EFSA advises on meat spoilage during storage and transport

Posted on July 1, 2016 by Douglas Powell

Continuing in the advice vein, the European Food Safety Authority is trying to balance safety and quality when transporting meat.

EFSA had previously advised on the implications for meat safety if two parameters – time and temperature – varied and provided several scenarios for ensuring safety of meat during storage and transport of meat. The Commission subsequently asked EFSA to consider what implications such scenarios would have for the growth of bacteria that cause meat to spoil.

“If the sole consideration was safety, policy makers would have more options on the table to pick from. However, scenarios that are acceptable in terms of safety may not be acceptable in terms of quality,” said Dr. Marta Hugas, Head of EFSA’s Biological Hazards and Contaminants unit.

Current legislation requires that carcasses are chilled to no more than 7C and that this temperature is maintained until mincing. The European Commission wants to revise this legislation to provide industry with more flexibility and asked EFSA’s scientific advice on safety and quality aspects.

Experts also said that effective hygienic measures during slaughter and processing help control contamination with spoilage bacteria.

Sucks to be a regulator: European food safety office evacuated after explosives found

Posted on June 8, 2016 by Douglas Powell

The European Food Safety Authority in Parma, Italy, received a package with explosive material on Tuesday which a local bomb squad destroyed, police said.

A worker in the authority’s mail room called police after discovering a suspicious, book-sized package addressed to an employee who no longer worked at the authority, a police spokeswoman said.

The package contained a small amount of a powdered explosive material that was enough to maim, she said.

Two floors of the building where the authority is housed were temporarily evacuated while the bomb was neutralised la Repubblica newspaper’s website said.

EU data on veterinary drug residues in animals and food

Posted on May 26, 2016 by Douglas Powell

European Food Safety Authority’s data report summarises the monitoring data from 2014, including compliance rates with EU residue limits, for a range of veterinary medicines, unauthorised substances and contaminants found in animals and animal-derived food.

Overall, 730,000 samples were reported in 2014 – a drop from the 1 million plus samples in last year’s report on 2013 data – from the 28 EU Member States.

In 2014, the level of non-compliance in targeted samples (i.e. samples taken to detect illegal use or check non-compliance with the maximum levels) rose slightly – to 0.37%, compared to 0.25%-0.34% over the previous seven years.

There was slightly higher non-compliance for resorcylic acid lactones (hormonally active compounds produced by fungi or man-made) and contaminants such as metals and mycotoxins (toxins produced by fungi).

The summary data reported suggest high rates of compliance overall and demonstrate the strengths of the EU monitoring system and its contribution to consumer protection.

Apricot kernels pose risk of cyanide poisoning

Posted on April 28, 2016 by Douglas Powell

Eating more than one large or three small raw apricot kernels in a serving can exceed safe levels. Toddlers consuming even one small apricot kernel risk being over the safe level.

A naturally-occurring compound called amygdalin is present in apricot kernels and converts to cyanide after eating. Cyanide poisoning can cause nausea, fever, headaches, insomnia, thirst, lethargy, nervousness, joint and muscle various aches and pains, and falling blood pressure. In extreme cases it is fatal.

Studies indicate 0.5 to 3.5 milligrams (mg) cyanide per kilogram of body weight can be lethal. The European Food Safety Authority’s Scientific Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain set a safe level for a one-off exposure (known as the Acute Reference Dose, or “ARfD”) of 20 micrograms per kilogram of body weight. This is 25 times below the lowest reported lethal dose.

Based on these limits and the amounts of amygdalin typically present in raw apricot kernels, EFSA’s experts estimate that adults could consume one large or three small apricot kernels (370mg), without exceeding the ARfD. For toddlers the amount would be 60mg which is about half of one small kernel.

Apricot fruit is not affected

Normal consumption of apricot fruit does not pose a health risk to consumers. The kernel is the seed from inside the apricot stone. It is obtained by cracking open and removing the hard stone shell and, therefore, has no contact with the fruit.

Most raw apricot kernels sold in the EU are believed to be imported from outside the EU and marketed to consumers via the internet. Sellers promote them as a cancer-fighting food and some actively promote intakes of 10 and 60 kernels per day for the general population and cancer patients, respectively.

Evaluating the claimed benefits of raw apricot kernels for cancer treatment or any other use is outside EFSA’s food safety remit and was, therefore, not part of this scientific opinion.

EFSA consulted its partners in EU Member States to discuss this scientific opinion and previous assessments by national authorities (see report below). This risk assessment will inform risk managers in the European Commission and Member States who regulate EU food safety. They will decide if measures are needed to protect public health from consumption of raw apricot kernels.

It’s so simple, European style: What we can learn from menopause

Posted on April 15, 2016 by Douglas Powell

The way scientists plan, verify and report how they use data and evidence is crucial for the transparency, impartiality and quality of scientific assessments. Our new interactive infographic provides an easy-to-follow overview to understand EFSA’s new approach for evidence use, developed in the context of the “Promoting methods for evidence use in scientific assessments” initiative.

This approach was first tested last year in a risk assessment for peri- and post-menopausal women taking food supplements containing isolated isoflavones. It is currently being implemented in further EFSA case-studies.

Yup, that’s it.

I’m going back to pajamas: Food safety risk communication

Posted on March 15, 2016 by Douglas Powell

The European Food Safety Authority has provided two new tools to assist with risk communication during a food safety outbreak.

The U.S. International Food Information Council says that “pajama-clad bloggers” can “cry wolf on a global stage” and that “every food-related kerfuffle becomes an opportunity for tweeting, fact or fiction, which is actually believed and followed by millions, fueled in large part by the fallibility of social media users themselves and an inability to judge risks rationally.”

If only we were ore rational (which means, see the world as I see the world, believe what I believe).

I’ll stick with the Europeans on this one.

EFSA created the guidelines together with EU Member States based on best practices gained from previous food-related crises. Developed in cooperation with members of EFSA’s Advisory Forum Communications Working Group, this document will help ensure consistency and coherence when communicating in a crisis.

Best practice for crisis communicators: How to communicate during food or feed safety incidents also clearly explains the role and responsibilities of EFSA and Member State organisations during the various phases of a crisis to improve preparedness for any future outbreaks that may cross borders.

In November 2015, EFSA carried out a simulation exercise with representatives of EU Member States, the European Commission and the World Health Organization. Their feedback was incorporated into the final version of the guidelines.

Shira Tabachnikoff, an international cooperation adviser at EFSA, said: “Preparation and cooperation are key elements to successfully communicating during a crisis. The simulation exercise brought home the need for a strong network and clear processes. These guidelines will prove useful if and when they are needed.”

The crisis communication guidelines include templates such as a practical checklist, a media inquiry log and a social media comments log.

Can scrapie in sheep cause disease in humans?

Posted on August 10, 2015 by Douglas Powell

On March 20, 1996, British Health Secretary Stephen Dorrell rose in the House to inform colleagues that scientists had discovered a new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (CJD) in 10 victims, and that they could not rule out a link with consumption of beef from cattle with bovine spongiform encephalapthy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease.

The announcement of March 20, 1996 was the culmination of 15 years of mismanagement, political bravado and a gross underestimation of the public’s capacity to deal with risk. More important than any of the several lessons to be drawn from the BSE fiasco was this: the risk of no-risk messages. For 10 years the British government and leading scientific advisors insisted there was no risk — or that the risk was so infintesimly small that it could be said there was no risk — of BSE leading to a similar malady in humans, CJD, even in the face of contradictory evidence. The no-risk message contributed to the devastating economic and social effects on Britons, a nation of beefeaters, the slaughter of over 1 million British cattle, and a decrease in global consumption of beef, especially in Japan, at a cost of billions of dollars.

Part of that logic stemmed from the apparent absence of zoonotic or human effects from the sheep transmissible spongiform Encephalopathy, scrapie, which had been know in the UK for hundreds of years.

European researchers have now reviewed the available evidence.

The factors that modulate the transmissibility of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (TSE) and the approaches for the study of their zoonotic potential are reviewed. The paper ‘Evidence for zoonotic potential of ovine scrapie prions’ by Cassard et al. (2014) is scientifically appraised, focussing on the experimental design, the results and the conclusions.

The paper provides evidence in a laboratory experiment that some Classical scrapie isolates can propagate in humanised transgenic mice and produce prions that on second passage are similar to those causing one form of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD). It is concluded that the results from the study raise the possibility that scrapie prions have the potential to be zoonotic, but do not provide evidence that transmission can or does take place under field conditions.

The conclusions of the 2011 ECDC-EFSA ‘Joint Scientific Opinion on any possible epidemiological or molecular association between TSEs in animals and humans’ are reviewed in the light of the new scientific evidence available since its publication. This supports and strengthens the conclusions of that opinion with regard to the potential for some animal TSE to be zoonotic, but does not provide evidence of a causal link between Classical or Atypical scrapie and human TSE. Current evidence does not establish this link, and no consistent risk factors have been identified for sCJD.

The possibility of scrapie-related public health risks from the consumption of ovine products cannot be assessed. Recommendations are formulated on further studies and data that are needed to investigate the zoonotic potential of animal TSE and to estimate the amount of infectivity from TSE-infected products sourced from small ruminants and entering the food chain in the European Union.

Scientific Opinion on a request for a review of a scientific publication concerning the zoonotic potential of ovine scrapie prions

EFSA Journal 2015;13(8):4197 [58 pp.]. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4197

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4197.htm?utm_source=feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ej

I volunteer: Study on THC in animal products

Posted on June 26, 2015 by Douglas Powell

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the risks for human health related to the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in milk and other food of animal origin.

THC, more precisely delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) is derived from the hemp plant Cannabis sativa. In fresh plant material, up to 90 % of total Δ9-THC is present as the non-psychoactive precursor Δ9-THC acid. Since few data on Δ9-THC levels in foods of animal origin were available, the Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) estimated acute human dietary exposure to Δ9-THC combining different scenarios for the presence of Δ9-THC in hemp seed-derived feed materials.

Acute exposure to Δ9-THC from the consumption of milk and dairy products ranged between 0.001 and 0.03 µg/kg body weight (b.w.) per day in adults, and 0.006 and 0.13 µg/kg b.w. per day in toddlers. From human data, the CONTAM Panel concluded that 2.5 mg Δ9-THC/day, corresponding to 0.036 mg Δ9-THC/kg b.w. per day, represents the lowest observed adverse effect level. By applying an overall uncertainty factor of 30, an acute reference dose (ARfD) of 1 μg Δ9-THC/kg b.w. was derived. The exposure estimates are at most 3 % and 13 % the ARfD, in adults and toddlers, respectively.

The CONTAM Panel concluded that exposure to Δ9-THC via consumption of milk and dairy products, resulting from the use of hemp seed-derived feed materials at the reported concentrations, is unlikely to pose a health concern.

A risk assessment resulting from the use of whole hemp plant-derived feed materials is currently not feasible due to a lack of occurrence data. The CONTAM Panel could also not conclude on the possible risks to public health from exposure to Δ9-THC via consumption of animal tissues and eggs, due to a lack of data on the potential transfer and fate of Δ9-THC.

Scientific Opinion on the risks for human health related to the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in milk and other food of animal origin

EFSA Journal 2015;13(6):4141[125 pp.]

EFSA

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4141.htm?utm_source=feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ej

EU report provides basis for effective fight against development of resistant bacteria

Posted on February 5, 2015 by Douglas Powell

The European Food Safety Authority reports the use of certain antimicrobials in animals and humans is associated with resistance to these antimicrobials in bacteria from animals and humans. There are also important differences in the consumption of antimicrobials in animals and in humans between European countries. These are some of the findings of the first integrated analysis of data from humans, animals and food in Europe published jointly by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

The ECDC/EFSA/EMA first joint report on the integrated analysis of the consumption of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from humans and food-producing animals also identifies data limitations that need to be addressed to allow further analysis and conclusions to be drawn. These include additional data on antimicrobial consumption by animal species, data on antimicrobial consumption in hospitals in more European countries and monitoring of resistant bacteria in the normal flora from both healthy and diseased people.

The analysis was carried out at the request of the European Commission and combines data from five European monitoring networks that gather information from the European Union (EU) Member States, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.

This holistic approach aims to make better use of the existing data and thus strengthen coordinated surveillance systems on antimicrobial consumption and antimicrobial resistance in human and veterinary medicine, and to allow policy makers to decide on the best way to tackle antimicrobial resistance in humans and animals.

The joint report will inform the European Commission’s action plan against the rising threats from antimicrobial resistance. The data will also contribute to establishing strong methodologies and priorities in the fight against the development of antimicrobial resistance.

This is the first in a series of reports that EMA, EFSA and ECDC are planning to publish based on the data collected by various monitoring networks.

Access to accurate data on the use of antimicrobials and the occurrence of antimicrobial resistance is an essential step to develop and monitor policies that minimise the development of resistance and keep antimicrobials effective for future generations.

Thanks Batz: Scientific opinion on the development of a risk ranking toolbox for the EFSA BIOHAZ Panel

Posted on January 24, 2015 by Douglas Powell

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards

EFSA Journal 2015;13(1):3939 [131 pp.]. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.3939

Eight tools relevant to risk ranking of biological hazards in food were identified and assessed using two case studies.

Differences in their performance were observed, related to the risk metrics, data requirements, ranking approach, model type, model variables and data integration. Quantitative stochastic models are the most reliable for risk ranking. However, this approach needs good characterisation of input parameters.

The use of deterministic models that ignore variability may result in risk ranking errors. The ordinal scoring approaches in semi-quantitative models provide ranking with more errors than the deterministic approaches. FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-iRISK was identified as the most appropriate tool for risk ranking of microbiological hazards.

The Burden of Communicable Diseases in Europe (BCoDE) toolkit can be used in combination with the outputs from FDA-iRISK or as a top-down tool to rank pathogens. Uncertainty needs to be addressed and communicated to decision makers and stakeholders as one of the outcomes of the risk ranking process. Uncertainty and variability can be represented by means of probability distributions. Techniques such as the NUSAP (numeral, unit, spread, assessment and pedigree) approach can also be used to prioritise factors for sensitivity and scenario analysis or stochastic modelling. Quantitative risk ranking models are preferred over semi-quantitative models. When data and time constraints do not allow quantitative risk ranking, semi-quantitative models could be used, but the limitations of these approaches linked to the selection and integration of the ordinal scores should be made explicit.

Decision trees should be used only to show how decisions are made about classifying food–pathogen combinations into broad categories. BCoDE and FDA-iRISK, in combination with a network of available predictive microbiology tools, databases and information sources, can form a risk ranking toolbox and be applied based on a “fit for purpose” approach supporting timely and transparent risk ranking.

barfblog

safe food from farm to fork

Tag Archives: efsa