E coli Mexican Grill

[samclem]

Who knows if some preservatives increase the likelihood of cancer for some people.

We do know that preservatives are used to slow the oxidation of many foods (e.g oils and lipids, esp), and the production of free radicals. We also know that free radicals cause cellular damage, including some cancers. The fact that some preservatives reduce cancers should not be in dispute.

 

[samclem]

The first time I saw the initials [BHT] was when I would read the ingredients on the back of the cereal box, paired with its cousin BHA.

Fun fact: often the BHT is just added to the packaging (sometimes that waxy plastic bag that holds the cookies inside the box). That's enough to keep them from spoiling.

 

[explanade]

Sales down 14.6% in last quarter, now a grand jury looking into norovirus outbreak at CA branch where meat was stored unsafely.

I held off on visiting a couple of days before a flight. Why take chances?

The brand damage may be irreparable.

 

[bUU]

To be clear, Chipotle was served with a subpoena. They haven't been accused of any wrong-doing, and there is no evidence that the grand jury investigation is specifically targeting Chipotle rather than its suppliers.

 

[samclem]

To be clear, Chipotle was served with a subpoena. They haven't been accused of any wrong-doing, and there is no evidence that the grand jury investigation is specifically targeting Chipotle rather than its suppliers.

The public will hold Chipotle responsible for the safety of the food they serve.

I don't think the damage will be irreparable, but it will take time and real changes to put things back on track. The changes will involve attention to standards, to training, and to continual inspection of their supply chain. It's unlikely that Chipotle can afford to take the risk of having hundreds of tiny hole-in-the-wall local suppliers when any slip-up will cost the entire company a lot of money and goodwill.

As a youth I worked in a fast food chain. At our store training was good and standards were tight. In the year or so I worked there, I never saw any toleration for a practice or problem that would have jeopardized food safety. It can be done, but it requires work and Chipotle won't get its reputation back overnight.

 

[NW-Bound]

Funny you should mention -- I did a double-take awhile back when I discovered some people were taking the preservative BHT as a dietary supplement (can't call it medicine per the FDA). It's supposed to have an antiviral effect. The first time I saw the initials was when I would read the ingredients on the back of the cereal box, paired with its cousin BHA.

I am not up-to-date on this stuff. So, Wikipedia comes to the rescue.

Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), also known as dibutylhydroxytoluene, ... is useful for its antioxidant properties. European and U.S. regulations allow small amounts to be used as a food additive.... forbidden as food additive in Japan (since 1958), Romania, Sweden, and Australia.

The National Cancer Institute determined in 1979 that it was noncarcinogenic in a mouse model.

Since the 1970s, BHT has been steadily replaced with BHA.​

OK, so BHA should be safer or less controversial, right?

Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) is an antioxidant ... a waxy solid used as a food additive... The primary use for BHA is as an antioxidant and preservative in food, food packaging, animal feed, cosmetics, rubber, and petroleum products. BHA also is commonly used in medicines, such as isotretinoin, lovastatin, and simvastatin, among others.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health report that BHA is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen based on evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In particular, when administered in high doses as part of their diet, BHA causes papillomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the forestomach in rats and Syrian golden hamsters. In mice, there is no carcinogenic effect, and even evidence of a protective effect against the carcinogenicity of other chemicals.

When examining human population statistics, the usual low intake levels of BHA show no significant association with an increased risk of cancer. The State of California, has, however, listed it as a carcinogen.​

So, BHA causes cancer in rats and hamsters, but fights cancer in mice. For human, it is not bad, except for those living in California.

It's clear as mud.

 

[braumeister]

As a youth I worked in a fast food chain. At our store training was good and standards were tight. In the year or so I worked there, I never saw any toleration for a practice or problem that would have jeopardized food safety. It can be done, but it requires work and Chipotle won't get its reputation back overnight.

I also worked for one in my youth; it was a very, very large chain. And standards were atrocious. I could go on for quite a while with horrible anecdotes, but I think the point is that it mostly comes down to local management to do the right thing.

 

[sanfanciscotreat]

I really did not intend for this thread to stay alive for so long, but E. Coli grill has been served with an indictment by a grand jury now. They just cannot get their heads out of the E. coli, noroviris, etc. Will there ever be a time when we will be comfortable buying this stock again?

 

[explanade]

Court of public opinion may be condemning them.

Wonder if there could be sabotage. Was a high flyer stock.

 

[bUU]

The public will hold Chipotle responsible for the safety of the food they serve.

And to a much greater extent than they'd hold a smaller company responsible for the safety of the food they serve - no question. The bigger a company is, the more some people want to exact a pound of flesh when something goes wrong, regardless of who is actually at fault. I suppose also, as alluded to above, perhaps some have a vested interest in driving the company under by keeping the innuendo and government scrutiny going as long as possible.

I don't think the damage will be irreparable, but it will take time and real changes to put things back on track. The changes will involve attention to standards, to training, and to continual inspection of their supply chain.

The fast-food restaurant biz is too competitive for a company like Chipotle to afford to employ more stringent standards than that which McDonald's, KFC and Subway abide. I haven't read anything yet that indicates that Chipotle underperforms those three chains with regard to corporate or individual store safety. So far all the objective evidence that I've read about remains consistent with Chipotle simply being the victim of circumstances specific to their menu - that which makes them Chipotle. It would be as if KFC was pinned down as the source of contraction of the H5N6 bird flu virus, or McDonald's being pinned down as the source of contraction of Mad Cow disease. These kinds of things have to be resolved by government action.

It's unlikely that Chipotle can afford to take the risk of having hundreds of tiny hole-in-the-wall local suppliers when any slip-up will cost the entire company a lot of money and goodwill.

So you're figuring Chipotle will simply switch to Sysco for all sourcing. I suppose that will avoid the cost of having to employ more stringent standards than McDonald's, KFC and Subway - it probably will even save Chipotle money.

 

[sanfanciscotreat]

Don't know about Subway, but McD's and Yum/KFC require suppliers to meet GFSI standards. Does anyone know if Chipotle requires GFSI standards for their suppliers?