A national salmonella outbreak that could have sickened thousands has led to the recall of 380 million eggs and renewed questions about whether it's feasible to keep the microbe -- the most common bacterial source of food-borne illness in the nation -- out of the henhouse.
The answer from experiences in Denmark and Sweden seems to be a qualified yes. It can be done, but at what cost?
The eggs being recalled -- the amount was expanded Wednesday from 228 million -- are from Wright County Egg, a Galt, Iowa, company whose five facilities produce 2.3 million dozen eggs a week, spokeswoman Hinda Mitchell says. The recalled eggs total almost 32 million dozen. In 2009, the United States produced nearly 6.5 billion dozen eggs, says the United Egg Producers.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that hundreds of people have been sickened in the outbreak, which appears to have started in May. CDC epidemiologist Christopher Braden said Wednesday that there may be thousands of illnesses, though no reported deaths. California health officials say at least 266 people in that state were sickened.
"We're speculating they could have had a highly infected flock or the product could have been mishandled, but we don't really know," says Mindy Brashears, a professor of food safety at Texas Tech University in Lubbock.
The Food and Drug Administration has new egg-safety rules that went into effect July 9 for producers with more than 50,000 hens. Smaller producers have two more years to prepare.
The rules set new procedures for testing for salmonella enteritidis and requirements for pasteurization if tests are positive. Rodent- and pest-control measures must be in place in poultry houses, which must be disinfected before new hens are added.
This is old hat to egg producers in Sweden and Denmark, which virtually eliminated salmonella from all poultry beginning in the 1970s. They tested flocks and if any came up positive, they would be slaughtered, says Lars Plym Forshell of Sweden's National Food Administration. "In the early days, farmers got 100% compensation" from the government for flocks they lost. Today, because only two or three flocks a year need to be destroyed, it's covered by insurance.
American experts say such draconian programs don't make sense. "Salmonella is widely distributed in the environment, so even if you destroy an entire flock, there's still a chance that it can be recontaminated from the environment," Brashears says.
Forshell counters that his country has very strict building codes for henhouses to keep out insects and rodents that typically carry the disease.
It's a question of whether to keep the disease out or deal with it later via testing and pasteurization. Europe in general roots out the problem, the United States tends to look for post-harvest solutions, says Mogens Madsen, a food safety expert with the Technical University of Denmark.
To see more of USAToday.com, or to subscribe, go to http://www.usatoday.com
Copyright 2009 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.