A critical review: Why isn't "cold pasteurization" being used widespread as a method to prevent food-related illnesses as a result of the consumption of ready-to-eat, fresh fruits, and vegetables

The Centers for Disease Control estimates that foodborne diseases cause approximately 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths in the United States each year. The American public is becoming more health conscious and there has been an increase in the dietary intake of fresh fruits and vegetables. Affluence and demand for convenience has allowed consumers to opt for pre-processed packaged fresh fruits and vegetables. These pre-processed foods are considered Ready-to-Eat. They have many of the advantages of fresh produce without the inconvenience of processing at home. After seeing a decline in food-related illnesses between 1996 and 2004, due to an improvement in meat and poultry safety, tainted produce has tilted the numbers back. This has resulted in none of the Healthy People 2010 targets for food-related illness reduction being reached. Irradiation has been shown to be effective in eliminating many of the foodborne pathogens. The application of irradiation as a food safety treatment has been widely endorsed by many of the major associations involved with food safety and public health. Despite these endorsements there has been very little use of this technology to date for reducing the disease burden associated with the consumption of these products. A review of the available literature since the passage of the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act was conducted on the barriers to implementing irradiation as a food safety process for fresh fruits and vegetables. The impediments to adopting widespread utilization of irradiation food processing as a food safety measure involve a complex array of legislative, regulatory, industry, and consumer issues. The FDA’s approval process limits the expansion of the list of foods approved for the application of irradiation as a food safety process. There is also a lack of capacity within the industry to meet the needs of a geographically dispersed industry.^

Automated soldier medical readiness: Prevalence of " medically not ready" using data from the electronic soldier readiness processing system (ESRP)

Identifying accurate numbers of soldiers determined to be medically not ready after completing soldier readiness processing may help inform Army leadership about ongoing pressures on the military involved in long conflict with regular deployment. In Army soldiers screened using the SRP checklist for deployment, what is the prevalence of soldiers determined to be medically not ready? Study group. 15,289 soldiers screened at all 25 Army deployment platform sites with the eSRP checklist over a 4-month period (June 20, 2009 to October 20, 2009). The data included for analysis included age, rank, component, gender and final deployment medical readiness status from MEDPROS database. Methods.^ This information was compiled and univariate analysis using chi-square was conducted for each of the key variables by medical readiness status. Results. Descriptive epidemiology Of the total sample 1548 (9.7%) were female and 14319 (90.2%) were male. Enlisted soldiers made up 13,543 (88.6%) of the sample and officers 1,746 (11.4%). In the sample, 1533 (10.0%) were soldiers over the age of 40 and 13756 (90.0%) were age 18-40. Reserve, National Guard and Active Duty made up 1,931 (12.6%), 2,942 (19.2%) and 10,416 (68.1%) respectively. Univariate analysis. Overall 1226 (8.0%) of the soldiers screened were determined to be medically not ready for deployment. Biggest predictive factor was female gender OR (2.8; 2.57-3.28) p<0.001. Followed by enlisted rank OR (2.01; 1.60-2.53) p<0.001. Reserve component OR (1.33; 1.16-1.53) p<0.001 and Guard OR (0.37; 0.30-0.46) p<0.001. For age > 40 demonstrated OR (1.2; 1.09-1.50) p<0.003. Overall the results underscore there may be key demographic groups relating to medical readiness that can be targeted with programs and funding to improve overall military medical readiness.^

Cross -packing among retroviruses and characterization of the feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) packaging signal: Implications for the development of FIV-based gene transfer systems

Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV)-based gene transfer systems are being seriously considered for human gene therapy as an alternative to vectors based on primate lentiviruses, a genetically complex group of retroviruses capable of infecting non-dividing cells. The greater phylogenetic distance between the feline and primate lentiviruses is thought to reduce chances of the generation of recombinant viruses. However, safety of FIV-based vector systems has not been tested experimentally. Since primate lentiviruses such as human and simian immunodeficiency viruses (HIV/SIV) can cross-package each other's genomes, we tested this trait with respect to FIV. Unexpectedly, both feline and primate lentiviruses were reciprocally able to both cross-package and propagate each other's RNA genomes. This was largely due to the recognition of viral packaging signals by the heterologous proteins. However, a simple retrovirus such as Mason-Pfizer monkey virus (MPMV) was unable to package FIV RNA. Interestingly, FIV could package MPMV RNA, but not propagate it for further steps of replication. These findings suggest that upon co-infection of the same host, cross-packaging may allow distinct retroviruses to generate chimeric variants with unknown pathogenic potential. ^ In order to understand the packaging determinants in FIV, we conducted a detailed mutational analysis of the region thought to contain FIV packaging signal. We show that the first 90–120 nt of the 5′ untranslated region (UTR) and the first 90 nt of gag were simultaneously required for efficient FIV RNA packaging. These results suggest that the primary FIV packaging signal is multipartite and discontinuous, composed of two core elements separated by 150 nt of the 5 ′UTR. ^ The above studies are being used towards the development of safer FIV-based self-inactivating (SIN) vectors. These vectors are being designed to eliminate the ability of FIV transfer vector RNAs to be mobilized by primate lentiviral proteins that may be present in the target cells. Preliminary test of the first generation of these vectors has revealed that they are incapable of being propagated by feline proteins. The inability of FIV transfer vectors to express packageable vector RNA after integration should greatly increase the safety of FIV vectors for human gene therapy. ^