Sludge Watch ==> the great spinach outbreak

[Maureen Reilly]

Reader Mailbag
Washington Post, United States - Nov 3, 2006

THE CHECKOUT
annys shinn
Reader Mailbag
After nearly two months of writing the blog, I've started to get a steady 
stream of questions from readers. From now on, I'm going to dip into the 
mailbag once in a while and try to answer some of your questions.

This week's mailbag had lots of inquiries related to the Great Spinach 
Outbreak, which we all know is a source of endless fascination for me, so 
I'll start with those.

Dr. John Yanek wants to know why health officials aren't releasing the names 
of the four farms in Salinas Valley, which have been implicated in the 
outbreak as well as the owners. He notes it's "not a matter of privacy or 
slander when the serious facts are proven and known."

Journalists have asked the Food and Drug Administration and California 
Department of Health Services officials this same question over and over 
again. Their response is that they're not done investigating yet and may 
still rule out some of those farms. Until they're done, they are withholding 
the names of the farms and the owners just in case they end up clearing any 
of them.

Next question comes to us from Thomas in Missouri, who wrote:
"It has been said repeatedly that investigators are looking at 'ranches' for 
the E. coli contamination. Are they talking about large grass pastures or 
feed lots? Here in Missouri cowpies are pretty spread out on a 'ranch' and 
shouldn't cause a problem, but a confined feeding operation are known to be 
sources of E. coli O157 H7."

The investigators have said when they use the term "ranch" they mean not 
only land used for livestock but also for the cultivation of produce. They 
have explained to reporters that they use that particular terminology 
because that is what the growers in California say.

At The Post, we decided to use the word "farm" because we felt readers in 
our area might think ranch referred only to livestock operations.

On the question of whether the cattle operation next to the spinach fields 
in Salinas Valley is more of a "ranch" as Thomas describes or whether it is 
closer to a confined feeding operation, I believe it is likely the former. 
California Department of Health Services deputy director Kevin Reilly has 
described the land where the livestock are as pasture and the cattle as 
grass fed. From what I've read, confined feeding operations or concentrated 
animal feeding operations usually involve some kind of enclosed facility or 
land that has less than 50 percent ground cover.

Yesterday, I got several letters from readers who were unhappy because I 
didn't list the states affected by the salmonella outbreak. The states are:

Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Kentucky, 
Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont and Washington.

A quick update, while I'm at it: Virginia officials, who had previously 
declined to specify the number of cases in the state because they were still 
investigating, have since said they have one confirmed case.

The FDA yesterday said the outbreak likely peaked in September. The agency 
believes that the contaminated food products that caused the illnesses have, 
at this point, been consumed, destroyed or thrown out because they are 
perishable. The FDA is still searching for the exact cause.

Finally, this week, I received several requests for information about the 
D.C. Attorney General's lawsuit against wireless service and phone retailer 
InPhonic. The two places you should contact regarding InPhonic are:

1. The D.C. Attorney General's office. Dorlisa Carter is the consumer 
affairs specialist who takes calls from consumers. Her number is (202) 
442-9828.

2. The Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Washington at (202) 393-8000. 
Because InPhonic is based in D.C., the local BBB has become the central 
repository for InPhonic complaints.