Consumer Reports Identifies Bacteria, Drug Residue in Pork

Consumer Reports magazine has allegedly identified bacterial contamination
as well as antibiotic-resistant bacteria and veterinary drug residues in pork
chop and ground-pork samples purchased from U.S. grocery stores. According
to an analysis in the January 2013 edition of the magazine, 69 percent of the
198 pork samples in question purportedly contained Yersinia enterocolitica;
11 percent contained Enterococcus; and 3 to 7 percent contained Salmonella,
Staphylococcus aureus, or Listeria monocytogenes. In addition, the magazine
reported that 13 of 14 Staphylococcus samples isolated from pork were
resistant to antimicrobials, as were six of eight Salmonella samples, 12 of 19
Enterococcus samples, and 121 of 132 Yersinia samples.

Consumer Reports has also claimed that approximately one-fifth of 240 pork products analyzed in a separate test “harbored low levels of the drug ractopamine,” a growth promoter used in U.S. pork production but banned in the European Union, China and Taiwan. Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, has apparently called for a ban on the drug, “citing insufficient evidence that it’s safe,” although all the samples used for the analysis “had less than 5 parts per billion,” or “well below the [Food and Drug Administration’s] limit of 50 ppb in muscle tissue and the international limit of 10 ppb adopted in July 2012 by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.”

Meanwhile, the magazine has warned readers to “watch out for misleading
labels. ‘Natural’ has nothing to do with antibiotic use or how an animal was
raised,” concludes the article. “Look for a clear statement regarding antibiotic
use. ‘No antibiotics used’ claims with a [U.S. Department of Agriculture] Process Verified shield are more reliable than those without verification.
Labels such as ‘Animal Welfare Approved’ or ‘Certified Humane’ indicate the
prudent use of antibiotics to treat illness.”