Dear All,
At least in the UK, some further factors hv also been recently highlighted, I have enclosed a few extracts below -
Incidents of listeria in the UK have doubled over the past decade as research reveals elderly people are more likely to expose themselves to the bacteria by eating food beyond its “use by” date.
The UK's Food Standards Agency (FSA) said eating food that has passed its “use by” date increases the risk of exposure to the potentially deadly bacteria listeria. The warning from the food safety watchdog came as it announced the number of cases of listeria had doubled in the past nine years - with much of the rise among those over 60 years old. The FSA said one in three of the people who get food poisoning caused by the bug die as a result.
The FSA has launched a campaign specifically targeted at older people as part of its annual Food Safety Week. Issues such as following storage instructions on food labels, ensuring fridge temperatures are between 0°C and 5°C, as well abiding by “use by” dates are all key themes.
http://www.foodprodu...re-use-by-datesand
http://www.foodprodu...rulent-listeriaInteresting that the often quoted max 8degC figure seems to hv been temporarily sidelined.
Another parallel issue seems rather ironic in respect to the above, eg -
Industry experts and the UK food safety watchdog have been assessing and clarifying the implications of the government’s much-discussed announcement to overhaul the food labelling date system.
The declaration made on Tuesday by Environment Minister Hiliary Benn to phase out some dating systems on labels to cut down on food waste was slammed by industry bodies and has now been questioned by an industry expert. The British Retail Consortium strongly dismissed the proposal that eliminating “best before” dates would reduce waste, insisting instead that consumer education on the issue was key
.
http://www.foodprodu...ate-intensifiesAnd on the larger EC scene – confusion has occurred over the actual standards being used -
The Codex Alimentarius Commission has moved quickly to clarify a newly ratified standard on permitted levels of listeria monocytogenes (Lm) in ready-to-eat (RTE) food after being challenged by the UK’s Chilled Food Association (CFA).
On Monday, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and World Health Organisation (WHO) released a statement summarising the main provisions of some of 30 new safety measures targeting dangerous bacteria and chemicals - including listeria monocytogenes in RTE products
Alternative approach
The joint announcement from the UN bodies triggered alarm in the RTE industry after saying that while a maximum level of listeria has been set for certain foods where the bacteria cannot grow, a zero tolerance approach had been adopted in RTE products where growth of the bacteria was possible.
The announcement failed to mention, however, a third additional measure contained in the detailed Codex document allowing for an “Alternative approach” to zero tolerance to be taken. This stipulation, agreed at a Codex Committee for Food Hygiene (CCFH) meeting in Guatemala last December, gives individual countries the flexibility to extend the maximum level of 100 colony forming units (cfu)/g across the board to include foods where growth of the bacteria can occur.
http://www.foodprodu...ady-to-eat-foodI hv not yet seen any statement as to the specific US standard being applied in the recall cases but it appears that a zero tolerance regulation is being used for all RTE foods. This would seem to hv significant implications for exporting RTE products to the USA, presumably already well-known if true.
Haven’t seen this mentioned in any reports as yet but an additional factor in these global incidents could relate to how production processes containing a bactericidal step are set up, ie prioritised on which species. It is typically easier to kill Salmonella than L.monocytogenes. E.coli 157 I don’t remember, probably somewhere in between.
Rgds / Charles.C
