5 replies to this topic

[MWidra]

Thought provoking article on where our focus should be; having safe food or passing an audit.

 

It also includes a basic process on how to do a risk assessment.

 

http://www.foodsafet...d/#.VRlCxk0tH3g

 

Martha

[Simon]

I agree that a robust risk assessment is necessary and should be carried out by a competent multi-disciplinary team, but that’s not an argument against audits.  3rd party audits like GFSI mandate the foundations (prerequisites)...great!  And they also require you to risk assess every food safety aspect of your unique business...super!  

[avy100]

Great article.  Thanks for sharing.

 

Often times the focus is too much on passing the audit rather than continuously improving the food safety system and ensuring that the product is safe for consumption.

 

The focus should be on on creating a culture of food safety.

[Charles.C]

I  wonder if this publication has utilised a viewpoint (originally submitted?) on a specific segment of the food chain so as to create a convenient Generalized Article ? The article is curiously lacking in respect to the mention of any specific FS programs at the focus of the expressed criticisms (I assume it was not FSMA).

 

From a general POV, I found some of the FS statements a little strange –

 

Minimally, food safety audits are a mechanism to demonstrate to yourself, senior management, and customers that you are following your food safety program, and that you can verify it through your audit that day

.

 

And the conclusion -

 

In fact, the best kind of audit would be one that verifies the farm or packing facility or processing plant is operating in accord with the operations-written, hazard-based food safety plan. Too bad we can’t start over and place hazard analysis first and properly use audits to verify their veracity

 

The author seems to be unaware of the objective of, for example, GFSI benchmarked FS Standards. And the objective of audits associated with the implementation of such Standards.

 

I agree that the use of a score-based system to determine Pass/Fail for  FS audits is debatable. But that is a different question.

[Tony-C]

Thought provoking article on where our focus should be; having safe food or passing an audit.

 

It also includes a basic process on how to do a risk assessment.

 

http://www.foodsafet...d/#.VRlCxk0tH3g

 

Martha

 

Thank you Martha, thought provoking yes but ................

 

Having safe food should be a given

 

'Food safety audits don’t really make food safer' - I would strongly disagree, if all those involved in the food chain had a recognized food safety certification then I believe food would generally be safer.

How did passing an audit become a substitute for actually building a risk-based food safety program? - It isn't a substitute, all recognised standards require hazard analysis, HACCP plans and food safety fundamentals.

'Realistically, taking an audit is like taking an exam when you know when the exam will be scheduled, you already know all the questions that will be on the exam, and you already have all the answers, too.' - Maybe, you should have all the answers but you will need to demonstrate those answers and unannounced audits are ever increasing so maybe a bit out of touch.

 

I don't really see an alternative offered to 'Food Safety Audits' maybe the author is of the belief that there is too much attention on passing the audit and not enough focus on putting 'hazard analysis first'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony
 

[JKRed]

"Great article. Thanks for sharing. Often times the focus is too much on passing the audit rather than continuously improving the food safety system and ensuring that the product is safe for consumption. The focus should be on on creating a culture of food safety. *- avy100"

 

Ditto!