The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

5 Surveillance of the Food Supply
Pages 177-194

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 177... ... Although food monitoring is theoretically capable of providing primary prevention against foodborne disease, Besser finds that such systems seldom meet this standard because of the technical complexity of the task (which can only be addressed at considerable expense) Read the entire page →
From page 178... ... ; and (b) those involving the collection of human or animal foodborne disease data to identify problems in the food supply through analyses 1Clinical Laboratory Manager, Public Health Laboratory. Read the entire page →
From page 179... ... eLEXNET Electronic Laboratory Exchange Network eLRN Environmental Laboratory Response Network Epi-X Epidemic Information Exchange Essence Electronic Surveillance System for Early Notification of Community-based Epidemics FERN Food Emergency Response Network FoodNet Foodborne Disease Active Surveillance Network GEMS Global Environmental Monitoring System Global Salm-Surv Global Salmonella Survey (WHO) GOARN Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network GPHIN Global Public Health Intelligence Network HAN Health Alert Network ICLN Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks IDSA-EIN Infectious Disease Society of America Emerging Infections Network INFOSAN International Food Safety Authorities Network LRN Laboratory Response Network NAHSS National Animal Health Surveillance System NARMS National Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring System NEDSS National Electronic Disease Surveillance System NETSS National Electronic Telecommunications System for Surveillance NPDN National Plant Diagnostic Network NRDM National Retail Data Monitor PulseNet PulseNet (CDC) Read the entire page →
From page 180... ... The use of lot-by-lot microbial monitoring to protect food is attractive because, unlike disease surveillance, food monitoring can potentially prevent initial cases. This may be the only option for high-risk situations where initial cases are intolerable from a societal point of view. Read the entire page →
From page 181... ... This may be especially true for pathogens introduced intentionally and sporadically into the food supply. Finally, the amount of confidence in the safety of food screened by testing is proportional to the amount of sampling done and inversely proportional to the prevalence of the pathogen. Read the entire page →
From page 182... ... Although encouraging in terms of potential throughput and per-sample cost, biosensor technology has many of the same theoretical limitations described for nucleic acid and conventional technology. The sum of sampling and sensitivity issues make food monitoring impractical as a broadly applied tool for protecting the food supply. Read the entire page →
From page 183... ... Microbial pathogens tend to be evenly distributed through specimens such as feces due to extended mixing in the digestive tract. Pathogen load is not generally an intrinsic limiting factor in foodborne disease surveillance, as microbial amplification is part of the pathogenesis of most foodborne infections. Read the entire page →
From page 184... ... . As much as we may want to prevent initial cases through food monitoring, humans are the best possible culture media and bioassay for detection of human disease agents, and disease surveillance will likely remain our most powerful detection tool for detecting problems in the food supply for years to come. Read the entire page →
From page 185... ... . Although pathogen-specific surveillance samples only a small percentage of total foodborne disease cases, it nevertheless has been one of the most robust indicators of problems in the food supply. Read the entire page →
From page 186... ... Surveillance for specific rare syndromes such as hemolytic uremic syndrome or Guillain-Barre syndrome resembles pathogen-specific surveillance more than syndromic surveillance in terms of sensitivity and specificity. Surveillance for unexplained death or critical illnesses with possible infectious etiology is a particularly important type of surveillance. Read the entire page →
From page 187... ... Outbreak reporting systems such as eFORS and GOARN can potentially detect national or international outbreaks by linking local outbreaks without previously recognized connection. PulseNet and associated foodborne disease surveillance programs are currently the most sensitive methods for detecting unforeseen problems in the food supply. Read the entire page →
From page 188... ... will provide a backbone for national surveillance, but the lack of standard forms for interviewing cases will continue to limit outbreak detection in the absence of specific agent information. Surveillance for unexplained death and serious illness caused by possible infectious etiology has significant potential for use in detecting serious problems in the food supply, such as intentional tampering. Read the entire page →
From page 189... ... Real-time foodborne disease surveillance at the state, federal, and international levels is an achievable, relatively inexpensive goal that would have an immediate, positive impact on food safety. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINT MONITORING SYSTEM: ENHANCING DISCOVERY AND MITIGATION OF FOODBORNE THREATS TO HEALTH THROUGH PATTERN SURVEILLANCE AND MULTIPLE-ATTRIBUTE ALGORITHMS CDR Kimberly Elenberg, M.S., R.N.2 and Artur Dubrawski, Ph.D.3 The Consumer Complaint Monitoring System (CCMS) Read the entire page →
From page 190... ... . Although PulseNet and FoodNet actively track pathogen strains isolated from humans with foodborne disease, CCMS employs a form of passive surveillance to provide the earliest possible warning of a wide variety of foodborne threats. Read the entire page →
From page 191... ... Although currently operated on a state-by-state basis, CCMS will soon permit state public health officials to track pathogens and contaminants beyond their borders and to view a national "snapshot" of adverse food events in real time. Data from earlier points in the farm-to-table continuum, which would be especially valuable in identifying patterns associated with zoonotic disease, could be analyzed in conjunction with consumer complaints as part of an integrated national biosurveillance system. Read the entire page →
From page 192... ... 1996. Bacterial Foodborne Disease: Medical Costs and Productivity Losses. Read the entire page →
From page 193... ... 2004. International Cooperation on Food Contamination and Foodborne Disease Surveillance. Read the entire page →
From page 194... ... 2005. Analyzing a bioterror attack on the food supply: The case of botulinum toxin in milk. Read the entire page →

From page 177...

... Although food monitoring is theoretically capable of providing primary prevention against foodborne disease, Besser finds that such systems seldom meet this standard because of the technical complexity of the task (which can only be addressed at considerable expense)

5 Surveillance of the Food Supply Pages 177-194

5 Surveillance of the Food Supply
Pages 177-194