25 Safe Meat Handling Practices

Introduction to Food & Meat Safety

Safe, nutritious, and consistently available food is essential for maintaining public health and well-being. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA): “Food safety refers to the conditions and practices that preserve the quality of food to prevent contamination and food-borne illnesses.” There must be planning and oversight to ensure food is safe and nutritious. Food safety is essential for preventing foodborne illnesses, ensuring nutritional value, and maintaining consumer trust in food quality and access via the food industry. Food is such a vast commodity to oversee that contaminations are a constant threat.

Ensuring food safety requires comprehensive planning and strict adherence to sanitary practices by food producers, processors, and vendors. Without these measures, contamination can lead to widespread outbreaks, causing severe health consequences and significant economic losses. In the United States alone, foodborne illnesses are responsible for an estimated 48 million cases and 3,000 deaths each year (USDA, 2020).

Meat safety is particularly concerning due to its frequent association with outbreaks. The CDC estimates 29% of foodborne illness deaths stem from meat-borne illnesses, the greatest of any category (CDC 2025). Proper sanitation of equipment, water sources, and facilities is essential to minimizing contamination risks. Floors must be kept clean to prevent both contamination and workplace injuries, such as slips and falls (Canning 2023). Additionally, workers must maintain strict hygiene practices and wear protective gear, including: gloves, masks, and specialized clothing for extreme cold or heat. Handling raw meat exposes workers to harmful bacteria such as Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria, which can lead to severe gastrointestinal infections, enhancing the importance of safety practices and personal protective equipment (PPE). (Burlage 2011).  Between 2012 and 2019, Salmonella outbreaks were linked to beef 27 times (Canning, 2023), underscoring the need for stringent food safety protocols.

Foodborne illnesses are largely preventable through strict hygiene measures, particularly during meat processing. High-risk populations– including children, the elderly, and individuals with weakened immune systems—are especially vulnerable to foodborne illnesses. Moreover, the globalization of food production has increased the risk of contamination due to complex supply chains and inconsistent regulations across countries. As food safety remains a persistent public health challenge, stronger oversight is necessary to reduce the risk of meat borne diseases to protect consumers.

History

It is important to remember the history that has brought the US to the current level of vulnerability. In the book “The Jungle,” Upton Sinclair divulges the perilous practices of the meat processing system, via his role as an undercover journalist working and witnessing horrid conditions of meat packing facilities and stockyards in the early 1900s. His crusade was to emotionally strike his readers with the trickle down consequences of capitalism to the poor immigrants working at these facilities. His disparagement of people caring more about profits than workers took the backseat in the attention economy of the time. Shocking depictions of the meat-packing stop between the farm to table believed to be ideal was forever tarnished with piles of meat covered with rats and their feces. As the public read about the futility of immigrants’ grueling work, the stories ripped the audience’s attention from his intended focal point of poverty and capitalism. The tipping-point focus migrated from the poor workers, to their work environment, and finally what was in contact with the readers’ dinner table. Society still hasn’t shaken the whisper of wondering what is actually in sausage or a hotdog. The outcry was immediate. There was outrage and an intense, immediate demand for consumers to have protections via requirements of facilities to be more transparent and accountable.

Millions of copies of “The Jungle” sold as meat sales plummeted in the US and foreign countries started to ban the sale of American meat due to the release of images and confirmed reports of these horrid depictions; President Theodore Roosevelt knew he had to act. “The Jungle” was published in November of 1905, and the first American comprehensive federal food laws were enacted in June of 1906, an unprecedented turnaround time given the resistance of Congress, who had money investments in the industry (Klein 2023).  The laws included two key oversights: the first was The Meat Inspection Act, which set standards for meat production, shipment, and prevented companies from mislabeling their products. Secondly, the Pure Food and Drug Act, which was the genesis for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s creation, ultimately strictly banned the mislabeling and adulteration of food (Klein 2024). Currently, the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) and Poultry Products Inspection acts are at play, which includes key enforceable federal oversight of meat slaughtering facilities by the Food Safety Inspection Services (FSIS).

The current governing body ensuring food safety within the United States is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in charge of regulations and inspection to ensure safety. Nestled under the USDA is FSIS, Food Safety Inspection Services, a key player in meat inspection. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) partners closely with the USDA and FSIS to investigate foodborne illnesses and outbreaks (Food Safety 2018).

Contamination 

Cross-Contamination is the spread of harmful pathogens to or from one surface or food to another (Van De Wal 2024). ​Contamination can occur at multiple stages along the food production chain, which could include upwards of 5 steps to reach the consumer.

In the animal, muscles, or the meat, upon slaughter, are sterile. However, skin, gastrointestinal tracts (GI tracts), and most other organs are not sterile, so any contact with the muscle can contaminate the meat. Most bacteria naturally inhabit the GI tract of the animal, with at least some strain of Salmonella being found in most chicken GI tracts (Russell 2021). This is why contact with/consumption of animal feces is particularly dangerous. Some bacteria are normal within the GI tract of certain animals, yet can cause illness upon ingestion. Contamination is a key preventable public health concern, and can occur at a number of different stages from farm to fork meat production, outlined in the following subsections.

During processing, improper handling, unsanitary equipment, or contaminate surface contact can introduce additional pathogens. For instance, slicing meat without adequate sanitation can spread bacteria. Additionally, transportation and storage pose risks. For example, if refrigeration is compromised at any point, bacterial growth can accelerate. Furthermore, inadequate hygiene practices, as simple as unwashed hands or sick food handlers  during food preparation can lead to contamination. Each of these variables presents opportunities for pathogens to enter the food supply, which has led these groups’ emphasis is on the importance of stringent safety measures throughout the production chain. Further investigation, study and solutions  include:

1. Farm: Animal Production– Introduction of and Spread of Bacteria

Contamination can start and stop at every stage in the production of meat. Starting with animal production on farms, the overcrowding of animals presents both ethical and physical  health concerns, ultimately facilitating an environment prone to the spread of pathogens. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs are of particular interest in this regard. CAFOs are large-scale industrial agricultural facilities that produce meat in relatively confined spaces (Hribar 2010). CAFOs pose public health, environmental health, occupational health, and ethical concerns. The confined spaces lead to higher potential pathogen transfer due to the large number of animals in a small amount of space. Another important consideration is that over 150 pathogens exist within livestock manure. When unsanitary conditions persist (i.e. manure is not adequately cleaned up in a timely manner) it is of particular concern, as it can contaminate drinking water (for both humans and animals), leading to the spread of pathogens, potentially even jumping into humans (Hribar 2010). While this introduction of pathogens may cause few symptoms in healthy people, it can be deadly to vulnerable populations.

When animals do fall sick, it is critical to separate them from the masses to limit the spread of bacteria and other contagious diseases, especially in confined spaces. If not completed, some animals will pick on sick animals to protect the masses, ultimately exposing them to more pathogens. A similar threat level arises as certain breeds and genetic traits are selected to yield fast-growing animals that can reach full size quickly. Oftentimes, these animals develop other health concerns that accompany growing, once again raising ethical concerns and creating a vulnerable environment for pathogens to target (Hribar 2010).

A final factor of low quantity antibiotics within animal feed creates other vulnerabilities with the food source attempting to limit the spread of harmful bacteria and decrease the energy spent by the animal fighting bacteria– a practice that is hypothesized to translate into quicker financial yields. When these antibiotics are used at a sub-therapeutic level, it can present the optimal environment for bacteria to develop antibiotic resistant strains (Hribar 2010). Antibiotic resistance is alarming and will be further discussed in a later section of this book.

2. Slaughter and Processing

Depiction of  basic slaughter procedure. Cross n.d. (quality will not get better; link)

Animals are then transported to a facility for slaughter and processing. Before and during slaughter, bacteria can be introduced or shared by cross-contamination. To maintain a humane approach, animals are stunned prior to slaughter, then being bled and organs are removed. If the GI-tract of the animal is even nicked, this contaminates the other parts of the meat. If any stomach or intestinal matter gets onto the slicing surface, it can contaminate the meat after in the production lines (Cross n.d.). Proper cleaning, drying, and avoidance of known contamination pathways are key to preventing this spread. Additionally, the federal oversight within these plants to ensure these procedures maintain quality control measures on a national scale. Proper cleaning of equipment and the spaces surrounding them is required by the USDA-FSIS inspectors, as well as proper PPE for staff.

The inspectors are also tasked with ensuring the animals are inspected throughout the process, discarding those that are not fit for consumption. Antemortem (or before death), animals are inspected to be “down, disabled, diseased, or dead” (Cross n.d). If an animal is any of these, it is not deemed consumable. It is also inspected postmortem (or after death) for any signs that any parts of the animal are not fit for human consumption. There is zero tolerance of any visible fecal contamination, as feces is a key carrier of many foodborne-illness causing pathogens.

Slaughterhouses and meat processing facilities are responsible for having processes in check to prevent contamination, of which,  consistently monitored by USDA officials (Slaughter Food Safety Standard, 2020). ​​In recent years, there has been a shift towards monitoring these processes rather than solely relying on visual inspections. Carcasses are tested at least once per shift for bacteria like E. coli, however, these tests represent only a small sample from the entire facility. The USDA sets limits on the amount of pathogens allowed to be found on the carcasses, as a certain concentration must be present to cause disease. However, these limits are outdated for many pathogens and do not reflect current standards. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has identified these limits as a concern for the USDA to improve upon (Office, U. S. G. A. 2025)..

In addition, occupational safety is a significant concern in meat processing facilities. The use of knives and fast pace of production lines create workplace hazards. To mitigate these risks, both the USDA and OSHA have established regulations and safety protocols that guide the design and daily operations of these facilities. Systems including the Pathogen Reduction/Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Systems mandate that meat processing facilities develop and follow HACCP plans to identify and control food safety hazards, identifying key control points that can be intervened at. Another major concern is exposure to pathogens, which makes the proper use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) essential for occupational health.

3. Transportation

(Ali 2022)

On the path from meat production facilities to retail grocery stores, a package of meat may pass through as many as five different stops, including processing, packaging, storage, distribution centers, and finally, the grocery store itself, as seen to the right. At each of these points, strict temperature control is crucial to ensure food safety and minimize microbial growth. After the animal is slaughtered, there is no longer a biological mechanism to inhibit the growth of bacteria and other microbes, and meat provides a nutrient rich substrate for bacteria to grow, meaning it is critical to maintain these consistent temperatures.

Cold chain is a process to keep products at desired temperatures throughout the steps of transport, and is utilized in multiple different fields (Intersam 2023). The cold chain provides an environment which can stop the growth of microorganisms, slow enzyme activity, and slow the rate of deterioration (Han et. al 2021). However, Han et. al. describes the barriers have been identified in the cold chain: “The integrity of CCL [Cold Chain Logistics] is rarely maintained in today’s commercial meat supply chain, and the abuse of temperature and chain breaks remain prominent problems that lead to significant meat loss, waste, and economic loss,” which is commonly identified as a significant area of improvement, although it could be incredibly costly (2021).  Increased oversight of these processes is integral to limit these losses, however, the main problem is when these products do not get taken off the shelves, and are still sold to consumers. Additional research must be done to recognize how dips in temperature impact meat quality and consumability– specifically spoilage and shelf life– and how these impact foodborne illnesses. Transparency is critical in these incidents. When meat is not consumed, it is a big greenhouse gas emitter or waste. It is also a concern how much emissions it takes to get products across the nation, let alone globally.

4. Consumer

Unfortunately, much of the responsibility for food safety is often placed on the consumer, despite their limited ability to verify the quality of the product they receive. However, this comes with the expectation that individuals have the knowledge and resources to properly handle and prepare meat to avoid contamination. Public health educational initiatives play a key role in this sense. The “Cook, Chill, Heat, and Store” guidelines found to the left are a simple tool that is designed to educate consumers of any education level on safe food handling practices (Prasertong 2011). These aim to communicate to the general public to cook meat to the proper internal temperature, chill it quickly, reheating leftovers safely, and store it correctly in the fridge to prevent bacterial growth, and ultimately, prevent foodborne illness. Public knowledge paired with regulatory improvements can help shift the burden of food safety away from consumers and toward a more preventative system. However, if consumers do not follow these guidelines, it could be for a number of reasons.

(Prasertong 2011)

Generally, consumers do not fully comprehend the risks associated with foodborne illness, hypothesized that there is less risk because it is not something that can be physically seen. If a person does get sick, it often goes unreported or unseen by a medical provider, as the symptoms for most may be short-term or mild. Combining this idea with the complexity of existing food production chains meaning it can be hard to find the source of an outbreak, nevertheless definitively prove a food item as the source. A number of social determinants of health influence these risk perceptions. In a study by Menini et al 2022, it looks at ethnographic data and how they may influence food safety patterns in handling meat products to determine where these perceptions may root from– whether cultural, practical, or due to time constraints/pressures.

During these studies, key objects were consistently contaminated within the kitchen, often starting with the hands, which then touched dish cloths, which then touched clean dishes. 13 of the 14 families in the study violated the food-safe hand washing techniques in some capacity; 11 of 14 families contaminated commonly used objects in the kitchen, including but not limited to: dish towels, phones, laptops, recipe cards. The mere presence of personal items within the kitchen that bring in other contaminants was also significant, especially adding children and pets into the mixture. The kitchen was also identified as a multifunctional space, not being properly cleaned between functions. that were contaminated (did not belong in the kitchen) was limited to 11 of 14 families. Additionally, storage practices were not up to standards, with raw meat present on the intermediate steps, or the fridge was not turned to the proper temperatures. Additionally, consumers broke the cold chain by keeping groceries out on the table while preparing dinner, or letting dinner thaw for an extended amount of time. Reusing oil– a family practice, also added to the contamination pool. These practices are often not considered wrong, as it is often what they have seen around them. Even when the families verbalized that they understood proper techniques, their risk perceptions made them feel as though they were in the clear. Managing and perception of risk with an emphasis on cultural safety and cultural competence is important in preventing the incorrect handling practices in kitchens across the nation.

5. Outbreak Detection and Investigation: 

Meat borne diseases include infections, intoxications, allergies, metabolic food disorders, and idiosyncratic illnesses (Abebe 2022). Most people are especially susceptible to these illnesses, infections and intoxications. Consumption of contaminated meat can lead to various diseases called GIT diseases and extra-GIT diseases. The bacterial pathogens causing GIT diseases include E. coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, and so on, while pathogens like Brucella and Mycobacterium can cause diseases other than GIT. Most cases of MBDs are due to gastrointestinal (GIT) problems, particularly small intestine issues that manifest as diarrhea (Ali 2021).

When a contaminated, undercooked, or piece of meat results in foodborne illness in two or more individuals, it is considered an outbreak. ​Food safety outbreaks pose significant challenges to public health, requiring prompt and coordinated responses to mitigate their impact, both socially and physically. Each state has a different procedure to report potential foodborne illnesses or outbreaks. This adds to the difficulty of identifying an outbreak across state lines that comes with a complex food network like the United States. Oftentimes, it requires the local health department or environmental health officer to be notified, frequently stemming from a restaurant visitor as a complaint. This data is then entered to databases, like PulseNet, which can help to identify trends through a “bacterial fingerprint,” which can aid in detecting an outbreak (FSIS 2025). This data is then released to the public through federal channels. Once a potential outbreak is detected, epidemiologists work to verify the diagnosis and identify and cluster impacted individuals. They then perform descriptive epidemiology to characterize the outbreak by time, place, and person, which starts the guided search for the source of the illness. Laboratory testing and environmental assessments of food practices further support the investigation. Public health officials implement control measures and communicate findings upon finding the source, advocating for recalls when needed (FSIS 2025).

Poultry 

Salmonella 

Of particular importance in America, accounting for the largest of any category of foodborne deaths at 19%, poultry is a key carrier of Salmonella, a bacteria that upon entering and affecting a host causes a range of illness from no symptoms to death (CDC 2025). Certain strains of the virus are particularly dangerous, one of which is Salmonella Heidelberg. Vulnerable populations (i.e. elderly) Outbreaks of Salmonella are typically cyclic in nature, however, the outbreak of the same strain between years is atypical. In one company, Foster Farms, an outbreak of Salmonella Heidelberg occurred years apart– an indicator of poor sanitary practices. However, this is also a reflection of the regulatory bodies responsible for inspecting the meat and upholding the standard to mitigate the production and spread of salmonella (Covney 2024).

The problem? 

In order for regulatory bodies to produce a recall, they must have definitive evidence, or the inclusion must be considered an adulterant, defined by the CDC as “ a product that is defective, unsafe, not shown to be safe, filthy, or produced under insanitary conditions.” Until 2022, Salmonella was not considered an adulterant, and even now, is only considered as such in particular chicken cutlets that have caused a higher concentration of outbreaks (Beach 2024).
This development was a long time coming– prior, it was incredibly hard to force a recall on a company with outbreaks associated with its food products. Outbreak investigators could find almost certain commonalities between the patient populations of outbreaks, yet they needed to find definitive evidence, meaning an unopened pack of poultry, with the exact same strand identified within the patient. As such, this is an incredibly large task to uptake, and is often not feasible. Should the governing bodies force a recall without one of these two criteria, the legalities would cause significant legal issues and monetary loss.

The USDA also has inspectors present in meat packing facilities, of which are required to be present daily for the facility to operate. However, procedure has largely stayed the same over many years: focusing a great deal on the visual rather than the invisible, or bacterial, aspects that are also incredibly important for human health (FSIS n.d.). According to the PBS Frontline documentary titled “The Trouble with Chicken.”, inspectors, on average, test just 1 specimen of poultry per day, even at facilities a quarter million birds in that timeframe. Additionally, rather than looking at the cutlets of chicken,  the typical market product, inspectors frequently swabbed the whole chicken. Statistics weren’t lining up, as people were still getting sick at high rates, yet the tested poultry was meeting standards at the same rates as when there was not an outbreak.

Consequently, scientists identified that salmonella can be released during the process of slicing the chicken. This was a breakthrough. In 2016, pathogen reduction standards set by the FSIS on chicken parts were set into play, and by testing more chicken cutlets for Salmonella, along with online postings of the compliance results, these changes yielded meaningful prevention of food-borne illness. These efforts were estimated to prevent, on average, 50,000 sicknesses in the U.S. (Dietrich 2016). These standards helped reduce outbreaks, yet regulatory bodies could still not enforce a recall. Finally, in 2024, after a long battle, certain cutlets have become identified as adulterants, and the FSIS can enforce a recall, rather than just request one (CDC 2021). Recalls can be a significant financial loss for companies, so asking them to do it on good faith occurs in slim to no cases. Additionally, a recall could be considered a bad look for a company, which could impact whether consumers select their products. Further, media coverage of outbreaks, the stigma around recalls, and the shared impacts of salmonella and other foodborne diseases are changing the narrative to place the burden on the companies rather than the consumers (Yim 2021).

Media Coverage

The media’s coverage of the meat market, particularly poultry production, has shaped public perception by frequently focusing on foodborne illness outbreaks, worker exploitation, and environmental concerns surrounding production facilities. Furthermore, programs to cut government spending are impacting the regulations set in place to protect the consumers while workers are potentially being laid off based on finance-based reductions(Blum 2025). The focus of the political system is shifting to profits, and the power in the meat industry remains in the hands of a few massive corporations that dictate pricing, safety standards, and even policy through aggressive lobbying. This makes policy change nearly impossible, as any reform attempts are met with resistance from industry giants who prioritize profit over consumer health (Blum 2025). While consumers are frequently told to be more vigilant, the reality is that contamination should not be so prevalent to begin with.

A significant amount of media coverage often fails to address the systemic issues at play, further shifting the blame onto consumers to properly sanitize, cook, and adequately prepare meat. Headlines spotlight Salmonella contamination or outbreaks, yet fail to question or address the loopholes in regulatory processes that permit unsafe conditions for salmonella to spread, as well as perpetuating unsafe working conditions. A significant step was taken in the identification of salmonella as an adulterant, however, much more work must be done.

A growing threat: antibiotic resistance 

Mentioned previously, food-borne illnesses are growing increasingly compounded with the increasingly common presence of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria , a known cause of food borne illnesses. Antibiotic resistance poses a unique threat: an individual’s symptoms are typically more severe, paired with the inability to treat the root cause: the microbe. The overuse of antibiotics in meat production has turned the industry into a breeding ground for drug-resistant bacteria, creating a major public health crisis.

Even though some regulations around antibiotic use in livestock have been introduced, the meat industry still manages to find gaps and political boundaries that pose a significant threat to public health and safety.  To illustrate: “Disease prevention” allows producers to continue using antibiotics on A massive scale.. However, this is not just a problem identified in the United States. Globally, a large amount of poultry production runs unchecked with antibiotics used frequently and little oversight on how this usage impacts global antibiotic resistance trends.

At the end of the day, consumers are once again the ones who end up paying the price. Factors that should be minimized like cross-contamination in kitchens, grocery stores, and processing plants means the risk starts long before it hits the plate. Additionally, when people inevitably get sick from these bacteria, the infections become more substantial, or even impossible, to treat. Instead of addressing this at the source, the blame is pushed onto the public, as if individual actions will undo the frequency of antibiotic misuse.

Personal Section: 

Food safety has always intrigued me, especially in investigating the outbreaks. The idea of tracking down the origin of contamination is fascinating, although I’ve come to realize through this project that it is far more complex than I initially thought. Asking people to remember everything they’ve eaten in the past two weeks is a significant challenge, made even more difficult when an unopened package is required to definitively confirm the source of contamination and ultimately create change.

To explore this further, I asked two of my friends to cook chicken breasts for me, without offering any guidance on what to do or how to do it. My goal was to identify small, seemingly insignificant moments that, in reality, could contribute to foodborne illness outbreaks. Much like the article by Menini et. al 2022, I interviewed my friends afterward to understand their perceptions of cooking meat and handling food safely. This experience highlighted the gap between perceived safety and actual risk, which is a reminder of how crucial proper food safety education really is.

Anusha Patel and Avery Fricke 

I came into their clean kitchen, asking them to simply make two chicken breasts as they normally do. They told me they were ready for the task. Avery wanted to cook a simple chicken and rice meal, a staple in her weekly diet. Anusha wanted to cook a spicy chicken breast. I was excited to see their cooking habits, giving them no feedback on their practices during the process. They opened the fridge, grabbing their chicken off of their respective shelves: the top and bottom. They drained the excess juice from the chicken down the sink, each hand-placing their chicken on a cutting board. They patted the chicken dry with paper towels, promptly throwing them away after use. Avery simply used  just salt and pepper, claiming she “likes to keep things simple.”Anusha, filled the kitchen with scents of garlic,  They both rubbed their seasoning into the raw meat with their hands. Both washed their hands for a rather short time in relatively cold water, using soap. Avery takes her chicken off the burner as soon as it hits 165 degrees, saying “I like to make sure I don’t overcook it, as I like juicy chicken, it adds to the flavor”. Not cleaning the thermometer after Anusha, Avery used it and watched it climb to 175 degrees fahrenheit before taking the chicken off the burner. Avery washed her cutting board; Anusha did not. They placed their cooked chicken on their cutting boards, letting them rest. Each cut into the chicken to find fully cooked chicken, showing all the signs of proper cooking. I tried a bite of each, favoring Anusha’s taste and texture, although I felt confident in Avery’s safety.

My main takeaways: Inadequate handwashing before/ and during cooking, not cleaning the sink after putting chicken juice down it, not cleaning the thermometer between uses, not cleaning cutting board, being on phones while cooking (contaminated objects), dried hands with dish towels that were later used to dry, storage containers and preparation tools and pans.&

During Anusha’s post-cooking interview, she mentioned she had learned from her Mother, who was an amazing self-taught chef. Avery, on the other hand, was completely self-taught, but had E.Coli when she was little, mentioning “I made sure I always cook my chicken well-done, using a thermometer each time… I even go above 165º to make sure it is fully cooked. I never want to experience that again.” Upon mentioning their takeaways of food safety, they seemed to shrug them off.

As a busy college student with roommates, I am relatively healthy. I want to avoid getting sick, but I know there’s a good chance I can recover if I do. I order Green Chef meals, which are sent each week packed in ice with fresh ingredients in paper bags, and a divider with meat beneath it. I have essentially learned how to cook with these meals and their simple recipes. They reinforce a lot of recommended principles on safe cooking.  My father, who I am always around in the kitchen or chat with when I am at home answers my questions about how to prepare dishes.  He’s always knowledgeable. I trust him more than the internet– another risk perception measure. This also means I will call him while I am cooking, I will change the music, and I will lousily wash my hands just to say I did. I will forget which pair of tongs I use, and accidentally use the one that touched the raw meat on the vegetables. Because what are the odds it actually makes me sick? That is the key to risk perception. I now try to avoid these small things, however, it can be hard when in a rush or when I’m too tired to function. Today, I looked into my fridge, where I hastily unloaded my Green Chef meals of the week, placing the chicken on the top shelf, all because I had to go to class. I need to take those extra few seconds to ward off illness.

Conclusion

Preventing meat contamination before it reaches the consumer is an important public health concern and is critical for maintaining trust in food systems. Implementing realistic and enforceable hygiene practices at every stage of production from farm to table significantly reduces the risk of harmful pathogens infecting humans. Enhanced farming practices, sanitation protocols, and worker training further ensure that contamination is mitigated when possible while maintaining worker safety. However, the responsibility for meat safety does not end at production, as consumers also play an important role. Proper handling, storage, and cooking techniques are essential to prevent the spread of bacteria and ensure meat is safe to eat. By prioritizing preventive measures across the entire supply chain, the risk of foodborne illness can be dramatically minimized.

References:

Abebe E, Gugsa G, Ahmed M. Review on major food-borne zoonotic bacterial pathogens. J Trop Med. (2020) 2020:4674235. doi: 10.1155/2020/4674235

Ali, S., & Alsayeqh, A. F. (2022, December 15). Review of major meat-borne zoonotic bacterial pathogens. Frontiers in public health. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9799061/#F3

Beach, C. (2024, April 26). USDA declares that salmonella is an adulterant in some chicken products. Food Safety News. https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2024/04/usda-declares-that-salmonella-is-an-adulterant-in-some-chicken-products/

Burlage RS, 2011. Principles of Public Health Microbiology. Jones and Bartlett Learning, Canada.

“The Current US Food Safety System.” Edited by National Academies Press (US), Institute of Medicine (US) and National Research Council (US) Committee to Ensure Safe Food from Production to Consumption., U.S. National Library of Medicine, 2018.

Canning et al. – Journal of Food Protection – 2023

United States Department of Agriculture. Food safety. www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety. Updated October 21, 2020. Accessed February 28, 2025.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021b, October 13). Salmonella outbreak linked to raw frozen breaded stuffed chicken products. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/salmonella/enteritidis-06-21/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025, March 19). Foodborne illness source estimates. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/food-safety/php/data-research/foodborne-illness-sources/index.html#:~:text=Among%20the%20estimated%20domestically%20acquired,illnesses%20and%2029%25%20of%20deaths

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, October 13). 2021 Salmonella Outbreak Linked to Raw Frozen Breaded Stuffed Chicken Products. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=https://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/enteritidis-06-21/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). You can help CDC solve foodborne outbreaks. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/foodborne-outbreaks/help-solve-outbreaks/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Key partners in foodborne outbreak investigations. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/foodborne-outbreaks/keypartners/index.html?ut

Covney, M. (2024, October 1)What are the most common strains of salmonella food poisoning that cause human illness?. Food Poisoning News. (2024, October 2). https://www.foodpoisoningnews.com/what-are-the-most-common-strains-of-salmonella-food-poisoning-that-cause-Medicine, C. for V. (n.d.). Glossary of terms related to FDA’s regulation of Animal Products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/resources-you/glossary-terms-related-fdas-regulation-animal-products#:~:text=Adulteration%3A%20A%20violation%20of%20the,or%20produced%20under%20insanitary%20conditionhuman-illness/?utm_source

​​Cross, R. (n.d.). Livestock slaughter procedures. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/technology/meat-processing/Livestock-slaughter-procedures

Gavin Van De Walle, M. (2024, October 29). Cross-contamination: Types and how to prevent it. FoodSafePal®. https://foodsafepal.com/cross-contamination/

Hribar, C. (2010). Understanding concentrated animal feeding operations and their impact on communities. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/59792

Hyejin Yim, Bhagyashree Katare, Effect of food safety recalls on consumer meat purchase: evidence from meat recalls 2007–2017, European Review of Agricultural Economics, Volume 50, Issue 2, April 2023, Pages 250–271, https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbac032

Intersam. (2023, February 7). The importance of the cold chain in meat products. https://intersam.es/en/the-importance-of-the-cold-chain-in-meat-products/

Jia-Wei Han, Min Zuo, Wen-Ying Zhu, Jin-Hua Zuo, En-Li Lü, Xin-Ting Yang, A comprehensive review of cold chain logistics for fresh agricultural products: Current status, challenges, and future trends, Trends in Food Science & Technology, Volume 109, 2021, Pages 536-551, ISSN 0924-2244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.01.066.

Menini A, Mascarello G, Giaretta M, Brombin A, Marcolin S, Personeni F, Pinto A, Crovato S. The Critical Role of Consumers in the Prevention of Foodborne Diseases: An Ethnographic Study of Italian Families. Foods. 2022 Mar 29 2022;11(7):1006. doi: 10.3390/foods11071006. PMID: 35407093; PMCID: PMC8997423.

Product Contamination | Food Safety and Inspection Service. Food Safety and Inspection Service . (n.d.). https://www.fsis.usda.gov/taxonomy/term/16?ut

Russel, A. (2021, August 20). Can you get salmonella from backyard chickens?. Texas AM Stories. https://stories.tamu.edu/news/2021/08/20/can-you-get-salmonella-from-backyard-chickens/#:~:text=Most%20chickens%2C%20ducks%20and%20turkeys,part%20of%20their%20microbial%20flora

Salmonella Outbreaks Linked to Beef, United States, 2012–2019

Perceived risk. Perceived Risk – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. (n.d.). https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/perceived-risk#:~:text=Perceived%20risk%20is%20defined%20as%20the%20extent%20to%20which%20there,Featherman%20%26%20Pavlou%2C%202003).

Schnirring, L. (2024, July 1). Salmonella outbreak from Backyard Poultry expands to 38 states. CIDRAP. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/salmonella/salmonella-outbreak-backyard-poultry-expands-38-states

Secretary Rollins takes action to streamline U.S. pork and poultry processing. Home. (2025, March 17). https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/03/17/secretary-rollins-takes-action-streamline-us-pork-and-poultry-processing

Slaughter Food Safety Standard. FSIS. (2020, March 24). https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media_file/2021-11/16_IM-Slaughter-Food-Safety-Standard-Student-Handout-03242020.pdf