....recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
thoroughly instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for
baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
with still-runny yolks.

Bob

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for baking and for
> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked with still-runny yolks.

I wondered that, too.

On Aug 21, 3:26*pm, zxcvbob > wrote:
> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. *What a
> waste! *Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
> thoroughly instead of throwing them away? *They should be fine for
> baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
> with still-runny yolks.
>
> Bob
Did you hear about a restaurant thta lost cutomer after a cusotner
died from it. It was just before the recall. The restaurant was a
reputble one and so they're dumbfounded. Only with the recall, the
authorities were able to put the puzzle together.

May be they'll sell to the companies that uses in some food items.

"Manda Ruby" > wrote in message
...
> On Aug 21, 3:26 pm, zxcvbob > wrote:
>> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
>> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
>> thoroughly instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for
>> baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
>> with still-runny yolks.
>>
>> Bob
> Did you hear about a restaurant thta lost cutomer after a cusotner
> died from it. It was just before the recall. The restaurant was a
> reputble one and so they're dumbfounded. Only with the recall, the
> authorities were able to put the puzzle together.
>
> May be they'll sell to the companies that uses in some food items.

Sort of like the tomato company that sold their off product to another
manufacturer whose cooked product included said tomatoes. Took the FDA a tad
longer, but still found source of that salmonella.

Realizing, of course, the best the best solution is not the easiest way to
do things, that may explain why sweeping the eggs under the table won't work
in the long run.

Best long term solution is to seriously fine, and put executives in jail
for killing customers if they can't fix their own products.

Alan

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for baking and for
> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked with still-runny yolks.
>
> Bob

I wonder how many will actually be returned. IIRC, the starting date was in
May. I doubt many people still have eggs from a few months ago.

I wonder too, if the eggs will be sorted to cull the infected ones and use
the good to make powdered eggs or the like.

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:52:23 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
> wrote:

>
>"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
>> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
>> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
>> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for baking and for
>> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked with still-runny yolks.
>>
>> Bob
>
>I wonder how many will actually be returned. IIRC, the starting date was in
>May. I doubt many people still have eggs from a few months ago.
>
>I wonder too, if the eggs will be sorted to cull the infected ones and use
>the good to make powdered eggs or the like.

Those eggs will very likely be destroyed,,, chickens don't stop laying
eggs, the supply won't diminish.

brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:52:23 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
> >> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> >> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for baking and for
> >> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked with still-runny yolks.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> >I wonder how many will actually be returned. IIRC, the starting date was in
> >May. I doubt many people still have eggs from a few months ago.
> >
> >I wonder too, if the eggs will be sorted to cull the infected ones and use
> >the good to make powdered eggs or the like.
>
> Those eggs will very likely be destroyed,,, chickens don't stop laying
> eggs, the supply won't diminish.



Whatever the case, made breakfast for dinner like a day before the
announcement and had one egg that had some slightly slimy egg white,
which wasn't white, as in undercooked.

And I really don't like re-cooking longer of what should have been
done right in the first place.

So I was going to give it to somebody else but thought, my laziness
should not give somebody else a possible illness, so I had it myself.
-
I know how bad food illness can be.
-
I worked at a high volume pizza chain, well very very high. Biggest of
the state.

So anyway I used to work the landing area on the highest volume
nights, at the end of the conveyor oven, to cut and package pizzas.

I would take a pizza (before the rush) and send it through, to test
the (probable) nights finished product, and adjust.

Then I would put it under the landing table, to eat on it all night.
(supposed to throw it away) <- waste

Anyway the test pizza from the Saturday night the week before was down
there, and I was thinking, how did this move from where I had it,
anyway took a big bite. (To much action to look what I was eating.)
-
Eghhh, any way I considered going outside and try to voluntarily barf,
but all the phone lines were lit up, the lobby was packed, and had
pizzas coming out faster than I could package em, (pizza pizza ya
know)

So I didn't do what I should have, that was barfing.
-
So anyway felt kinda crappy the next morning, then in just minutes it
was severe dizziness.

Just the most horrid feeling.

Seriously should have went to the hospital, but couldn't really do
anything, maybe, possibly, dial 911 and drool.

Luckily was able to sleep really heavily most of the first days,
-
Anyway didn't poo for a week so surely nothing was being digested.

Bloating and seriously ****ed up tasting burp ups pretty much
confirmed that.

Each burp would 'slightly limit' hours upon hours of intense pain and
would allow some sleep until the next time.
-
Should have just stuck my finger down my throat, 'at any given time.'
-
Anyway almost a week later I finally barfed up the worst foulest huge
mass of stuff, for about 20 minutes.

It hurt bad but we all know how that goes, moments of watery eyes and
a 'whew' of relief..

So anyway, woke up the next day with a mild headache most of the day
but was doing 92% better.

So then after all, the day after feeling better, it was a complete
week later.

Went back to work at the store and guess what was under there?

The 'original pizza' and the 'new pizza' from the week before, still
under there..
-

The End.

"zxcvbob" > ha scritto nel messaggio

> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a >
> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for > baking and for
> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked > with still-runny
> yolks.

They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go into
producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost more, but
it's only a little more and isn't it worth it? How many got sick this time?

Ranee wrote:

> What amazes me is how unhealthy the chickens must be. To have that
> much salmonella in the oviduct, for the standard bleach solution
> cleaning on eggs that are sold in the stores not to have enough of an
> effect.

Bleach only affects the outside of the egg. The salmonella is inside.

Bob

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:26:44 -0500, zxcvbob >
wrote:

>...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
>waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
>thoroughly instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for
>baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
>with still-runny yolks.
>
>Bob

Here is a pretty complete story. I copied it from my Yahoo news.

A supplier in egg recall has history of violations
AP

By MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press Writer Mary Clare Jalonick,
Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 38 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Two Iowa farms that together recalled more than half a
billion potentially tainted eggs this month share close ties,
including suppliers of chickens and feed.

Both farms are linked to businessman Austin "Jack" DeCoster, who has
been cited for numerous health, safety and employment violations over
the years. DeCoster owns Wright County Egg, the original farm that
recalled 380 million eggs Aug. 13 after they were linked to more than
1,000 reported cases of salmonella poisoning.

Another of his companies, Quality Egg, supplies young chickens and
feed to both Wright County Egg and Hillandale Farms, the second farm
that recalled another 170 million eggs a week later.

Jewanna Porter, a spokeswoman for the egg industry, said the two
companies share other suppliers as well, but she did not name them.

The cause of the outbreaks is so far unknown, as Food and Drug
Administration investigators are still on the ground at the farms
trying to figure it out. The federal Centers for Disease Control has
said the number of illnesses, estimated as high as 1,300, would likely
grow.

DeCoster is no stranger to controversy in his food and farm
operations:

• In 1997, DeCoster Egg Farms agreed to pay $2 million in fines to
settle citations brought in 1996 for health and safety violations at
DeCoster's farm in Turner, Maine. Then-Labor Secretary Robert Reich
said conditions were "as dangerous and oppressive as any sweatshop."
He cited unguarded machinery, electrical hazards, exposure to harmful
bacteria and other unsanitary conditions.

• In 2000, Iowa designated DeCoster a "habitual violator" of
environmental regulations for problems that included hog manure runoff
into waterways. The label made him subject to increased penalties and
prohibited him from building new farms.

• In 2002, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
announced a more than $1.5 million settlement of an employment
discrimination lawsuit against DeCoster Farms on behalf of Mexican
women who reported they were subjected to sexual harassment, including
rape, abuse and retaliation by some supervisory workers at DeCoster's
Wright County plants.

• In 2007, 51 workers were arrested during an immigration raid at six
DeCoster egg farms. The farm had been the subject of at least three
previous raids.

• In June 2010, Maine Contract Farming — the successor company to
DeCoster Egg Farms — agreed in state court to pay $25,000 in penalties
and to make a one-time payment of $100,000 to the Maine Department of
Agriculture over animal cruelty allegations that were spurred by a
hidden-camera investigation by an animal welfare organization.

It is unclear what role DeCoster's company played in the current
salmonella outbreak. The FDA investigation could take months, and
sources of contamination are often difficult to find. The current
recall goes back to April, and many of the eggs have already been
consumed.

Still, DeCoster's Wright County Egg is already facing at least two
lawsuits related to the egg recall. One is from food distributor Dutch
Farms, which says the company used unauthorized cartons to package and
sell eggs under its brand without its knowledge.

The other is from a person who said they became ill after eating
tainted eggs in a salad at a restaurant in Kenosha, Wis.

The CDC said investigations by 10 states since April have identified
26 cases where more than one person became ill. Preliminary
information showed that Wright was the supplier in at least 15 of
those.

Almost 2,000 illnesses from the strain of salmonella linked to both
recalls were reported between May and July, nearly 1,300 more than
usual, the CDC said. No deaths have been reported.

The most common symptoms of salmonella are diarrhea, abdominal cramps
and fever within eight hours to 72 hours of eating a contaminated
product. The disease can be life-threatening, especially to those with
weakened immune systems.

___

Associated Press Writer Jeff Baenen in Minneapolis contributed to this
report.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:26:44 -0500, zxcvbob wrote:

> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
> thoroughly instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for
> baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
> with still-runny yolks.

Kinda like having sex with somebody who has AIDS as long as you use a
rubber.

-sw

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:52:23 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> I wonder too, if the eggs will be sorted to cull the infected ones and use
> the good to make powdered eggs or the like.

I really doubt it would be economical to individually test $.07 eggs. And
the returned eggs were most likely not stored properly and many have broken
(leaking salmonella all over the non-salmonella eggs).

-sw

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 02:48:27 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>Ranee wrote:
>
>> What amazes me is how unhealthy the chickens must be. To have that
>> much salmonella in the oviduct, for the standard bleach solution
>> cleaning on eggs that are sold in the stores not to have enough of an
>> effect.
>
>Bleach only affects the outside of the egg. The salmonella is inside.
>
>Idiot Bob
>
>

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 08:41:00 -0500, The Cook >
wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:26:44 -0500, zxcvbob >
>wrote:
>
>>...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
>>waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually
>>thoroughly instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for
>>baking and for scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked
>>with still-runny yolks.
>>
>>Bob
>
>Here is a pretty complete story. I copied it from my Yahoo news.
>
>A supplier in egg recall has history of violations
>AP
>
>By MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press Writer Mary Clare Jalonick,
>Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 38 mins ago
>
>WASHINGTON – Two Iowa farms that together recalled more than half a
>billion potentially tainted eggs this month share close ties,
>including suppliers of chickens and feed.
>
>Both farms are linked to businessman Austin "Jack" DeCoster, who has
>been cited for numerous health, safety and employment violations over
>the years. DeCoster owns Wright County Egg, the original farm that
>recalled 380 million eggs Aug. 13 after they were linked to more than
>1,000 reported cases of salmonella poisoning.
>
>Another of his companies, Quality Egg, supplies young chickens and
>feed to both Wright County Egg and Hillandale Farms, the second farm
>that recalled another 170 million eggs a week later.
>
>Jewanna Porter, a spokeswoman for the egg industry, said the two
>companies share other suppliers as well, but she did not name them.
>
>
>The cause of the outbreaks is so far unknown, as Food and Drug
>Administration investigators are still on the ground at the farms
>trying to figure it out.


Posting this article is real helpful...

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:52:23 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> "zxcvbob" > wrote in message
> ...
>> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a
>> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
>> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for baking and for
>> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked with still-runny yolks.
>>
>> Bob
>
> I wonder how many will actually be returned. IIRC, the starting date was in
> May. I doubt many people still have eggs from a few months ago.
>
> I wonder too, if the eggs will be sorted to cull the infected ones and use
> the good to make powdered eggs or the like.

no way. if someone got sick (or even pretended to get sick) from a product
*knowingly* made from a batch of eggs that was recalled there'd be hell to
pay. the return wouldn't be worth the risk.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 23:27:41 -0700 (PDT), duckstandard
> wrote:

> Went back to work at the store and guess what was under there?
>
> The 'original pizza' and the 'new pizza' from the week before, still
> under there..

I guess your manager doesn't have very high standards for clean up and
nobody inspects anything. Too bad you learned it the hard way.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 10:59:38 +0200, "Giusi" >
wrote:

> They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
> more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
> exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go into
> producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost more, but
> it's only a little more and isn't it worth it? How many got sick this time?

Why wouldn't vaccinating be a better solution? Once and you're done
vs. doing all the other stuff that has to be a lot more expensive in
the long run.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

Clueless AOL newbie Sheldon "Pussy" Katz spouted:

>>> What amazes me is how unhealthy the chickens must be. To have that
>>> much salmonella in the oviduct, for the standard bleach solution
>>> cleaning on eggs that are sold in the stores not to have enough of an
>>> effect.
>>
>>Bleach only affects the outside of the egg. The salmonella is inside.
>>
>>Idiot Bob

Look at the facts, newbie. Salmonella is inside the egg. Bleach is outside.
They don't interact. Or do you believe that bleach gets INSIDE the egg
through the membrane? Are you THAT ignorant?

Bob

Giusi wrote:
> "zxcvbob" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>
>> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a >
>> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
>> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for > baking and for
>> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked > with still-runny
>> yolks.
>
> They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
> more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
> exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go into
> producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost more, but
> it's only a little more and isn't it worth it?


How many got sick this time?
>

The report I read said over 1,000.

gloria p

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:29:51 -0600, "gloria.p" >
wrote:

> Giusi wrote:
> > "zxcvbob" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> >
> >> ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a >
> >> waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> >> instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for > baking and for
> >> scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked > with still-runny
> >> yolks.
> >
> > They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
> > more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
> > exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go into
> > producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost more, but
> > it's only a little more and isn't it worth it?
>
>
> How many got sick this time?
> >
>
> The report I read said over 1,000.
>
So, should I worry or not? I want to make carbonara tonight.


--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:29:51 -0600, "gloria.p" >
> wrote:
>
>> Giusi wrote:

>>
>> How many got sick this time?
>> The report I read said over 1,000.
>>
> So, should I worry or not? I want to make carbonara tonight.
>
>



Are your eggs from Iowa? Are you feeling lucky?

gloria p

"sf" > wrote
>>
> So, should I worry or not? I want to make carbonara tonight.
>

I'd not worry, but I'd use proper precautions. First step is to find out if
your eggs are part of the recall. If so, exchange them for fresh and don't
worry.

The eggs will be cooked in the food, so that is not going to be a problem.

Since the egg is infected, use care in cracking the egg so as not to
splatter or drip, then clean your hands. I'd be more conerned about a
secondary exposure than from the egg dish itself.

"sf" > ha scritto nel messaggio > On Sun, 22 Aug 2010
10:59:38 +0200, "Giusi" > wrote:
>
>> They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
>> >> more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
>> >> exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go
>> into >> producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost
>> more, but >> it's only a little more and isn't it worth it? How many got
>> sick this time?
>
> Why wouldn't vaccinating be a better solution? Once and you're done> vs.
> doing all the other stuff that has to be a lot more expensive in
> the long run.

Vaccinating the baby chicks is exactly how they know to solve the problem.
I was surrounded by poultry farms on my farm in the USA. When the
technology arrived all the farmers were relieved, but then nothing happened.
Why? Because over and over again, the infected, filthy, badly kept, badly
killed and polluted food problem is left squarely on the plate of the
consumer. You wanna be safe? Cook it to death, clean it yourself, or
suggested here, grow it yourself. So if you live in a city highrise, the
message must be eat artificial food or die.

How have Americans allowed this to happen? Why can they not be made to care
enough to pay the few cents more? If the occasional budget doesn't stretch
wouldn't it be preferable to eat cheaper cuts of meat and more fillers than
to consume germ-crammed food that has to be incinerated? The idea of eating
a hardcooked fried egg filled with Salmonella corpses is just not appealing.

Giusi wrote:
>
> "zxcvbob" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>
> > ...recalled for salmonella, and the number is still growing. What a >
> > waste! Why can't they encourage people to cook them unusually thoroughly
> > instead of throwing them away? They should be fine for > baking and for
> > scrambled eggs, just don't eat them raw or cooked > with still-runny
> > yolks.
>
> They have known how to remove salmonella from the poultry population for
> more than a decade. Why not insist on that solution instead of mass
> exterminations and wasting tons of feed, electricity, water that go into
> producing that many eggs? They claim it's because egg would cost more, but
> it's only a little more and isn't it worth it? How many got sick this time?


There's no accurate way to tell how many were made ill. It can take up
to 72 hours for Salmonella infection to take hold. For every case that
is reported, there are many more that go unreported. Only when someone
gets really ill, or when a group gets sick that notice is taken. Those
who get a mild case of the runs wouldn't necessarily go see the MDs
about it.

>
> The other is from a person who said they became ill after eating
> tainted eggs in a salad at a restaurant in Kenosha, Wis.

This, I don't get. The woman ate a Cobb salad - with hard-boiled
eggs. It would seem the restaurant would be at fault, not the egg
producer. Someone's looking to make some easy money.

N.

Nancy2 > wrote:

> I assume that you are now aware that bleaching the egg shell has
> nothing to do with safety of the eggs, since salmonella is inside as
> well.

Naturally-occuring salmonella strains are only on the outside of
the shell, but artificial "superbugs" bred in chicken factories have
figured out how to invade the egg and live inside of it.



Steve

On 8/24/2010 11:31 PM, Steve Pope wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> I assume that you are now aware that bleaching the egg shell has
>> nothing to do with safety of the eggs, since salmonella is inside as
>> well.
>
> Naturally-occuring salmonella strains are only on the outside of
> the shell, but artificial "superbugs" bred in chicken factories have
> figured out how to invade the egg and live inside of it.

Nope. It's a naturally occurring strain that infects the chicken's
ovary. It doesn't "get inside the shell", it gets in before the shell
goes on.

why not radiate ?

alkem

The chickens?

Half a billion eggs wasted...
And here I am with half a billion sperm! LOL-LOL

That comes to a billion wasted. Some things are better tossed out than used. I like the relation you've drawn between these two. The only time that sperm and eggs are like apples to apples. Smart man.

"Gorio" > wrote
>
> That comes to a billion wasted. Some things are better tossed out than
> used. I like the relation you've drawn between these two. The only time
> that sperm and eggs are like apples to apples. Smart man.

It was maybe that many recalled, but many were long gone and eaten. The
returned eggs were destroyed, however, the factory eggs are being
pasteurized and used in other products. The hens are still laying too.

This article says the recalled eggs are now being pasteurized. I hope
so, it seems like a waste to toss them in the garbage.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/25...sed/index.html

Becca

On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:37:41 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:

> Half a billion eggs wasted...
> And here I am with half a billion sperm! LOL-LOL

in your dirty socks, maybe.

blake