8 replies to this topic

[kfromNE]

When the USDA takes random raw meat samples, we take a complimentary sample. For those that do this, have you ever had different results than what they got? How do you interpret this?

[olenazh]

Canada. We've always been taking duplicate samples of whatever CFIA's sampling (e.g. products, surfaces) and sending to the accredited lab for the same testing - but never had different results. 

[Scampi]

This used to happen all the time with CFIA

 

I chock it up to methodology differences at the lab

 

If both labs aren't' using identical methods to perform analysis, there will differences in outcomes

[Scampi]

CFIA used to tell us (months later) that a flock had tested positive for a cocciodostat, it had NEVER been given to any of the birds

 

That's also an issue that belongs with the farmer..........all you can do is report it back to the farmer via email really

 

If you're program for live animal receiving is inclusive, there's nothing more you can do

[SQFconsultant]

We retained a sample of raw ground beef an agency came in to collect a sample -  two children had gotten sick.

 

The agency sample came up negative - but our sample came up positive -- we reported this to the agency and they decided to re-test from two labs.

 

Both came up positive that 2nd and 3rd time.

[Charles.C]

When the USDA takes random raw meat samples, we take a complimentary sample.

 

For those that do this, have you ever had different results than what they got?

How do you interpret this?

 

Hi kfrom NE,

 

Query is a trifle vague

Different results for ?

And what were the results ?

[kfromNE]

Hi kfrom NE,

 

Query is a trifle vague

Different results for ?

And what were the results ?

 

It was vague

 

A bratwurst was tested for Salmonella.

Edited by kfromNE, 10 May 2021 - 06:37 PM.

[Scampi]

Salmonella in a bratwurst.......totally understandable why there could be 2 different results.

 

Imagine this scenario........the batch was all done being blended and was ready for casing............the casing station does not have a cover.........one single drop of condensation falls........it hits a single sausage..............USDA just happens to take that one...........you grab the subsequent sausage sans drip........one tests positive, the other negative

 

also note: salmonella testing.......the lab WOULD NOT make a slurry from the entire sausage and then take a sample for dilution from that........no way, no how

 

 

It does, however, beg the question..........how did salmonella enter the sausage???

[Charles.C]

It was vague

 

A bratwurst was tested for Salmonella.

Hi kfromNE,

 

One needs to make a few assumptions, eg analytical capabilities are comparable.

 

For a given lot size (L), given sampling size (N) and  given level of Salmonella (X), statistics can predict how often (Y) a negative result for detection will occur, for example 95 times in 100 attempts.

 

For "smallish" N, N/L, X, the value of Y strongly favours Nil detection.

 

Except for the "unlucky" 5% !