Report to the Technical Consultative Committee (TCC) Recommended Product Safety Limits for the NZ Dairy Industry

Similar documents
Glen Pinna General Manager, Biotech Laboratories. Session A1 Food Safety

Checklist of issues to be considered by food business operators when implementing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005

On shelf life of foods

Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs Information for Manufacturers/Processors

Date Marking User Guide Standard Date Marking of Packaged Food September 2010

Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005. foodstuffs CA

Complementary Medicine or Food. Peter Kissane Chief Operating Officer Sphere Healthcare

Food Microbiology 101

MRA basic awareness course

L 322/12 Official Journal of the European Union

SANCO/1797/2006 REV 6

Draft of Sanitation Standards for General Foods

(Unofficial) (Mr. Pradit Sinthawanarong) Minister of Public Health

TANZANIA BUREAU OF STANDARDS

FOODBALT 2014 MICROBIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF MEAT PREPARATIONS AND MEAT PRODUCTS

Listeria monocytogenes in Food Plants with emphasis on Cold-Smoked Salmon Plants & Dairies. Presented by Rebecca Robertson January 19, 2009

27 GUIDANCE NOTE. Guidance Note on the Enforcement. Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs

Summary and Conclusion

Compendium of Microbiological Criteria for Food. (January 2018)

Guidance for Reduced Oxygen Packaging

Date Marking. User Guide. Standard Date Marking of Food. December 2013

Levels of Sulphite-Reducing Clostridia in New Zealand Nutritional Dairy Powders

TANZANIA BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Business Compliance with the Requirements of Regulation 2073/ Shelf Life Studies Training Workshop. Dr. Karl McDonald Dr.

Compendium of Microbiological Criteria for Food. (October 2016)

APPENDIX A - Potentially Hazardous Foods

FOODBORNE DISEASES. Why learning foodborne diseases is very important? What do you know about foodborne diseases? What do you want to know more?

Listeria monocytogenes Risk Assessment: Executive Summary

FACTORS AFFECTING THE GROWTH OF MICRO-ORGANISMS IN FOODS

Effective use of performance criteria for individual plants

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES

Microbiological Risk Assessment Review of B. cereus

TANZANIA BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Lm Regulatory Update

Guidance on the safety and shelf-life of vacuum and modified atmosphere packed chilled foods. January 2004 (DRAFT)

Institute of Food Research. Predicting bacterial growth in reduced salt foods

MICROBIAL SAFETY OF READY-TO-USE LIPID-BASED THERAPEUTIC AND SUPPLEMENTARY FOODS. Conclusions and Recommendations of an FAO/WHO Technical Meeting

Cook Chill Its not for Dills

Managing Risk in a Zero Tolerance World: International Impact of Risk Assessment

On 24 April 2012, FSANZ sought submissions on a draft variation and published an associated report. FSANZ received seven submissions.

Inspection Report Item 29: Compliance with Variance, Specialized Process, Reduced Oxygen Packaging Criteria, and HACCP Plan

Microbiological Criteria

גדות תעשיות ביוכימיה בע"מ Gadot Biochemical Industries Ltd.

Technical Specifications for the manufacture of: CANNED BEEF

Food safety: Avoiding listeria

A Guide to Food Hygiene Regulations in the UK

(OJ L 338, , p. 1)

I S I F O O D P R OT E C T I O N. Microorganisms in food: THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY 192,720,000,000,000

Bacteria. Major Food Poisoning Caused by Bacteria. Most Important Prevention Measure. Controlling time. Preventing cross-contamination

Food Consumption Data in Microbiological Risk Assessment

Fate of selected pathogens during the production of raw milk cheese Dr Duncan Craig:

Industry Uses of Microbiological Criteria and Testing for Raw Food Products. R. B. Tompkin Food Safety Consultant

Elaboration of Multiannual sampling plan concerning microbiological hazards in food 16/06/2010

2. To determine the risk status of all meat processing plants in RSA.

Module 34: Legal aspects, ADI and GRAS status of food additives

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL

for a germ-free environment

NO-RINSE SANITIZING Multi-Surface Wipes

Food2Market South Carolina Food Regulations and Food Safety Education for Food Entrepreneurs. Food2Market. The Idea

THE HYGIENE PACKAGE A NEW APPROACH TO FOOD SAFETY

+ Agenda Items 2, 3 and 4 CRD 14 JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME

RISKS ASSESSMENT IN ROMANIAN FOOD SAFETY SYSTEMS: OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINS. Abstract

EDICT ± OF GOVERNMENT

1)Nitrite is added to meats specifically to inhibit growth of. 3) Which of the following statements about viruses is NOT correct?

Regulatory Update Jennifer McEntire. PMA & United Fresh Joint Listeria Workshop

SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY

NZQA registered unit standard version 5 Page 1 of 7. Dairy Processing > Milk Products

Dr. Tipvon Parinyasiri

LIST OF PUBLISHED STANDARDS

Epidemiology of Food Poisoning. Dr Varun malhotra Dept of Community Medicine

Validation of Product Shelf-life (Revision 3)

Risk assessment as the scientific basis for policy decisions: possibilities and limitations

Monitoring of foodborne outbreaks caused by toxin-producing bacteria in the European Union Giusi Amore

Safety & Sanitation. In your Kitchen. Presented by: Alex Shortsleeve, MBA

GUIDANCE ON CHEESE AS RAW MATERIAL IN THE MANUFACTURE OF FOOD PRODUCTS

Food Safety and Sanitation

REGIONAL STANDARD 1: DRAFT CASSAVA FLOUR - Specifications. Latest edition October 1, Reference number CARSPS 1: 2017

Food Science and Technology Notes

The Effects of High Hydrostatic Pressure on Meats

Food Quality Check Program

namib la U n IVERS ITY OF SCIEnCE AnD TECHnOLOGY

Vimta Labs Ltd., Life Sciences Facility, Plot No. 5, Alexandria Knowledge Park, Genome Valley, Shameerpet, Hyderabad, Telangana

Canadian Regulations and Guidelines for Listeria. Terry Peters Microbiology Program Specialist Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Controlling Clostridium botulinum. Using challenge testing to create safe chilled foods. Dr Peter Wareing. A Leatherhead Food Research white paper

GCSE Food Technology (AQA) Food safety and hygiene

DRAFT EAST AFRICAN STANDARD

גדות תעשיות ביוכימיה בע"מ Gadot Biochemical Industries Ltd.

EU policy on acrylamide in food reducing human exposure to ensure a high level of human health protection

Food Contamination and Spoilage Food Safety: Managing with the HACCP System Second Edition (245TXT or 245CIN)

CODEX and the European Union s food safety policy

Hospital Catering: Pitfalls, Standards and Management

GERMANY Population 1999: Population 2000: Area: km 2

INHIBITION OF STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS IN SWEET WHEY

Probiotics : What we Know and Where we are Going Next

גדות תעשיות ביוכימיה בע"מ Gadot Biochemical Industries Ltd.

Old bugs in new places The changing face of food safety microbiology

The legal basis of this draft Regulation is Art. 11 (4) of Regulation (EC) No. 882/2204.

SUMMARY OF FOODBORNE AND WATERBORNE DISEASE CHARACTERISTICS

Safety Assessment of Yestimun Beta-Glucans

Transcription:

Report to the Technical Consultative Committee (TCC) Recommended Product Safety Limits for the NZ Dairy Industry TCC SubGroup 1 Microbial Product Safety Limits (PSLs) Bruce Hill, Fonterra Research Centre. Sally Hasell, New Zealand Milk. Dianne Schumacher, New Zealand Food Safety Authority. Issue Date: 3 March 23 1. Introduction: Safe food is that which does not contain pathogens, toxins or other injurious substance above a level that is likely to endanger consumer health. Confidence in food safety may exist when a manufacturing process is operating under a product safety or risk management programme (PSP/RMP) and the following have been achieved: hazards have been identified by HACCP inprocess monitoring shows that CCPs are controlled pathogens are not recovered during environmental monitoring endproduct testing verifies compliance with the product safety limits (PSLs) (as set out in NZFSA Dairy Standard D17). Key to this confidence in food safety is that these mandatory product safety limits (PSLs) correctly differentiate between foods that have a low or a high risk of causing illness. Objective: Subgroup 1 was set the task of recommending, to the TCC, appropriate PSLs for the main pathogens of concern to the dairy industry and for the wide range of products manufactured by the New Zealand industry. 2. How to Set PSLs? Before launching in to the PSLsetting process, the subgroup tried to define the methodology it would use for developing the PSLs recommended in this document. However, as the efforts of previous working groups in developing the old New Zealand Industry Code of Practice NZCP & MAF Std D17) have shown, finding a sound, logical basis for the PSLs is not straightforward. For example, should PSLs: be based on risk assessment? be synchronised with relevant standards of other national and international organisations? be generic or productspecific? take in to account the risk to different consumer groups?

The subgroup opted for: a twoclass PSL approach: (1) General PSLs for the less susceptible / general population. (2) Specific PSLs for products that are specifically designated for / and are likely to form a substantial part of the dietary intake of more susceptible members of the population (ie the young, old, pregnant and immunocompromised). generic rather than productspecific PSLs (except when necessitated by certain product / process combinations). The approach is summarised in Figure 1. Simplistically, for each pathogen: The PSL = The UNSAFE LEVEL a SAFETY MARGIN A. Unsafe Level: For each pathogen, an unsafe level was derived from various publications etc). For any food, this is the level at or above which there is a very high risk of illness if that food is consumed. B. Safety Margin: In each case, a safety margin was set below the unsafe level. This was to give increased confidence that a food would not contain pathogens at a level that would be likely to cause illness. When setting the safety margin the intention was to take in to account: characteristics of the organism, disease mechanism, illness severity, food matrix, how food is used, amount of food consumed etc. C. Product Safety Limit: The PSL is the figure below which there is an extremely low risk that illness will occur when a food is consumed. When setting each PSL the subgroup took in to account the unsafe level, the safety margin as well as the standards and guidelines of other organisations both local and international (Appendix 1). It should be noted that a food product is not necessarily unsafe when a PSL is exceeded. However the safety margin will have been compromised thereby reducing the margin between high risk and low risk food leading to reduced confidence in the safety of the food. It should also be noted that PSLs do not cover the situation where a product is subjected to significant abuse after it has been tested (ie during storage, transport, further processing or use by the consumer). When a PSL is exceeded, certain mandatory actions are required of the manufacturer, by NZFSA (as detailed in Dairy Standard D18). These requirements include actions such as: notifying NZFSA, putting product on hold and instigating disposal procedures. NZFSA Information 3 Version 1 27 February 23

Product safety limits must not be confused with customer specifications, importing country requirements or the product quality that can be achieved when GMP is maintained: D. GMP Target: A GMP target is the upper level of a particular organism (pathogen) that a manufacturing process should never exceed when good manufacturing practice is being applied. Note that GMP targets are: not mandatory. set by the manufacturer based on various factors (both generic factors and unique characteristics of a particular plant and process). E. Market Access & Customer Requirements: The requirements of the governments of importing countries and the quality specifications of customers will usually fall in the range between the PSL and GMP targets. They are quite independent of PSLs and should play no part in establishing the PSL for each type of pathogen. Even so, it is important to understand that compliance with the PSLs will not guarantee compliance with customer specifications and market access requirements. Manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that their products meet all the safety and quality requirements demanded of them. NZFSA Information 4 Version 1 27 February 23

Figure 1 Methodology for Setting PSLs Unsafe Level The level at or above, which there is a very high risk of illness if a contaminated food is consumed. A Safety Margin Gives confidence that food is unlikely to contain pathogens at a level that would cause illness B PSL PSL: The limit below which there is an extremely low risk that illness will occur when a food is consumed. C Market access & customer E GMP TARGE Product manufactured using GMP will not normally exceed the GMP target D NZFSA Information Version 1 27 February 23

3.When Do PSLs Apply? (Figure 2) A. HACCPMOTIVATED PATHOGEN TESTING Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) assessments, which are applied to each manufacturing process (refer to NZFSA Dairy Standard D11), are a central requirement of each manufacturer s PSP/RMP (Step 1 in Figure2). The HACCP shall identify whether or under what circumstances routine analysis for a particular pathogen is necessary. When routine pathogen testing is performed, it is the test results that are judged against the PSLs (Step 2 in Fig 2). B. OTHER TRIGGERS FOR PATHOGEN TESTING Even when routine analysis for a particular pathogen is not required as part of a PSP/RMP, other situations may trigger the need for pathogen testing (Step 3 in Fig 2) eg when processmonitoring indicates that process control at a CCP has been lost eg pasteurisation failure, loss of ph control product testing is triggered when pathogens are recovered during environmental monitoring. pathogen testing is required by a customer ie specifications there is a market access requirement eg importing country standard The results of all pathogen tests must be judged against the PSLs no matter what triggers the testing. C. ACTIONS WHEN PSLS ARE EXCEEDED The presence, in a food, of a potential pathogen, at greater than the relevant PSL, does not necessarily mean that the food is unsafe. In some circumstances, the particular organism may not pose a significant risk to the consumer because the strain does not possess pathogenic characteristics eg: Coagulase positive staphylococci: Many of the coagulase positive staphylococcus strains isolated from dairy products are nontoxigenic ie they are not pathogenic. E. coli: Most strains of E. coli, recovered from dairy products, are (like the coliforms) no more than hygiene indicators. And almost invariably, when isolated from pasteurised products, they do not indicate that faecal contamination has occurred. When pathogenic strains are recovered, millions are required to cause illness in most cases (eg EPEC, ETEC, EIEC). It is only the STEC/VTEC/EHECs that endanger consumer health when low levels (1 to 1 3 CFU) are present. This being the case, when a PSL is exceeded, a manufacturer may have the option to obtain important and relevant information that will influence the disposal decisions that are made about a product (Step 4 in Fig 2) eg Toxin test results in the case of coagulase positive staphylococci Strain identification (to demonstrate whether pathogen characteristics are present) in the case of E. coli. Subgroup 1 has taken responsibility for identifying some of these situations and making recommendations on how to handle them (Section ). NZFSA Information 6 Version 1 27 February 23

Figure 2 DecisionMaking Flow chart for Establishing PSLs (1)PSP/RMP: HACCP will determine how pathogen control is maintained Whether or not to test? Routine pathogen Testing is required Pathogen testing is not usually required (2) Testing may be triggered by market or customer requirement when a CCP is exceeded etc by environmental sampling Other reasons why testing might be conducted Where to set the PSLs? (3) What PSL is Appropriate? / Is the PSL Exceeded? (SubGroup 1) YES (4) Information to be gathered to aid disposal decisionmaking eg Toxin testing results Demonstration of strain pathogenicity etc NO Useful analytical responses when a PSL is exceeded. Disposal Decisions (SubGroup 2) Product Released NZFSA Information 7 Version 1 27 February 23

4.Recommended PSLs Table 1 presents a summary of the PSLs that subgroup 1 recommends to the TCC for inclusion in D17. Table 1 The PSLs recommended by subgroup1 for six potential pathogens Potential Pathogen General PSL (Less Susceptible Consumers)+ Specific PSL (More Susceptible Consumers)# Explanatory Notes / Comments ND/2g ND/2g ND = Not Detected in the volume tested Composites collected throughout the production run L. monocytogenes Coagulase Positive Staphylococci (S. aureus) ND/2g ND/2g ND = Not Detected in the volume (1/g) (1) tested Composites collected throughout the production run 1/g 1/g It is critical that sampling & testing are performed in a way that correctly estimates the maximum number of reached in a product at the peak of growth eg. This could be before pasteurisation or during cheese making with abnormal starter performance. This is important because the risk posed by released enterotoxin is estimated by the bacterial load B. cereus 1/g 1/g 1/g: Products designated specifically for infants E. coli 1/g 1/g C. perfringens (3) 1/g 1/g Footnotes: These PSLs apply to all dairy products other than those that are manufactured from raw milk + General PSLs for the less susceptible consumers / general population) # Specific PSLs for products that are specifically designated for / and are likely to form a substantial part of the dietary intake of more susceptible members of the population (ie the young, old, pregnant and immunocompromised). (1) Listeria monocytogenes: The 1/g figure is proposed in the Draft Guidelines for the Control of Listeria monocytogenes in Foods" Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme; Codex Committee on Food Hygiene and is obtaining increasingly wide acceptance. A PSL of 1/g may be adopted, in some circumstances. However, before the 1/g PSL can be adopted, a manufacturer must be able to demonstrate to NZFSA that growth is extremely unlikely to occur during the life of the product and that the level is acceptable to customers, importing countries etc. NZFSA Information 8 Version 1 27 February 23

(3) C. perfringens: Subgroup 1 is not convinced that general or specific PSLs are required for C. perfringens. There is no epidemiological link between C. perfringens and illness arising from the consumption of dairy products. In addition, it is extremely rare for large numbers of C. perfringens to be recovered. However, the PSLs in Table 1 would be appropriate to apply to any food, including dairy products, as a trigger for a traceback, disposal decisions etc in the unlikely event that heavy contamination was discovered.. Disposal Options when a PSL is Exceeded It is important to recognise that exceeding a PSL does not mean that a food must be destroyed. In many cases there are alternative disposal strategies that will protect the health of the consumer eg: heat treatment to destroy heatsensitive pathogens (in the case of organisms that do not release heat stable toxins), sublotting etc. These alternatives have been addressed, in detail, by subgroup 2. However, subgroup 1 recommends that sublotting (governed by the rules being developed by subgroup 2) be considered in the following situations: Coagulase Positive Staphylococci: When the General PSL is exceeded and the number of coagulase positive staphylococci falls in the range between 1 & 1 /g, but enterotoxin is not detected (using MAFapproved test methods). Note: The product will not be considered suitable for human consumption when the number of cells exceeds 1 /g. E. coli: When the General PSL is exceeded and the number of E. coli falls in the range between 1 & 1/g, but STEC/VTEC/EHEC are not detected (using MAFapproved test methods). Bacillus cereus: Products for Less Susceptible Consumers: When the General PSL is exceeded and number of B. cereus falls between 1 & 1 /g, NZSFA may allow the product to be released for its original purpose providing the manufacturer can show that there will be no opportunity for further growth of B. cereus during the life, or the later use, of a product, Products for Susceptible Consumers: When the specific PSL for B. cereus is exceeded but the number of B. cereus falls between 1 and 1/g. Clostridium perfringens: Products for Less Susceptible Consumers: When the General PSL is exceeded and number of C. perfringens falls between 1 & 1 /g, NZSFA may allow the product to be released for its original purpose providing the manufacturer can show that there will be no opportunity for further growth of C. perfringens during the life, or the later use, of a product, Products for Susceptible Consumers: When the specific PSL for C. perfringens is exceeded but the number falls between 1 and 1/g. NZFSA Information 9 Version 1 27 February 23

Appendix 1: Standards & Guidelines This section summarises the key standards and guidelines referred to by the subgroup during the development of PSLs for each pathogen. Table 1: FSANZ ReadytoEat Guidelines (Summarised) Pathogen Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactor y Potentially Hazardous Explanatory Notes ND/2g Detected L. monocytogene s ND/2g Detected but 1 2 <1 2+ for YOPIs Detected + ND/2g for refrigerated products with long shelflife <1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 4 (Toxin Test +ve) E. coli <3 3 1 2 1 2 ** **Pathogenic strains should be absent B. cereus <1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 4 C. perfringens <1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 4 NZFSA Information 1 Version 1 27 February 23

Table 3: FSANZ Microbiological Limits in Food (Summarised) Food Pathogen n c m M Butter made from Unpasteurised Milk Unpasteurised milk products Campylobacter/2g /g /g E.coli/g L.monocytogenes/2g /2g SPC/g 1 1 1 1 1 3 x1 1 1 9 All cheese E.coli/g 1 1 1 Soft/SemiSoft Cheese (>39% moisture, ph.) L.monocytognes/2g Dried Milk /2g Powdered Infant Formula B.cereus/g /g /g /2g SPC/g 1 2 1 2 2 1 <3 1 3 1 1 1 1 4 These are all in Standard 1.6.1of the ANZJFSC. Table 3: FDA Federal Register: Proposed Rules Infant Foods (1996) (Summarised) Microorganism Faecal B. cereus M Value 3. MPN/g 3.MPN/g 3./g 1/g NZFSA Information 11 Version 1 27 February 23

Table 4: Ministry Of Health (199) Microbiological Criteria for Foods (Summarised) These are now redundant Product Pathogen m M Cheese (Food Regs) E. coli 1 1 Yoghurt Cream L. moncytogenes (/2) Soured Cream Faecal coliforms 1 1 Foods Misc Dried B. cereus Faecal (/2g) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Foods Cooked Ready to Eat Infant Foods (not requiring further cooking) Salted Butter Powder for Infants Powders for General Use Pasteurised Milk B. cereus C. perfringens Faecal coliforms (/2g) (/2g) B. cereus C. perfringens Faecal (/2g) (/2g) Faecal (/2g) (/2g) B. cereus C. perfringens Faecal (/2g) (/2g) Faecal 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 <1.8 1 <1 <1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NZFSA Information 12 Version 1 27 February 23

Table : ICMSF (1986) Microbiological Criteria for Foods (Summarised) Product Pathogen m M Dried Milk (Normal/Routine) (High Risk) 1 1 Cheese 1 Foods for Infants & Children 1 1 1 1 Table 6: EU Compliance Standards (Summarised) Product Microorganism m M AMF Butter 1 Hard Cheese Soft Cheese Frozen Milk Based Liquid Milk Based All Powders E. coli 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NZFSA Information 13 Version 1 27 February 23

Table 7 Institute of Food Science & Technology (UK) 1999 Microbiological Criteria for Foods PATHOGEN INDICATOR Food Type Pathogen GMP Max Organism GMP Max Liquid Milk, ND/2g ND/2g E. coli: Cream, Cheese, Ice Cream, L. monocytog ND/2g <2 1 1 Raw milk soft Cheese <1 1 Butter, Dairy E. coli (O17)* ND/2g ND/2g Other cheeses <1 1 Desserts, Yoghurts, Other Past Milk Products <1 1 Fermented Products Milk Powder ND/2g ND/2g <1 1 <2 1 B. cereus <1 1 E. coli C. perfringens <1 1 Infant Foods E. coli O17+ C. perfringens B. cereus * Raw milk products only + Products containing beef only ND/2g ND/2g <1 <1 ND/g ND/2g ND/2g 1 1 1 E. coli ND/g 1 GMP Max Values expected immediately after manufacture Maximum level expected at any time during the shelf life of a product NZFSA Information 14 Version 1 27 February 23