April 25, 2024

Ikea Recalls Its Meatballs Horse Meat Is Detected

Ikea’s decision — which followed a recall by the Swiss food maker Nestlé last week — demonstrated that even closely guarded brand names have found themselves vulnerable.

In weeks of tracing the problem, European Union and national officials have conceded that their oversight had not been aimed at authenticating food products. Now that governments and companies have undertaken more extensive testing, the results appear to indicate that food adulteration may be more commonplace and widespread than previously believed.

“Clearly there has been fraud on a massive scale across multiple countries in the E.U.,” Simon Coveney, the agriculture minister for Ireland, which holds the union’s rotating presidency, told a news conference after a meeting with colleagues in Brussels on Monday.

Noting that “big brands and big names that people trust” have been caught up in the issue, Mr. Coveney said, “We are all eager to get to the bottom of this.”

The detection of horse meat, which began in Ireland and spread quickly, has raised questions about the quality and oversight of Europe’s complex chain of slaughterhouses, processed meat producers, distributors and retailers.

Already millions of products have been withdrawn, and new cases of adulteration are being discovered almost daily, involving some of the best-known food makers — including Findus and Iglo — and most prominent supermarket chains.

Ikea’s announcement underlined how few retailers can rest easy as more scrutiny is applied. The recall risks denting the homely Scandinavian image of Ikea, one of Sweden’s best-known companies.

A traditional part of Swedish cuisine, meatballs are consumed in huge quantities — 150 million a year, according to the company’s Web site — by customers in Ikea cafeterias and are also sold for consumption at home.

The company said its action concerned meatballs manufactured by one supplier in Sweden and applies to all European countries except Norway and Russia and to a limited number of products in Switzerland and Poland. The United States is not affected, the company said.

Clive Black, a retail analyst at Shore Capital, an investment banking company in London, said that Ikea’s announcement was “another left-field random outcome of the whole situation. Did Ikea want to sell horse meat? No. Have they been caught out by rogue elements? Yes.”

“The breadth with which contamination has been found clearly shows that there has been substantial rogue activity,” he added.

Ikea first said that it would not sell or serve any meatballs at its stores in Sweden after the Czech authorities detected horse meat in frozen meatballs that were labeled beef and pork, even though Ikea’s own tests two weeks ago had not detected horse DNA.

The company also said it was stopping sales in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, France, Britain, Portugal, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Greece, Cyprus and Ireland. The meatballs were produced by Ikea’s main supplier of the product, a Swedish company called Familjen Dafgard.

In a statement later in the day, Anders Lennartsson, a spokesman for Ikea Food Services, said, “We take seriously the test result from the Czech Republic authorities, indicating presence of horse meat in one batch of our meatballs.”

Results of DNA tests conducted by the food industry in Britain, released last week, showed that 1 percent of beef products were tainted with horse meat. But that news was offset by the discovery of tainted beef products destined for school meals in Scotland.

And, while the issue is primarily seen as one of fraud and mislabeling, there is concern that a powerful equine painkiller, phenylbutazone, or bute, may have entered the food chain.

Stephen Castle reported from London, and Andrew Higgins from Brussels.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/world/europe/ikea-recalls-its-meatballs-horse-meat-is-detected.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Walmart Removes Enfamil Formula After Boy Dies

The action by Walmart and Supervalu, which owns supermarket chains like Acme and Jewel, was highly unusual because there had been no determination by authorities that the formula was to blame for the child’s death, and neither the manufacturer nor federal officials had sought a recall.

Shares of Mead Johnson Nutrition, which manufactures Enfamil, fell more than 20 percent intraday on Thursday as news about the situation spread. The stock partly recovered by the end of the day, closing at $68.76, down 10 percent.

The Food and Drug Administration said it was testing samples of the formula, Enfamil Premium Newborn powder, that it had obtained from the family of the dead child, Avery Cornett. Officials asserted that there was no immediate indication that the formula had been contaminated.

A Walmart spokeswoman said the company learned on Sunday night of the baby’s death and that his parents had fed him formula bought at the chain’s store in Lebanon, Mo. On Monday, the company decided to pull all containers of the formula that had come from the same manufacturing lot from the shelves of its stores.

“As a precautionary measure, we made a company decision to remove the specific lot of the product from our store shelves nationwide,” said Dianna Gee, the Walmart spokeswoman. “We’re not saying the product’s unsafe.”

Walmart identified the product consumed by the baby who died as Enfamil Premium Newborn powdered infant formula in a 12.5-ounce container, with the lot number ZP1K7G printed on the bottom of the canister.

The baby boy, who was 10 days old when he died on Sunday, was infected with Cronobacter sakazakii, a bacterium that is commonly found in the environment and has occasionally been known to cause severe illness in infants.

In a written statement, Mead Johnson said Thursday, “We are confident that all our products are safe and nutritious when prepared, stored and used as instructed on the label.”

The company said that it had tested all of its formula for Cronobacter. It said that its records showed that the batch bought by the Missouri infant’s family had been tested before it was distributed and that no Cronobacter had been found.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that it received reports of about four to six Cronobacter infections in infants a year. The fatality rate is 40 percent.

Scientific studies and disease investigations have found Cronobacter in various types of formula. In some cases, when the bacterium was found in open containers, it was not clear whether the formula had become contaminated after opening. But in other instances, the bacterium has been found in sealed packages delivered from the factory.

In one case in 2001, an infant died from Cronobacter in Tennessee, and investigators found a genetically indistinguishable strain of the bacterium in sealed containers of the formula, according to reports by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the F.D.A. The formula, a Mead Johnson product called Portagen, was recalled.

Health officials said it was important for parents to take precautions when preparing formula. That includes washing hands thoroughly, sterilizing bottles and other feeding equipment and preparing only enough formula for a single feeding.

Officials said the bacterium could grow over time if it was in the formula, and holding onto mixed formula for more than one feeding could increase the chance of infection.

Ms. Gee said Walmart had removed the newborn formula from more than 3,000 stores nationwide. She said the company was holding onto the product and that if it was cleared in the investigation, the company might put it back on sale. Walmart continues to sell other Enfamil products.

Walmart said customers who bought Enfamil from the same lot could bring it back and receive a refund or another product in its place.

Supervalu said Thursday that it had also received formula from the same lot and was removing it from store shelves.

Michael A. Siemienas, a Supervalu spokesman, said the formula might have been shipped to hundreds of its stores around the country, including Jewel, Shaws, Shop and Save, Acme, Farm Fresh, Shoppers and some Albertsons supermarkets.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=bff1c28c1605395ec191a29d5614c53f

Cash Crops Under Glass and Up on the Roof

In all but the short summer season, the availability of fresh, locally grown fruit and vegetables has been little more than a pipe dream for Montreal residents.

But Lufa Farms, founded by Mohamed Hage and Kurt Lynn, turned an unassuming office rooftop into a 31,000-square-foot greenhouse that grows tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers and other produce year-round and is a working example of a developing trend known as urban rooftop farming.

It has taken a timely convergence of technologies and consumer attitudes to bring rooftop farming to the fore. The advance of hydroponic growing techniques and innovative, cost-effective greenhouse systems, together with increasing consumer desire for organic produce, has redefined the term locally grown and spurred entrepreneurs to create a variety of greenhouse technologies and business models.

The Lufa Farms model is to sell directly to consumers through a co-op. Other urban farms are forming partnerships with supermarket chains by building large greenhouses on supermarket roofs and selling their produce to the store below.

A third concept, called vertical farming, involves growing food in skyscrapers or even warehouses using artificial light and organic growing materials. In theory, a 30-story, one-square block farm could yield as much food as 2,400 outdoor acres, and with less spoilage because it would travel less distance, according to Dickson D. Despommier, a Columbia University emeritus professor of public health and microbiology and a leading proponent of vertical farming.

TerraSphere, a unit of Converted Organics with offices in Surrey, British Columbia, and Boston, designs and builds vertical farm systems and sells its lettuce and spinach through Choices Markets, an organic grocery chain in western Canada.

As the technologies have been conquered and viability studies have evolved into real enterprises, a crucial question remains: Can rooftop farmers make a profit?

After four years of developing the business, building the greenhouse and refining growing techniques, Lufa Farms has started delivering baskets of produce to local subscribers: $22 for a six-pound basket and $30 for a basket weighing about nine pounds.

With more than 400 customers signed up and more joining daily, Mr. Lynn, a 60-year-old technology entrepreneur who founded, ListenUP! Canada, a hearing aid chain, says Lufa Farms can enroll a thousand customers, break even this year and reap a 15 percent profit in the future.

“Unlike a lot of start-ups, we’re not trying to find a market,” Mr. Lynn said. “We know there is a demand for this.”

Montreal, like other cold-climate cities, has its share of small organic farms. But a land-based farmer is restricted to a 24- to 28-week growing season while a rooftop greenhouse can produce year-round.

The capital costs to get started are higher for rooftop farms — from $1.2 million to $2 million to find a building and set up a greenhouse — but the operating costs are much lower. That is because rooftop farms require less labor, land, water, fertilizer and heavy equipment and because they all but eliminate shipping costs by selling to the local market. The result, proponents say, is a fresher, tastier, longer-lasting, more nutritious product.

Most rooftop gardens use hydroponic cultivation, a water-based growing system in which no soil is required, nutrients are carefully controlled and natural pest control using insects is favored over pesticides. These greenhouses extend the already popular green-roof concept, using recycled water and lowering energy consumption in the buildings upon which they sit. Lufa Farms says it has saved its host building 25 percent in heating costs since it completed its greenhouse.

Rooftop farms can command a similar or slightly higher price for their produce, but the biggest advantage for Lufa is that its urban location means it can attract more customers and deliver more than a thousand baskets of produce a week, compared with 200 to 300 for a typical land-based co-op. The company’s business plan calls for rapid expansion to more rooftops in Montreal and other cities with similar climates.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=89a5902f4391fc33758bbd6890c9edeb