If you have noticed, in more and more over-the-counter food service operations that the person preparing your food is wearing plastic gloves you have got a glimpse of a requirement which is blossoming into controversy—and genuine disagreement among professional.
  The issue of gloves n the preparation of ready-to-eat foods began with the increased awareness (as more and more people eat out) that dirty hands can spread disease. The controversy begins, of course, with the obvious knowledge that dirty gloved hands can spread disease, too.
  The matter will be immediate in less than a month as the new, November rules for food service go into effect. At that time the FDA Food Code is scheduled to become law in this state. It requires that "suitable utensils" replace the bare hand in contact with ready to eat food. Suitable utensils can include "deli tissue, spatulas, tongs, single use gloves or dispensing equipment." Most used "utensil" is the glove, which may be a loose fitting polyethylene glove, good for light tasks that require frequent changing, or a vinyl glove which is tighter (closer fitting) and is good for jobs that require a better feel for the products. There is a latex glove also, but there are enough reports of workers developing an allergy either to the material or to the powder which enables one to get them on that this glove is not recommended for food handling, essentially leaving only the two kinds.
  In favor of the glove "barrier" to the bacteria on the bare hand is that they do cover hands which might be unclean. They make an operation look professional to customers, too, who tend to think that the glove use is protecting them. It seems like such an obvious concern for customer welfare. Inspectors and food managers like them because it is easier to check this kind of "compliance" than it is to check if the employees have washed hands. And it is easy for the employee.
  But, serious objections exist, also. The main one is that gloves can, and do, provide a false sense of security; food workers wearing gloves tend to think that they can do no harm because their hands are covered and feel secure. There are, however, credible studies that show that contaminated gloves can transfer pathogens to food and other surfaces even better than bare hands.
  Probably the most damaging objection is that as improper handwashing is the primary culprit requiring the use of gloves, the gloves quickly become just another "skin" and one is back with the handwashing problem again—because federal requirements say that the employee must change gloves as jobs change and hands must be thoroughly washed before putting on the new pair of gloves!
  In fact, the skin contamination requiring the use of gloves is not just a product of "dirty" hands (as after a trip to the toilet) but acquired from the constant touching of the face, the nose, the mouth by the employee. There is an interesting video taken of various kitchens without worker knowledge that show how often, all of us, touch our faces, especially the mouth area, without realizing it. It is said that the mouth is the most contaminated orifice in the body! (Some of the language on TV would seem to indicate the truth of this.) Another problem develops when the gloves are worn a long time without changing. The humidity beneath the gloves helps any bacteria on the hands to grow. However, there are some food preparation operations (salads for instance) where the wearing of the loose-fitting polyethylene gloves is very fitting.
  Food Talk, a trade publication which is the source for many of the facts in this piece, reports some interesting information from a very large food chain in Texas, H-E-B Grocery, which requires its food service employees to wear gloves on properly washed hands. They report good results, but a spokesman notes, "Don't put gloves on dirty hands…without handwashing, gloves are a failure."
  There also is a study published in December of 1998 by Dairy Food and Environmental Sanitation which compared the effectiveness of handwashing versus glove use in controlling contamination. The research, which was funded by a hand sanitizer manufacturer, concluded that bare hands, washed and sanitized hourly, had lower bacterial levels than gloved hands. In fact, the study found germ levels on gloved hands, changed hourly with handwashing in between, were almost as high as those on bare, unwashed hands.
  One of the instructions for using gloves "correctly" requires that one wash hands and change gloves after sneezing, coughing or touching the face or other body parts with gloved hands. (!) Readers must be confused by now. So are people in the field.
  Our own environmental unit of the Marquette County Health Department, which is a very well run section, staffed by educated, experienced sanitarians, is in internal disagreement on this issue. But the law will require changes and those changes which are necessary will be enforced, I bet.
  I have treated this matter seemingly somewhat lightly, but the contamination problem is a very serious one and grows worse with the proliferation of food service operations and untrained and, most importantly, unmanaged workers.
  I think, however, that with some minor exceptions, the insistence on gloves everywhere borders on ludicrous. In almost all areas of our existence we live in a technology culture. If we find a problem, "technology": will fix it. However, "clean hands" is not a technology matter. And gloves will not fix the basic problem, but only cover it up.
  Quite possibly the answer to all this was stated by Fred Reimers (only half-jokingly) of the aforementioned Texas grocery chain: maybe, he said, workers should put gloves on when they enter the bathroom and throw them away when they come out.

And also, in the food safety area:
Come November the requirement for refrigerator temperature will drop from the current 45 degrees to 41 degrees. Also, requirements for establishments preparing food will be the same whether the business is under the inspection of the Agriculture Department or the Health Department. This has been a big area of non-compliance on the part of many if not most of those businesses under Agriculture, primarily gasoline stations and quick-stop places whose sales from food represent less than fifty percent of their business. Ventilation and return air requirements need to be equalized. Now the problem will be getting enough Agriculture inspectors to get around to the gas stations, some of whom are very bad, indeed. I certainly don't want to tar all of them, because several I know are clean and properly run (except for ventilation). But most would not now pass the inspection of the Marquette County Health Department inspectors I have dealt with.
  But it's progress, anyway.
—Don Curto

Marquette Monthly(TM), Copyright 1999-2008 * Site Comments? Web Design