Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

President4242

Thu Jul 31 06:39:13 -0700 2008

manage

And everybody claimed I was racist when I said this outbreak probably came from Mexico and inadequate inspection of foreign trade in foodstuffs.

Well, it did.  Is it too much to expect that if they ram foreign trade and unlabeled products down our markets, that those products should be inspected?

And yes, I know Uncle Entity believes that no product should ever be inspected- it's just another tax.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

C. Conrad Cady

Thu Jul 31 06:58:27 -0700 2008

manage

The statement that "the outbreak probably came from Mexico" is racist. 

The statement that "the terrorist is probably Muslim" is also racist, even though it may be correct according to mathematical probability.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

Charles E Hill

Thu Jul 31 07:32:23 -0700 2008

manage

"The terrorist is probably Muslim" isn't racist.  At worst, it is religion-biased, but race is not involved.  Depending on the location of the terror act, it is probably very probable.

I believe you meant to say "the terrorist is probably an Arab", which would have racial connotation.  Again, depending on the location of the terror act, probability overrules political correctness.

HOWEVER, if you flip it around to "the Arab is probably a terrorist" then you most definately have a racist statement.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

C. Conrad Cady

Thu Jul 31 08:19:28 -0700 2008

manage

You are right.  And also, as my wife pointed out "the outbreak probably came from Mexico" may say be interpreted to say something about the government of Mexico, or the supply chain from Mexico, and have nothing to do with the race.

I apologize, and stand corrected.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

pyro9

Sun Aug 03 22:08:25 -0700 2008

manage

The statement that "the outbreak probably came from Mexico" is racist.

That is highly dependant on the situation. If it's because of stereotyping Mexicans, then it is racist. If it's based on the epidemiology compared to supply routes or objective knowledge that inspections there are less thorough than other suppliers, then no, it's not racist. Unless, of course, that "objective knowledge" is based on finding negative reports about Mexicans more believable than those about others beczause "that figures, they're Mexicans". That would be racist.

If you presume that your Mexican neighbor's garden tomatoes are likely contaminated just because he's Mexican and that's "how they are", it's racist. If your belief is based on  his sewer pipe bursting next to the garden last week, it's not racist.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

Charles E Hill

Thu Jul 31 07:28:30 -0700 2008

manage

Define "inadequate inspection".  Are you familiar with the inspection methods of U.S. and foreign imported produce?  Do you know if they're the same for each importing nation?

Because I can list several recent outbreaks like this that came from DOMESTIC sources.  Remember the spinach in California?

Don't even get started with e. coli in domestic beef and the amount of recalls recently.

What IS apparent is that our methods of tracking produce, regardless of source, is seriously deficient.  Mixing should not be allowed.  It should be simple:

1. Put produce in container on farm.

2. Label container with packing date and origin, preferrably in both human readable and electronic formats such as barcodes or RFID.

3. Ship to distributor/customer.

4. Profit!

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

Gailin

Thu Jul 31 09:30:19 -0700 2008

manage

In my younger years, I worked for a company that dealt with refrigerated loads from California and Mexico to the Arizona market.  The process you described was generally how it worked. 

Loads would be picked up from the grower (if large enough) or some dock space they had rented from a larger facility.  The produce would be clearly marked in packaging of the grower with origination paperwork. Loads from Mexico differed, in that there would be a staging point in Nogales that the grower used to transfer the loads to US trucks.  It would not be taken out of its grower supplied packaging or anything of that nature.

It would be driven to Central Arizona to the distribution point for the store.  From there it would be put on store owned trucks and distributed to the stores around the city.

The store we hauled loads for was a nationwide chain. Merchants of other sizes may have other processes.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

President4242

Thu Jul 31 18:25:42 -0700 2008

manage

Define "inadequate inspection".  Are you familiar with the inspection methods of U.S. and foreign imported produce?  Do you know if they're the same for each importing nation?

The actual method doesn't matter to me as much as the fact that it apparently isn't being done properly.  There should be *NO* reason why a batch of produce contaminated with anything can make it past a state border.

EVER.

Let alone an international one.

That goes for human diseases such as salmonella along with invasive species such as the Tui Chub or Scotch Broom.

Any contaminated vehicle should be DESTROYED along with it's load and not allowed to reach market.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

Gailin

Fri Aug 01 07:43:42 -0700 2008

manage

I'm not looking for an argument. But, "Any contaminated vehicle should be DESTROYED along with it's load."  Is waaay overboard.  The loads are obviously discarded.  But to destroy the livelihood of an owner/operator driving the truck, who had no involvement in the growing or care of the load seems childish. 

Unless you honestly think, that every truck driver should have a portable lab and the requisite days to inspect 25 tons of produce by hand, and the commiserate degree it takes to understand the results.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

President4242

Fri Aug 01 18:21:02 -0700 2008

manage

I'm not looking for an argument. But, "Any contaminated vehicle should be DESTROYED along with it's load."  Is waaay overboard.  The loads are obviously discarded.  But to destroy the livelihood of an owner/operator driving the truck, who had no involvement in the growing or care of the load seems childish.

He failed to inspect his load, and took consignment of a hazardous load.  Profit should not be allowed to be taken at the expense of the rest of society.  For anything.  Anything less than a draconian stand on this becomes corporate welfare.

Unless you honestly think, that every truck driver should have a portable lab and the requisite days to inspect 25 tons of produce by hand, and the commiserate degree it takes to understand the results.

And/or pay somebody to take a representative sample, and charge the farm for the service, yes.

To me, there's no excuse for doing a half-assed job.

If a trucker (or more likely, since we're talking interstate/international shipments here, a corporation) wants to make money, they have a responsibility to the rest of society to do it safely.

This is no different than requiring that a trucker check his brakes and secure his load before entering the public freeway.

It's a matter of public safety- and anybody who can't handle doing their job in a safe manner, shouldn't be doing that job.

And if it pushes the cost of shipped goods up, well, that's the TRUE cost of doing interstate/international business, as opposed to the "let's inspect 1/1000 loads and hope for the best".

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

Gailin

Fri Aug 01 19:00:30 -0700 2008

manage

The person who packaged the load is responsible for properly describing the contents of the goods.  Including performing health checks.  The driver is required to maintain his vehicles according to the law.  The receivers of our produce ALWAYS had inspectors for quality, etc. As they obviously have a responsibility in this as well. 

Everyone has their role in this chain and last I checked Salad Greens were not on the Hazmat list.

The grower is at fault, because that is their job.  They are required  by probably a dozen regulations they broke not to do whatever it is they did.

If a truck driver knowingly hauls hazardous materials that are not properly documented etc, he is of course in the wrong.  But you cannot fault a trucker for hauling a properly documented load who followed the law. The trucker has a responsibility to transport those items safely and legally (brakes, etc) to their destination.  They also have a responsibility to allow the state inspectors to inspect his load, and follow their declarations should they deem the load unfit.

"If a trucker (or more likely, since we're talking interstate/international shipments here, a corporation) wants to make money, they have a responsibility to the rest of society to do it safely."

There is a pretty reasonable split between owner/operators and large corporations in this arena.  Maybe less so now because of fuel prices, but it was a pretty even mix before. 

This is no different than requiring that a trucker check his brakes and secure his load before entering the public freeway.

It's a matter of public safety- and anybody who can't handle doing their job in a safe manner, shouldn't be doing that job.

Materials are classified as hazardous by the government.  Those loads require special handling, licensing, trafficking, etc.  If a truck driver did not follow those rules, he should be in trouble, as he would be today.  Carrying a non-hazardous load does not confer the same responsibility as the former obviously, nor should it.

We do not expect truckers who carry hazardous materials to be chemists, phsyicists, etc.  We expect truckers who carry hazardous materials to understand the proper practices and procedures for hauling those loads.  There is a dramatic difference between asking a trucker to maintain his equipment, and conferring on him the responsibility to duplicate the testing that is supposed to have been done on the items he hauls prior to shipping.

There is certainly plenty of blame to go around.  But yelling at the guy who drove tainted spinach from LA to Vegas is pretty reaching.  I mean, should we sink the boats most of the produce is shipped on when their is a bad batch?  How about the trains and planes that carry a lot of interstate commerce.  Should they be broken down and sold for scrap when they unknowingly carry something hazardous, though they did everything by law and to the best of their abilities?  Or should we blame the state inspectors at the borders, who did not inspect every melon and berry themselves? 

Bah, I'm being argumentative, and I said I would not.   My apologies, and I hope you have a nice evening.

Salmonella Tomatoes and Peppers Update

pyro9

Mon Aug 04 05:24:45 -0700 2008

manage

If you would destroy the truck, you would also destroy the personal cars of everyone who picked and packed the produce.

The trucker is simply a contractor who is hired to carry a load to a destination. He is generally allowed to look but not touch. Once he sees that it is, in fact, produce and not cocaine or bombs (to the best of his limited ability to determine that since he may not touch), his duty to inspect ends.

He does not have a portable lab in the back. Most of the loads he carries are not food. He may carry auto parts one day, produce the next, then computer parts, cold remedies, etc. He can't know enough about every industry to determine what safety requirements might exist and what sort of inspection should be carried out. At no point in the process does he become the owner of his cargo.

This is no different than requiring that a trucker check his brakes and secure his load before entering the public freeway.

Actually, it is very different. A trucker is a specialist in transporting cargo by roads. He can be reasonably expected to understand his own vehicle and how to secure a load. He cannot be expected to understand every single thing he might carry. We cannot expect him to check produce for diseases, test cattle for BSE, check the calibration of X-ray machines, check nuclear fuel for criticality problems and composition, inspect brake pads for cracks or hidden flaws, do crash testing on automobiles, etc. Those are the jobs of the people who own the cargo (and specialize in the various industries involved).

The food should be inspected certainly, but it should be done by the U.S. distributor. If the distributor wants to push that up the chain and get it done at the farm, that's between them and the farmers.

Note, the distributor and the trucker are different entities. The trucker may contract directory with the distributor, or may contract with a logistics company that contracts with the distributor. He may or may not be an employee of the logistics company or the distributor.

To put the whole thing in perspective, 1300 people TOTAL are reported to have gotten sick from this since May. 257 of those badly enough to go to the hospital. Two deaths are related to the outbreak, but at most, it hastened the inevitable (1 was a 60 year old man who died of cancer while infected, the other an 80 year old man who died of heart failure while infected).

Everyone else has recovered. I'm betting that more than 2 people have died in the same time period from auto accidents while on the way to or from the grocery store to buy produce.

The above suggests that we shouldn't be spending huge amounts of money on this problem. Simple steps to require that shipments not be combined and that tracking numbers be applied to labels would have been enough to stop this whole thing just as it got started back in may (news report: if you see tomatoes with an origin code: 897238796219438, don't eat them).

There are a few good reasons to limit the interstate and international shipping of food, but this is not one of them.