Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 10, Number 10—October 2004
Research

Egg Quality Assurance Programs and Egg-associated Salmonella Enteritidis Infections, United States

Gerald A. Mumma*Comments to Author , Patricia M. Griffin*, Martin I. Meltzer*, Chris R. Braden*, and Robert V. Tauxe*
Author affiliations: *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Main Article

Figure 1

Reported isolates per 100,000 persons of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis by region, United States, 1970–1999. New England: Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont. Mid-Atlantic: New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania. Pacific: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington. Mountain: Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah. Other states: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minne

Figure 1. Reported isolates per 100,000 persons of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis by region, United States, 1970–1999. New England: Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont. Mid-Atlantic: New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania. Pacific: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington. Mountain: Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah. Other states: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington DC, West Virginia, Wisconsin. Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Salmonella Surveillance System (1).

Main Article

References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Salmonella Surveillance System Annual Summary, 2000. Atlanta: the Centers; 2001.
  2. St. Louis  ME, Morse  DL, Potter  ME, DeMelfi  TM, Guzewich  JJ, Tauxe  RV, The emergence of grade A eggs as a major source of Salmonella Enteritidis infections: new implication for control of salmonellosis. JAMA. 1988;259:2103–7. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Hogue  A, White  P, Guard-Petter  J, Schlosser  W, Gast  R, Ebel  E, Epidemiology and control of egg-associated Salmonella Enteritidis in the United States of America. Rev Sci Tech. 1997;16:542–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Rhorer  AR. Control of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis under the U.S. National Poultry Improvement Plan. In: Saeed AM, editor. Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis in humans and animals: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and control. Ames (IA): Iowa State University Press; 1999. p. 307–12.
  5. Mason  J. Salmonella Enteritidis control programs in the United States. Int J Food Microbiol. 1994;21:155–69. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Shell eggs. Memorandum from Division of Food Service (BF-220). Washington: the Administration; 1973.
  7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Potentially hazardous food—shell eggs. Retail food protection manual. Washington: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Retail Food Protection Branch; 1990.
  8. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Salmonella Enteritidis control program—task force status reports. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1993.
  9. Food Safety and Inspection Service. Refrigeration and labeling requirements for shell eggs. 7 CFR Part 59. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1998.
  10. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Veterinary and biological products. Licensees and permittees. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 2001. p. 50, 55, 83.
  11. Henzler  DJ, Henninger  M, Debok  P. A five-year (1994–1999) critical analysis of the Pennsylvania egg quality assurance program (PEQAP). Proceedings of the 1999 American Veterinary Medical Association/American Association of Avian Pathologist Annual Meetings; 1999 Jul 10; New Orleans, LA. JAVMA. 1999:215. Abstract #45.
  12. Kradel  D, Henzler  D, Hanninger  M. Salmonella Enteritidis (S. Enteritidis) experiences with a control program. Proceedings of the 47th North Central Avian Disease Conference and Symposium on Making and Evaluating Health Management Decisions; 1996 Sep 29–Oct 1; Columbus, OH.
  13. Kradel  DC. Salmonella Enteritidis control: egg industry perspective. Presented at the 46th Annual New England Poultry Health Conference; 1997 Mar 26; Portsmouth, NH.
  14. Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. Salmonella Enteritidis pilot project progress report. Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Health and Diagnostic Services; 1995.
  15. White  PL, Schlosser  W, Benson  CE, Maddox  C, Hogue  A. Environmental survey by manure drag sampling for Salmonella Enteritidis in chicken layer houses. J Food Prot. 1997;60:1189–93.
  16. Henzler  DJ, Kradel  DC, Sischo  WM. Management and environmental risk factors for Salmonella Enteritidis contamination of eggs. Am J Vet Res. 1998;59:824–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Trepka  MJ, Archer  JR, Alterkruse  SF, Proctor  ME, Davis  JP. An increase in sporadic and outbreak-associated Salmonella Enteritidis infections in Wisconsin: the role of eggs. J Infect Dis. 1999;180:1214–9. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Food Safety Inspection Service. Salmonella Enteritidis risk assessment: shell eggs and egg products. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1998.
  19. United Egg Producers. UEP “5-STAR” total quality assurance program: a HACCP type food safety program with validation. Atlanta: United Egg Producers; 2001.
  20. SHAZAM Econometric Computer Program. User’s reference manual 8.0, version 8.0. Vancouver (Canada); 1997.
  21. Parks  RW. Efficient estimation of a system of regression equations when disturbances are both serially and contemporaneously correlated. J Am Stat Assoc. 1967;62:500–9. DOIGoogle Scholar
  22. Kmenta  J. Elements of econometrics. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company; 1986.
  23. Green  WH. Econometric analysis. Third edition. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.; 1995.
  24. Gujarati  ND. Basic econometrics. Third Edition. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.; 1995.
  25. Abdulkadri  AO, Langemeier  MR. Using farm consumption data to estimate the intertemporal elasticity of substitution and relative risk aversion coefficients. Agricultural Finance Review. 2000;60:61–70. DOIGoogle Scholar
  26. U.S. Bureau of Census. Resident population for selected age groups (1980–1989). 2003 Mar [cited 2004 Aug 16]. Available from http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/estage80.txt
  27. U.S. Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service. chickens and eggs final estimates, 1970–2000. [cited 2004 Aug 16]. Available from http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/poultry/pec-bbl/
  28. U.S. Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Inspection Service. Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis in table egg layers in the U.S. National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS). Conyers (GA): the Department; 2000.
  29. Golan  E, Krissof  B, Kuchler  F. Traceability for food marketing and food safety: what’s the next step? Agricultural Outlook. 2002;(01-2):21–5.
  30. Mead  PS, Slutsker  L, Diet  V, McCaig  LF, Bresee  JS, Shapiro  C, Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 1999;5:607–25. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Main Article

Page created: June 15, 2011
Page updated: June 15, 2011
Page reviewed: June 15, 2011
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external