On Nov. 3, the FSIS will hold a public meeting to discuss a new regulatory framework to control Salmonella in poultry. The proposed framework can be found here.

As meat and poultry industry stakeholders, it is imperative that we participate in the meeting. Comments will be taken directly at the meeting and they can also be submitted in written form. There will be loud voices that participate that have no real “stake” in this industry, but are actually against this industry. I know from experience that these voices can drive policy. The voice of this industry needs to be heard. The perception of outside “stakeholders” is inaccurate and doesn’t portray the science-based decisions that the meat and poultry industry makes to control pathogens. The industry funds the research, tests the interventions (pre and post-harvest) and implements the control measures. They do exponentially more testing than the regulatory agencies to ensure food safety. Outside stakeholders with no understanding of this industry will be at the table at this meeting, so please participate and share data, experiences and the potential impact of the new proposed framework. It is important to discuss research gaps and needs, when/if this framework is implemented.

The proposed framework includes three components:

Testing of incoming flocks for Salmonella
Enhancement of establishment process control and FSIS verification
Implement enforceable final product standards for Salmonella

All of these components hold the potential to reduce Salmonella, but it is important that each one is driven by science and that the decisions made aren’t simply to look good on paper/press releases. Of key concern is the fact that the agency still uses the generic term “Salmonella” as if all Salmonella were the same. The FSIS is finally exploring quantification of Salmonella, lagging years behind the industry who already routinely do this. This action is promising, but this is only one component. Quantification is part of the solution but must be combined with serotyping and identification of highly pathogenic Salmonella. Not all Salmonella are the same. On one end of the spectrum, there could be a high number of Kentucky present that wouldn’t ever be associated with an outbreak. On the other end, there could be a few cells of highly pathogenic Salmonella that could cause a major outbreak. Without all 3 pieces of information, there are still gaps and the decisions made will be misinformed.

As most already know, there is a consideration to declare Salmonella an adulterant in raw, breaded, stuffed chicken breasts. The decisions behind this also need to be discussed in this meeting from a scientific perspective. You can see my other blogs for details on this topic!

The most important thing is to SHOW UP and to let your voice be heard. For those of you working in beef and pork, you may think that a poultry Salmonella meeting doesn’t matter. I assure you that it does! This meeting will set a precedent that can be carried to other species and/or other pathogens. This industry is committed to food safety and has gone a long way in driving down the presence of Salmonella in product and continues to do so. It is important that the decisions made in this meeting are data-driven and not based on anecdotes. Anecdotes do not drive down illnesses; sound, scientific decisions do!

Your voice matters

Join for free* to continue reading.