Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Foot Bath options


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

#1 svnh.bell

svnh.bell

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 28 posts
  • 2 thanks

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 23 January 2014 - 06:08 PM

We are looking into getting foot baths for our food operation, but it was mentioned that we do not was liquid baths. Ironic, right? Someone said there were "Crystal" foot baths out there. Does anyone know about these or where I can find them?


  • 0

#2 TheDude

TheDude

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 48 posts
  • 6 thanks

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 23 January 2014 - 07:28 PM

We use quat based sanitzer beads (Traffic Aid No. 315) in a rubber mat.


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:
Parkz58

#3 Slab

Slab

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 281 posts
  • 120 thanks

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Heel of the Boot
  • Interests:Reading (history, science fiction), Photography, drawing,food safety, metrology, TQM, hoplology, etc.

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:10 PM

Hi, and welcome to the forums.

 

Why could you not use liquid?  Could you please provide some more information about your industry?

Either an iodine or QA dip in a scrub mat is a good, inexpensive, and low maintenance solution.  A better method IMO is a foaming station with a QA range of 600-1,200 ppm, however the initial cost is much greater (roughly $2,000 usd per unit).  Daily operational maintenance is non-existent which can be a life saver during audits, as the system is basically just flipping the switch preop (other than checking titrations of course).


  • 0

#4 jonboy47

jonboy47

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 15 posts
  • 6 thanks

  • United States
    United States

Posted 23 January 2014 - 10:08 PM

Slab:

 

I'm not sure what is produced in this individual's facility, but in many "dry" facilities (such as those which produce nuts or grains and have no wet processing) rely on a dry production environment to reduce microbial growth risk and risk to product.  Wet food baths unnecessarily introduce moisture into a production environment that would not otherwise have it and may introduce new risks to the facility.

 

I would encourage anyone utilizing foot baths to assess their effectiveness in your facility (verification, validation).  I have heard that there has been some research into this subject and the data does not indicate that foot baths alone are an effective control measure.  Captive footwear, in conjuction with baths, is the measure that I have heard works best for prevention.  Some facilities may not even need a control measure for foot traffic, depending on their production environment.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Jon


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:
Slab

#5 svnh.bell

svnh.bell

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 28 posts
  • 2 thanks

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 24 January 2014 - 12:42 PM

 

Thank you all for your input. Our facility is a dry powder blending facility. What Jon said is true, we do not want to introduce unnecessary moisture. We have an effective Environmental Monitoring program in place and have had to microbial issues to date (knock on wood). However, using foot baths is being suggested by several of our customers so it is something we are looking into.


  • 0

#6 jreinke

jreinke

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 1 thanks

  • United States
    United States

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:08 PM

I have resently as our chemical about this as well. He is recommending a product called Boost.

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:
chu lin

#7 Slab

Slab

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 281 posts
  • 120 thanks

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Heel of the Boot
  • Interests:Reading (history, science fiction), Photography, drawing,food safety, metrology, TQM, hoplology, etc.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:00 PM

Slab:

 

I'm not sure what is produced in this individual's facility, but in many "dry" facilities (such as those which produce nuts or grains and have no wet processing) rely on a dry production environment to reduce microbial growth risk and risk to product.  Wet food baths unnecessarily introduce moisture into a production environment that would not otherwise have it and may introduce new risks to the facility.

 

I would encourage anyone utilizing foot baths to assess their effectiveness in your facility (verification, validation).  I have heard that there has been some research into this subject and the data does not indicate that foot baths alone are an effective control measure.  Captive footwear, in conjuction with baths, is the measure that I have heard works best for prevention.  Some facilities may not even need a control measure for foot traffic, depending on their production environment.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Jon

 

 

Thank you all for your input. Our facility is a dry powder blending facility. What Jon said is true, we do not want to introduce unnecessary moisture. We have an effective Environmental Monitoring program in place and have had to microbial issues to date (knock on wood). However, using foot baths is being suggested by several of our customers so it is something we are looking into.

 

That makes perfect sense.

My concern with a dry sanitize application is dust as it may become airborne and contaminate product. So perhaps your lack of boot scrub could be validated with procedural methods strengthened as jonboy advises.

Here is a thread on the same topic;

http://www.ifsqn.com...hoe-sanitizers/


  • 0

#8 clover

clover

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 77 posts
  • 3 thanks

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 15 July 2016 - 08:01 AM

Just how effective is a foot bath? I know it should be monitored and regulated, with frequent change but how should this be done? The sanitizing solution inside the foot bath has a contact time of 1 minute but surely no one is going to stand inside the foot bath for half a minute, much less one minute when passing through the entrance/exit of butchery...!!


  • 0

#9 clover

clover

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 77 posts
  • 3 thanks

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 19 August 2016 - 05:01 AM

Hi , any takers on my enquiry below? 

 

Just wondering if there are any other better alternatives compared to foot bath? I feel that foot bath is a complete waste of money + useless. Please feel free to share your opinion with me :) 

Just how effective is a foot bath? I know it should be monitored and regulated, with frequent change but how should this be done? The sanitizing solution inside the foot bath has a contact time of 1 minute but surely no one is going to stand inside the foot bath for half a minute, much less one minute when passing through the entrance/exit of butchery...!!


  • 0

#10 scampi

scampi

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 375 posts
  • 84 thanks

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 August 2016 - 01:29 PM

a quat based foot bath at the correct dosage does not need 1 minute of contact time. The idea is to use the correct chemical at the correct dosage for the required contact time. Ours are placed directly in front of the hand wash stations so employees are standing in it the entire time of the hand wash. The quat we use is effective against listeria, poultry viruses and gram negative organisms. The boot dips are dosed at 800-1000 ppm to be effective for 30 second contact time. The quats are appealing because of a very long efficacy time vs many other options.  Almost everyone would chose an automatic foamer over a step in tray, but as mentioned in PP, they are very expensive. I have been in RTE facilities were you are required to walk through a boot cleaner that scrubs your boots almost to the knee. It wouldn't be mandatory in many countries if they weren't effective.  BTW, part of terms of employment are our facility is that work boots do not go outside and do not leave the premises unless you've terminated your employement


  • 0

#11 Tim V

Tim V

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 0 thanks

  • United States
    United States

Posted 02 October 2016 - 01:44 AM

At my vasility we don't have foot baths at or near every door entering production areas. Are foot baths more of a required item or are they just recommended and are not 100% needed?


  • 0

#12 Tim V

Tim V

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 0 thanks

  • United States
    United States

Posted 02 October 2016 - 01:44 AM

At my vasility we don't have foot baths at or near every door entering production areas. Are foot baths more of a required item or are they just recommended and are not 100% needed?


  • 0

#13 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 11,648 posts
  • 2917 thanks

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

Posted 02 October 2016 - 07:25 AM

At my vasility we don't have foot baths at or near every door entering production areas. Are foot baths more of a required item or are they just recommended and are not 100% needed?

 

Hi Tim,

 

As per Post4, it may relate to what kind of business you are doing and under whose jurisdiction ?


  • 0

#14 kushan_c

kushan_c

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks

  • Sri Lanka
    Sri Lanka

Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:38 AM

Hello,

I am new for the forum. There are many things to learn for me. Thanks everyone.

 

In our factory, we use same foot bath for two sections. Because  the entrances are nearly close. Is it Ok or Not? 


  • 0

#15 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 11,648 posts
  • 2917 thanks

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

Posted 17 April 2017 - 12:38 PM

Hello,

I am new for the forum. There are many things to learn for me. Thanks everyone.

 

In our factory, we use same foot bath for two sections. Because  the entrances are nearly close. Is it Ok or Not? 

 

I suggest doing a Risk Assessment.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users