Recent news headlines included an unsettling story about a man who passed a nine-foot tape worm and claimed it came from seafood he’d consumed at a local restaurant. Newscasters joked that the tape worm looked, well, exactly like nine feet of tape, or a nine-foot tape measure, and it had a face like a drill bit. And now the man is suing the restaurant!

I write this not to scare you off seafood for lunch, because seafood is still delicious and generally pretty healthy. No, friends, this is just an important reminder that food safety isn’t a guarantee, no matter where you are. In general, we all assume that food is safe in this country, and that’s because it is. But nothing is absolute.

Take parasites, like our friend the nine-foot tapeworm (let’s call him Duke). If evolution means anything anymore, parasites are winning the race. They outnumber every other creature on the planet, which means they’re pretty good at what they do. Cockroaches probably fear parasites. Another interesting fact, at nine-feet tall our Duke is the Michael Jordan of the parasite world. Imagine Duke facing a whole basketball team of tiny heartworms; I actually worry about the safety of those little worms facing off against our Duke! (Next time you get caught calling someone insipid a “parasite” behind their backs, try using this one: “No, no, I meant parasite-good, not parasite-bad! Parasites are some of the most resilient and ingenious animals!”)

The good news is that man has evolved as well. We’ve developed a couple of ingenious inventions to help win the war against parasites and bacteria — pots, pans and refrigerators! Hooray for people! We may actually win this thing!

Controlling temperature is the most effective, and easy, way to stop pathogens and parasites, but I have to admit, I do feel a bit funny about advising people to cook their food, or keep food in a refrigerator. I hope everyone understands that these are good, healthy things. But then again, there is a lot of information about food safety to go over, and mistakes can be deadly. Can you name the correct cooking temperatures for meats off the top of your head? You can?! That’s great, I totally can’t! (You’re a very intelligent blog reader, do you know that?)

While it’s not exactly breaking news, perhaps it’s a good idea, in honor of Duke, to go over some common cooking and chilling guidelines to help ensure food safety. In fact, that’s the whole goal of the BacDown! campaign -- to simply remind people of the basics of refrigeration and cooking and point out some basic rules about appropriate temperatures for cooking and chilling.

You can get a lot of information on this at www.fightbac.org, which recommends refrigerator temperatures be set lower than 40 degrees but higher that 32, which can damage delicate foods. It also advises that all new or leftover foods be placed in the fridge within two hours, and always use the refrigerator to defrost or marinade foods and meats. Food stays safe in the freezer when it’s frozen in small containers, for quicker cooling, or chilled in an un-crowded refrigerator. To check on how long you can keep a food in the fridge, click here.

Of course, the Fightbac folks also offer a cooking chart, available here. This chart gives safe cooking temperatures for all kinds of meats—145 degrees for a perfect medium rare steak—egg dishes, fish, seafood and even casseroles. Poor Duke, he may never find another host!

Using the stove and refrigerator properly is important, lifesaving work when you consider that every year 5,000 people die of food-borne illnesses. Now go forth and cook and refrigerate food like a pro. (Wow, just think of how many children won’t be getting salmonella tonight as a result of this blog! I’m so good!)

The hard part about animal welfare issues is that they’re complex in nature, and the answers or solutions are rarely black and white.

There’s an upcoming referendum in California known as Proposition 2 – or the Standards for Confining Farm Animals ballot initiative – that’s scheduled for vote in that state on November 4. The proposition deals with animals that are raised for food – like chickens and pigs and cattle -- and it would make some changes in the way they are housed so that they would be able to display what’s called “normal behaviors.”

The problem with Prop 2 – as it’s come to be known – is that food animal veterinarians and animal welfare scientists were never asked for their input on the new regulation. As a consequence, it appears that this well-meaning proposal could have some very negative consequences that will directly impact the very animals it seeks to help.

There’s a lot of discussion about Proposition 2 in the food community these days, and we’re getting some questions about what our position is on the issue. The AVMA is the oldest, largest and most respected veterinary association in the United States, and people want to know where we stand.

As California voters consider Proposition 2, the AVMA believes it is essential that they be given the opportunity to make informed decisions. That includes being provided all the pertinent information required to make an educated choice.

We are enthusiastic supporters of all efforts to improve animal welfare for all livestock, farm animals, wildlife and pets, but, as you will see in the full statement of the AVMA on Proposition 2, we believe this ballot initiative may create different welfare problems at the same time it seeks to solve others.

For more information about California Proposition 2, make sure you read our full statement. Also, check back on this site and on the AVMA homesite for occasional updates.

As with all votes and elections, it’s important to consider all angles and possible consequences before making a decision.

Here’s a fad that’s led to some scary results: people are drinking “raw milk”… straight from the udder, that is. And here’s the scary results: raw milk drinkers are getting seriously ill.

Raw milk has become increasingly popular, and proponents claim that the unpasteurized milk contains microbes that help in digestion and provides increased nutrition. Consumers also report that they drink raw milk for convenience, taste preference or other perceived health benefits -- including decreased risks for atherosclerosis, arthritis and lactose intolerance.

Problem is, these claims are not supported by scientific evidence, and proponents for raw milk neglect to mention that unpasteurized milk may also contain harmful bacteria, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Before 1938, the year when milk pasteurization was widely adopted in the United States, approximately 25% of all foodborne and waterborne outbreaks of disease were associated with the consumption of raw milk. By 2001, the percentage of these outbreaks was less than 1%. From 1998-2005, a total of 45 outbreaks of foodborne illness from raw milk (or cheese suspected to have been made from raw milk) were reported to CDC. These outbreaks resulted in 1007 cases of illness, 104 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. And there’s a strong possibility that not all illnesses due to drinking raw milk are reported; so the number is likely to be much greater.

Raw milk is of particular concern for infants and children under the age of seven. They not only have no say in their choice of milk, but they are also more at risk. So, heads up if you’re thinking switching to raw milk or if you’re giving it to your kids. Make sure you’re fully informed about the potential health risks…before you make the plunge. To learn more, visit:

• Dairy Farming Today
• FDA Consumer Magazine Article on Raw Milk
• USDA Food Safety Research Information Office
• Modern Dairy Farming Practices and Milk Quality: Myths and Facts, Dairy Council Digest

We are just finishing up our second week of Congress’ August recess. The quiet time is nice -- it gives us time to catch-up before Congress comes back in September.

Last Wednesday, we had the opportunity to visit Congressional offices with Dr. Jim Riviere to talk about funding for the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD). Dr. Riviere is a professor at North Carolina State University, College of Veterinary Medicine where he also oversees the FARAD program. He would have to make the very difficult decision to shut FARAD down if it does not receive additional funding.

Our meetings went o.k. -- the staffers understood the importance of FARAD to keeping our food safe. We also met with Senator Tim Johnson from South Dakota. Senator Johnson suffered a stroke last year, but he looks and feels great. He is back working in the Senate and running for reelection in South Dakota. The Senator was very interested in FARAD, especially because he represents a cattle-producing state. We look forward to working with his office to get FARAD funded.

We are running short on time -- FARAD will run out of money at the end of September. We are hopeful to receive funding in the Supplemental that Congress will pass in September -- however, given the political climate, we are not certain that this bill will be passed.

Please contact your Members of Congress and ask them to support FARAD funding in the Supplemental, and in the FY09 Agriculture Appropriations bill. FARAD’s existence literally depends on getting this funding.

On another note, we are going into the last few weeks of summer, and I am sure that most of you will have cook-outs with friends and family. Be sure to properly cook your meat and use a thermometer to make sure it is cooked to the correct temperature, and refrigerate and store your leftovers properly. The USDA Food Safety Inspection Service has information on their website about safe food handling.

Enjoy the rest of your summer. We will update you about FARAD funding after Congress returns in September.