Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Bakery, Identification of Low Risk and High Care

HACCP Low Risk High Care Desserts

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#26 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 16,045 posts
  • 4433 thanks
732
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 05 December 2019 - 10:16 AM

Hi Charles,

 

FSMA is my area. Therefore I don't understand this statement: 

 

 

 

"Is there any evidence for FDA supporting baking not being a CCP  within the traditional haccp scheme?"

 

 

It is contradictory in view of HARPC, especially the part about "traditional HACCP scheme" and FSMA. Can you perhaps elaborate?

 

Regards. 

 

Hi kettlecorn,

 

I will attempt to elaborate.

 

As I understand FSMA typically requires the baking step to be a Preventive Control (eg Ch6/FSMA Draft Hazard Analysis Guidelines).

I deduce this implies that FSMA do not agree with suggestions like "output quality failure" can justify that inadequate baking does not present a potential micro.hazard to the consumer.

 

Prior to FSMA, FDA implemented (traditional) haccp based on Codex/NACMCF. If my above  interpretation  is accurate and FDA's (then) opinion was unchanged from current, I anticipate that FDA would  favour a CCP at the baking step .

 

But I have not seen any published examples of FDA-authorised baking haccp plans going back to this period. Hence my query in Post 21.

(A random Literature scan of around 10-15 studies indicated the majority showed Baking CCPs. A few [2-4] did show absence, but with no explanation.)


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate