Also included in the guidance document was a testing system that takes advantage of two factors in rotary drum production of sprouts, originally proposed by Katherine Swanson, PhD, vice president of food safety at Ecolab. A generally accepted mantra says testing cannot provide food safety due to sampling error and time required for results. In the case of rotary drum sprout production, both of these issues are easily overcome.
Based on work done by Dr. Swanson and Ruth Petran in their lab at The Pillsbury Company and duplicated by others, microbial growth in sprout seed under rotary drum conditions (warm and wet) is very rapid with a peak in growth of pathogenic organisms at about 48 hours. Rotary drums have an internal irrigation system that adds water to the rotating mass of sprouts several times per hour, primarily to keep the sprout mass cool. Excess water flows out of the drum after mixing thoroughly with the sprouts. This excess water provides a complete sample of whatever microbes may be growing in the drum. Sampling the water at 48 hours leaves at least another 48 hours, often a few more, before the sampled sprouts are harvested. With modern microbiological detection systems, 48 hours is more than sufficient time to determine the presence or absence of pathogenic organisms prior to harvest.
This system of testing spent irrigation water from sprouting systems is included in the 1999 guidance document, along with the suggestion that both the 20,000 ppm calcium hypochlorite seed treatment and irrigation water testing are an appropriate standard for the industry.
Unfortunately, the suggestions in the FDA guidance document, while widely adopted by many sprouters, have not been adopted by a significant number of (usually smaller) sprouters. Sprouters who have not adopted or have only partially adopted FDA guidance suggestions have voiced objections to the use of chlorine (especially as it violates organic production standards) and to the cost of testing spent irrigation water, and have even questioned the epidemiological statistics that have repeatedly determined sprouts to be the source of foodborne disease outbreaks.
A number of larger sprouters follow the 1999 FDA guidance, in addition to standard GMPs, and are producing in buildings designed and built as food production facilities. These sprouters produce a significant proportion of the sprout products available and have done so without being associated with foodborne disease outbreaks over the past 10 years. The common factors among sprouters associated with outbreaks are smaller size, buildings not designed and built as food production facilities, limited background and training in scientific food safety, and, perhaps most important, ideological and/or financial objections to one or more aspects of the 1999 FDA guidance.
Sprouts can be grown and marketed with a reasonable level of safety, as demonstrated by the larger sprout producers who have followed the 1999 FDA guidance over the past 10-plus years. It is unfortunate that a few smaller sprouters operating with ideological and resource constraints are able to harm consumers and damage the market.
Art Davis is a food industry veteran and consultant with more than 30 years’ experience. He has served as vice president of food safety for The Vista Institute, vice president of produce for IEH Laboratories and Consultants, and vice president of operations for The Sholl Group II/Green Giant Fresh.
Leave a Reply