Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Hazards Analysis of ingredients in animal feed production

Share this

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

Rudra

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 133 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • Mauritius
    Mauritius
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Triolet
  • Interests:Music, reading, surfing, cinema, beach, exercises

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:04 AM

Hi,

My company is ISO22000:2005 certified. Thanks to this network I have fully understood the concept of hazards analysis.

We produce animal feeds and our ingredients are NOT FIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION.

My auditor is insisting that my hazards analysis should take into account impact on health of human. I argued that we have considered impact n health of animals and there is no need for us to consider impact on man's health. Moreover, our raw materials are being used to produce animal feeds and are not fit for human consumption.

I really need your ideas and opinions,

 

Rudra



jel

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 113 posts
  • 33 thanks
13
Good

  • Mexico
    Mexico
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 August 2014 - 02:13 PM

I think your auditor is correct. While you produce your food for animals, there are many compounds that could be used, but could have an adverse effect by eating meat. To give an example, in my country Mexico, one of the problems that occurs with beef, is that food producers add a product called clenbuterol to increase the muscle mass of the animal but it cause severe poisoning in humans . Obviously this is banned by health authorities, and when the meat is detected is confiscated. 
 
You should always keep in mind that your company produces animal feed but is part of the food chain, and that sooner or later what you do will affect humans. 
 
If you are producing pet food, production should be almost like you're making food for human consumption, not only because pets get sick very similar to humans, but because there may be contagion to family members.


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:17 PM

Dear Rudra,

 

As per previous post, it's a question of seeing the BIG PICTURE.

 

For  example, in various locations, the manufacture / distribution of animal feed is well-recognized as having historically contributed to the introduction of pathogens like Salmonella into the "human" food chain.

 

Internationally, there is a perpetual disagreement over what represents acceptable additions to the animal diet, notably between EU and USA from memory regarding hormones, as per previous post.

 

When controlling petfood production, i was obliged to "sample" it personally. Another good reason IMO for the wide view. :biggrin:

 

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Rudra

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 133 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • Mauritius
    Mauritius
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Triolet
  • Interests:Music, reading, surfing, cinema, beach, exercises

Posted 02 August 2014 - 04:37 AM

Many thanks for your opinions 

:smile:

However, i believe that if we have all controls in place to ensure that our finished products for animal feed is safe with no health impact on animals, then why should we consider human health in our hazards analysis? I mean, for e.g, cadmium level in fish feeds will not be the same as cadmium level in fish itself. This means should I consider the 2 limits for cadmium in fish feeds and fish? We should put in place controls for feeds and human? I can't understand this. please help.

 

Rgds,

Rudra....



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 02 August 2014 - 07:19 AM

Dear Rudra,

 

This specifically relates to ISO22000, not FSSC22000.

 

i suggest you carefully study the following text -

 

ISO22000 - Introduction / Fig1

                   section 1 - scope

                   section 7.4.2.1

 

ISO22004 - Section 0.2

                   section 7.4.2

                   section 7.4.3

 

The above should particularly clarify the relevance of "food chain" to ISO22000

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - this "classic" link is also quite informative -

 

http://www.praxiom.c...definitions.htm


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C




Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users