Tweets Identify Food Poisoning Outbreaks

In Chicago monitoring Twitter for reports of food poisoning led to 133 restaurant inspections for health violations, with 21 establishments shut down. Dina Fine Maron reports

 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


On May 15th, 2013, Chicago magazine dining critic Jeff Ruby tweeted the following:
 
“When Nietzsche said "That which does not kill you makes you stronger," he obviously never had food poisoning from a Lebanese restaurant.”
 
Such Twitter messages are now being flagged by the Chicago Department of Public Health to spot food establishments that may be making patrons ill. The tweets elicit a reply from health agency workers linking them to a complaint form that will help identify problematic places.
 
During a 10-month stretch last year, staff members at the health agency responded to 270 tweets about “food poisoning.” Based on those tweets, 193 complaints were filed and 133 restaurants in the city were inspected. Twenty-one were closed down and another 33 were forced to fix health violations. That’s according to a study in the journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. [Jenine K. Harris et al, Health Department Use of Social Media to Identify Foodborne Illness — Chicago, Illinois, 2013–2014]
 
And study researcher Jenine Harris at the Washington University in St. Louis says that health officials in Boston and New York are also looking to tap Twitter in the future.
 
Many food poisoning victims do not seek treatment, but still complain to their friends, and now their Twitter followers. Such social media surveillance could help put a lid on food-borne disease outbreaks.
 
—Dina Fine Maron
 
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe