II were contaminated with ALSV (Waters et al 1972). A recent study by the Centers of Disease Control report that virtually all stocks of measles and mumps vaccine currently in use in the United States are contaminated with the endogenous forms of ALSV (Tsang et al, 1999).
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 4:19pm
 
3) exposure of the general population, from inoculation with vaccines prepared from chicken embryo cells contaminated with these viruses;
 
.............................................................................................................
 
 
HOW SAFE ARE EGGS .... USED FOR VACCINES
.....................................................................................................
 
 
 
 
Title: OCCURRENCE OF AVIAN LEUKOSIS VIRUS SUBGROUP J IN COMMERCIAL LAYER FLOCKS IN CHINA

Authors
item Xu, B - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Dong, W - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Yu, C - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item He, Z - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Lv, Y - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Sun, Y - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Feng, X - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Li, N - CHINA AGRIC UNIV BEIJING
item Lee, Lucy

<> Submitted to: Avian Pathology
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: August 15, 2003
Publication Date:
February 1, 2004
Citation:
Xu, B., Dong, W., Yu, C., He, Z., Lv, Y., Sun, Y., Feng, X., Li, N., Lee, L.F. 2004. Occurrence of avian leukosis virus subgroup J in commercial layer flocks in china. Avian Pathology. 33(1):13-17.

Interpretive Summary: Subgroup J avian leucosis virus (ALV-J)
 
is an emerging economically important virus infection that can cause cancer-like disease and other production problems in meat-type chickens. The virus was first reported in 1991 in the United Kingdom and in 1993 in the United States in meat-type of chickens.
 
This paper describes the identification of myeloid leucosis in egg layer chickens in China. Immunohistochemical studies with monoclonal antibody against envelope glycoprotein gp85 of ALV-J revealed antigen in all organs examined. This is the first report of field cases of myeloid leucosis caused by ALV-J in commercial egg-type chickens. This new information is significant and useful to scientists in academia and industry who are studying the epidemiology and control of this important virus infection of chickens.

Technical Abstract: Mortality from myeloid leukosis was observed in commercial layers from 12 farms in northern China. Affected chickens were extremely thin and dehydrated, bleeding occurred in feather follicles and claws, combs were pale and anaemic, phalanges were swollen, and many yellowish-white tumours were seen on the visceral surface of the sternum. Focal tumour cells, with spherical eosinophilic granules in the cytoplasm, were found in the liver, spleen, kidney, ovary, oviduct, lung, bone marrow, proventriculus and gut by histopathological examination. Immunohistochemical studies with a monoclonal antibody to gp85 of avian leukosis virus subgroup J (ALV-J) revealed antigen in all organs examined. Polymerase chain reaction tests using a pair of ALV-J-specific primers H5/H7 (Smith et al., 1998) produced a 545 basepair fragment. The sequence of the Polymerase chain reaction product was compared with that of the ALV-J HPRS-103 prototype strain. The identity of nucleotides and predicted amino acids was 97.4% and 96.1%, respectively. On this basis the disease in the egg-type chickens was diagnosed as an ALV-J infection.

 
This is the first report of field cases of myeloid leukosis caused by ALV-J in commercial egg-type chickens.

 
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 4:34pm
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 4:58pm

 
Title: ISOLATION OF SUBGROUP A AVIAN LEUKOSIS VIRUS FROM COMMERCIAL MAREK'S DISEASE VACCINES

Authors

<> Submitted to: International Marek's Disease Symposium Abstracts and Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract
Publication Acceptance Date: July 14, 2004
Publication Date: July 14, 2004
Citation: Fadly, A.M., Silva, R.F., Hunt, H.D. 2004. Isolation of subgroup A avian leukosis virus from commercial Marek's disease vaccines [abstract]. International Marek's Disease Symposium Abstracts and Proceedings. Paper No. P.8.

Technical Abstract: Commercial Marek's disease (MD) vaccines were submitted to USDA-ARS Avian Disease and Oncology Laboratory for testing for possible contamination with
 
 avian leukosis virus (ALV).
 
Samples of MD vaccines manufactured by two different companies (A & B) were received from a breeder company; samples were also received directly from vaccine company B. Initially, samples tested positive by virus isolation for subgroup E (endogenous) ALV. However, upon re-passage, the vaccines also tested positive for exogenous (subgroup A) ALV. PCR and DNA sequencing of the envelope of isolated ALVs confirmed the results obtained from virus isolation assays that in addition to endogenous subgroup E ALV, an exogenous subgroup A ALV was also present in the vaccines tested. Although the source of this contamination of MD vaccines with exogenous subgroup A ALV has not be determined, the data presented in this paper should be of interest to vaccine manufacturers, suppliers of specific-pathogen-free (SPF) eggs as well as scientists from academia and government.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTVdb/ICTVdB/61030000.htm

Name, Synonyms and Lineage

Synonym(s): "Avian type C retroviruses". Virus is assigned to the subfamily 00.061.1. Orthoretrovirinae ; assigned to the family 00.061. Retroviridae .

Taxonomic Proposals and Changes

A taxonomic proposal has been submitted to the ICTV by the Vertebrate Virus Subcommittee Study Group for Retroviridae at the meeting in San Diego, March 1998, to change the name from
 
"Avian type C retroviruses" to Alpharetrovirus.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 5:10pm
wikipedia....

A gammaretrovirus is a genus of the retroviridae family. Many species contain

 

Examples are the murine leukemia virus, the feline leukemia virus, the feline sarcoma virus, and the avian reticuloendotheliosis viruses.

 
.........................................................................................................
 
Reticuloendotheliosis viruses have been shown to be causative of
 
tumors in a variety of avian species.
 
The major structural protein of these non-genetically transmitted viruses is demonstrated to possess antigenic determinants common to those of all known mammalian type C viruses.
 
 These findings establish a mammalian origin for this oncogenic avian retrovirus group.
 
None of the known mammalian type C virus groups demonstrated a closer immunological relationship to avian reticuloendotheliosis viruses.
 
These results suggest that reticuloendotheliosis viruses have been non-genetically transmitted for a long period of evolution or that these viruses may have arisen by relatively recent infection of birds with an as yet undiscovered mammalian type C retrovirus.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 20 2007 at 5:24pm
 
Excerpt....
 
Vaccines effectively reduce and prevent death and disease from many viral infections. However,
 
 vaccine production occasionally has been complicated by inadvertent contamination with adventitious agents that may have originated from cell substrates used to propagate vaccine strains.
 
Examples of such contamination include
 
simian virus in early polio vaccines grown on monkey kidney cells and avian leukosis virus (ALV) in yellow fever vaccines propagated in chick embryos (1). Hepatitis B virus has also been identified in yellow fever vaccines produced by using pooled human serum as a stabilizing agent
 
(2). Exposure of vaccine recipients to contaminated vaccines has been associated with effects ranging from benign to demonstrable transmission of infection, with or without subsequent disease (2,3).

Reverse transcriptase (RT) activity, an indicator of retroviruses, has recently been detected by sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based RT assays in currently used vaccines produced in chick embryo fibroblasts or embryonated eggs (4-7).

The RT-positive vaccines include measles, mumps, and yellow fever vaccines produced by several manufacturers in Europe and the United States (4,5).
 
RT activity was detected in the vaccines despite strict manufacturing practices requiring that chick embryos and embryo fibroblasts be derived from closed, specific-pathogen-free chicken flocks.
 
Such chickens are screened for known pathogens, including two exogenous
 
avian retroviruses:
 
 reticuloendotheliosis virus
 
and ALV (8). 
 
 (AVIAN LEUKOSIS VIRUS)
 
 
.......................................
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down