Mental hazard as a fourth hazard
Started by siddhu, Oct 17 2008 10:29 AM
Dear Members
Hi and Good day to you
I want to discuss whether Mental Hazard is important in food safety.
Can we consider it as fourth Hazard in addition to physical, chemical and biological hazard?
Best regards,
siddhu
Hi and Good day to you
I want to discuss whether Mental Hazard is important in food safety.
Can we consider it as fourth Hazard in addition to physical, chemical and biological hazard?
Best regards,
siddhu
[Ad]
No, it's a cause of one of the above hazards. If tired, overworked, under motivated etc, you might do something which causes a biological, physical, chemical or allergen hazard.
(Note the 4th hazard should be allergens surely?)
(Note the 4th hazard should be allergens surely?)
During an FSMS audit, I would always consider such a possibility.
Attached Files
Mental problems do affect the workers and I have seen this few times in our units too. Though it is not considered as a hazard. I think the management can upto a certain extent help the workers depending upon the situation.
This leads us to a question of what the term "hazard" means under the food safety context. When we perform a "hazard risk analysis", what exactly are we trying to achieve in order to justify the risk assessment / risk management. I agree it is a risk but it also has hazardous contributions.Mental problems do affect the workers and I have seen this few times in our units too. Though it is not considered as a hazard.
Seems a bit interesting to day that a mental hazard is 'reasonably' likely to occur.
I don't think it belongs in HACCP. I think this should be addressed in a food defense plan where personnel screening is considered as well as any unusual behavior.
I don't think it belongs in HACCP. I think this should be addressed in a food defense plan where personnel screening is considered as well as any unusual behavior.
No, it's a cause of one of the above hazards. If tired, overworked, under motivated etc, you might do something which causes a biological, physical, chemical or allergen hazard.
(Note the 4th hazard should be allergens surely?)
Why introduce a fourth Hazard category, when none really is needed?
the Codex Alimentarius Commission (HACCP 'govenours') defines 'hazard' as a 'condition of or an agent in food that has the potential to cause an adverse health effect' 9CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 4-2003, page 5).
Mental illness or other problems that lead a food worker to deliberately contaminate food (including bio-terrorism) is surely a serious issue, but, I agree with GMO and Cathy, needs to be addressed as a prerequisite to HACCP (e.g. in company security policy).
GMO: Are allergens not chemical substances? I would include them under chemical hazard and cross-reference to physical hazards for prevention and detection purposes because allergens are ususlly introduced to foods via a carrier substance (e.g. segregate allergen-containing and allergen-free product during storage, handling and manufacture of foods). If they cannot be avoided in a product or process, the end product must be labelled accordingly.
In the manufacturing of allergen-free foods for coeliacs, etc, I would insist that allergen control is made a CCP or at least an operative pre-requisite that is closely monitored.
Matt
Dear All,
To follow up Cathy's comment, it's interesting that I don't think I hv ever seen questions related to mental illness or other psychological factors on the standard employee appplication form ? Perhaps categorised as unethical ?
If you look up the numerous textbooks on HACCP, the typical comment is "process oriented" with respect to hazard analysis. This is a subjective choice since HACCP is supposed to be all-seeing but conventionally, I think HACCP is regarded as a (qualitative ?) subset of a "complete" Risk Assessment.
Perhaps such aspects should be specified as "not included" (or otherwise) in the HACCP system introduction section (assuming there is one
Rgds / Charles.C
added - one attempt to compare HACCP to risk analysis is here - risk_variants.jpg 20.72KB 41 downloads
(specification of criteria = establishment of critical limits)
All clear now ? Supports the importance of clearly defining terminologies IMO
To follow up Cathy's comment, it's interesting that I don't think I hv ever seen questions related to mental illness or other psychological factors on the standard employee appplication form ? Perhaps categorised as unethical ?
If you look up the numerous textbooks on HACCP, the typical comment is "process oriented" with respect to hazard analysis. This is a subjective choice since HACCP is supposed to be all-seeing but conventionally, I think HACCP is regarded as a (qualitative ?) subset of a "complete" Risk Assessment.
Perhaps such aspects should be specified as "not included" (or otherwise) in the HACCP system introduction section (assuming there is one
Rgds / Charles.C
added - one attempt to compare HACCP to risk analysis is here - risk_variants.jpg 20.72KB 41 downloads
(specification of criteria = establishment of critical limits)
All clear now ? Supports the importance of clearly defining terminologies IMO
Dear Members
Hi and Good day to you
I want to discuss whether Mental Hazard is important in food safety.
Can we consider it as fourth Hazard in addition to physical, chemical and biological hazard?
Best regards,
siddhu
Hi,
Please correct me if I am wrong. Usually, I consider any Incidents that would affect the food safety due to Person as ' Employee Unrest' under ISO 22000 Clause 5.7 Emergency preparedness and response and BRC Global Food Clause 3.11 Management of Incidents, Product Withdrawal and Product Recall.
Best regards,
Geetha
Mental problems do affect the workers and I have seen this few times in our units too. Though it is not considered as a hazard. I think the management can upto a certain extent help the workers depending upon the situation.
Hi
thanks for reply
all hazard may occur in excess if mental hazard is present
do you agree??
regards,
siddhu
Hi,
Please correct me if I am wrong. Usually, I consider any Incidents that would affect the food safety due to Person as ' Employee Unrest' under ISO 22000 Clause 5.7 Emergency preparedness and response and BRC Global Food Clause 3.11 Management of Incidents, Product Withdrawal and Product Recall.
Best regards,
Geetha
Hi Geetha
Thanks for reply
I agree with your views. I am glad that you are considering it because all hazards will occur in excess if the person responsible for monitoring CCP is not mentally stable due to work procedure
Best regards,
Dr. S.N.Rindhe
Hi thanks for reply all hazard may occur in excess if mental hazard is present do you agree?? regards, siddhu [size="3"][font="Times New Roman"][/font][/size]
Dear Siddhu,
I agree with you that any hazards can occur with a mental problem. Kindly excuse my post as I didn’t complete my sentence due to distractions. I meant to say IMO, mental hazards should not be considered as a food safety hazard along with physical, chemical and microbiological hazards. Any staff found to have any mental problems have to be dealt by the management or HR depending on the situation. Any mentally ill person, is not allowed to work for sure. Therefore communication, supervision and teamwork etc are important attributes in any work place. I have seen situations where people worry a lot due to finances and finally end up with either cuts or accidents etc due to lack of attentiveness at work. Therefore control of staff welfare is very crucial in any industry to avoid any risks. These should be covered in the personnel requirements and security systems of the company.
Dear Jean,
I totally agree (pre-requisites !) but I'm afraid the practical situation is often rather different.
A lot of people I hv met claim this is one specific reaon why Japanese manufacturing companies have been so successful. In addition to Dr Deming of course.
Rgds / Charles.C
These should be covered in the personnel requirements and security systems of the company.
I totally agree (pre-requisites !) but I'm afraid the practical situation is often rather different.
A lot of people I hv met claim this is one specific reaon why Japanese manufacturing companies have been so successful. In addition to Dr Deming of course.
Rgds / Charles.C
IMO.. Mental hAzard not only cause hazard in term of food safety problems.. But.. It can cause THe big problem in company in term of persoonel relationship....
And I think all of company have a system ( HR systems) to avoid the "potential problems Employee" joint with the company...
So Ithink "mental Hazard" do not need to add to Risk Hazard in food safety systems
And I think all of company have a system ( HR systems) to avoid the "potential problems Employee" joint with the company...
So Ithink "mental Hazard" do not need to add to Risk Hazard in food safety systems
Mental welfare (stress, depression etc) would be covered, in the uk at least, by the Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974. so you should address it this.
It is not viable to include it in HACCP as a hazard. How would you risk assess it? Stress / depression etc affects people in different ways.
I also agree with GMO, any risk to product by a person who has mental welfare problems would be contamination by chemical, physical or microbial contamination, and it would be a fair assumption to say that you can not control that sort of risk.
And lets be honest, you don't have to have mental welfare problems to cause such a risk, just need to be bloody minded!
Perhaps we should just use automation, just to be on the safe side!
c x
It is not viable to include it in HACCP as a hazard. How would you risk assess it? Stress / depression etc affects people in different ways.
I also agree with GMO, any risk to product by a person who has mental welfare problems would be contamination by chemical, physical or microbial contamination, and it would be a fair assumption to say that you can not control that sort of risk.
And lets be honest, you don't have to have mental welfare problems to cause such a risk, just need to be bloody minded!
Perhaps we should just use automation, just to be on the safe side!
c x
I know you were joking Caz, but you are sort of right. Automation would of course remove the problem of process variance caused by the vagaries of human performance. Although this may not be possible we should always consider reducing the opportunity for human error from the process.Perhaps we should just use automation, just to be on the safe side!
See this website on Mistake Proofing
Regards,
Simon
Here is an example of what stress can do visibly to a person. Surely performance must be effected.
gordon.jpg 39.11KB 31 downloads
gordon.jpg 39.11KB 31 downloads
Yes it can be considered as a fourth hazard as mental problems do affect physical and biological aspects of our body so one can be called as healthy and fit if he/she is both mentally and physically fit
IMO, we can integrate mental hazard along with Health and Safety instead of HACCP.
In the UK under Health & Safety Law employers have a duty to protect the health and safety of employees and employees have duty to protect themselves and their colleagues. This includes mental health. So yes poor health and safety policy could be the cause with the effects being all sorts of negative impacts on the business including food safety breaches. IMO you are 100% right Jean.IMO, we can integrate mental hazard along with Health and Safety instead of HACCP.
Regards,
Simon
I would suggest that issues such as this should be covered by a food security prerequisite progam with strict employment controls and regular audits. This is very much common place in the states and has been for afew years now. I would also suggest that allergens are the 4th hazard as i belive the results of them not getting this sort of focus can be disastrous. Pilsbury who help originally develop HACCP now include allergens as a 4th hazard.
That's interesting JSFB. Does anyone else consider allergens as a 4th hazard in their FSMS?I would suggest that issues such as this should be covered by a food security prerequisite progam with strict employment controls and regular audits. This is very much common place in the states and has been for afew years now. I would also suggest that allergens are the 4th hazard as i belive the results of them not getting this sort of focus can be disastrous. Pilsbury who help originally develop HACCP now include allergens as a 4th hazard.
IMO.. to consider alergen as 4th Hazard is depend on the industry.. I think Milk/Dairy industry or nut industry can't state the alergen as 4th HAzard, because they product contain the alergen...