Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Is water quality analysis required when we have pasteurization?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 mind over matter

mind over matter

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 369 posts
  • 43 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 20 February 2011 - 09:18 PM

I think for products that has pasteurization process, we don’t need to do a water analysis. Do you think pasteurization will suffice? For products without pasteurization step, are we required to do a water analysis? The water came from NAWASA.

Thanks in advance.



  • 0

#2 Jomy Abraham

Jomy Abraham

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 96 posts
  • 39 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India

Posted 21 February 2011 - 05:45 AM

Dear MOM

I have one quest. Do you think that raw milk is not required to analyse, if we have UHT/pasteurization in the process?

All the RAW material to be entered in the Food processing units should be analysed. You can set the frequency of analysis. If its recieved from a trusted source with proper certificate of analysis (COA), I may not prefer to check it every day. As water is your major ingredient, defenitley you need to check on day to day basis. If its used for cleaning purposes, the frequency need to be fixed based on your operational requirements.

PRODUCT RECALLs are always in the market and its reported mostly from the reputed org's.

Regards
Jomy Abraham

I think for products that has pasteurization process, we don’t need to do a water analysis. Do you think pasteurization will suffice? For products without pasteurization step, are we required to do a water analysis? The water came from NAWASA.

Thanks in advance.




  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,958 posts
  • 791 thanks
167
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 22 February 2011 - 05:22 AM

I think for products that has pasteurization process, we don’t need to do a water analysis. Do you think pasteurization will suffice? For products without pasteurization step, are we required to do a water analysis? The water came from NAWASA.

Thanks in advance.




From CODEX

4.4 FACILITIES
4.4.1 Water supply
An adequate supply of potable water with appropriate facilities for its storage, distribution and temperature control, should be available whenever necessary to ensure the safety and suitability of food.
Potable water should be as specified in the latest edition of WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, or water of a higher standard. Non-potable water (for use in, for example, fire control, steam production, refrigeration and other similar purposes where it would not contaminate food), shall have a separate system. Non-potable water systems shall be identified and shall not connect with, or allow reflux into, potable water systems.


You need to test to verify your water is potable.

Regards,

Tony

Edited by Tony-C, 22 February 2011 - 05:24 AM.

  • 0

Thanked by 2 Members:

#4 Dr Ajay Shah

Dr Ajay Shah

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 318 posts
  • 105 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 22 February 2011 - 12:22 PM

I agree with the comments made by Tony in that the water should be tested to verify for potability. In addition it is important to note that if the water is in direct contact with the product then it is important to ensure that the quality of the water used is good and acceptable.


  • 0
Dr Ajay Shah.,
BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, PGCE(FE)
Managing Director & Principal Consultant
AAS Food Technology Pty Ltd
www.aasfood.com


Thanked by 1 Member:

#5 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,216 posts
  • 469 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 22 February 2011 - 01:07 PM

It is also recommended that water used for washing activities is monitored for quality. IME even "potable" towns water occasionally has out of specs and also your own system may not be infallible, especially if there are water tanks or dead legs in your process.

Personally I would continue to monitor as best practice but perhaps adjust monitoring frequency as you see fit according to risk.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#6 redchariot

redchariot

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 11 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ireland
    Ireland
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 22 February 2011 - 06:40 PM

Yes, you have to verify that water is potable if used for food processing, hand washing, equipment washing. You don't need potable water for areas like yard washing and flushing toilets; the recognised tests are TVC at 37°C and 22°C and coliforms. Weekly testing is considered the norm

In addition if you are drawing from your own well and not from a local authority suply you also have to do extensive chemical testing (once/twice a year depending on usage), which can be quite expensive


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 mind over matter

mind over matter

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 369 posts
  • 43 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:03 AM

Thank you for great replies. Just a follow up... What is better and cheaper based from your experience, seek the service of an independent laboratory (external) or do it yourself?


  • 0

#8 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,460 posts
  • 3246 thanks
347
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 23 February 2011 - 02:55 PM

Dear red chariot,

You don't need potable water for areas like yard washing and flushing toilets


So what do you need ? :smile: ( Validation ?)

@MOM -

What is better and cheaper based from your experience, seek the service of an independent laboratory (external) or do it yourself?


As it stands, I'm afraid that this question is unanswerable, ie what is "yourself" ? The routine analyses involved are often very competitive between independent labs so they offer "package" deals. But if "you" are a set-up/running micro. lab. doing this as part of an extensive program, "average" cost maybe cheaper. Plus it depends how "you" do it of course :smile: .

Rgds / Charles.C
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#9 Philip.H

Philip.H

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 15 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Belgium
    Belgium

Posted 23 February 2011 - 06:58 PM

Hello,

Isn't it easier to ask a lab to do the analysis since the water that is taken has to be a representable sample taken from multiple points.
And isn't it obvious that you have to a wateranalysis since not only the microbiological parameters are important but also chemical parameters
like: lead, copper, Fluor, nitrates and so on.

PH


  • 0

#10 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,460 posts
  • 3246 thanks
347
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 23 February 2011 - 08:40 PM

Dear Philip.H,

And isn't it obvious that you have to a wateranalysis since not only the microbiological parameters are important but also chemical parameters
like: lead, copper, Fluor, nitrates and so on

I guess it may depend on the specific case (eg location / regulatory / risk analysis) but IMEX, the typical routine requirement, eg monthly, only involves basic micro. measurements. The detailed micro., chemical and physical analysis is then done yearly (usually by external lab and at considerable cost). It might be expected that a Metropolitan water supply would be self-guaranteed however auditors tend to not be totally convinced by such theoretical logic.

Rgds / Charles.C
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#11 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,958 posts
  • 791 thanks
167
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:44 PM

It is also recommended that water used for washing activities is monitored for quality. IME even "potable" towns water occasionally has out of specs and also your own system may not be infallible, especially if there are water tanks or dead legs in your process.


Yes monitoring should be at point of use.
  • 0

#12 mind over matter

mind over matter

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 369 posts
  • 43 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 25 February 2011 - 03:25 AM

Dear red chariot,



So what do you need ? :smile: ( Validation ?)

@MOM -

As it stands, I'm afraid that this question is unanswerable, ie what is "yourself" ? The routine analyses involved are often very competitive between independent labs so they offer "package" deals. But if "you" are a set-up/running micro. lab. doing this as part of an extensive program, "average" cost maybe cheaper. Plus it depends how "you" do it of course :smile: .

Rgds / Charles.C

I mean the test will be done internally. I was trying to get the merits of hiring external laboratory versus "do-it-yourself" based from the experiences of fellow IFSQN members. Perhaps the cost of the test will vary from lab to lab and on what kind of test to do. Some mentioned chemical, microbiological, etc


  • 0

#13 Foodworker

Foodworker

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 239 posts
  • 170 thanks
7
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 26 February 2011 - 11:08 AM

Tony C's comment about monitoring at the point of use is absolutely correct.

In the UK, the water companys' reports relate generally to sample points within a square kilometer. Your own factory pipework can introduce contamination, microbiological and chemical, if not designed correctly.

Laboratory results have to be valid and if you do not have your own accredited lab, you would have to use an external lab.

One aspect of water monitoring that companies rarely do is organoleptic and visual. You can often pick up problems at an early stage simply by tasting and looking at the water for cloudiness, discolouration and odd flavours.

OK you may not be able to identify the contaminant without further work but it should trigger an investigation. The other big plus is that it easy to do and free.

There are standard methods for organoleptic and visual testing of water, but you don't have to go that far. Simply holding a sample against a white backgound and a black background will show up turbidity and discolouration. If you find a problem investigate it.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users