The original article by Public Health England did not go into detail as to how this alleged transmission occurred so we are left in the dark about it. Anyone who earns their living working in people’s homes will know that hygiene standards vary enormously, some being extremely poor. It could be that correct procedures were not adhered to but of course that equally might not be the case.
Re the piece by Natures Menu, in light of the lack of detail about the case, he is brave to take on the statutory body (Public Health England) who investigated these incidents. Of note are his comments:
“We therefore believe that the risk to customers in handling raw pet food is no higher than that of handling raw meat for their own consumption, providing basic hygiene rules are implemented. (my bold)
“Raw feeding responsibly is completely safe.....(my bold)
Of course he is correct about following good hygiene rules but handling meat is not the whole issue. There is evidence that shedding of bacteria can occur after consuming bacteria laden food (link)
but this doesn’t seem to be mentioned.
He says it is ‘completely safe’ yet recalls due to infection do occur. I am aware of dogs who were made ill by eating contaminated raw food - the recall was too late. Those dogs had diarrhoea and were probably shedding salmonella into the environment. Some time ago I too inadvertently fed a raw food product that was recalled due to salmonella. Fortunately the dogs were alright. Can any food be guaranteed to be ‘completely safe’?
Perhaps this might be one reason why Public Health England state that with the increased uptake of raw feeding they are expecting more problems. The key is in the word ‘public’ - this government body is concerned with the wider issue of public
health, not just the individual.