10 replies to this topic

[AL BUNDY]

Hi everyone... this is my first post.

my question is: ¿should I consider Listeria m. as a significant hazard in a pork slaugther?
pro facts: Listeria colonice equipments, growth in cool storage.
cont facts: the product must be cooked before eating, so the consumer has the responsability to control de hazard.

thanx....
by the way English it's not my first language....

Attached Files

•  HA.doc   43KB   39 downloads

[Simon]

Hi everyone... this is my first post.

my question is: ¿should I consider Listeria m. as a significant hazard in a pork slaugther?
pro facts: Listeria colonice equipments, growth in cool storage.
cont facts: the product must be cooked before eating, so the consumer has the responsability to control de hazard.

thanx....
by the way English it's not my first language....

Hi Al, I used to enjoy Married with Children a lot. It's good to see you're still working with pigs.

Seriously welcome to the forums. Let's see if somebody can help you out with your query.

Regards,
Simon

[Charles.C]

Dear Al,

Knew I’d heard yr name somewhere. Welcome to the forum.

Not a pig person professionally but I did a bit of googling to start the discussion. The detailed answer will depend on the FSO of your HACCP Plan but a quick (generic) answer seems to be no as indicated by these links –

http://www.fsis.usda...cp/hidguide.htm
(rather old – 1999)

http://www.teagasc.i...4869table01.htm
(more recent I think)

(Factory related L.mono. factors are presumably taken care of by yr pre-requisite programs.)

Would be nice if a pork expert will give more detail or correct the above.

(BTW, the detailed HACCP plans from which 2nd link above taken are apparently available free from the authors -
see - http://www.teagasc.i...9/eopr-4869.htm )

Regards / Charles.C

[Penard]

Hell Al bundy,

Welcome on the forum, same thing for me english isn't my native language, so don't worry, you can improve it thanks to this discussion forum!

Concerning listeria, a good question; when you work on a Haccp study, you have to consider 2 points :

- first, you have to evaluate risk; if you think - with scientific studies, experiencies...you're able to expect..you have a significant hazard. For instance listeria is usually considered as a significant hazard in Haccp studies; if everybody in your country know they have to cook pork a lot to avoid it it's ok.

-second, legislation : if the country you live require some limits concerning your listeria - presence or not, in 25g/ 50g/ 100g...for instance absence in 50g, you have to consider it's a significant hazard to find it in your study.


Just an example in France, results are ok below 2 or 4/10 porks with listeria -I don't remember exactly. So we have to take care about it even though we know everybody will cook enough the meat - but don't forget cross contamination in butcheries or at home! This percentage means too you don't have a lot of listeria -it's very very difficult to avoid it in a slaughter house, but if you're right with your cleaning plan, good manufacturing pratcices...it will be ok,

Hope it helps,

Kind regards,

Emmanuel.

[Charles.C]

Dear Emmanuel / Al,

-second, legislation : if the country you live require some limits ….

Good point. The validity of” Regulatory HACCP” has been debated many times but if it exists where you are, I guess that’s your conclusion.

Just an example in France, results are ok below 2 or 4/10 porks with listeria -I don't remember exactly.

Interesting. I looked up the EU regs (in the UK meat inspection guide 2006) and cannot see any reference to L.monocytogenes in the microbiological criteria for carcasses (or other raw meat products.) This is maybe a specifically French “Regulatory HACCP” (or a Producers HACCP FSO or ....) ? Not disagreeing with the use of a number, just wondering as to its meaning.

Rgds / Charles.C

[AL BUNDY]

to sum up....
Internationally theres no microbiological criteria for Listeria m. on carcass; we know Listeria cut be in carcass because it's everywhere
but the Listeria m. risk to overgrow it's unknow... we can't give a answer to the decision tree Q. "Could contamination with the identified hazard occur in excess or the safe or acceptable level or could it increase to an unacceptable level?"

[Charles.C]

Dear Al,

but the Listeria m. risk to overgrow it's unknow....

As you say, the hazard is for growth.

I don't know about the pork matrix but as an example for seafood, the USFDA analysed similar questions via these tables -

 t_T__2__guidance_for_pathogen_growth.htm   20.75KB   52 downloads

Some more googling required perhaps.

Rgds / Charles.C

added - this ref is older (ca 1990) but is more general and gives idea how such time/temp. data can be interpreted -

 food_pathogen_t_vs_T_control_data.pdf   208.5KB   47 downloads
(seemed v.slow to open, maybe save preferable)

[AL BUNDY]

.... doup.
If overgrow it's the hazzard... Why the USDA and others, name salmonella, E.coli and Campylo as a hazzard when..
salmonella GTº: 5,2º C
E. coli GTº: 6,5ºC
Listeria m GTº: -0,4ºC.
So for me.... Listeria has more odds to grow.

And if we think in the consumer:
Salmonella D60: 1,73 min.
E. coli D60: 0,75 min.
Listeria D60: 2,85 min.

So consumers have more chance to eat listeria due to improper coocking than others bacterias.
and have more risk to get sick becuase the Listeria infective dose (unknow yet) appears to be low.

Is there a good reason not to put Listeria m. in a raw meat HACCP, other than political issues???

[cazyncymru]

.... doup.
If overgrow it's the hazzard... Why the USDA and others, name salmonella, E.coli and Campylo as a hazzard when..
salmonella GTº: 5,2º C
E. coli GTº: 6,5ºC
Listeria m GTº: -0,4ºC.
So for me.... Listeria has more odds to grow.

And if we think in the consumer:
Salmonella D60: 1,73 min.
E. coli D60: 0,75 min.
Listeria D60: 2,85 min.

So consumers have more chance to eat listeria due to improper coocking than others bacterias.
and have more risk to get sick becuase the Listeria infective dose (unknow yet) appears to be low.

Is there a good reason not to put Listeria m. in a raw meat HACCP, other than political issues???

I , by no stretch of the imagination, know anything about pigs.

But hopefully the two guidance notes that i have attached will be of help to you.
I had a quick flick through, and it looks like, according to these, that Salmonella would be biggest concern and not Listeria. This is British Legislation, but i'm sure that Chile would have something similar.

C x

Attached Files

•  brc_micro_regs.pdf   1.28MB   22 downloads
•  CFA_20Micro_20testing_20and_20interpretation_20guidance_201.1_20web.pdf   552.87KB   24 downloads

[Charles.C]

Dear Al,

Is there a good reason not to put Listeria m. in a raw meat HACCP, other than political issues???

Well, to get back to basics, this is a quote from a standard HACCP text –
( http://europe.ilsi.o...LSIHACCP3rd.pdf )

Another example deals with the selection of significant hazards from the list of potential hazards. This selection is based on the likelihood of their occurrence in the final product at levels that are unacceptable. Thus, judgements have to be made and decisions have to be taken based on quantitative considerations.

The “judgements” have to be made at each step of your process of course as per yr original attachment.

If you wish to be very quantitative, can set up a FSO.

From the same text -

"Examples of technical data that may be required for a HACCP study

1. Epidemiological and legal data on microbial pathogens, toxins and chemicals
a Incidence of foodborne illness (especially if related to similar product)
b Results of surveillance programmes and sentinel studies
c Legal microbiological food safety criteria and Maximum Residue Limits

2. Food Safety data
a Likely presence of microbiological and chemical hazards in raw materials (see category 1 above)
bGrowth rates of pathogens in food products
c Death rates of pathogens under a range of conditions
d Fate of chemicals and toxins during processing, storage, distribution and use

3. Raw material, intermediate and final product data
a Formulation
b Acidity (pH)
c Water activity (aw)
d Packaging materials
e Product structure
f Processing conditions
g Storage and distribution conditions
h Shelf life
i Consumer use instructions, package labelling, including code dating practices

4. Processing data
a Number and sequence of all processing stages including storage
b Range of product time/temperature conditions
c Handling of rework (recycled material from the manufacturing process)
d High/low risk area separation
e Flow conditions (for liquids)
f Presence of void spaces in processing equipment
g Efficacy of cleaning and disinfecting


Some thoughts -

The immediate relevant items are perhaps 1(a,b), 2(a,b), 3 (i), 4(a,b,g)
1a is obviously highly important from a health viewpoint. Presumably this data exists for yr situation.
(there is also a ranking list of bacterial species "severity" in another forum thread although I think the tendency is to group the common pathogens as "severe" in terms of potency).
1b will, sadly, be important even if you don’t agree with the legal numbers (and they may not be validated). Whether or not this item is justified as being directly linked to HACCP is debatable IMO but it is a fact of life.
2a,b this thread has just been discussing. Do you think that for yr process, the temperature/times, eg chilling, involved will permit (significant) growth of any L.monocytogenes (and any other pathogens ??). If not, perhaps you shud not consider chilling to be a CCP. But do the local regulations (auditors??) demand it anyway ?? (regulatory CCP?)
3i – do You trust the consumer to properly cook?. Some generic HACCP plans do and classify salmonella in the raw material as a non - significant pathogen. This seemingly ignores the possible ampont of pathogen and any xcontamination effect to the factory environment. And then you maybe hv to consider 1b again.
4a.b. Depends on Yr process.
4g. How much L.mono in Yr environment?

Rgds / Charles.C

[AL BUNDY]

Excellent...
thanx to averyone.