Micro testing standards
Where can I find a list with all the micros that can be run for water, ice, raw fish, TBC fish and the standards limits? I tried FDA website and other websites, but I cannot find a straight answer anywhere. Does anyone have any idea where to locate or anyone can help me with some standards to relate to?
Mainly I am looking for: Aerobic Plate Count, Coliform, E:Coli, Heterotrophic Plate Count, S. Aureus.
Thank you :)
Hi, LoredanaM;
This is a rather lengthy publication attached, but it's what I go by and satisfies FDA and SQF. Customers and economic zones may have differing/tighter standards (e.g. Vibrio spp. heavy metal limits), so flexibility is required. There seems to be a shortage of of any solid agreement on micro limits outside of what is considered "generally accepted".
Look at table 27 pages 190-191. As far as water/ice I assume you mean only potability which will vary on state codes as well. I would contact your DPH on water sanitation regs for specific limits. Again, generally (IIRC) an acceptance is less that 100 for Coliform and HTP per 100 ml sample.
ICMSF 2nd Edition OSU.pdf 812.8KB 217 downloads
Hi, LoredanaM;
This is a rather lengthy publication attached, but it's what I go by and satisfies FDA and SQF. Customers and economic zones may have differing/tighter standards (e.g. Vibrio spp. heavy metal limits), so flexibility is required. There seems to be a shortage of of any solid agreement on micro limits outside of what is considered "generally accepted".
Look at table 27 pages 190-191. As far as water/ice I assume you mean only potability which will vary on state codes as well. I would contact your DPH on water sanitation regs for specific limits. Again, generally (IIRC) an acceptance is less that 100 for Coliform and HTP per 100 ml sample.
Thank you for your help. I was checking for those limits as well on the DPH AZ, but you have to be a lawyer to understand the in and ends of all legislation. Straight and forward seems to not be possible.
I know its more UK based, but it might give you some guidance
http://multimedia.fo...iolcriteria.pdf
Caz x
Dear Loredana,
Mainly I am looking for: Aerobic Plate Count, Coliform, E:Coli, Heterotrophic Plate Count, S. Aureus
No idea what TBC means, "to be cooked" perhaps = local slang ? :smile:
Anyway, I assume you are referring to raw materials, non-frozen or frozen, not intended to be eaten without further processing, eg cooking.
IMEX, based on US import standards, there are no USFDA standards for the above items for raw fish. The reason is that FDA focus on "significant" pathogens and cooked products (Salmonella is one notable exception), eg Salmonella, L.mono, certain Vibrio species. The (import) standards are published, (eg from memory on the well-known Cornell website).
Local US States may well have a mind of their own of course. I recall there is a compendium of their various limits for a variety of foods in Jay's Food Microbiology. Probably nothing for raw fish though.
Historically, non-pathogen-related standards have been proposed at various times for raw seafood, and other non-raw products but often failed to be validated. Some standards also resulted in legally successful challenges.
The US fascination with Listeria is globally famous (with some internal historical reasons of course).
Rgds / Charles.C
Dear Loredana,
No idea what TBC means, "to be cooked" perhaps = local slang ? :smile:
Hi, Charles;
TBC = Total Bacteria Count. Synonymous with Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC, HTP), Aerobic Plate Count (APC), Total Plate Count (TPC), Standard Plate Count (SPC). Language is more akin to testing methods and material to be tested.
Hi, Charles;
TBC = Total Bacteria Count. Synonymous with Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC, HTP), Aerobic Plate Count (APC), Total Plate Count (TPC), Standard Plate Count (SPC). Language is more akin to testing methods and material to be tested.
Dear Slab,
Thks for the clarification.
I had guessed TBC was maybe yet another Americanization like RTC (ready-to-cook). Not to forget the (more worrying) NRTC (or is it NRTE?, i forget). Admittedly the latter terms seem to have been trumped by Tesco-UK with FRTC (fresh-ready-to-cook). i suspect there are whole PR departments thinking these up. :smile:
It's certainy a fact that there is a multiplicity of terminologies in use in quantitative microbial statements. Most of them equally dubious IMO but firmly stuck in common parlance, ie slangish.
TBC
I do believe your prediction (?) particularly since i could only find 1 support for mine vs about 4-5 for yours, namely -
http://www.pinterest...c-to-be-cooked/
(located apparently in "English(US)")
Nonetheless this reference classifies yr interpetation as rare (but maybe same for all micro.acronyms) -
http://www.acronymfi...ount-(TBC).html
It does apear to be popular in Hong Kong and Sweden -
http://www.envirolab...?catid=11&id=49
http://www.milkprodu...teria-concerns/
But i still suspect the real origin is USA, the (proud?) home of acronyms. Difficult IMO to see how one can have a synonym to something which is itself undefined but perhaps "synonym" is an equally flexible term.
Hopefully the OP will someday confirm her intentions. If you are correct, maybe the fish was RTE ? :smile:
Rgds / Charles.C
Dear Slab,
Thks for the clarification.
I had guessed TBC was maybe yet another Americanization like RTC (ready-to-cook). Not to forget the (more worrying) NRTC (or is it NRTE?, i forget). Admittedly the latter terms seem to have been trumped by Tesco-UK with FRTC (fresh-ready-to-cook). i suspect there are whole PR departments thinking these up. :smile:
I'm thinking of marketing our products as "NSHC" - Not Safe For Human Consumption. Then I'll never have to worry about those pesky humans getting sick.
It's a perfect plan, and I don't see what could go wrong.
I'm thinking of marketing our products as "NSHC" - Not Safe For Human Consumption. Then I'll never have to worry about those pesky humans getting sick.
It's a perfect plan, and I don't see what could go wrong.
Dear magenta_m,
Spoken like a true hamster. :thumbup:
Rgds / Charles.C
Ps - @Loredana - Apologies for the slight OT
Dear Slab,
Thks for the clarification.
I had guessed TBC was maybe yet another Americanization like RTC (ready-to-cook). Not to forget the (more worrying) NRTC (or is it NRTE?, i forget). Admittedly the latter terms seem to have been trumped by Tesco-UK with FRTC (fresh-ready-to-cook). i suspect there are whole PR departments thinking these up. :smile:
It's certainy a fact that there is a multiplicity of terminologies in use in quantitative microbial statements. Most of them equally dubious IMO but firmly stuck in common parlance, ie slangish.
TBC
I do believe your prediction (?) particularly since i could only find 1 support for mine vs about 4-5 for yours, namely -
http://www.pinterest...c-to-be-cooked/
(located apparently in "English(US)")
Nonetheless this reference classifies yr interpetation as rare (but maybe same for all micro.acronyms) -
http://www.acronymfi...ount-(TBC).html
It does apear to be popular in Hong Kong and Sweden -
http://www.envirolab...?catid=11&id=49
http://www.milkprodu...teria-concerns/
But i still suspect the real origin is USA, the (proud?) home of acronyms. Difficult IMO to see how one can have a synonym to something which is itself undefined but perhaps "synonym" is an equally flexible term.
Hopefully the OP will someday confirm her intentions. If you are correct, maybe the fish was RTE ? :smile:
Rgds / Charles.C
I very well could be mistaken to the OPs intent on meaning. Under regulatory guidance there would be no differentiation for raw RTE or raw TBC (I have just been introduced to a new acronym :spoton: ).
And I agree we're in the "Dark Ages" of codification in language for food safety. Good observation, Charles.
Dear Loredana,
No idea what TBC means, "to be cooked" perhaps = local slang ? :smile:
Anyway, I assume you are referring to raw materials, non-frozen or frozen, not intended to be eaten without further processing, eg cooking.
IMEX, based on US import standards, there are no USFDA standards for the above items for raw fish. The reason is that FDA focus on "significant" pathogens and cooked products (Salmonella is one notable exception), eg Salmonella, L.mono, certain Vibrio species. The (import) standards are published, (eg from memory on the well-known Cornell website).
Local US States may well have a mind of their own of course. I recall there is a compendium of their various limits for a variety of foods in Jay's Food Microbiology. Probably nothing for raw fish though.
Historically, non-pathogen-related standards have been proposed at various times for raw seafood, and other non-raw products but often failed to be validated. Some standards also resulted in legally successful challenges.
The US fascination with Listeria is globally famous (with some internal historical reasons of course).
Rgds / Charles.C
Yes, that is the meaning ... honestly I used the 'slangs' because otherwise I feel left out by 'new ways of communication'.
Hello everyone - well, I haven't quite thought that we can have fun here, but some of your replies really made me laugh.