Front Page  »  

E. coli infection spike blamed on plastic bag ban

February 10, 2013

bagbanIn San Francisco, the first major city to pass a plastic bag ban, emergency rooms have seen a spike in E. coli infections and a 46 percent increase in deaths from foodborne illness in the three months after the bag ban that went into effect in 2007, according to a study by professors at the University of Pennsylvania and George Mason University. [HuffingtonPost]

The study, released in August, found a spike in hospital emergency room treatment due to E. coli infections. E. coli bacteria, common in the human intestine and frequent suspects in food poisoning, can range from harmless to lethal.

In October, San Luis Obispo County residents were required to add reusable bags to their shopping lists or pay 10 cents apiece for paper bags to comply with a new ordinance.

The 10 cent charge was enacted to encourage the public to use reusable bags rather than paper. But as people tend to neglect washing those bags, increased food contamination becomes likely.

“Using standard estimates of the statistical value of life,” the study’s authors point out dryly, “we show that the health costs associated with the San Francisco ban swamp any budgetary savings from reduced litter.”

While members of the San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority board argued for and against the plastic bag ban, opponents questioned the safety of reusing cloth bags because bacteria could result in cross contamination and argued against the mandated paper bag charge.

Proponents of the ordinance noted the environmental hazards with plastic bags ending up in waterways, poisoning marine life and polluting landfills.

 


Loading...
Subjects:                 
Related:


83 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Simply launder your reusable bags as you would any other piece of clothing or laundry item thereby reducing the likelihood of E. coli infection. It’s not rocket science.Other cultures have used cloth bags for centuries.


0

You can check out the data yourself at: http://wonder.cdc.gov


San Diego saw a similar jump in deaths at the same time with no bag ban. As did the entire state of California. These authors did not account for confounding factors. The study is questionable.


0

unforeseen consequences of short sighted simplistic decisions…


0

easy solution, i have my meat put in a plastic bag so it won’t leak


0

Did you notice what you put it into? PLASTIC!


0

Pretty funny A. Seriously, if you cut your habit from 6 to 1, that is an improvement. Also was pleased to see that the take from local beach cleanup was markedly lower in 2012.


0

Was it overall lower (all types of trash)? Certain type? How much%? Surprised that if markedly lower, how I missed in local media.


0

this is from Socal and represents some pretty heavily visited beaches http://www.sdcoastkeeper.org/blog/marine-debris.html

note they don’t give statistical comparisons (that’s why i said notable)


0

Unfortunately this was not unforeseen. I wrote this back in Jan 2012

Plastic Bags

Unfortunately, the argument against plastic bags is based on junk science. Practically all of the claims against plastic bags have been proven false. For example:

1. Plastic bags kill 100,000 sea animals each year based on a Canadian study. FALSE – Proponents misread the study. There were no plastic bags involved. It was used fishing nets that were the culprit.

2. There is a big floating garbage pool in the pacific implying it is made up of plastic bags. FALSE – Studies show that the garbage pool contains little or no plastic bags

3. Plastic bags kill wildlife – FALSE – Major environmentalists have taken issue with this. Let’s see the data not just one picture without any sourcing!

4. Plastic bags use up valuable resources. TRUE but paper bags use up MORE valuable resources. That is why there was a push to go to plastic to save the forests.

5. Producing plastic bags uses energy. TRUE but producing paper bags uses MORE energy.

6. Plastic bags are non-degradable. TRUE but for a landfill that is good and they compact effectively just like glass and other items. Paper bags on the other hand are degradable and give off methane gas in the process increasing the greenhouse effect which is more damaging to our environment.

7. Lawsuits against County’s outlawing plastic bags have failed. FALSE – The lawsuits were requiring the County’s to perform environmental impact studies associated with the ban. This lawsuit was won by the plaintiff and supported by the California Supreme Court. County’s like LA and San Jose were required to conduct those studies. Interestingly, they are finding that paper bags may be a bigger problem than plastic bags.

8. Picking up plastic bags cost the County significant funds. NO EVIDENCE. I walk my dog along the beach and on the roadways and see little if any plastic bags. What I do see are fast food bags, beer cans and soda cans. It would be interesting for a college student needing a paper to ride with the crews that clean the SLO County highways and document what types of trash is collected and determine the percentage of plastic bags by number and volume.

Although somewhat discounted, the potential for illness from contaminated reusable bags exists. There is evidence that after a few uses, these reusable bags are being thrown away resulting in higher volume waste. 40% of plastic bags are recycled and if you are a dog owner it is very much higher (Note: without easy access to plastic bags i.e. from stores, some dog owners my just leave the poop. It is hard to pick up poop with a paper bag). The remainder of plastic bags generally goes in the trash.

So if you are like me and think this recent action to ban plastic bags is an uninformed overreach by our government, then do not be discouraged. There will be a SLO lawsuit coming that from “Save the Plastic Bag” which should slow the process down. There is a lawsuit in LA County based on Proposition 26 indicating that local ordinances or laws that involve taxes masquerading as fees should be subject to approval by two-thirds of the voters, in accordance with the California Constitution. This is to counter the required 10 cent fee mandate. Ultimately, if enough of us are mad about this decision, then we could make it a ballet measure.


0

I gave up “ballet” long ago – but I do think every little girl should give it a whirl.


0

Talk to the local checkers and the bag(person)s are seeing an increase in skin rashes, etc.

Also, theft has increased as people are walking out with items in their bags or just carrying them out and avoiding the check out lines. We will all be paying higher food costs with increases in stores work comp insurance due to claims and the cost to cover the increased theft. Going green will leave us all a little light with the green.


0

new ointment in 1st aid section: bagaway


0

Feel bad for checkers and baggers but ZERO empathy for the stores. They have the resourses that they could have helped fight this. They stood by and did NOTHING. The silence I heard coming from all chain stores doing business in this area, was DEAFENING!!


0

The increase in theft due to the ban is complete bunk. It wasn’t like you couldn’t bring a bag or backpack into the store before the bag ban. People have been bringing reusable bags into the stores for years, so the ban did not introduce a new way to steal that hadn’t existed before. Do you really think that thieves avoiding stealing from grocery stores until the ban opened their eyes to a new way to steal that they hadn’t considered before? Riiight…


0

Occured before? So is this why places like Vons in Atascadero now have posted a sign (that they didn’t have previously) asking people NOT to put their grocery’s in their bags till they go through the register?


0

I have confidence the store management will find a way to deal with the supposed “theft” due to people walking out of the store with “items in their bag.”


I don’t believe there has been an increase in skin rashes in grocery packers. I’m on a CDC infectious disease outbreak email list, and I’ve seen nothing about it.


0

i bet if we researched the introduction of the plastic bag it was probably the same argument(s) that it was for cloth bags. incidentally, i had a checker tell me to wash my bags because they were nasty.


as least people were being green when they got sick.


0

The next think is that the baggers at the stores will be required to wear of all things PLASTIC gloves to protect themselves when using reusable bags. Will it ever end?


0

bag inspection at the door, whole new generation of instant sensors


0

Bag inspections at the door..it’s called Costco.


0

The disease risk always existed. Did you ever consider the shoppers and their feces infested kids touched the items that the baggers had to handle, even when things were bagged in disposable plastic bags? The reusable bag risk is a red herring – you’d get more exposure to disease from the shopping cart handle and the checkout counter.


0

Not to confuse you with a little science but let’s go back to school here for a moment. What do bacteria live on longer a dry surface or a moist surface? So the handle of the cart you mentioned WILL NOT have as long a life for bacteria, (dry surface) as a cloth bag that gets the juice from meat on it and then might sit in the trunk of your cold car (this time of year) and stay…………………..moist.


So yes the risk from the cloth bags can exist.


0

You fail to consider that the surface on the cart handle could have been touched only minutes before by another customer, while the inside of the bag would not have had contact with a bacteria source since the last time you went to the store days earlier and probably dried out long since.


0

Um didn’t consider. Didn’t I mention that it could sit in a trunk, in winter, while cold and stay damp? Don’t know what else to say?


0

If it is too cold for moisture to evaporate, it is too cold for many infectious organisms to live.


0

Really Mary? So nothing in your fridge spoils? Or that meat you freeze and thaw no longer has bacteria? Here is something for you to read and learn.


http://www.wedlinydomowe.com/sausage-making/bacteria


If you want to save time just read the first five paragraphs. Simple stuff they taught us in school.


0

Simple, whatever San Francisco does, do the opposite. Since Obama took office I tradecontrary to his economic vision and have made bank. You can profit from idiots.


0

Bag insurance, to cover the cost of illness and death.


0

Saddly that’s funny!!


0

“But as people tend to neglect washing those bags, increased food contamination becomes likely.”


That at least partly sums up the problem. If folks managed their life better then the problem would be alleviated quite a bit.


The ban has complicated life a bit but as with any regulation the greater good has to be considered. Our cars cost more, energy costs more- almost everything costs more when regulated for safety and the effect on the environment. It is all a trade off.


0

No NOT a trade off. It is an EQUAL TRADE!! O.k. wash the bags. Hmm that takes WATER AND ENERGY!! So for all the BLATHER we have had to endure about savings, it is a net sum game.


0

Oh and lets not forget for all the enviromentialists that want to save the world, how about all that extra detergent to?


0

It does little good for those environmentalists to attempt to save a world that Drone’s can blow it with precious little consideration. Oh, and that’s not so good for the inhabitants either.


0

Danika we have lived under the threat of Nuclear bombs even longer than the Drone’s but not sure what that has to do with the plastic bags we are talking about??


0

I beg to differ. I think the bottom line here is called PROFIT, for somebody.


0

hotdog…these whiners are just LAZY.

I started carrying re-usable cloths sacks almost a year before the ban went into effect. It’s all a matter of conditioning. You get used to it. We never usd to recycle, and now everyone is hip. Cost effective , too.

The concrete minds that post here? Well, they’ll be the last to move, or they’ll die in defiance first.


0

hip is relative! we started carrying bags in 1973, if we didn’t we had no way to get our food home from the markets in France where we were living. we weren’t hip…………..just hungry


0

No it isn’t lazy we are talking about. He used an arguement to say that it is a trade off. NO it isn’t.


Also most people I know where recycling fine without being told to. I have seen recycling higher now (even without ban) than at any time in my life.


I figure the old addage you catch more flies with honey. Point, don’t ram it down peoples throats. It was working even before and getting better. You mamby pamby types have no patience and like little kids want it all your way and want it now.


0

Well Geez, who would eve have seen this coming? Lemme guess….a politician in Ca owns the majority share of stock or the actual company itself that makes reusable bags.


0

Life is stranger than fiction. I had an exact thing happen in my industry. Twenty years ago they mandate we use a product for safety. In my opinon it was a boondoogle and waste.


Also low and behold 3M was the ONLY company at that time, that made said product. Luckily three years later they pretty much stopped requiring and it all went away. HMMM. Figure it added about $2000.00 dollars a year to cost. For larger business in big cities I could see it being up to $50,000 easily.


0

I never bothered to research the facts on this one but reliable sources told me the reason Dupont invented R134 refrigerant, which was mandated as as what we must use in A/C units, is because Dupont’s patent was about to run out on R12. When R12 became free game any company could make it and Dupont would no longer have the corner on the market. I was also told Dupont’s patent rights on R134 are close to expired so there will be yet another version out soon that big buisness…….ahhh.. I mean the Government will tell us we must use cause its safer.


0

Which politician and which company are you referencing?


0
1 2 3