Tracking food poisoning cases is laborious detective work, and at times the perpetrator is not disclosed. The task of identifying sources of contamination could be even more difficult— and, paradoxically, it’s because of a test made to identification food poisoning quicker and easier than ever before.
Unlike traditional bacterial tests which take days, that same analysis can be delivered by CIDTs in hours. But that speed comes at a cost.
Among the largest challenges in sourcing food poisoning outbreaks has been the timescale dilemma that CIDTs help to fix. When you have a bacteria having an incubation period of weeks, like E. coli, you ca’t simply go back into the kitchen to evaluation for potential sources when someone gets ill. By that time, the food has already been eaten and the counters wiped down.
What’s the trouble whether this evaluation is a diagnosis that is newer, quicker, and just as effective?
It’s no wonder the utilization of CIDTs continues to be in the last few years on a steady rise. It started picking up in 2012 and has been climbing. Last year alone, the number of food poisoning cases diagnosed just by CIDTs doubled. What’s the trouble whether this test is an investigation that is newer, faster, and just as effective?
Culturing the bacteria could be more time-consuming, because such evaluations deliver a DNA profile of the bacteria but it yields far more information. It ’s antibiotic resistance, although it affords advice not only on the nature of the bacteria. An analysis may be delivered by CIDTs within an outbreak—but eventually, and the information used to monitor quit, an outbreak is missing.
In the long run, the CDC has discussed developing newer quicker sequencing tests that would unite the advice of the traditional culture and the speed of the CIDTs together. Those are a ways away, though. Meanwhile, the best solution probably lies with convincing laboratories to double up on evaluations and culturing bacteria even after a positive CIDT diagnosis. It may look at first like an extraneous step, however there is no one perfect evaluation as it pertains to food poisoning, at least for now.