Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific IgG Antibodies Among Adults Living in Connecticut: Post-Infection Prevalence (PIP) Study.

BACKGROUND: A seroprevalence study can estimate the percentage of people with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in the general population; however, most existing reports have used a convenience sample, which may bias their estimates. METHODS: We sought a representative sample of Connecticut residents, ages ≥18 years and residing in noncongregate settings, who completed a survey between June 4 and June 23, 2020, and underwent serology testing for SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies between June 10 and July 29, 2020. We also oversampled non-Hispanic black and Hispanic subpopulations. We estimated the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies and the prevalence of symptomatic illness and self-reported adherence to risk-mitigation behaviors among this population. RESULTS: Of the 567 respondents (mean age 50 [± 17] years; 53% women; 75% non-Hispanic white individuals) included at the state level, 23 respondents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, resulting in weighted seroprevalence of 4.0 (90% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-6.0). The weighted seroprevalence for the oversampled non-Hispanic black and Hispanic populations was 6.4% (90% CI 0.9-11.9) and 19.9% (90% CI 13.2-26.6), respectively. The majority of respondents at the state level reported following risk-mitigation behaviors: 73% avoided public places, 75% avoided gatherings of families or friends, and 97% wore a facemask, at least part of the time. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates indicate that the vast majority of people in Connecticut lack antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, and there is variation by race and ethnicity. There is a need for continued adherence to risk-mitigation behaviors among Connecticut residents to prevent resurgence of COVID-19 in this region.

Contamination of Fresh Produce by Microbial Indicators on Farms and in Packing Facilities: Elucidation of Environmental Routes.

To improve food safety on farms, it is critical to quantify the impact of environmental microbial contamination sources on fresh produce. However, studies are hampered by difficulties achieving study designs with powered sample sizes to elucidate relationships between environmental and produce contamination. Our goal was to quantify, in the agricultural production environment, the relationship between microbial contamination on hands, soil, and water and contamination on fresh produce. In 11 farms and packing facilities in northern Mexico, we applied a matched study design: composite samples (n = 636, equivalent to 11,046 units) of produce rinses were matched to water, soil, and worker hand rinses during two growing seasons. Microbial indicators (coliforms, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus spp., and somatic coliphage) were quantified from composite samples. Statistical measures of association and correlations were calculated through Spearman's correlation, linear regression, and logistic regression models. The concentrations of all microbial indicators were positively correlated between produce and hands (ρ range, 0.41 to 0.75; P < 0.01). When E. coli was present on hands, the handled produce was nine times more likely to contain E. coli (P < 0.05). Similarly, when coliphage was present on hands, the handled produce was eight times more likely to contain coliphage (P < 0.05). There were relatively low concentrations of indicators in soil and water samples, and a few sporadic significant associations were observed between contamination of soil and water and contamination of produce. This methodology provides a foundation for future field studies, and results highlight the need for interventions surrounding farmworker hygiene and sanitation to reduce microbial contamination of farmworkers' hands.IMPORTANCE This study of the relationships between microbes on produce and in the farm environment can be used to support the design of targeted interventions to prevent or reduce microbial contamination of fresh produce with associated reductions in foodborne illness.

Somatic Coliphage Profiles of Produce and Environmental Samples from Farms in Northern México.

Somatic coliphages were quantified in 459 produce and environmental samples from 11 farms in Northern Mexico to compare amounts of somatic coliphages among different types of fresh produce and environmental samples across the production steps on farms. Rinsates from cantaloupe melons, jalapeño peppers, tomatoes, and the hands of workers, soil, and water were collected during 2011-2012 at four successive steps on each farm, from the field before harvest through the packing facility, and assayed by FastPhage MPN Quanti-tray method. Cantaloupe farm samples contained more coliphages than jalapeño or tomato (p range <0.01-0.03). Across production steps, jalapeños had higher coliphage percentages before harvest than during packing (p = 0.03), while tomatoes had higher coliphage concentrations at packing than all preceding production steps (p range <0.01-0.02). These findings support the use of targeted produce-specific interventions at multiple points in the process of growing and packing produce to reduce the risk of enteric virus contamination and improve food safety during fruit and vegetable production.

Ability of Hand Hygiene Interventions Using Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizers and Soap To Reduce Microbial Load on Farmworker Hands Soiled during Harvest.

Effective hand hygiene is essential to prevent the spread of pathogens on produce farms and reduce foodborne illness. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act Proposed Rule for Produce Safety recommends the use of soap and running water for hand hygiene of produce handlers. The use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) may be an effective alternative hygiene intervention where access to water is limited. There are no published data on the efficacy of either soap or ABHS-based interventions to reduce microbial contamination in agricultural settings. The goal of this study was to assess the ability of two soap-based (traditional or pumice) and two ABHS-based (label-use or two-step) hygiene interventions to reduce microbes (coliforms, Escherichia coli, and Enterococcus spp.) and soil (absorbance of hand rinsate at 600 nm [A600]) on farmworker hands after harvesting produce, compared with the results for a no-hand-hygiene control. With no hand hygiene, farmworker hands were soiled (median A600, 0.48) and had high concentrations of coliforms (geometric mean, 3.4 log CFU per hand) and Enterococcus spp. (geometric mean, 5.3 log CFU per hand) after 1 to 2 h of harvesting tomatoes. Differences in microbial loads in comparison to the loads in the control group varied by indicator organism and hygiene intervention (0 to 2.3 log CFU per hand). All interventions yielded lower concentrations of Enterococcus spp. and E. coli (P < 0.05), but not of coliforms, than were found in the control group. The two-step ABHS intervention led to significantly lower concentrations of coliforms and Enterococcus spp. than the pumice soap and label-use ABHS interventions (P < 0.05) and was the only intervention to yield significantly fewer samples with E. coli than were found in the control group (P < 0.05). All interventions removed soil from hands (P < 0.05), soap-based interventions more so than ABHS-based interventions (P < 0.05). ABHS-based interventions were equally as effective as hand washing with soap at reducing indicator organisms on farmworker hands. Based on these results, ABHS is an efficacious hand hygiene solution for produce handlers, even on soiled hands.