Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

CODEX DECISION TREE

Share this

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

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

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

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

Posted 27 March 2006 - 02:25 PM

Simon -

(1) USA Dev.of haccp plans with via d.trees - http://seafoodhaccp....anuals_pdf.html


(2) Canada - main page http://www.inspectio...cp/haccpe.shtml
d.tree esp. http://www.inspectio...ol2/vol2e.shtml


(3) NZ - haccp plan development (there is a note deep in the text that the exact method of risk appraisal has been left to the user - rather evasive perhaps). http://www.nzfsa.gov...haccp/index.htm

The pre-requisite requirement for packaging in some cases is 'a letter of guarantee from the supplier.' This maybe results from a minimum prescribed official requirement. Adequate ??#

A lot of the basics in above is hardly new but I suspect that the actual method of assessing risk is still often problematical. Mad cows ??

I know - it's always easy to criticise.

# added, - Sorry, this was over-simplistic, people are very tolerant on this site. Although packaging approval seems to be effected in many ways outside Europe (hence my comment), any purchaser of plastic packaging would presumably be delighted if their supplier was BRC/IOP approved.

Rgds Charles.C


Edited by Charles.C, 27 March 2006 - 07:00 PM.

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,826 posts
  • 1363 thanks
880
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 27 March 2006 - 07:18 PM

Thanks for the links Charles. :beer:


Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 180 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html


Johnson Opoku-Boateng

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ghana
    Ghana

Posted 15 April 2017 - 05:20 AM

Dear Charles,

 

I can appreciate your confusion and yes, it happens that your raw and packaging materials should be assessed to ascertain if there are potential hazards that could have an effect on consumers. In my many years of handling HACCP, the issue of taking RM/PM through the Codex decision tree has been a bit challenging. The simplest rule of thumb has been, to put in a Supplier Approval system to deal with the identified hazard. But simply saying "Approved Supplier" as a control measure and showing documents to prove that is not enough I guess. I am still stuck with the opinion that, the Codex decision tree should be able to clearly and unambiguously help us to either put the responsibility at the doorstep of the supplier  or take up the responsibility through process steps within our establishment.

 

A worthwhile exercise for us on this platform would be, to identify a few raw materials such as milk powder, paper for food packaging etc, take them through the codex decision tree and agree on a common solution.

 

I am not worried about auditors, since most of us on this page are auditors anyway. I am worried about protecting the consumer through scientific means of ensuring food is safe.

 

Johnson 





Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users