Source:  Rita Jane Gabbett, MEATINGPLACE.COM, 9/1/10

Cargill’s weekend recall of 8,500 pounds of ground beef over concerns about a connection between E. coli O26 and three illnesses in two states was the first recall directly relating a beef product to illnesses traced to a non-O157:H7 STEC, reigniting the debate over testing for and regulating these pathogens.

Less than two weeks ago the American Meat Institute sent a letter to Agriculture Tom Vilsack opposing declaring these pathogens adulterants, pointing out, among other things, that no reported outbreak in the United States had been directly linked to beef products. That is no longer the case.

By Monday afternoon Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), chairwoman of the FDA and Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, pointed to Cargill’s weekend recall as justification for her E. coli Traceability and Eradication Act, which would require USDA to regulate all strains of toxin-producing E. coli.

“It is time for USDA to acknowledge the scientific evidence and classify all toxin-producing E. coli strains as an adulterant that should be made subject to testing,” she said in a statement. “This would close a significant gap in our food safety system and help minimize additional foodborne illnesses.”

DeLauro isn’t the only one turning up the pressure on USDA. Bill Marler, a Seattle-based food safety attorney and advocate, renewed his call for stronger regulation of non-O157 STECs.

"The USDA and beef industry know well that there are at least six additional strains of Shiga toxin-producing E. coli: O45, O111, O121, O145, O103 and O26 that are highly dangerous to humans and should not exist in food," Marler said in his own Food Safety News online news and opinion service.

Former USDA Undersecretary for Food Safety Richard Raymond also repeated his call for increased awareness and regulation. “Secretary Vilsack and the president are going to have to decide if this is a big enough recall to act on,” Raymond told Meatingplace. “Do we have to wait for another Jack-in-the-Box?” he added in a reference to the massive E. coli O157:H7 outbreak in 1993 that led to that strain being declared an adulterant.

Not as easy as it seems
There are, however, a number of barriers to effectively testing for and regulating non-O157 STECs.
Experts have said only about 10 percent of laboratories are currently capable of testing for non-O157 STECs. That is because these pathogens lack a single distinctive phenotypic characteristic in common that could be reliably tested through some selective medium, biochemical test or other procedure.

USDA is still working to complete validation of laboratory methods for discerning which of six non-O157 STECs (O26, O103, O111, O121, O45, and O145) are present in samples so it can start sampling for them later this year, Kenneth Petersen, assistant administrator of the Office of Field Operations for USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, said earlier this month at the National Meat Association’s summer conference.

At the time, he added, however, “Sampling and testing does not mean regulating them. No decision has been made on regulating them.”

The recall comes just days after Elisabeth Hagen was confirmed as USDA’s new undersecretary for food safety.

As AOL News Senior Public Health Correspondent Andrew Schneider put it in a column on Monday, “She may get the opportunity to work with a non-O157 outbreak sooner than she or anyone else thought.”

For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.