Airlines food — menace in the skies

Press, 29 July 1989, Page 21

Airlines food — menace in the skies

THE 10 BIGGEST airline caterers in Britain, serving more than 50 million meals annually, have been considering a threat to passenger safety which public health experts claim is as great a potential menace as hijacking. Convened by three London boroughs serving Heathrow Airport, they have been presented with results of a joint survey by the Central Public Health Laboratory which found that nearly a quarter of airline meals contained excessive levels of bacteria.

Of 1013 meals sampled from the 10 flight kitchens, 241 gave surface colony counts of more than a million organisms per gramme — 10 times the permitted level. One in five of the meals sampled contained excessive amounts of E. Coli, the bacteria associated with faecal contamination. Four of the samples, three of them from uncooked hors d’oeuvre, contained salmonella enteritidis.

Despite the well-publicised scare over salmonella in eggs, the survey’s findings suggest that consumers are several thousand times more at risk of being poisoned by an airline meal than by eating a cocktail of raw eggs on the ground. The airlines are clearly aware of the problem, since pilots and co-pilots on all major airlines are forbidden from eating the same in-flight meal. They have to choose totally separate dishes so as to avoid the risk of being simultaneously struck by food poisoning. The official report into the quality of airline meals at Heathrow, which was completed in 1986 but published only recently, was prompted by one of the worst ever single-source food poisoning incidents. On March 15, 1984, the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, was notified of eight passengers taken ill after flying to the United States on a British Airways flight. On the same day, local public health authorities informed the Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre in London of cases of gastro-enteritis among British Airways flight staff.

It was the start of a worldwide epidemic of food poisoning that struck more than 750 British

Airways crew and passengers. Mr Kim Wan Chan, a 42-year-old London-based businessman from Hong Kong, died after emergency surgery for suspected bowel obstruction. Another passenger, Mr Ali Alireza, the former Saudi Ambassador to the United States, died from a heart attack a few days after being poisoned. In all, 37 passengers were admitted to hospital. Other passengers who were affected included Knut Hammarskjold, the head of the International Air Transport Association, and business tycoon Peter de Savary. The outbreak was eventually traced back to

salmonella enteritidis found in an aspic glaze used on hors d’oeuvre served mainly to first, and club class passengers. The probable source of the contamination was a kitchen worker, who failed to wash his hands carefully after going to the toilet. He then contaminated the hot aspic solution, which was poured over the starter dishes before' being allowed to cool. British Airways’ costs in compensation payments and improvements to its catering arrangements in the wake of this episode was estimated at nearly $3O million Much more difficult to quantify was the damage done in public relations terms as actions for damages were brought by the affected passengers. It is against this background that the disturbing results of the latest survey into the hygiene of airline meals have to be seen. According to the criteria adopted by the flight caterers and local authorities, about a quarter of the dishes sampled in the latest survey were “on the limits of being unsatisfactory.” If the Department of Health’s

guidelines were applied, the report’s authors say, “ah even higher proportion would have been unacceptable.”

Scientists at the Central Public Health Laboratory sampled meals taken directly from the flight catering units. But passengers would not eat these meals until many hours later. The consequence of flight delays, long flying times and poor temperature controls can mean that marginally contaminated food turns into a Borgia’s feast. The report blames the excessive bacterial counts principally on the lack of strict temperature controls, particularly the failure to refrigerate food sufficiently after cooking. But there are other factors which go some way to explaining the excessive counts.

The presence of raw garnishes or vegetables, and the requirement of airlines for meats to be served “pink” and vegetables “crispy,” means that the in-flight caterers only part-cook the main dishes, with further cooking tak-

ing place on the aircraft. Some foods, such as yoghurt, Parma ham and salami, contain high levels of organisms in their natural state.

At present, there are no microbiological standards in Britain for pre-cooked food such as

airline meals. But the survey points out that, as flight catering is essentially a cook-chill operation the standards for microbiological quality laid down by the Department of Health’s guidelines on pre-cooked, chilled food ought to apply. The report recommends that all airline caterers should observe the guidelines that cover the preparation of cook-chill food, but complains that the caterers are reluctant to do so. The regional vice-president for Marriott In-Flight Services, Fred O’Hara, disputes this charge saying they are in compliance with the Department of Health guidelines and do what they are asked to do. Asked about the survey’s finding of high bacteria levels in a quarter of airline meals, Mr O’Hara says that Marriott has served 10 million meals in the past year “without incident.” British Airways says that it does not follow cook-chill guidelines because its preparation of airline meals is not “a classic cook-chill regime.” A spokesman said that since the 1984 epidemic, and the expenditure of more than $2l million on improved refrigeration and catering facilities, there had been no further incidents. All food was sampled by the airline’s in-house dieticians. Trusthouse Forte says that the Department of Health guidelines are being observed, though “we are continually seeking improvements.” Despite such assurances, criticism is mounting in Parliament of

the Goverment’s failure to enforce its own guidelines or to respond to the findings of the latest report.

Anne Clwyd, Labour M.P. for Cynon Valley, says it is disgraceful that Ministers and the airlines should have sat on the report for so long without taking any action. An early-day motion sponsored by Miss Clwyd and signed by 12 Labour colleagues criticises “the continuing cavalier approach of the Government to food safety.” The Department of Health says the results of the survey are still

being considered. “The whole area of food safety is of great concern to us,” said a spokesman.

Food poisoning on aircraft is accepted to be grossly underreported. In the past 25 years, fewer than 30 outbreaks have been reported to health authorities. But with more than 750 million meals being served annually, the scale of the problem is potentially enormous.

Professor Stanley Mohler and Dr Kenneth Beers, of Wright State University School in Dayton, Ohio, have accused the airlines of deliberately keeping the issue under wraps. They claim that food poising is by far the greatest cause of pilot illness and probably poses a greater threat to passenger safety than hijacking.

ADAM RAPHAEL, of the “Observer,” reports from London on the foodpoisoning problem confronting airline caterers.

Inadequate chilling after cooking, and rawness contribute to high bacterial levels

Dangerous recipe: Passengers’ food prepared for consumption days later. Nearly a quarter of British airline meals can contain excessive bacteria.

Problem possibly

on a huge scale