WATT PoultryUSA - June 2011

getting attention over the last 10 years has nothing to do with this organism being an “emerged pathogen” as with E. coli O157:H7. Campylobacter was described back in 1886 by Theodor Escherich of Escherichia coli fame. This begs the question: Why are we focusing on it only now? The answer is because it is very hard to detect microbiologically and tools for detection have not been widely available.

Requiring the poultry industry to test for this organism will call for very specific and expensive CO2 incubators, specialized media, a phase contrast microscope, and personnel with far more microbiological training than most poultry companies currently employ to conduct the testing.

Sampling methods hamper U.S. industry
competitiveness

There are other hidden costs involved with differences in sampling methods for foodborne pathogens between countries that impact trade. USDA requires a whole-carcass rinse to detect Salmonella. In the EU, however, plant employees collect a 25-gram neck skin sample from three different carcasses and pool them.

In some other countries, the test method used is completely different (in particular for exported product) than the methods used regularly in the U.S. and EU. The chicken skin is sterilized using a blow-torch or iodine solution, then the skin is removed

using sterile tweezers and a sample of deep breast muscle is taken and tested for Salmonella. Not surprisingly, Salmonella is never found using this technique, allowing companies and countries to state that they do not have any Salmonella on their poultry. This is misleading and causes great confusion. By this testing method, a company could say that their chicken is sterile, which is, of course, ridiculous.

Meanwhile, the USDA-FSIS requires companies in the U.S. to post their Salmonella prevalence, and their names, addresses and P-numbers on the Internet for the world to see, placing them at a competitive disadvantage. Efforts should be made by USDA-FSIS to standardize these testing methods.

High costs without measurable benefits

Scientific data exist that clearly demonstrate no relationship between human salmonellosis and prevalence of Salmonella on poultry. The new performance standards will only place additional burdens on the poultry industry, possibly resulting in higher food costs to the consumer with no measurable public health benefit. Such significant changes, without strong scientific data showing public health benefits, place the U.S. chicken industry at a competitive disadvantage for export opportunities. ■

Scott M. Russell, Ph.D., University of Georgia, srussell@uga.edu

Balance Their Immune System for Health and Performance.

The benefits of a balanced immune system and improved intestinal function include:

IMMUNITY

PRODUC TION PERFORMANCE | FEED EFFICIENC Y | OVERALL FLOCK HEALTH

GUT
MICROBIOTA
GUT
MORPHOLOGY

That’s why you need Original XPC™. The unique nutritional fermentation metabolites in Original XPC™ support robust digestive health by balancing gut microbiota, the immune system and optimizing gut morphology.

In fact, performance results of poultry reseach trials* consistently prove that feeding all-natural, science-based Original XPC™ is the smart, healthy decision.