USDA Compliance Guideline for Controlling Salmonella in Poultry, May 2010 | INFJ Forum

USDA Compliance Guideline for Controlling Salmonella in Poultry, May 2010

T

testing

On Holiday
Aug 14, 2009
902
91
0
MBTI
qwer
Why? :becky: Because it's soooo sexy, and I don't want to pollute Enty's thread anymore. (sorry for doing that) and I, for one, demand to know the truth about chicken standards.

And there's even a PDF, which you can read! http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Compliance_Guide_Controling_Salmonella_Campylobacter_Poultry_0510.pdf

According to official USDA guidelines, the highest acceptable amount of salmonella present in chickens is 5 birds out of 51 testing positive for salmonella. That's 9.8%.

(As for Noam Chomsky, that one is going to take a while, and he's quite the informative read. But I've got the information on the chickens, anyway.)
 
Janet said:
Why? :becky: Because it's soooo sexy, and I don't want to pollute Enty's thread anymore. (sorry for doing that) and I, for one, demand to know the truth about chicken standards.

And there's even a PDF, which you can read! http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Compliance_Guide_Controling_Salmonella_Campylobacter_Poultry_0510.pdf

According to official USDA guidelines, the highest acceptable amount of salmonella present in chickens is 5 birds out of 51 testing positive for salmonella. That's 9.8%.

(As for Noam Chomsky, that one is going to take a while, and he's quite the informative read. But I've got the information on the chickens, anyway.)
Click to expand...
Well, does testing positive mean it saturated with salmonella, or is some sort of biological 1 parts per million sort of thing? Is there some sort of thresh hold for testing positive, meaning that you have to have so much of it before it a positive? Cause if over 90% of birds have 0 salmonella, thats amazing.
 
Shai Gar's US-bashing based on false propaganda, exposed for the lies that they are! :becky:

Not that he doesn't have a point, mind you. :wink:


good work,
Ian
 
  • Like
Reactions: slant
DoveAlexa said:
Well, does testing positive mean it saturated with salmonella, or is some sort of biological 1 parts per million sort of thing? Is there some sort of thresh hold for testing positive, meaning that you have to have so much of it before it a positive? Cause if over 90% of birds have 0 salmonella, thats amazing.
Click to expand...

I don't know what the infection threshold is or how they measure it; I think it may be explained in that PDF somewhere. All I can say is that the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service website is not pleasant ( http://www.fsis.usda.gov/). If you want to learn about the most sanitary way to eviscerate a chicken, that link has everything you wanted to know, and it probably talks in more detail about just how many individual salmonella organisms constitute testing positive.

Shai Gar's US-bashing based on false propaganda, exposed for the lies that they are!
becky.gif


Not that he doesn't have a point, mind you.
wink.gif
Click to expand...

I live but to serve.
becky.gif
Exposing Shai is just a fringe benefit. Still trying to find some enslaved South Americans to do my laundry, however. (Point taken, nonetheless, I know, I know Agribusiness sucks, buy locally and organically, yadda yadda yadda... I'm all about that.)
 
Last edited:
Janet said:
I don't know what the infection threshold is or how they measure it; I think it may be explained in that PDF somewhere. All I can say is that the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service website is not pleasant ( http://www.fsis.usda.gov/). If you want to learn about the most sanitary way to eviscerate a chicken, that link has everything you wanted to know, and it probably talks in more detail about just how many individual salmonella organisms constitute testing positive.
Click to expand...
but... I don't wanna read it.
Can't you just tl;dr it for me? :D

Kidding, I'll read it but not right now. Then I'll come back if I find anything XD.
 
DoveAlexa, this is also going to haunt me until I know the answer, dammit.

Here's one thing I found:

Salmonella lives in the intestinal track of humans and other animals, including birds. Salmonella is usually transmitted to humans by eating foods contaminated with animal feces. Salmonella present on raw meat and poultry could survive if the product is not cooked to a safe minimum internal temperature, as measured with a food thermometer. Salmonella can also cause foodborne illness (salmonellosis) through cross-contamination, e.g., when juices from raw meat or poultry come in contact with ready-to-eat foods, such as salads. Food may also become contaminated by the unwashed hands of an infected food handler. Salmonella can also be found in the feces of some pets, especially those with diarrhea. People can become infected if they do not wash their hands after contact with these feces. Reptiles are particularly likely to harbor Salmonella. People should always wash their hands immediately after handling a reptile, even if the reptile is healthy.

As on any perishable meat, fish or poultry, bacteria can be found on raw or undercooked chicken. Some bacteria associated with chicken are Salmonella enteritidis, Staphylococcus aureus, Campylobacter jejuni, and Listeria monocytogenes. They multiply rapidly at temperatures between 40
Click to expand...
 
Hahaha, I must have a strong stomach today, I'd go for a chicken burger if offered! Usually I get turned right off on that though XD.
I guess that means if there is any on the bird, even a tiny bit, it's a positive. Considering the salmonella comes from bird feces then its a lot worse to have it get on the bird than if salmonella was a skin type bug. Its also less forgivable but I still think 90% without salmonella is amazing. I assumed ALL birds had salmonella on them!
 
I'm having a chemgasm flipping through that file. I'll spare you the details though.
 
I got my information from discovery science. I said that in the thread.

What are the punishments for not following guidelines, how rigorously are the companies tested by the government and can you tl;dr the proofs that these birds are properly tested?

Everything i have heard about us slaughterhouses is that they fight violently against the humane slaighter act whenever it rears its head.
 
I assume it's about as binding as our section 31 of the constitution with regards to the UNDHR after being signed and ratified.

IOW, not at all.
 
Shai Gar said:
I got my information from discovery science. I said that in the thread.

What are the punishments for not following guidelines, how rigorously are the companies tested by the government and can you tl;dr the proofs that these birds are properly tested?

Everything i have heard about us slaughterhouses is that they fight violently against the humane slaighter act whenever it rears its head.
Click to expand...

I have no idea. Crap, now I have to find out.

There are lots of chicken farms near me; it's true, they are a powerful lobby, and may or may not be properly tested/regulated. They certainly don't want consumers to get sick, and I am aware of several cases where some were shut down. So there is some punishment, at least... I can say that.

I imagine that other countries also have powerful agriculture lobbies who have a vested interest in discrediting the us slaughterhouses. I would not be shocked if less-than-ideal practices are international rather than solely in the US, and that some of this bad press is driven more by companies worldwide wanting to sell their own chickens rather than their competitors'.
 
No actually, your country is not like every other nation with lobbies. I worked in a slaughterhouse and we had an AQIS (quarrantine inspection) on site, no meat went out without their inspection and they were everywhere on the production chain. Food does not get sold here without AQIS's approval.
 
Shai Gar said:
No actually, your country is not like every other nation with lobbies. I worked in a slaughterhouse and we had an AQIS (quarrantine inspection) on site, no meat went out without their inspection and they were everywhere on the production chain. Food does not get sold here without AQIS's approval.
Click to expand...

But then, Australia is anal about its quarantine. :m122:
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ--faib7to&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube- Undercover Investigation at Hy-Line Hatchery[/ame]
 
No wonder the us is against the humane slaughter act. That's far worse than I imagined. I didnt really think it was that bad, bad, but not that bad.

Shows me for giving the us the benefit of the doubt...
 
And....

Bringing to you, straight from the UK, a glimpse at international chicken production practices, thanks to You Tube:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glFySsTDsjo"]YouTube- The Broiler Industry[/ame]

It's not just the US, Shai. What do you do in Australia, massage them to sleep before you slaughter them? Riiiiight. So sorry I ever gave you the benefit of the doubt.
 
Janet said:
According to official USDA guidelines, the highest acceptable amount of salmonella present in chickens is 5 birds out of 51 testing positive for salmonella. That's 9.8%.
Click to expand...

I do not find this comforting at all.


And Shai, the way animals are treated and slaughtered in the U.S. CFOs is as grotesque as it gets.
 
I have killed chickens before. It's done humanely.

How it's done professionally I do not know yet. But I challenge everyone to dig up dirt on my nation so that I can see the log in our eyes too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back