Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/15
Outputs
Target Audience:Consumers who purchase or receive as gifts fresh or frozen meat or seafood that was purchased online and delivered using FedEx, UPS, DHL or other package delivery service. Government agencies who regulate vendors of meat or seafood. Educators who work with consumers who purchase or receive as gifts fresh or frozen meat or seafood that was purchased online and delivered using FedEx, UPS, DHL or other package delivery service. Media Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Graduate and undergraduate students were trained in microbiological analyses. They also learned how to follow very detailed protocols for data entry and assessment. They were trained in the use of Excel and SPSS to analyze data. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?An educational flyer was prepared, reviewed by USDA and FDA personnel, and uploaded to our food safety website. It has also been released to USDA for their use. Several conferences have been held with USDA, FDA and CDC personnel to discuss the findings and potential impact of this study on policy changes. Special seminars/webinars have been presented for USDA and CDC personnel and invitees. A session on packaging was given at the Food Safety Consortium which is for vendors. An article reviewing the project results was published in Food Safety News which is widely distributed to all food safety educators and professionals.Names and contact information of companies misrepresenting USDA and FDA food safety recommendations were provided to USDA for possible follow-up. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Shipping perishable items directly to consumers can be safe if done correctly. However, there is very little regulation of entry into this market and no training is required. Vendor's policies of permitting deliveries without requiring a signature may subject perishable products to temperature abuse. Many of the products investigated in our study arrived outside of the temperature safety zone, and some of the food safety information provided was incorrect. That along with what may be a false sense of security of consumers may place them at increased risk of getting a food-borne illness. Since they are the last line of defense in preventing such an illness, it is important that they take a more active role in ensuring that their food is safe. They should: check the temperature of products upon arrival using a food thermometer, store products in refrigerator or freezer immediately after determining they arrived at a safe temperature; and contact the company if there is doubt about the safety of the product received. We recommend that industry be held responsible for the safety of their products. They should be more aware that once the package of perishable products leaves their facility it is treated like any other package containing non-perishable items. At a minimum they should ensure that the shipping container, dunnage, and coolants used are sufficient to keep the product at a safe temperature, include food safety information with the products and on their websites, making sure that this information is in agreement with food safety information provided by USDA and FDA, and if using dry ice as a coolant, be sure to include warnings and handling instructions for the consumer on both the outside and inside of the shipping container. Government, industry, academia, and consumer organizations need to work together to improve the food safety of these products and increase the visibility of publications that educate consumers and industry on safe handling of food products purchased over the internet and shipped via common carrier. Objective 1. Complete an inventory of online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products in the United States, characterizing the products offered, ways they are shipped, and the presence and quality of the food safety advice provided for consumers. An examination of vendor's websites was completed to determine what food safety information they provide to their customers, and whether packages may be delivered without requiring a signature and therefore, potentially left outside for long periods. Most vendors permitted packages to be delivered without requiring a signature, with many adding a disclaimer that they will not be responsible for the contents of the packages once delivered. Moreover, 58% offer no information related to food safety on their sites. Objective 2. Ascertain consumer expectations, knowledge, and behaviors related to ordering, receiving, handling, storing, cooking, and consuming meat, fish, and seafood products available for purchase online. An online survey was conducted with 1002 qualified individuals. Most recalled seeing information about the company, company contact information, and shipping/delivery details on the site. Food safety tips/instructions were one of the lowest recalled pieces of information provided on a company's website. Of those that did recall seeing this information the majority felt that the instructions were complete. When asked if they believe that purchasing fresh or frozen meat or seafood products online and having them shipped is safe, most believed that the process was very safe. Even though a strong majority felt that the process was very safe there was still a strong agreement that it is important for the internet companies to provide food safety information on their websites. A majority of those who received packages said they were opened within one hour. Dry ice was the predominantly used coolant in the shipping container. A majority of the consumers said they read all of the food safety tips/ instructions provided. Recalling their last package delivered, consumers felt that the products were delivered at the proper temperature. Methods for determining this included: visually inspecting the product, smelling the product, and touching the individual items to see if they are still cold. Consumers were generally satisfied with the quality of products they received from the online food companies. Few contacted the vendor. Objective 3. Survey the microbial safety of a representative cross-section of available meat, fish, and seafood products offered by online purveyors, and Objective 4. Document length of and selected temporal and thermal parameters within and among shipping routes. Samples of meat, fish, and seafood products offered by each selected purveyor were purchased and sent to either Rutgers or Tennessee State for microbial analysis and assessment of delivery processes. Time of delivery and the size, type, construction, maker, integrity, and other conditions of the package were recorded. Upon delivery, temperatures of the food products in the package were measured and total weight and overall condition of the products were recorded. Contents of the package were examined for any food safety or customer service information included by the purveyor. An estimate of the amount and form of dry ice and/or weight of gel packs both originally included and remaining in the package were recorded. Photographs were taken of each package, both outside and within. Only 25% had any food safety information inside the package. The majority of shipments included a polystyrene foam box; 76.9% also used an exterior cardboard box. The majority contained gel packs; 42.4% had dry ice. Upon opening the packages, the surface temperatures on the top of the products ranged from -23.5°F to 72°F (M = 36.8°F). Temperatures on the bottom ranged from -22.7°F to 75°F (M = 36.8°F). Nearly half had a surface temperature above 40°F. The microbiological quality and safety of each of the samples were evaluated for the presence and concentration of indicator organisms and foodborne pathogens using standard protocols. Positive results were found for generic E. coli, pathogenic E. coli, Salmonella, B. cereus, V. parahaemolyticus and C. perfringens. A majority of E. coli, and Salmonella positive samples were received at temperatures >4°C. Tracking information provided by the carrier was used to determine the average time a package was in the parcel carriers possession and length of time in carrier's storage facilities. Average possession time was 1 day, 8 hours, and 10 minutes. Packages spent an average of 12 hours in company warehouses. There was an average of 5 hours and 29 minutes between the package's delivery and its opening. Objective 5: Evaluate shipping containers for their adequacy for keeping products within safe temperature zones. The size, type, construction, maker, integrity, and other conditions of the package were assessed upon delivery. Comparisons were made between the temperatures of products delivered and the size and construction of containers. No significant differences were found. Objective 6: Create and publish online and print materials useful for outreach to consumers and online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products. An educational flyer was prepared, reviewed by USDA and FDA personnel, and uploaded to our food safety website. It was released to USDA for their use. Several conferences have been held with USDA, FDA and CDC personnel to discuss the findings and potential impact of this study on policy changes. Names and contact information of companies misrepresenting USDA and FDA food safety recommendations were provided to USDA for possible follow-up. Special seminars/webinars have been presented for USDA and CDC personnel and invitees. A session on packaging was given at the Food Safety Consortium which is for vendors.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
S. Godwin, R. Stone and W. Hallman. 2014. Food Safety Risk Factors For Consumers Ordering And Receiving Perishable Food Items From Online Companies. Report of Study Results. Publication No. TSU-13-0031(A)-4g-13515. Available at http://www.fightc-les.org.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
S. Godwin, W. Hallman, and A. Senger-Mersich. 2014. Ordering Raw Meat, Poultry, Game and Seafood Online. Identifying Food Safety Risk Factors. Consumer Food Safety Education Conference. Crystal City, VA. Available at http://www.fightc-les.org.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
S. Godwin, R. Stone, W. Hallman, and A. Senger-Mersich. 2014. Identifying Gaps in Food Safety Information Provided by Online Companies and Consumers Expectations. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114(9):A75.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
L. Zuraw. 2014. Research: Ordering Raw Meat or Seafood Online Can Be Unsafe. Food Safety News. December 15. Available at http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/12/raw-meat-seafood-ordered-online-can-be-unsafe/#.Vgy5GpVdEdV
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
S. Godwin, R. Stone, A. Senger-Mersich, and W. Hallman. 2015. Consumer Awareness of and Response to Safety Issues upon Delivery of Meat, Fish and/or Seafood Purchased Online. Journal of Food Protection 178(Sup A): 119.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
W. Hallman and S. Godwin. 2015. Raw Meat, Poultry, Game and Seafood Products Purchased Online. Assessment of Packaging and Delivery. Food Safety Consortium. Shaumburg, IL. Nov. 18.
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
S. Godwin, R. Stone and W. Hallman. 2015. A Consumers Guide to Safely Ordering and Receiving Perishable Food Products From Online Companies. Publication No. TSU-15-0110(A)-15-13515. Available at http://www.fightc-les.org.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
S. Godwin and W. Hallman. 2015. Identifying Food Safety Risk Factors and Educational Strategies for Consumers Purchasing Seafood and Meat Products Online. Seminar/webinar presented Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, National Institute of Food and Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture. Washington, DC. July 30.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
W. Hallman and S. Godwin. 2015. Identifying Potential Food Safety Risk Factors for Meat, Poultry, and Seafood Products Ordered Online and Delivered Using Common Carriers. Seminar presented at Centers for Disease Control. Atlanta, GA. May 29.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
W. Hallman, A. Senger-Mersich, and S. Godwin. 2015. Online Purveyors of Raw Meat, Poultry, and Seafood Products: Delivery Policies and Available Consumer Food Safety Information. Food Protection Trends 35(2):80-88.
|
Progress 09/01/13 to 08/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: Consumers who purchase meat, fish, poultry and seafood over the internet and have it delivered via a common carrier Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? A student was trained in microbiological techniques needed to assess the products. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Major tasks remaining include: 1) Consumer website: Using the information generated in the accomplishment of the previous objectives, we will create a consumer website with advice and information concerning the safe purchasing, delivery, handling, storage, and cooking of perishable products obtained from online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood. As part of this plan we will solicit feedback from food safety professionals, extension specialists, and consumers. Fifteen food safety professionals from across the country will be asked to evaluate the content of the consumer website and downloadable materials providing feedback concerning the adequacy and appropriateness of the information to meet the needs of consumers. In addition, 24 consumers (12 in NJ and 12 in TN) will be asked to provide information concerning their comprehension and judgments concerning the usefulness of the information provided. We will also create a brief online evaluation form to solicit feedback from consumers who view the finished consumer website to gauge: a) how they were directed to the website; b) whether the information provided meets consumer needs; c) whether additional or different information or advice would be useful; and, d) their comprehension of the advice and information provided. 2) Industry-oriented website. We will also create an industry-oriented website with advice and information concerning the safe shipping of meat, fish, and seafood products based both on the information obtained from the evaluation of containers and shipping routes and the data collected concerning consumer expectations and behaviors related to these products. The website would include specific information concerning the adequacy of shipping containers quantities of dry ice under the range of predicted shipping conditions and the likely growth of pathogens of concern on meat, fish, and seafood products under predicted conditions. The website will also provide suggestions to the industry about the kinds of consumer information they should include on their own websites to help improve the overall food safety of the products they sell. 3) Create downloadable print materials for use by purveyors. The project will also create a downloadable set of print materials (or modifiable templates) that can be personalized and distributed by online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products in the shipping boxes sent to their customers. These materials will provide specific information concerning: a) how to determine that the perishable products that are delivered are safe to consume; b) what consumers should do if the meat, fish, or seafood products they receive have been delivered outside of safe temperature zones; c) how to receive a new shipment of safe products or a refund for spoiled or unsafe products; and d) advice and information concerning the safe handling, storage, and cooking of raw products and the storage and reheating of leftover products. As part of this activity, we will solicit feedback from food safety professionals and online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products during the creation of the industry website and downloadable materials. Fifteen food safety professionals from across the country will be asked to evaluate the content of the industry website and downloadable materials providing feedback concerning the adequacy and appropriateness of the information to meet the needs of the industry. In addition, a stratified sample of 60 of the online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products identified as part of objective 1 will be solicited to participate in evaluating the content of the industry website and downloadable materials providing feedback concerning the adequacy and appropriateness of the information to meet the needs of the industry. A brief online evaluation form will also be created to solicit feedback those who view the finished industry website to assess: a) how they were directed to the website; b) whether the information provided meets their needs; c) whether additional or different information or advice would be useful; and, d) their comprehension of the advice and information provided. 4) Provide results and recommendations to FSIS officials through an in-person conference and follow-up feedback. 5) Publish results in refereed journals, 6) Present results at major conferences.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Using a purposive sampling plan, purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products were randomly selected for inclusion in the product sampling phase of the project. The products offered by each company were categorized to maximize the number and variety of products analyzed, giving us the broadest look at potential problems across the industry. Samples of meat, fish, and seafood products offered by each selected purveyor (169) were purchased and sent to Rutgers or Tennessee State University (TSU) for microbial analysis and assessment of delivery processes. The delivered packages were evaluated using a protocol recording its time of delivery and the size, type, construction, maker, integrity, and other conditions of the package. The ambient temperature of the interior package was recorded upon delivery using a probe thermometer passed through the side of the Styrofoam packaging. Upon delivery, the temperatures of the food products in the package (684) were measured using an infrared thermometer and recorded. The total weight and overall condition of the products were recorded. The contents of the package were examined for any food safety or customer service information included by the purveyor. An estimate of the amount and form (block or pelletized) of dry ice and/or weight of gel packs both originally included and remaining in the package were recorded. Photographs were taken of each package, both outside and within. Objective 3: Survey the microbial safety of a representative cross-section of available meat, fish, and seafood products offered by online purveyors. Foods were enumerated for the presence of indicator organisms including total plate count, coliforms and generic E. coli, and tested for the presence of pathogens including Salmonella, pathogenic E. coli, Clostridium perfringens, and Bacillus cereus. Seafood samples were tested for Vibrio parahaemolyticus, and Ready-to-Eat (RTE) samples were tested for Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus. Testing protocols were based on US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Bacteriological and Analytical Manual (BAM) techniques. A total of 196 meat, 34 poultry, and 111 seafood samples were tested at RU. Of these, 18.7% were positive for generic E. coli, 9.9% for pathogenic E. coli, 10.2% for Salmonella, 50.3% for B. cereus, 38.7% for V. parahaemolyticus and 18.2% for C. perfringens. More than 35% of the time foods were received at temperatures >4°C. A majority of E. coli, Salmonella and V. parahaemolyticus positive samples were received at temperatures >4°C. Amongst the 21 RTE samples tested, L. monocytogenes was detected in 4 samples. None of the samples tested positive for S. aureus. 196 meat, 22 poultry, and 123 seafood samples were tested at TSU. Of these, 6.7% were positive for generic E. coli, 0.9% for pathogenic E. coli, 1.1% for Salmonella, 10.2% for B. cereus, 0% for V. parahaemolyticus and 3.6% for C. perfringens. More than 32% of the time foods were received at temperatures >4°C. A majority of E. coli, and Salmonella positive samples were received at temperatures >4°C. Amongst the 24 RTE samples tested, L. monocytogenes was detected in 1 sample. Seven of the samples tested positive for S. aureus. Objective 4. Document length of and selected temporal and thermal parameters within and among shipping routes. Samples of 679 raw meat, poultry, fish, and shellfish products were purchased online from 160 US purveyors between January and October 2013, and shipped using common carriers. Results: Including nine replacements, 169 shipments were received and 684 food items were tested. Of these, 375 were meat, 47 poultry (chicken, duck, turkey), 231 seafood (finfish and shellfish) and 30 “other” products. Orders were shipped via FedEx (59.2%), UPS (39.6%); or USPS (<1%). Shipping was ‘overnight’ (32.4%), ‘2-day’ (29.4%), and ‘standard/ground’ (27.1%). Tracking information provided by the carrier was used to determine the average time a package was in the parcel carriers possession and length of time in carrier’s storage facilities. Average possession time was 1 day, 8 hours, and 10 minutes, with a maximum of 3 days and 8 hours, and a minimum of 13 hours and 36 minutes. Packages spent an average of 11 hours and 54 minutes in company warehouses, with a maximum of 1 day, 19 hours, and 54 minutes, and a minimum of 6 minutes. There was an average of 5 hours and 29 minutes between the package’s delivery and its opening, with a maximum of 21 hours and 43 minutes, and a minimum of 4 minutes. The average daily temperatures were recorded for each stop on the packages delivery route. Packages were exposed to an average temperature of 64.6oF, with a maximum of 83oF, and a minimum of 32.5oF. Mean transit time was 32.4 hours (SD=14.8 hours). Only 4.1% had external damage, although 3.6% had leakage on the inside. Only 36.7% had food safety information on the outside of the box; 7.7% had no labels indicating their perishable contents. Only 25% had any food safety information inside the package. The majority of shipments (92.9%) included a polystyrene foam box; 76.9% also used an exterior cardboard box. The majority (50.6%) contained gel packs, 42.4% had dry ice, 4.1% included both; 2.4% contained conventional ice, and 4.1% of the packages contained no refrigerant. Upon opening the packages, the surface temperatures on the top of the products ranged from –23.5°F to 72°F (M = 36.8°F, SD = 13.3°F). The temperatures on the bottom ranged from –22.7°F to 75°F (M = 36.8°F, SD = 12.9°F). Nearly half (46.6%) had a surface temperature above 40°F.
Publications
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
M. Agarwal. 2014. Prevalence of Pathogens and Indicators in Foods Ordered from Online Vendors. (Masters Thesis). Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
M. Agarwal, W. Hallman, A. Senger-Mersich, F. Chen, S. Godwin, and D. Schaffner. 2014. Prevalence of pathogens and indicators in foods ordered from online vendors in the United States. International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting. Indianapolis, P2-01.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
S. Godwin, R. Stone, A. Senger-Mersich, and W. Hallman. 2014. Food safety information recalled by consumers who purchased and/or received raw meat, poultry, or seafood Products from online purveyors. International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting. Indianapolis, P2-158.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
W. Hallman, A. Senger-Mersich, S. Godwin, R. Stone, F. Chen, D. Schaffner. 2014. Perishable meat and seafood products ordered from online vendors in the United States Analysis of shipping methods, packaging materials, and product temperatures. International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting. Indianapolis, P3-119.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
S. Godwin, .R. Stone, A. Senger-Mersich, and W. Hallman. 2014. Does the food safety information provided by online companies match consumers expectations? Tennessee Association of Family and Consumer Sciences, Knoxville.
|
Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience this year was consumers who purchase or receive as gifts fresh or frozen meat or seafood that was purchased online and delivered using FedEx, UPS, DHL or other package delivery service. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? We will continue to order products from online purveyors and assess the delivery and microbial data for these products. Analysis of the results from the web-enhanced survey will be finalyzed and articles will be written for publication. Objective 5 will be completed. We willcreate educational materials for consumers and purveyors.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objective 1. Complete an inventory of online purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products in the United States, characterizing the products offered, ways they are shipped, and the presence and quality of the food safety advice provided for consumers. Accomplishments.Vendors were identified using Google searches including combinations of the terms: online, delivery, meat, game, fish, shellfish, and seafood, as well as specific products in these categories.Of the 429 vendors identified, only 12 (3%) specifically require a signature for package delivery. The remainder (97%) appear to permit packages to be delivered without requiring a signature, with many adding a disclaimer that they will not be responsible for the contents of the packages once delivered. Moreover, 251 (58%) offer no information related to the safe handling, thawing, storage, or cooking of their raw products. The policy of permitting deliveries without requiring a signature, (and therefore left outdoors at ambient temperatures) may subject perishable products to temperature abuse.Objective 2. Ascertain consumer expectations, knowledge, and behaviors related to ordering, receiving, handling, storing, coking, and consuming meat, fish, and seafood products available for purchase online. Accomplishments. An online survey was conducted using a nationally representative sample to identify 1000 purchasers or recipients of perishable meat, fish, or seafood products delivered using express parcel carriers such as FedEx and UPS within the past year. A 10.1% qualification rate resulted in 9,911 individuals completing the project screener before 1002 were identified as qualified, i.e. having purchased or received the products indicated. When asked about their last order, 66.7% purchased a fresh or frozen meat or seafood product online to be delivered. These consumers were asked to recall what information was provided by the internet food company on their website.Food safety tips/instructions were one of the lowest recalled pieces of information provided on a company’s website. Of those that did recall seeing the information provided, most recalled seeing product storage instructions after removing from the shipping container. A majority of those that reported seeing the food safety tips/instructions on the websites felt that the instructions were complete.When asked if they believe that purchasing fresh or frozen meat or seafood products online and having them shipped is safe, most believed that the process was very safe.Nine hundred and six consumers reported receiving a fresh or frozen meat or seafood product that was ordered online and shipped using a package delivery service. A majority of the packages were delivered to the consumers’ residenceand were opened within 1 hour of the delivery time. Dry ice was the predominantly used coolant in the shipping container.Those that indicated that there was literature containing food safety tips/instructions were asked to recall the information provided. Popular pieces of information included instructions on how to correctly handle the raw product, instructions on how to thaw the frozen product, and cooking temperature instructions for different products offered. A majority of the consumers read all of the food safety tips/ instructions provided. Consumers that reported there was no additional literature or do not remember if there was additional literature included in the package were asked to identify which items they think companies should provide. A majority chose food safety tips/instructions. Recalling their last package delivered, consumers were asked if any of the products were delivered too warm (not cold enough) to be safe to cook or eat. A majority felt that the products were delivered at the proper temperature. Some popular methods for determining whether the products delivered were safe to cook included: visually inspecting the product, smelling the product, and touching the individual items to see if they are still cold. The consumers who reported that the products delivered were too warm and not safe to cook or eat, were asked how they came to this conclusion. A majority reported to visually inspecting the product. Consumers had a high satisfaction level for the quality of products they received from the online food companies. Most believe that receiving fresh or frozen meat or seafood products that are delivered by a package delivery service is safe, but also felt that it was important that the company provides food safety information in the packaging. Objective 3. Survey the microbial safety of a representative cross-section of available meat, fish, and seafood products offered by online purveyors, and Objective 4. Document length of and selected temporal and thermal parameters within and among shipping routes. Accomplishments. Using a purposive sampling plan, purveyors of meat, fish, and seafood products were randomly selected for inclusion in the product sampling phase of the project. The products offered by each company were categorized to maximize the number and variety of products analyzed, giving us the broadest look at potential problems across the industry. Samples of meat, fish, and seafood products offered by each selected purveyor (126 to date) were purchased and sent to Rutgers or Tennessee State University (TSU) for microbial analysis and assessment of delivery processes. The delivered packages were evaluated using a protocol recording its time of delivery and the size, type, construction, maker, integrity, and other conditions of the package. The ambient temperature of the interior package was recorded upon delivery using a probe thermometer passed through the side of the Styrofoam packaging. Upon delivery, the temperatures of the food products in the package (n=543) were measured using an infrared thermometer and recorded. The total weight and overall condition of the products were recorded. The contents of the package were examined for any food safety or customer service information included by the purveyor. An estimate of the amount and form (block or pelletized) of dry ice and/or weight of gel packs both originally included and remaining in the package were recorded. Photographs were taken of each package, both outside and within. The microbiological quality and safety of each of the samples were evaluated for the presence and concentration of indicator organisms and foodborne pathogens using standard protocols for: Total aerobic plate count, coliforms, fecal coliforms, generic E. coli, pathogenic E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Since this phase of the project is still underway, analysis of results has not been completed. Thus full results will be included in next years report.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2012
Citation:
Godwin, S., W. Hallman, F. Chen and D. Schaffner. 2012. Challenges Faced By Consumers When Purchasing Meat, Fish, and Seafood Products Online. Food Distribution Research Society, San Juan, PR, October 15.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Hallman, W., S. Godwin, A. Mersich, and H. Berman. 2013. Online Purveyors of Raw Meat, Poultry, and Seafood Products: Delivery Policies and Available Consumer Food Safety Information. Journal of Food Protection 76(Sup):96.
|
Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: The template for conducting a comprehensive inventory of companies selling foods over the internet was developed and used to assess the companies that sell foods over the internet, what products they sell, delivery options, what, if any, food safety information they provide, and an evaluation of that information. For each website, we have collected information about its physical location and the origin of its products, whether they offer any organic products, and whether any products are subject to seasonal availability or other restrictions. We are also recording information about each company's policies about delivery, whether consumers must sign for packages upon delivery, and their policies concerning returns/reimbursement for products that may arrive damaged or pose a potential food safety problem. In addition, we are specifically looking for relevant food safety and cooking information, noting its presence, and how many clicks it takes to locate it. We are also recording, verbatim, specific instructions given regarding handling, thawing, storage and cooking, of available products, including mentions of cooking to specific internal temperatures. We have assessed 347 companies to date and have about 200 more to complete. This is an ongoing process since new companies are emerging, some go out of business, some change the products they offer, and many change the content of their websites. We conducted telephone interviews of 15 individuals to gauge their experiences with the purchase and delivery of perishable meats, fish, and seafood products from online purveyors, their perceptions of the potential food safety risks, and their knowledge and performance of appropriate food safety practices related to the handling, storage, cooking, and consumption of these products. The information gained from the interviews is being used to developing the consumer food safety questionnaire that will be conducted using a web-enhanced interview system. Procedures have been developed for the selection of the vendors, tracking the items during transit, assessing the condition of the products upon arrival, and conducting the microbiological evaluations. A Web-portal was developed and tested for deposition of data by the participating scientists. Laboratory supplies were procured for conducting the microbial analyses. The first products have been ordered for tracking and analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Dr. Sandria Godwin, PI, Dr. Fur-chi Chen, Co-PI, Richard Stone and Crystal Armstrong, Research Assistants at Tennessee State University; Drs. William Hallman and Donald Schaffner, co-PIs, Angela Mersich, program manager, Dan Farnsworth, computer programmer, and Holly Berman, student employee, all at Rutgers University. TARGET AUDIENCES: We have interviewed 15 persons who purchased meat or seafood products over the internet. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Not relevant to this project.
Impacts
Few of the sites for the companies that sell food over the internet include food safety information regarding their product. Only one specifically mentions the importance of keeping items below 40˚F. Several tell consumers not to worry if dry ice is gone when package is opened. Results of the interviews show that when ordering meat and seafood products over the internet, many of the participants had no concerns and felt the online ordering experience was safe. They reported that almost all the packages contained some type of instructions, but most did not read the instructions. None of the participants that ordered the foods themselves recalled seeing any food safety information on the website. Most of the participants felt that the companies should provide more food safety information on their website; although they were confident that the companies were probably following safe practices or they would not be in business.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|