Search for: "Cross et al v. Merck"
Results 1 - 20
of 27
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2024, 5:20 pm
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 3:12 pm
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 6:02 am
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. [read post]
20 Jan 2022, 8:57 pm
AN OUTBREAK OF E. [read post]
30 Jun 2019, 11:22 am
United Site Services provided al…Read More » Arizona Petting Zoo 2005 Organism: E. coli O157:H7 Vehicle: Animal Contact Two children were hospitalized due to infections with an identical strain of E.coli O157:H7. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 2:33 am
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 12:00 pm
RATIOPHARM ET AL. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 7:37 am
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[42] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no margin of error. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 9:16 am
(cross-petition asks for recourse on failure to dance) Antitrust Reverse Payments: GlaxoSmithKline, et al. v. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 6:50 am
Post Grant Admin: Merck & Cie, et al. v. [read post]
28 Sep 2016, 8:39 am
Post Grant Admin: Merck & Cie, et al. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2016, 6:03 pm
Post Grant Admin: Merck & Cie, et al. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 6:46 pm
Post Grant Admin: Merck & Cie, et al. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2015, 9:33 am
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[33] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no real margin of error, and the cost of error can be death. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 11:55 am
Indeed, a principle and consistent criticism of the USDA E. coli O157:H7 policy is the fact that it has failed to focus on the risks of cross-contamination versus that posed by so-called improper cooking.[33] With this pathogen, there is ultimately no real margin of error, and the cost of error can be death. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 8:07 pm
”[29] As few as twenty organisms have been said to be sufficient to infect a person and, as a result, possibly kill them.[30] And unlike generic E. coli, the O157:H7 serotype multiplies at temperatures up to 44° Fahrenheit, survives freezing and thawing, is heat resistant, grows at temperatures up to 111° Fahrenheit, resists drying, and can survive exposure to acidic environments.[31] And, finally, to make it even more of a dangerous threat, E. coli O157:H7 bacteria are… [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 4:00 am
Merck & Co. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
Merck (Vioxx) Trial2006-05-08 Doherty v. [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 6:52 am
Merck (Vioxx) Trial2006-05-08 Doherty v. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 7:27 am
In Casey et al. v. [read post]
