Does Chlordecone need to be in the hazard analysis?
Hi Good day! can anyone tell me about chlordecone. my company packs ready to eat products which is pasteurized chilled crab meat. does chlordecone need to be in the hazard analysis? and what is/are possibble control measures on it? and by which processing steps? we have receiving-sensory-sorting-mixing-can filling- weighing- lid covering- can seaming- can printing- pasteurization -chilling. thanks !
Interestingly this is the first google hit I got for this substance
Kepone, also known as chlordecone, is an organochlorine compound and a colourless solid. This compound is an obsolete insecticide related to Mirex and DDT. Its use was so disastrous that it is now prohibited in the western world, but only after many millions of kilograms had been produced.
Every other search I've tried says this substance is banned??????
In a recent review on chemical residue concerns in seafood, Price (1992), concluded that risk from chemical contaminants in commercially harvested fish and shellfish is low and not a problem. Risk from chemical residues (mercury, selenium, dioxins, PCPs, kepone, chlordane, dieldrine and DDT) are primarily a concern with sport caught fish and shellfish, caught in coastal waters and (possibly) in highly polluted waters.
http://www.fao.org/d...8E/T1768E03.htm
Can you elaborate please..........................do you mean testing for the presence of kepone?
nope! BRC wanted us to include chlordecone as identified hazard which we don't. because we know that its already banned. so the question is, how come we should include it as a hazard?? coz its already banned!! we are wild caught (blue swimming crab specifically) it is not caught not in the polluted water.
Chlordecone is a persistent organic pollutant (similar to other delightful substances like DDT) - it can stay in soil and water for many years. My understanding is that it can bind particularly to sediments and thus may be taken up by species that feed in those environments, and being bioaccumulative you could therefore still find some animal species in some specific areas containing residual levels in excess of regulatory limits (even if, as Scampi noted, in general you wouldn't expect levels to be excessive in most sources).
Whether it's actually a significant risk for you will depend on where your crabs are coming from.
I've never worked with crustaceans/shellfish so may not be best-placed to advise on the specifics, but in your position I'd be inclined to address this as a prerequisite through supplier approval and management - i.e. ensuring that they're not coming from areas that are still known to potentially be affected by chlordecone (there were a few places around the world where it was used extremely heavily - have a look at e.g. use on Bananas in Martinique and the consequential effects on the broader environment there). Obviously I don't understand / know your supply chain, so the other potential point to include this could perhaps be receiving, with the check being origin/source.
Depending on the assessed risk you may possibly want to look at some sort of monitoring program. Personally I'd probably do some testing too anyway - if the auditor has got a bit fixated on it then it can be useful to help placate them, and shouldn't be expensive or time consuming as it's included in the scope of many of the standard pesticide suites offered by labs, and indeed if you happen to already do any pesticide analysis you may find it's already included in the scope.
Hi shanshan,
Until now, never heard of this compound.
I suspect there must have been a specific reason for it's coming up from "BRC" (= ?).
Recent Local Area / Product Issue ?
Or perhaps someone's been (idly?) reading through the Fishery Hazards Guide -
(maybe more to come ?)
chlordecone.PNG 20.95KB 0 downloads