Food Protection Trends - March 2011 - (Page 196)

Celebrating 100 Years of IAFP Journals: 1950s Prepared by the FPT Subcommittee of the 100−Year Planning Committee* n the 1950s, the prominence attached to sanitation was changing because of the impact of technology and increasing concern for public health. This enhanced emphasis on public health was in part due to the increasing proportion of the population over age 45 (7). At the same time, the public’s needs for sanitation were growing along with its general understanding of sanitation programs (16). Growth in sanitary science was necessary to combat increased probability of infection and modes of transmission that were associated with more people living in closer proximity to one another (10). One aspect of the National Sanitation Program, as described in 1950, was preventive sanitation, which included an education component for the healthy people of the community. In contrast, curative sanitation had focused on what was thought to be only a small part of the public (16). The importance of good sanitation was seen by all, including members of the armed forces, where adverse health effects of insanitary environments were believed to have caused more damage than enemies’ bullets (21). Curiously, sanitarians and food microbiologists were facing many of the same problems we are facing today, as indicated by the papers published in the Journal of Milk and F ood Technology throughout the 1950s. These issues included application of new technologies to advance food and beverage production, changing regulations, indicator organisms, biodefense, outbreak investigation and epidemiology, control of animal housing and disease, pesticide and antibiotic residues, and product and environmental testing. By the mid-1950s, population increase led to an increased intake of protective foods such as dairy products and fresh produce (22). In 1953, the Grocery Manufacturers of America reported that grocery advertising had increased during the previous ten years from $38 million to $108 million. At the same time, per capita fluid milk consumption had increased by one percent (three pounds), in part due to the nearly universal availability of refrigeration and display cases. An editorial written in 1951 (2) modified the meaning of the term “sanitize” from simply make “free from filth and infection” to a broader meaning, “to bring into condition conducive to health”; additionally, “sanitize” was recognized as a more complex process with general use in the food industry. The Milk and Food Sanitation Program of the Public Health Service was first developed in 1924, and by 1950, 34 states were utilizing standard milk regulations to ensure milk safety (4). Interestingly, in 1950, the US Public Health Service and the University of California funded a study to determine current temperature-time standards and thermal death rates of Coxiella burnetii in milk. This research remains in use for the assessment of pasteurization parameters for novel pathogens in milk, including Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (14). Testing remains an integral issue of food safety and effective sanitation programs. Escherichia coli was adopted I as an indicator organism in 1904 with the publication of the first edition of Standards Methods of Water Analysis (11). However, more than 100 years later, scientists are still wrestling with questions concerning adequate indicators of sanitation (8, 20). In the 1950s, scientists asked “How valid are claims that E. coli is the index to sanitation?” (11). Heatresistant strains of E. coli could have accounted for viable coliforms that survived the pasteurization process. In light of this possible resistance, the suitability of Streptococcus mastitidis or Streptococcus lactis, rather than E. coli, as tracer organisms was studied. As a result of these studies, various indicators were used. The consistent findings of higher levels of E. coli and other coliforms in ice cream with fruit added, compared to plain ice cream-based products, were questioned (1). Analysis indicated that confirmatory tests were necessary to avoid reporting of false positives; approximately 20–40% of positive tests for coliforms by desoxycholate lactose as reported by various companies were determined to be false (1). Sanitarians decided that if a plant was found to be free of E. coli, then the plant’s equipment could be given a clean bill of health. However, in many cases coliforms were still present (11). In one case, ice cream made for the U.S. Army was found to have high levels of E. coli and Aerobacter aerogenes contamination (11). Both organisms were identified as coming from egg white used to make marshmallow powder that was added to ice cream mix. Shortly thereafter, the USDA-ARS undertook a study on enhancing the natural fermentation process for the preparation of egg white to better control these organisms (18). The complex nature of sanitation problems associated with disasters was explored, including disasters caused by Mother Nature and those caused by humankind in the Continued on page 189 196 FOOD PROTECTION TRENDS | MARCH 2011 FEBRUARY 2011

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - March 2011

Food Protection Trends - March 2011
Contents
Sustaining Members
Reflections of Your President
Commentary from the Executive Director
Evaluation of Microwave Oven Heating and Salad Dressings to Control Listeria monocytogenes on Diced Ham and Turkey Breast
Consumer Awareness of and Concerns about Food Safety at Three Arkansas Farmers’ Markets
IAFP 2011–2012 Secretary Candidates
New Members
What’s Happening in Food Safety
Industry Products
Activities
General Information
Registration Rates
Special Contributors and Sponsors
IAFP 100-Year Anniversary Sponsors
Coming Events
Advertising Index
Journal of Food Protection Table of Contents
Audiovisual Library Order Form
Booklet Order Form
Membership Application
Celebrating 100 Years of IAFP: 1950s

Food Protection Trends - March 2011