For what it's worth, my FDA facility audit was last week and the auditor said "Don't forget: micro-toxins are chemicals hazards, not biological ones but you've got them well controlled so just pointing it out."
I love it

Posted Today, 01:50 PM
For what it's worth, my FDA facility audit was last week and the auditor said "Don't forget: micro-toxins are chemicals hazards, not biological ones but you've got them well controlled so just pointing it out."
I love it

Posted Today, 03:06 PM
Hi hygienic,
Wow, an old zombie topic! Where have you been for the past 13 odd years? Studying toxins?
You contradict yourself given aflatoxins are produced by growth of a fungus?
Also, I don’t see why Bacterial toxins cannot be described as ‘naturally occurring’?
As per previous posts whether they are categorised as a chemical or biological hazard is somewhat irrelevant as long as effective control measures are in place.
Kind regards,
Tony
I was dreaming about aflatoxins 😅😅
Mycotoxin produced by fungus as secondary metabolism not produced due to food contamination .
But based on Codex-style definitions, mycotoxins are treated as naturally occurring chemical contaminants, so they fall under chemical hazards. Some can even pose risks via inhalation or contact.
Biological hazards, as defined, include bacteria, viruses, parasites, and the toxins/metabolites they produce (e.g., Clostridium). So HACCP classification often depends on source and control approach.
Posted Today, 03:09 PM
For what it's worth, my FDA facility audit was last week and the auditor said "Don't forget: micro-toxins are chemicals hazards, not biological ones but you've got them well controlled so just pointing it out."
Very Nice ,,, Really ? Please see the below document from FDA its draft but still worth also to read clearly mentioned and explained every thing,