WDATCP Priorities for Industry: Working together for Safe Food, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Steve Ingham Administrator, Div. of Food Safety WI Dept. of Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection

WDATCP Priorities for Industry: Working together for “Safe Food, Honestly Sold”

Mutual understanding of:

 Scope of the food safety challenge  Macro-factors that might affect future food safety  Hazards and controls associated with ingredients  Hazards and controls associated with processes  Requirements and susceptibility of customers  Strengths and limitations of the food safety regulatory system

Doing the numbers – foodborne illness

• f microbial origin in the USA

 Experienced > Reported > Confirmed > Attributed  31 major pathogens (identified cause):

• 9.4M episodes;
• 56,000 hospitalizations;
• 1,350 deaths
• Scallan et al., 2011a. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 17: 7 – 15

 “unspecified agents”:

• 38.4 M episodes;
• 72,000 hospitalizations;
• 1,700 deaths
• Scallan et al., 2011b. Emerg. Infect. Dis.17: 16 - 22

Costs of food-borne illness in USA

 Medical cost  Productivity lost  Illness-related mortality

(estimated value of life)

 $51 to $78 billion 

$1,100 - $1,600 per case

 Many low-cost cases, few

high-cost cases

Comparison with other causes of death in USA

 Radon – 21,000 lung cancer-related deaths  Influenza – 3,000 to 49,000 (varies with year and study)  Heart diseases – about 600,000  Homicide – about 17,000  Medical errors – 44,000

Macro-factors that might affect future food safety

 Climate  Population growth  Urbanization  Aging populations  Changes in health care delivery  Trade globalization  Travel globalization

Climate change

Population Growth

Food-borne illness episodes attributable to major pathogens

 Norovirus: 5.5M  Salmonella spp: 1.0M  Clostridium perfringens: 966K  Campylobacter: 845K  Staphylococcus aureus : 241K  Shigella spp.: 131K  Non-O157 Shiga-toxigenic E. coli (STEC): 113K  Toxoplasma gondii: 87K  Giardia: 77K  O157 STEC: 63K

Major Sources of Food-borne Pathogens

 Norovirus: feces, vomitus from humans  Salmonella spp: feces from animals, humans  Clostridium perfringens: soil; feces of animals and humans  Campylobacter: feces of birds and animals  Staphylococcus aureus : skin of animals and humans  Shigella spp.: feces of humans  Non-O157 Shiga-toxigenic E. coli (STEC): feces of cattle and

humans

 Toxoplasma gondii: feces of animals  Giardia: feces of animals  water  O157 STEC: feces of cattle and humans

12

Where Chickens Are Raised

13

Where Hogs Are Raised

14

Where Cattle Are Raised

Global trade of grains and oilseeds

Concentration of Food Processing and Sales (Stats ca. 2011)

20

 4 companies: over 80% of U.S. beef.  4 companies: 67% of U.S. pork. Plants that slaughter

• ver a million hogs per year supply 95% of market

(compared to 27% in 1976).

 4 companies: 59% of U.S. chicken.  5 companies: 50% of U.S. supermarket sales

And yet… A tale of two systems

Even a small company is in a global market

Dairy Farms – Grade A

 Produce ca. 98% of total WI

milk

 2012 survey results: largest

21% of farms (> 2.6 M lbs per year) produce 71% of grade A milk

 These farms would pass EU

SCC criterion 98% of the time

 Smallest farms (< 550,000

lbs per year): 20% of farms, 2.5% of milk, would pass EU SCC criterion 85% of time

Dairy Farms – Grade B

 14% of farms producing

2% of the WI milk

Seems sim Seems simple, doesn’t it? It’s no le, doesn’t it? It’s not! t!

Producers Processors Distributors Sellers Consumers

Ingredient issues start at the farm

 Chemical and biological

inputs

 Water quality  Wild and domestic animals  Contamination via neighbors  Feed for animals

Biological Soil Amendments

6/23/2014 28

Harvest Hygiene

Water Quality and Post-Harvest Handling

Global and Local Sourcing of Ingredients

Sanitary Transportation of Food

Transport: what are your specifications? Are they being met?

Safe Food Transport – problems at street level!

Dairy Plants

Food Processing Plants

Understand the process

Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls

• Hazard analysis, including

intentional adulterants: what can go wrong?

• Preventive controls: what can

you do to control the hazards?

• Monitoring: how will you

know?

• Corrective actions: “Oops”…
• Verification: Proof that

preventive controls work

An inspection priority: looking at what the firm measures and records

Consider environmental sampling

 Can help verify that preventive controls are effective  WDATCP looking at regulatory testing for indicator bacteria

in Zones 1 and 2 of RTE processing areas

Should regulations adopt microbiological performance standards?

 Performance standard, examples

 Requirement to destroy a specified number of pathogen cells  Requirement to prevent pathogen growth

 “How to” standard, example

 Hold raw-milk cheese for at least 60 days at a temperature not

less than 35°F

 Encourage flexibility and innovation  Let the science speak  “Safe Harbors” for those without resources to conduct studies

Don’t forget the basics!

Retail Food Establishments

Know your customers

 Accuracy in labeling  Susceptible populations

Civics 101 (why regulatory change can lag behind industry change)

 To address “big problems”, elected officials pass LEGISLATION  Often empowers or requires agency to create regulations  Sometimes “little problems” are addressed  Non-elected officials create REGULATIONS and GUIDANCE  May be possible without new legislation  Requirements for meeting the “big picture” goals = regulations  Writing and approving regulations can take years  Information on complying with regulations = guidance which

may be the day-to-day reality for industry and regulators

 GET INVOLVED!!

 Industry and public comments

Regulating food safety today

 “Fair, effective, and efficient – regardless of how big the

business is!

 Is undergoing a transition.

 Past  Command and control – “This is what you must do.”  “Snapshot” on-site observations – “This is what I see now.”  Present  How well is establishment controlling the process?  Preventive  Documentation emphasis – “This is what your records show

since the last inspection.”

Food Safety Regulation in the Future

48

 More Emphasis on “Upstream”Food Sources

• More regulation of on-farm practices (especially produce).
• Yet, increasing pressure to exempt “small” and “local”.
• More scrutiny of “supply contracts” that dictate food safety

requirements.

• More scrutiny of private auditing and certification of

suppliers.

Regulatory challenges ahead…

 Regulators are in uncharted territory  Success of regulatory efforts depends on people

 Resources for hiring (and keeping) the best  Training!  The “time sink” of compliance actions

 How can we better integrate with federal regulators?

 FSMA regulations  changes in laws, rules, jurisdictions, training

 How can we better receive, process, and transmit information?

 Standardization of processes  Avoiding mixed messages

Questions?

 Steve.Ingham@wi.gov  608-224-4701