Very poor food - template BA response
Jan 4, 2019, 12:28 pm
#31
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 397
Jan 4, 2019, 1:53 pm
#32
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 534
minded, that post was somewhat odd, here is what the NHS says food poisoning is https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/food-poisoning/
Jan 4, 2019, 4:29 pm
#34
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Northern Ireland
Programs: BA Silver, A3
Posts: 1,101
Edit: Sorry if this is repeating an answer that I have just read , above.
I hate to disagree with some of those who have said that food poisoning only happens after a day or so. My partner is a doctor and suggested that I quote from a reliable source. I thought it best to do so from an official nhs Scotland website page.
"The symptoms of food poisoning usually begin within one to two days of eating contaminated food, although they may start at any point between a few hours and several weeks later."
I hate to disagree with some of those who have said that food poisoning only happens after a day or so. My partner is a doctor and suggested that I quote from a reliable source. I thought it best to do so from an official nhs Scotland website page.
"The symptoms of food poisoning usually begin within one to two days of eating contaminated food, although they may start at any point between a few hours and several weeks later."
Jan 4, 2019, 4:32 pm
#35
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,937
I hate to disagree with some of those who have said that food poisoning only happens after a day or so. My partner is a doctor and suggested that I quote from a reliable source. I thought it best to do so from an official nhs Scotland website page.
"The symptoms of food poisoning usually begin within one to two days of eating contaminated food, although they may start at any point between a few hours and several weeks later."
"The symptoms of food poisoning usually begin within one to two days of eating contaminated food, although they may start at any point between a few hours and several weeks later."
Last edited by navylad; Jan 5, 2019 at 4:20 pm
Jan 5, 2019, 12:03 pm
#36
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
there is no suggestion that the food was improperly stored, if stored correctly, chicken that has been properly cooked then cooled is safe to eat, irrespective of what you or your wife personally do.
This answer may be of use in explaining more https://www.theskepticsguide.org/ask...reheating-meat
Bacteroa from incorrectly stored food can produce toxins which remain despite the cooking process whereas incorrectly heated food, the bacteria themselves can remain.
Let's take it a step at a time. The chicken was cooked by the catering company and delivered to the plane cold or frozen. The chicken was then reheated on board but not sufficiently obviously as it was served 'lukewarm and/or cold' according to the OP. So what we are concerned here with is the potential effect of that reheating of the chicken, NOT how it was cooked, cooled or stored up until that point. Let's presume those were all done properly.
So we are at the reheating stage which was NOT done properly and what potential effects that might have. The line that then is applicable in the link is, "When reheating food, again reheat rapidly, preferably to above 75C/165F to kill any bacteria that formed during the cooling and reheating process. And again maintain above 60C/140F until used." The OP is telling us that was not done obviously. IF that is not done, then bacteria can form and because of that, the chicken should never have been served or eaten.
I think you are looking only at the line in the link which says, "It is safe to eat cold meat that has been thoroughly cooked and then rapidly cooled." That is in fact true but it depends entirely on knowing that it was cooled properly. That is in fact an assumption that is generally true if you put leftover chicken or whatever into the fridge right after eating the rest of the chicken for example but for some people, any 'assumption' that cannot be verified is an assumption too far. To be 100% sure and safe, reheating to over 75C/165F is the ONLY sure thing.
But this thread is not about cooling properly or eating cold chicken, it is about eating reheated chicken which has not been reheated sufficiently and nothing more. Reheating occurred and during that reheating time, bacteria can and will form. It certainly appears that that is what happened and led to the OP being sick. When someone ends up in hospital and on a drip, it is no laughing matter and certainly not something that anyone should be trying to argue about it being safe to take a chance on eating improperly reheated food. All the main courses should have been binned.
Jan 5, 2019, 1:46 pm
#37
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 574
Proving food poisoning is difficult but serving lukewarm chicken and rice was an admitted error. Even rice can be dangerous when served at lukewarm or ambient temperature.
Last edited by AnaTravel; Jan 5, 2019 at 1:51 pm
Jan 5, 2019, 2:36 pm
#38
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 778
They say that rice is one of the most dangerous items if incorrectly reheated and that combined with chicken - double whammy! - might I ask one question if if was lukewarm why did not try and return to the galley
Jan 5, 2019, 2:48 pm
#39
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 574
I guess that not everyone knows how harmful rice can be when not heated properly but chicken? Maybe the OP was comforted by the reassurance from the CC? I wouldn't have been but the OP might want to explain further.
Jan 5, 2019, 4:27 pm
#40
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,937
Huh? You are re-linking the link I provided and suggesting it contradicts what I said? Really?
Let's take it a step at a time. The chicken was cooked by the catering company and delivered to the plane cold or frozen. The chicken was then reheated on board but not sufficiently obviously as it was served 'lukewarm and/or cold' according to the OP. So what we are concerned here with is the potential effect of that reheating of the chicken, NOT how it was cooked, cooled or stored up until that point. Let's presume those were all done properly.
So we are at the reheating stage which was NOT done properly and what potential effects that might have. The line that then is applicable in the link is, "When reheating food, again reheat rapidly, preferably to above 75C/165F to kill any bacteria that formed during the cooling and reheating process. And again maintain above 60C/140F until used." The OP is telling us that was not done obviously. IF that is not done, then bacteria can form and because of that, the chicken should never have been served or eaten.
I think you are looking only at the line in the link which says, "It is safe to eat cold meat that has been thoroughly cooked and then rapidly cooled." That is in fact true but it depends entirely on knowing that it was cooled properly. That is in fact an assumption that is generally true if you put leftover chicken or whatever into the fridge right after eating the rest of the chicken for example but for some people, any 'assumption' that cannot be verified is an assumption too far. To be 100% sure and safe, reheating to over 75C/165F is the ONLY sure thing.
But this thread is not about cooling properly or eating cold chicken, it is about eating reheated chicken which has not been reheated sufficiently and nothing more. Reheating occurred and during that reheating time, bacteria can and will form. It certainly appears that that is what happened and led to the OP being sick. When someone ends up in hospital and on a drip, it is no laughing matter and certainly not something that anyone should be trying to argue about it being safe to take a chance on eating improperly reheated food. All the main courses should have been binned.
Let's take it a step at a time. The chicken was cooked by the catering company and delivered to the plane cold or frozen. The chicken was then reheated on board but not sufficiently obviously as it was served 'lukewarm and/or cold' according to the OP. So what we are concerned here with is the potential effect of that reheating of the chicken, NOT how it was cooked, cooled or stored up until that point. Let's presume those were all done properly.
So we are at the reheating stage which was NOT done properly and what potential effects that might have. The line that then is applicable in the link is, "When reheating food, again reheat rapidly, preferably to above 75C/165F to kill any bacteria that formed during the cooling and reheating process. And again maintain above 60C/140F until used." The OP is telling us that was not done obviously. IF that is not done, then bacteria can form and because of that, the chicken should never have been served or eaten.
I think you are looking only at the line in the link which says, "It is safe to eat cold meat that has been thoroughly cooked and then rapidly cooled." That is in fact true but it depends entirely on knowing that it was cooled properly. That is in fact an assumption that is generally true if you put leftover chicken or whatever into the fridge right after eating the rest of the chicken for example but for some people, any 'assumption' that cannot be verified is an assumption too far. To be 100% sure and safe, reheating to over 75C/165F is the ONLY sure thing.
But this thread is not about cooling properly or eating cold chicken, it is about eating reheated chicken which has not been reheated sufficiently and nothing more. Reheating occurred and during that reheating time, bacteria can and will form. It certainly appears that that is what happened and led to the OP being sick. When someone ends up in hospital and on a drip, it is no laughing matter and certainly not something that anyone should be trying to argue about it being safe to take a chance on eating improperly reheated food. All the main courses should have been binned.
as for a concept that bacteria can form during a rehearing process, there is no scientific basis for that. What there is a basis for is that bacteria can multiply during rn reheating process, but they would only be there is the food had been incorrectly cooked initially or stored incorrectly. Given the length gone to by aviation catering companies, I very much doubt that is the case.
With regard to Rice reheating, I’d refer to this article published by the NHS https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-que...ood-poisoning/ Again it reaffirms that reheating isn’t the problem, it is incorrectly stored rice that is then reheated.
With a lot of public health advice, you create a prevention paradox by deliberately advising multiple protective factors. This doesn’t mean that if one of those protective factors isn’t followed, you have the aligned holes of your Swiss chess model to get food poisoning.
To reiterate, there was clearly a service failing here but we can’t say with any certainty that the insufficient reheating was the cause of the gastrointestinal symptoms.
Last edited by navylad; Jan 5, 2019 at 4:33 pm
Jan 5, 2019, 4:55 pm
#41
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 574
NavyLad, the article you quoted does not confirm that reheating rice isn't a problem. It states that rice should be served "steaming hot" when reheated. The OP had chicken curry and rice. The food was served lukewarm - with the chicken being cold in places. How rice is initially cooked and stored is important. Reheating is too. It may be that the rice was piping hot and the chicken lukewarm and cold in places. The OP can answer that. Regardless, I'd not have eaten that food.
Jan 5, 2019, 4:57 pm
#42
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: YYC
Programs: BA bronze, Aeroplan peon
Posts: 4,746
Isn't WT catered very close to the actual passenger numbers? I can't imagine there are many extra meals leftover after the meals service, so perhaps the cabin crew were faced with the certainty that if they binned the meals those passengers would go hungry and took a chance that the meals were fine?
I though they were required put the temperature sticks in the meals and has to heat the meals until the colour changed, I'm surprised they would get under heated, as though that temp stick procedure was the reason behind the extra well done steaks in CW?
I though they were required put the temperature sticks in the meals and has to heat the meals until the colour changed, I'm surprised they would get under heated, as though that temp stick procedure was the reason behind the extra well done steaks in CW?
Jan 5, 2019, 4:59 pm
#43
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,160
Jan 5, 2019, 5:09 pm
#44
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,937
NavyLad, the article you quoted does not confirm that reheating rice isn't a problem. It states that rice should be served "steaming hot" when reheated. The OP had chicken curry and rice. The food was served lukewarm - with the chicken being cold in places. How rice is initially cooked and stored is important. Reheating is too. It may be that the rice was piping hot and the chicken lukewarm and cold in places. The OP can answer that. Regardless, I'd not have eaten that food.