7 replies to this topic

[pinar.uzun]

hi to everybody,

 

I have to calculate thE fraud and adulteration risk for some ingredients for BRC,

Oregano, chilli pepper, citric acid, potassium sorbate, glucoe, sunflower oil,

I dont know which is the way to calculate the risk,

could you please help me and show me the way,

i need  a clear guide,

 

many thanks in advance

[Charles.C]

 

hi to everybody,

 

I have to calculate thE fraud and adulteration risk for some ingredients for BRC,

Oregano, chilli pepper, citric acid, potassium sorbate, glucoe, sunflower oil,

I dont know which is the way to calculate the risk,

could you please help me and show me the way,

i need  a clear guide,

 

many thanks in advance

 

 

Hi pinar,

 

I assume you mean vulnerability assessment.

 

See this post -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...rc/#entry111585

[pinar.uzun]

thanks Charles

[Charles.C]

thanks Charles

Welcome.

 

And Welcome to the Forum !

[GMO]

It should (IMO) be a combination of historical fraud and adulteration stuff with the nature of the ingredient (how easy it is to contaminate) and then how easy it is to test for also has to be a factor (as that may deter some criminals.)

 

The RASFF portal is a good source of historical issues:

 

https://webgate.ec.e...m&cleanSearch=1

 

From knowledge and a bit of gut feel from the ingredients you mention, if you're talking about dried oregano and chilli powder, those are the two I'd really look into.  Dried herbs can be subject to people mixing in other dried leaves padding out and reducing the cost and chilli powder has had historical issues with Sudan and similar dyes because "redder" powders command a premium.

[pinar.uzun]

Thank you,

 

yes l mean exactly dry thyme and red chilli powder,

I hope l can do it, because BRC superviser record it as an awkwardness, so l must close it,

If i understand well l must create a personal schema, and give point (1-5) for each factor of risk,

 

thanks again

[Charles.C]

Hi Pinar,

 

Strictly BRC probably  accept any appropriate methodology to do a vulnerability assessment (VA). There are many published interpretations/approaches although, IMO, none are particularly simple. Assessing the history etc can be awkward. Previously the USP database was probably the most recommended but now requires membership. The cost of success.

 

As you have no doubt realized, the VA is particularly related to BRC7 clause 3.5.1.1. The latter’s initial objective  can be summarized as  –

 

(1) Formulating a method to estimate the overall risk of a “raw material/input”  for a given food/food process, eg via an equation (for food ingredient inputs) like -

 

Overall Risk Result = function ( hazard analysis risk result, quality risk result, legality risk result, vulnerability risk result)

 

(2) Designating Inputs as High/Low Risk based on the result of (1).

 

Just as an  illustration of the potential extent of BRC’s specific demands, FDA are attempting (for FSMA)  to generate a list for item (2) above but prioritized  only on aspects of the first contribution in equation (1). Their  draft “proposed approach” was issued in 2014 for industry/public comment (see file below/Appendix example). A variety of criticisms are given in the feedback files attached. Since then, afaik, silence.

 

https://www.fda.gov/...a/ucm380210.htm

 FSMA High-Risk Draft Approach 013114.pdf   216.96KB   64 downloads

 Comments-on-proposed-Designation-of-High-Risk-Foods - United-Fresh.pdf   395.97KB   45 downloads

 Comments on proposed High Risk Foods Designation - PMA.pdf   352.08KB   42 downloads

 

The BRC Food Standard’s pioneering inclusion of vulnerability assessment was presumably boosted  by the Horsegate scandal and its impact on retail branded foods in UK.

https://en.wikipedia...se_meat_scandal

[pinar.uzun]

Many thanks for this detaled explanation,

 

kind regards,