of campylobacters in food. Because these are in-
extricably bound with processing methods, they
are considered below in the section on the effects of
food processing on campylobacters. (See Meat:
Slaughter.)
Contamination of Milk from Milk-producing Animals
0035 At any one time, an average of about 25% of milking
cows excrete campylobacters in their feces. Carriage
in individual animals is variable, and several strains
may circulate in a herd over a period. Some degree of
fecal contamination is unavoidable, even in well-run
milking parlors, and several outbreaks have been
caused by drinking top-grade certified milk in the
USA. Table 4 shows that, on average, 4.8% of bulked
milk contains campylobacters. Positive samples
usually have high counts of E. coli, but occasionally,
campylobacters have been found without E. coli,
probably through excretion from the udder. High
counts of C. jejuni have been found in milk from
cows with campylobacter mastitis, an uncommon
naturally occurring infection. In experimental mas-
titis, many campylobacters may be excreted from an
infected quarter before the milk appears obviously
granular.
Contamination of Milk by Wild Birds
0036 In the UK, where it is common practice for fresh milk
to be delivered to the doorstep in metal-foil-topped
bottles, magpies (Pica pica) and jackdaws (Corvus
monedula) have developed the habit of pecking
through the foil tops and contaminating the contents.
This is a seasonal activity when the birds are raising
fledglings (April to June), which is also a time when
they frequently probe cow dung for invertebrates.
The habit is geographically variable; in areas of
highest prevalence, case-control studies have shown
it to account for a high proportion of campylobacter
infections at that time of year.
Cross-contamination in the Kitchen
0037 Items of food, such as raw poultry that are heavily
contaminated with campylobacters, provide a reser-
voir of bacteria in the kitchen from which other foods
can become contaminated. This may come about
through direct contact (e.g., from the liquor of a
thawing chicken), or via common utensils, counter
tops, chopping boards, and the hands of kitchen
staff. Campylobacters have been isolated from all of
these sites in working kitchens and from 76% of the
hands of staff who had held contaminated chicken.
0038 A frequent finding in campylobacter outbreak
investigations is a failure to separate raw meats
from other foods in food preparation areas – and
often a disturbing ignorance on the part of the staff
of the need for this separation. Although it is seldom
possible to prove cross-contamination, it is probably
the most frequent event leading to infection.
0039Insects Theoretically insects could be passive
vectors of infection via food. Campylobacters have
been isolated from houseflies (2.4% of flies caught in
houses and gardens in the UK; 5.5% in Pakistan) and
cockroaches, but substantial carriage has been found
only in the close vicinity of chicken sheds and pigger-
ies. Campylobacters failed to survive for more than 2
days in flies artificially fed with campylobacter broth
cultures. (See Insect Pests: Problems Caused by
Insects and Mites.)
Fate of Campylobacters During Food
Processing
Animal Slaughter and Meat Processing
0040Contamination of animal carcasses with intestinal
contents during slaughter and preparation is univer-
sal and, to some degree, unavoidable. Fortunately, in
the case of large animals (cattle, sheep, pigs), conven-
tional forced air evaporative chilling with frequent
mechanical spraying greatly reduces the numbers of
live campylobacters remaining on the surfaces of car-
casses, mainly through the effect of drying. Cooling
without mechanical assistance causes only about a
50% reduction in campylobacter numbers.
0041Broiler chickens and other poultry pose a greater
problem owing to the high degree of mechanization
required for processing birds at rates that satisfy
public demand. Two stages of processing are particu-
larly problematic:
1.
0042Mechanical defeathering, which is preceded by
immersion in hot water (‘scalding’) to facilitate
plucking. ‘Hard scalding’ at temperatures above
58
C causes a reduction in bacterial counts, but
‘soft scalding’ at 50–52
C, used for birds that are
to be sold fresh, has little effect; thus, leakage of
intestinal contents, which is common, results in
gross cross-contamination.
2.
0043Mechanical evisceration, which often results in the
rupture of the gut of birds that are not of consistent
size. Again, widespread cross-contamination is
the inevitable consequence; birds that are initially
clean become contaminated during processing.
Contamination can be reduced, but not eliminated,
by chilling in well-designed reverse-flow systems
containing chlorinated water (10 p.p.m. chlorine).
Uneviscerated (‘New York dressed’) birds are
the most heavily contaminated; campylobacter
784
CAMPYLOBACTER
/Properties and Occurrence