Stairs interlog on wed 3 jun 98
Hi all,
I'm in Geneva, Switzerland for a while, and I just got my e-mail
straightened out after a week or so absence, so apologies for the lateness
of this post.
This discussion about the safety of crazed ware for food service is a bit
of a puzzle. We have been down a long country lane on the problem of
infectious disease over the last century or so. From the time of Jenner
(who introduced antisepsis in medical practice) until today, we have passed
from the early, heroic struggles of people like Pasteur and Koch, through
the miracles of sulfa, penicillin and the antibiotics, to this point.
Certainly, elementary hygiene, including washing food ware in hot, soapy
water, must be considered to be one of the most consistent successes.
Bacteria and other infectious agents seem to be able to adapt to
antibiotics and other agents, but a good, hot wash is still more than most
can handle, and I've not heard of any cases of adaptation. There are
organisms that can survive in hot baths (hot tubs, public baths, hot
springs, etc.), some of which are pathogenic, but these do not grow and
prosper on dishes.
In the end, we rely on our immune systems to protect us from the everyday
risks of infection. Many of the disease causing agents that we fear are
endemic in our environment, meaning that we come into contact with them
every day. A completely sterile environment is not good for this immunity,
since it gets no reminders of what to fend off, and can essentially go to
sleep. Our daily contact is a sort of inoculation against the diseases,
which we therefore only contract if we come into contact with an infectious
agent in large doses.
If this analysis is correct, we should not fear low doses of bacteria such
as what might hide in a crack in a glaze. However, if we then place into
such a pot a nice culture medium, like some food, and keep it there for a
while, we may find that the small colony in a crack has become a large
culture in the food. Then we are in trouble.
This indicates to me that we should be sensitive to a range of risk.
Greatest risk is in food storage containers, especially for wet foods and
liquids. My feeling is that these should be entirely free of crazing and
surface blemishes on the food contact side. This includes the lip. And
this should be the case in both pots for sale, and for individual use.
Next are food preparation surfaces and pots. I think these should also be
craze free, certainly on articles for sale, and for the food service
industry. For personal use, I would not necessarily throw out a favorite
pot that developed a glaze crack or two.
Finally, individual plates, cups and bowls. These are the least sensitive,
provided they are consistently washed in hot, soapy water, and are not used
for food storage. So one might easily accept a crazed glaze on these for
one's personal use. But can we control their use by purchasers? I would
still be on the side of an unblemished glaze surface on pots for sale as
food ware.
What about vases, flower pots, etc.? We know that these are not intended
for use as food service vessels, and we might suppose that others would as
well. But we have all seen pots intended for one thing being used for
another. Government authorities tend to err on the side of caution (some
might say extreme caution), and assume that anything that can hold food,
will. We might do the same, and assume that any pot without a hole in the
bottom is a food pot.
All of that being said, I come back to the argument that we have been
eating off crazed plates for a very long time, and we are still here. The
risk is not enormous, or there would be no room for discussion. I'm sure
some people have become ill from eating food from crazed pots, but I have
no statistics or anecdotes to prove it: just a slight understanding of how
bacteria work. I would guess that most cases of infection are
sub-clinical, meaning that they clear up by themselves without health
professional intervention, and maybe without the person knowing it at all.
We do hear of cases of widespread food poisoning from time to time, most of
which are traceable to poor food hygiene practice in preparation. I would
not countenance using crazed glaze pots in a cafeteria, for instance.
Nevertheless, as I recounted to the list a short while ago, in a restaurant
I once ate soup from a cracked pot and survived to tell about it.
I suppose that the case is about parallel to that of pasteurization of
milk. If you are drinking milk from a cow which is known to you and is
well, and which was milked the same day (or equivalently, the cheese or
yogurt was made the same day), the risk of drinking raw milk is slight. If
you are drinking milk which has been collected from many large farms, mixed
and processed together, and stored for a time, the risk is far greater,
effectively by a factor of the number of cows involved, etc.
Pasteurization is warranted. In the case of pottery safety, if we are
dealing with a case of an individual dish for our own use, carefully washed
and used appropriately, the risk is slight. If we are dealing with a line
of dishes for sale, possibly to the food service industry, then the risks
are very much greater. Or at least our liability is potentially much greater.
This discussion began with an exchange between a concerned potter and a
large producer of food ware for public sale about a line of crackle glaze
dinnerware. I presume the large manufacturer has not yet been sued for
damages resulting from a case of infection. The possibility that they will
be, or that someone may get ill or die from the use (or misuse) of their
ware is for anyone to judge, perhaps particularly their legal department or
some regulatory authorities. Other contributors to the list have pointed
out that a) stoneware is not 100% non-porous, and b) bacteria can indeed
lodge in the cracks, and c) there are techniques to produce the aesthetic
effect of a crackle without the crazes on the final glaze. If I were in
the position of the large manufacturer, I would certainly opt for a
craze-free surface.
Finally, however, I can't help but note that our ancestors ate, prepared
and stored food in porous, unglazed, earthenware pots for millennia before
we came around to discuss the matter. Safety issues have few blacks and
whites, and much grey.
Gavin
Hluch - Kevin A. on thu 4 jun 98
Please note that on this particular subject my previous offer still
stands.
If you have any crazed utilitarian pottery by any number of well-known
potters please forward them to me immediately and I will keep them in safe
circumstances so that none on you become ill through their usage.
Thus far, no one has taken me up on this offer and I am greatly concerned
about the possible ill effects these objects may have on your health.
Please, please do not subject yourselves to such risks....For your own
safety, send this work to me as quickly as you can.
My address follows. Thank you very much for cooperating in this very
important health issue.
Kevin A. Hluch
102 E. 8th St.
Frederick, MD 21701
USA
e-mail: kahluch@umd5.umd.edu
http://www.erols.com/mhluch/mudslinger.html
On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Stairs interlog wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Hi all,
>
> I'm in Geneva, Switzerland for a while, and I just got my e-mail
> straightened out after a week or so absence, so apologies for the lateness
> of this post.
>
> This discussion about the safety of crazed ware for food service is a bit
> of a puzzle. We have been down a long country lane on the problem of
> infectious disease over the last century or so. From the time of Jenner
> (who introduced antisepsis in medical practice) until today, we have passed
> from the early, heroic struggles of people like Pasteur and Koch, through
> the miracles of sulfa, penicillin and the antibiotics, to this point.
> Certainly, elementary hygiene, including washing food ware in hot, soapy
> water, must be considered to be one of the most consistent successes.
> Bacteria and other infectious agents seem to be able to adapt to
> antibiotics and other agents, but a good, hot wash is still more than most
> can handle, and I've not heard of any cases of adaptation. There are
> organisms that can survive in hot baths (hot tubs, public baths, hot
> springs, etc.), some of which are pathogenic, but these do not grow and
> prosper on dishes.
>
> In the end, we rely on our immune systems to protect us from the everyday
> risks of infection. Many of the disease causing agents that we fear are
> endemic in our environment, meaning that we come into contact with them
> every day. A completely sterile environment is not good for this immunity,
> since it gets no reminders of what to fend off, and can essentially go to
> sleep. Our daily contact is a sort of inoculation against the diseases,
> which we therefore only contract if we come into contact with an infectious
> agent in large doses.
>
> If this analysis is correct, we should not fear low doses of bacteria such
> as what might hide in a crack in a glaze. However, if we then place into
> such a pot a nice culture medium, like some food, and keep it there for a
> while, we may find that the small colony in a crack has become a large
> culture in the food. Then we are in trouble.
>
> This indicates to me that we should be sensitive to a range of risk.
>
> Greatest risk is in food storage containers, especially for wet foods and
> liquids. My feeling is that these should be entirely free of crazing and
> surface blemishes on the food contact side. This includes the lip. And
> this should be the case in both pots for sale, and for individual use.
>
> Next are food preparation surfaces and pots. I think these should also be
> craze free, certainly on articles for sale, and for the food service
> industry. For personal use, I would not necessarily throw out a favorite
> pot that developed a glaze crack or two.
>
> Finally, individual plates, cups and bowls. These are the least sensitive,
> provided they are consistently washed in hot, soapy water, and are not used
> for food storage. So one might easily accept a crazed glaze on these for
> one's personal use. But can we control their use by purchasers? I would
> still be on the side of an unblemished glaze surface on pots for sale as
> food ware.
>
> What about vases, flower pots, etc.? We know that these are not intended
> for use as food service vessels, and we might suppose that others would as
> well. But we have all seen pots intended for one thing being used for
> another. Government authorities tend to err on the side of caution (some
> might say extreme caution), and assume that anything that can hold food,
> will. We might do the same, and assume that any pot without a hole in the
> bottom is a food pot.
>
> All of that being said, I come back to the argument that we have been
> eating off crazed plates for a very long time, and we are still here. The
> risk is not enormous, or there would be no room for discussion. I'm sure
> some people have become ill from eating food from crazed pots, but I have
> no statistics or anecdotes to prove it: just a slight understanding of how
> bacteria work. I would guess that most cases of infection are
> sub-clinical, meaning that they clear up by themselves without health
> professional intervention, and maybe without the person knowing it at all.
> We do hear of cases of widespread food poisoning from time to time, most of
> which are traceable to poor food hygiene practice in preparation. I would
> not countenance using crazed glaze pots in a cafeteria, for instance.
> Nevertheless, as I recounted to the list a short while ago, in a restaurant
> I once ate soup from a cracked pot and survived to tell about it.
>
> I suppose that the case is about parallel to that of pasteurization of
> milk. If you are drinking milk from a cow which is known to you and is
> well, and which was milked the same day (or equivalently, the cheese or
> yogurt was made the same day), the risk of drinking raw milk is slight. If
> you are drinking milk which has been collected from many large farms, mixed
> and processed together, and stored for a time, the risk is far greater,
> effectively by a factor of the number of cows involved, etc.
> Pasteurization is warranted. In the case of pottery safety, if we are
> dealing with a case of an individual dish for our own use, carefully washed
> and used appropriately, the risk is slight. If we are dealing with a line
> of dishes for sale, possibly to the food service industry, then the risks
> are very much greater. Or at least our liability is potentially much greater.
>
> This discussion began with an exchange between a concerned potter and a
> large producer of food ware for public sale about a line of crackle glaze
> dinnerware. I presume the large manufacturer has not yet been sued for
> damages resulting from a case of infection. The possibility that they will
> be, or that someone may get ill or die from the use (or misuse) of their
> ware is for anyone to judge, perhaps particularly their legal department or
> some regulatory authorities. Other contributors to the list have pointed
> out that a) stoneware is not 100% non-porous, and b) bacteria can indeed
> lodge in the cracks, and c) there are techniques to produce the aesthetic
> effect of a crackle without the crazes on the final glaze. If I were in
> the position of the large manufacturer, I would certainly opt for a
> craze-free surface.
>
> Finally, however, I can't help but note that our ancestors ate, prepared
> and stored food in porous, unglazed, earthenware pots for millennia before
> we came around to discuss the matter. Safety issues have few blacks and
> whites, and much grey.
>
> Gavin
>
maggie j jones on thu 4 jun 98
WELL SAID...Hot, soapy water does the trick and with the wonder of
dishwashers (my mom said we had less colds in the family when they got
one back in the 50's)...what is the problem?....crazed ware will not pass
germs if common sense, with cleaning and storing is used.
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
| |
|
