November 22, 2011

Get Ready to Gobble Drug-Resistant Bacteria

Many meat and poultry products probably carry drug-resistant bacteria before cooking. Katherine Harmon reports

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Health

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Thanksgiving is just days away, a time to feast with family. And to avoid food-borne bacterial infections.

The National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, or NARMS, is a joint effort of the CDC, the FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Microbiologist Lance Price talked about NARMS data last month at the ScienceWriters2011 conference in Flagstaff:

“What’s the probability of not finding drug-resistant bacteria on your meat and poultry? So pork chops you have about a one-in-10 chance of NOT finding drug-resistant bacteria. And this is just based on four bacteria that NARMS tests for: campylobactor, salmonella, E. coli and Enterococcus. Ground beef, one in 20. Chicken breasts, less than a one-in-100 chance of not finding drug-resistant bacteria. And then ground turkey, forget it: less than a one in 300 chance. Pretty much every sample of ground turkey will have drug-resistant bacteria.”

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.

So remember, if you buy ground turkey for meatballs or burgers once the whole bird is gone, cook it. Thoroughly.

—Katherine Harmon

[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