Tag Archives: allergens

Food Safety Consortium 2023
From the Editor’s Desk

Registration Open for the 2023 Food Safety Consortium

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Food Safety Consortium 2023

Registration for the 11th Annual Food Safety Consortium, which will take place October 16-18 at the Hilton Parsippany in New Jersey, is now open.

Presented by Food Safety Tech, the Food Safety Consortium is a business-to-business conference that brings together food safety and quality assurance professionals for education, networking and discussion geared toward solving the key challenges facing the food safety industry today.

In addition to two full days of high-level panel discussions, this year’s program will include a second Food Safety Hazards track. These “Boots on the Ground” sessions provide education on the detection, mitigation, control and regulation of key food hazards.

New this year is a strategic co-location with the Cannabis Quality Conference (CQC), a business-to-business conference and expo where cannabis industry leaders and stakeholders meet to build the future of the cannabis marketplace. Registered attendees get full access to both conferences.

Registration options are available for in-person and virtual attendance.

The Consortium will kick off with presentations from Erik Mettler, Assistant Commissioner for Partnerships and Policy in the FDA’s Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA), and Sandra Eskin, Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety at the USDA FSIS, followed by a Town Hall with the regulators.

Other agenda highlights include:

  • The Future of Food Safety Culture
  • The Rise of Previously Unforeseen Hazards,
  • FSMA 204: The Final Rule – Looking Ahead,
  • Anti-Food Fraud Tactics for the Entire Supply Chain
  • Bridging the gap between food safety and cybersecurity
    Protecting Allergic Consumers through Audited and Validated Allergen Control Plans
  • Succession Planning for Food Safety Inspectors
    Utilizing Food Quality Plans to Ignite Positive Food Safety Culture
  • Recalls Trends and Predictions

View the full agenda and register here.

Attendees will also have the opportunity to take part in pre-conference workshops on Monday, October 16, including:

  • Food Safety Auditor Training
  • CP-FS Credential Review Course
  • The Food Safety Culture Design Workshop
  • The Seed to Sale Safety Workshop

Event Hours

Monday, October 16: 8:30 am – 5:00 pm (Pre-conference Workshops)

Tuesday, October 17: 8 am – 6:30 pm

Wednesday, October 18: 8:30 am – 3:45 pm

Register now

Tabletop exhibits and custom sponsorship packages are available. Contact Sales Director RJ Palermo.

About Food Safety Tech

Food Safety Tech is a digital media community for food industry professionals interested in food safety and quality. We inform, educate and connect food manufacturers and processors, retail & food service, food laboratories, growers, suppliers and vendors, and regulatory agencies with original, in-depth features and reports, curated industry news and user-contributed content, and live and virtual events that offer knowledge, perspectives, strategies and resources to facilitate an environment that fosters safer food for consumers.

About the Food Safety Consortium

The Food Safety Consortium is an educational and networking event for Food Protection that has food safety, food integrity and food defense as the foundation of its educational content. With a unique focus on science, technology and compliance, the “Consortium” enables attendees to engage in conversations that are critical for advancing careers and organizations alike. Delegates visit with exhibitors to learn about cutting-edge solutions, explore high-level educational tracks, and network with industry executives to find solutions to improve quality, efficiency and cost effectiveness in the evolving food industry.

 

Matthew Taylor

Mitigating the Risks of Food Fraud in an Inflationary Environment

By Matthew Taylor
No Comments
Matthew Taylor

Inflation can create a challenging environment for the food industry, making it more difficult to maintain product quality, safety, and transparency. In August 2022, U.S. food inflation hit a 40-year high of 11.4% and has since remained persistently high, at 10.1% in January 2023. Manufacturers and suppliers must stay vigilant and take proactive steps to mitigate the risks posed by stubbornly high food inflation and increasingly complex supply chains.

Inflation can be a catalyst for risk in food supply chains for several reasons. Rising prices could encourage bad actors or tempt manufacturers and suppliers to cut corners or compromise quality to maintain profit margins. This can lead to an increased risk of food fraud, where lower-quality or counterfeit ingredients are substituted for genuine ones or where mislabeled products are sold to unsuspecting consumers. Supply chain disruptions could increasingly affect manufacturers as suppliers struggle to manage the increased costs of raw materials, transportation, and labor, as seen this winter in Europe, with the UK experiencing shortages of tomatoes and eggs. This can result in delays, shortages, and other logistical challenges that can make it difficult to maintain product quality and safety.

Inflation can also increase food allergy and sensitivity incidents. Mislabeling or allergen contamination due to substituted alternative ingredients could put allergen or intolerance sufferers at greater risk, as well as your brand. With the threat of food fraud lurking in increasingly complex and volatile supply chains, what steps can food manufacturers take to protect themselves and their customers?

Tackling Food Fraud and Allergen Incidents

Despite legislative and industry process improvements, food fraud continues to be a significant risk in the food industry, costing businesses an estimated $30 to $40 billion annually. Food fraud refers to any act of deception, intentional or otherwise, that is intended to result in the sale of a food product that is not what it purports to be. This can take many forms, from adulterating ingredients to misbranding and counterfeiting.

The consequences of food fraud can be severe and include economic losses, harm to human health, damage to the reputation of food companies and loss of consumer confidence in the food supply. Food fraud can also cause environmental consequences, including the illegal use of pesticides, or overfishing, which can have long-term effects on the environment, wildlife, and ecosystems.

Subscribe to the Food Safety Tech weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest news and information on food safety and quality.

In recent years, several high-profile cases of food fraud have occurred, including the widespread contamination of infant formula with melamine in China and the horse meat scandal in Europe. These incidents have highlighted the need for better measures to prevent food fraud and to ensure the safety of the food supply.

To protect the integrity and bolster consumer and producer confidence in organic food, which has long been a target of food fraud, the USDA published one of the largest-ever reforms to their organic program in January 2023. However, many risks remain as legislation tries to catch and close loopholes.

One of the challenges of preventing food fraud is that the supply chain is often complex and global, making it difficult to track the origin of ingredients and monitor their quality. In addition, many food frauds are not detected until they reach the end-consumer, making it difficult to recall contaminated products. In order to mitigate the risk of food fraud, it is essential to plan ahead and implement strong supply chain management practices, including the use of technology such as traceability systems and predictive analytics.

A good starting point to mitigate your risk of food fraud is to conduct a deep dive into your highest-risk raw materials and suppliers instead of trying to tackle everything at once, particularly if you have a large number of raw materials to assess. For instance, you may want to prioritize raw materials that have been linked to recent fraud incidents, such as infant formula, honey, and olive oil.

Four Steps to Protecting Your Business

Know your supply chain. Controlling and understanding your supply chain is essential for minimizing risk. It is important to audit your supply chain back to the field, if possible, or at least to the production and processing facility. For smaller businesses, forensic auditing may not be feasible. However, there are still steps they can take to protect themselves, such as seeking third-party certification programs that verify the sustainability, quality, and ethical sourcing of ingredients. Going back by more than one step in your supply chain is crucial, and conducting a vulnerability assessment of your raw materials and suppliers is an excellent starting point.

Shop around safely. Review the market for potential alternate suppliers or less ‘at risk’ ingredients, subject to the required quality checks and labeling requirements. It is crucial to thoroughly assess current and potential new suppliers and ensure they meet the minimum Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) certification standards, wherever possible. Scrutinize all raw material specifications, including the country of origin, as countries with less established food safety regulations may pose a higher risk. Establishing solid relationships with your suppliers and engaging in regular communication with them is also essential to maintain a high standard of quality, safety, and sustainability.

Be vigilant about ingredients. Markets are constantly evolving, and economic, social, and environmental changes can impact the substitution risk profile of any ingredient that you purchase. To manage this risk, it is essential to have an up-to-date awareness of the various market forces that affect ingredients and their availability.

It is important to note that product adulteration may not always be motivated by economic factors. As ingredients become in short supply, manufacturers may make local substitution decisions to keep the supply available. Remember, there is no substitute for a thorough risk-assessed approach to managing this challenge with a complete and detailed understanding of your supply chains.

Utilize training to build awareness and readiness. Training employees on how to identify, prevent and respond to incidents of potential food fraud or allergens is essential but often challenging for food manufacturers. Regular training should include the types of fraud, how to recognize suspicious behavior, and the importance of accurate record-keeping. Ensuring your teams are trained on what to do is there is a food fraud issue is also key, as is testing the teams through mock exercises to see how they would manage a food fraud event in the business.

Persistently high food inflation rates have created a challenging environment for the food industry, making it harder for manufacturers and suppliers to maintain product quality, safety, and transparency. Food businesses must exercise extra vigilance to face an increased risk of food fraud, supply chain disruptions, and an increase in food allergy and sensitivity incidents. Now is the time to proactively mitigate these risks by prioritizing transparency, gaining control and understanding of supply chains, and acting to prevent food fraud.

It is important to note that no system is foolproof. Food manufacturers should regularly assess and improve their supply chain management practices to ensure they are up to date with industry best practices and changing threats. Increasing your transparency in the ingredient supply chain requires a commitment to responsible sourcing and a willingness to invest in traceability, certification, and supplier relationships. While the risks to food quality and safety are well known, businesses need to ask themselves the right questions and take the necessary steps to protect themselves and their customers. By doing so, they can protect their brand reputation and consumer confidence in the food supply and the environment.

 

FDA Logo

FDA Releases List of 2023 Priority Guidance Topics for Foods Program

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
FDA Logo

The FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) and Office of Food Policy and Response (OFPR) has released a list of draft and final guidance topics that are a priority for the FDA Foods Program to complete during the next 12 months.

The guidance documents do not impose legally enforceable requirements, but they can help stakeholders plan for potential changes that may impact their businesses and organizations. The agency anticipates it will publish many of the listed documents by January 2024.

The priority list of draft and final guidance topics include (by category):

Allergens

  • Questions and Answers Regarding Food Allergens, Including the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004 (Edition 5); Guidance for Industry
  • Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 555.250 Major Food Allergen Labeling and Cross-contact; Draft Guidance for FDA Staff
  • Evaluating the Public Health Importance of Food Allergens Other Than the Major Food Allergens Listed in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; Guidance for FDA Staff and Stakeholders

Food Additives

  • Preparation of Premarket Submission for Food Contact Substances (Chemistry Recommendations): Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Premarket Consultation on Cultured Animal Cell Foods: Draft Guidance for Industry

Food Safety

  • Foods Derived from Plants Produced Using Genome Editing; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Inorganic Arsenic in Apple Juice: Action Level; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Detention Without Physical Examination (DWPE) of Fish and Fishery Products Due to the Appearance of Adulteration by Bacterial Pathogens, Unlawful Animal Drugs, Scombrotoxin (Histamine), or Decomposition – Evidence Recommended for Release of Goods Subject to DWPE and Removal of a Foreign Manufacturer’s Goods from DWPE; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 555.320 Listeria monocytogenes in Human Food; Draft Guidance for FDA Staff

FSMA

  • Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Appendix 1: Potential Hazards for Foods and Processes; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Chapter 11: Food Allergen Controls; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Chapter 16: Validation of Process Controls; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Chapter 17: Classifying Food as Ready-To-Eat or Not Ready- to-Eat; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Chapter 18: Acidified Foods; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Compliance with and Recommendations for Implementation of the Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption for Sprout Operations: Guidance for Industry

Labeling

  • Labeling of Plant-Based Alternatives to Animal-Derived Foods; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Questions and Answers About Dietary Guidance Statements in Food Labeling; Draft Guidance for Industry
  • Use of Nutrient Content Claims for Added Sugars in the Labeling of Human Food Products: Draft Guidance for Industry

Public comments on the list of guidance topics, including suggestions for alternatives or recommendations on the topics the FDA is considering, can be submitted to www.regulations.gov, using Docket ID: FDA-2021-N-0553.

 

2022 FDA Food Code

FDA Issues 2022 Food Code

No Comments
2022 FDA Food Code

The FDA has issued the 2022 edition of the FDA Food Code, which contains some significant changes, including:

  • Adding sesame as a major food allergen to reflect that the Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education, and Research Act of 2021 established sesame as the 9th major food allergen
  • Informing consumers, in writing, of major food allergens as ingredients in unpackaged food
  • Adding labeling of major food allergens in bulk food that is available for consumer self-dispensing
  • Creating new requirements for the allowance of pet dogs in outdoor dining spaces
  • Revising the definition of intact meat, including enhancements to clarify time/temperature cooking requirements

For the first time, the FDA Food Code specifically addresses food donations, included as part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health. The National Strategy, which was rolled out in September at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health, provides a roadmap of actions the federal government is taking to end hunger and reduce diet-related diseases by 2030.

The FDA noted that the 2022 edition reflects the input of regulatory officials, industry, academia, and consumers that participated in the 2020 biennial meeting of the Conference for Food Protection (CFP).

The Food Code is offered for adoption by local, state, and federal governmental jurisdictions for administration by the various departments, agencies, bureaus, divisions, and other units within each jurisdiction that have been delegated compliance responsibilities for food service, retail food stores, or food vending operations. Alternatives that offer an equivalent level of public health protection to ensure that food at retail and food service is safe are recognized in the Food Code.

View a full list of the Summary of Changes.

 

FDA Logo

FDA Issues Two New Guidances on Food Allergen Labeling Requirements

No Comments
FDA Logo

The FDA has issued two new guidance documents on food allergen labeling requirements.

Questions and Answers Regarding Food Allergens, Including the Food Allergen Labeling Requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Edition 5); Guidance for Industry updates the previous edition (Edition 4) with new and revised questions and answers related to the labeling of food allergens, including requirements in the Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education, and Research Act of 2021 (FASTER Act) and the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004 (FALCPA).

The FALCPA amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) by defining the term “major food allergen” and requiring that foods or ingredients that contain a major food allergen be specifically labeled with the name of the allergen source. This law identified eight foods as major food allergens: milk, eggs, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans. The FASTER Act adds sesame to the list of major food allergens effective January 1, 2023.

The draft guidance includes:

  • New questions and answers about food allergen labeling requirements, such as the labeling of sesame, milk, and eggs; the labeling of major food allergens in the labeling of dietary supplement products; and other technical labeling issues.
  • Revised questions and answers to update and clarify information presented in earlier editions of the final guidance, such as the labeling of tree nuts, fish, and crustacean shellfish.
  • Images that show examples of labeling requirements.

The agency also issued a final guidance with the same title to preserve the questions and answers from the previous edition (Edition 4) that were not changed, except for editorial changes such as renumbering the questions and reorganizing the information in the guidance.

Stakeholders can submit comments about the draft guidance within 60 days of the November 30 publication of the notice in the Federal Register. Submit comments electronically on www.regulations.gov or by mail:

Dockets Management Staff
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm 1061
Rockville, MD 20852

All written comments should be identified with this document’s Docket ID: FDA-2022-D-0099.

Karen Constable
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Where’s the Coconut?

By Karen Constable
No Comments
Karen Constable

Coconut water and coconut milk are vulnerable to food fraud because they can easily be diluted with other liquids and adulterated with undeclared ingredients, such as added sweeteners and dairy products, that are difficult for consumers to detect. The FoodChainID Food Fraud Database[i] (formerly the Decernis and United States Pharmacopeia [USP] database) contains 20 records related to coconut water, coconut milk and coconut milk powder. These include one story of a “coconut water” manufacturer that was found to be using water, sugar and flavoring to make the beverage, which contained no coconut at all.[ii]

Because the potential diluents and adulterants are cheap and easily available, the fraud is both profitable and easy to perpetrate. Organic coconut products are also at risk of having their organic status faked. Six of the Food Chain ID records are for products that were falsely labelled “organic.”

The addition of undeclared sweeteners is a commonly perpetrated fraud in coconut water. In the U.S., it has been estimated that 15% of all imported coconut waters are adulterated with added sugars that are not declared on the label.[iii] In 2021, Brazilian authorities confiscated 173,000 litres of coconut water with added sugars.[iv] Authorities in the United Kingdom reported that the presence of undeclared sugars in coconut water was “widespread” in 2017.[v]

Coconut milk and coconut milk powder have been adulterated with undeclared cow’s milk powder[vi] and with cornflour.[vii] Adulteration with dairy products poses a serious food safety risk to allergic consumers. To protect such consumers, food fraud risk mitigation activities for coconut milks, creams and yogurts should include regular monitoring for the presence of dairy allergens.

References:

[i] https://www.foodchainid.com/food-fraud-database/

[ii] Trinidad Express Newspapers (2016) “Health Ministry Removes Local Coconut Water Off the Market.” Available at: https://trinidadexpress.com/news/local/health-ministry-removes-local-coconut-water-off-the-market/article_0f37536d-0968-5a73-a6f2-cba56a4e6beb.html [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022]

[iii] Foodnavigator-usa.com (2014). “Fifteen percent of coconut waters mislabeled; let’s level the playing field.” Available at: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Suppliers2/iTi-15-of-coconut-water-mislabeled  [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022].

[iv] Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento (2021) “Ação de fiscalização do Mapa apreende 173 mil litros de bebidas com indícios de fraude.” Available at: https://www.gov.br/agricultura/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/mapa-apreende-173-mil-litros-de-bebidas-com-indicios-de-fraude [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022]

[v] The Grocer (2017) “FSA probe finds widespread addition of undeclared sugar in coconut water.” Available at: https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/soft-drinks/fsa-probe-finds-widespread-addition-of-undeclared-sugar-in-coconut-water/558787.article

[vi] Centre for Food Safety The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Food Alerts / Allergy Alerts – “Undeclared allergen (milk) found in prepackaged coconut milk powder.” Available at: https://www.cfs.gov.hk/english/whatsnew/whatsnew_fa/2017_177.html  [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022]

[vii] Azlin-Hasim, S., Siang, Q., Yusof, F., Khairi Zainol, M. and Mohd, H. (2019). “Chemical Composition and Potential Adulterants In Coconut Milk Sold In Kuala Lumpur.” Malays. Appl. Biol, [online] 48(3), pp.27–34. Available at: http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14685/1/48_03_04.pdf  [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022]

 

 

 

Tamales

Public Health Alert for Poultry and Meat Products Containing FDA-Regulated Corn Starch

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Tamales

The USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has issued a public health alert for select La Guadalupana Foods, Inc. poultry and meat products, which contain an FDA-regulated corn starch that has been recalled due to an undeclared allergen, specifically milk.

FSIS issued the public health alert to ensure that consumers are aware that these products should not be consumed. The FSIS announcement notes that additional products may be added, as it is likely that additional meat and poultry products will be affected by the corn starch.

The list of products subject to the public health alert are available here. The tamales were shipped to warehouse, distributor and retail locations in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. However, if other products are added, additional states might be affected.

FSIS and FDA are working together to determine the extent of the distribution of the corn starch to other establishments. There have been no confirmed reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products. FSIS urges consumers who have purchased these products not to consume them and either throw them away or return them to the place of purchase.

Allergens

FDA Issues Draft Guidance Emphasizing Increased Importance on Food Allergens

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Allergens

Today the FDA issued a draft guidance that shines a spotlight on the importance of assessing food allergens that are not one of the nine major food allergens (milk, eggs, fish, crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, sesame and soybeans). “The nine major food allergens don’t currently represent all foods nationwide that people are allergic to or that cause food hypersensitivities,” said CFSAN Director Susan Mayne, Ph.D., in an agency release. “This draft guidance is part of the FDA’s efforts to evaluate emerging evidence about other non-listed food allergens that can cause serious reactions in a consistent and transparent manner, which can inform potential future actions to better help protect the health of consumers.”

The draft, “Evaluating the Public Health Importance of Food Allergens Other Than the Major Food Allergens Listed in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act”, targets immunoglobulin E antibody (IgE)-mediated food allergies, which can cause severe and life-threatening reactions such as anaphylaxis. The document reviews the evidence that establishes a food as a cause of IgE-mediated food allergy and scientific factors, such as prevalence, severity and allergenic potency, that the FDA would consider in evaluations. It also reviews the agency’s recommendations for identifying and evidence to determine the public health importance of a non-listed food allergen.

Comments on the draft guidance can be submitted by August 17, 2022.

Plant based milk

How Advancements in Analytical Testing Are Supporting the Development of Novel Plant-Based Dairy Alternatives

By David Honigs, Ph.D.
No Comments
Plant based milk

Globally, milk and dairy products rank among the top eight allergens that affect consumers across the world. In America in particular, 32 million people suffer from some form of allergy, of which a staggering 4.7 million are allergic to milk. Additionally, it is estimated that around 70% of adults worldwide have expressed some form of lactose intolerance. As such, it is important for key stakeholders in the dairy industry to create novel products that meet the wants and needs of consumers.

Low-lactose products have been available since the 1980s. But in recent years, the demand for plant-based alternatives to dairy products has been on the rise. Some of this demand has come from individuals who cannot digest lactose or those that have an allergy to dairy. However, as all consumers continue to scrutinize their food labels and assess the environmental and ethical impact of their dietary choices, plant-based milk has become an appealing alternative to traditional dairy products.

To adapt to this changing landscape, traditional dairy processors have started to create these alternatives alongside their regular product lines. As such, they need access to instruments that are flexible enough to help them overcome the challenges of testing novel plant-based milk, while maintaining effective analysis and testing of conventional product lines.

 David Honigs, Ph.D. will share his expertise during the complimentary webinar, “Supporting the Plant-Based Boom: Applying Intuitive Analytical Methods to Enhance Plant-based Dairy Product Development” | Friday, December 17 at 12 pm ETLow in Lactose, High in Quality

Some consumers—although not allergic to dairy—lack the lactase enzyme that is responsible for breaking down the disaccharide, lactose, into the more easily digestible glucose and galactose.

Low-lactose products first started to emerge in 1985 when the USDA developed technology that allowed milk processors to produce lactose-free milk, ice cream and yogurt. This meant consumers that previously had to avoid dairy products could still reap their nutritional benefits without any adverse side effects.

Similar to conventional dairy products, routine in-process analysis in lactose-free dairy production is often carried out using infrared spectroscopy, due to its rapid reporting. Additionally, the wavelengths that are used to identify dairy components are well documented, allowing for easier determination of fats, proteins and sugars.

Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) technologies are the most popular of the infrared spectroscopy instruments used in dairy analysis. As cream is still very liquid, even at high solid levels, FTIR can still effectively be used for the determination and analysis of its components. For products with a higher percentage of solids—usually above 20%—near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy can provide much better results. Due to its ability to penetrate pathlengths up to 20 mm, this method is more suitable for the analysis of cheeses and yogurts. For low-lactose products in particular, FTIR technology is integral to production, as it can also be used to monitor the breakdown of lactose.

Finger on the Pulse

For some consumers, dairy products must be avoided altogether. Contrary to intolerances that only affect the digestive system, allergies affect the immune system of the body. This means that allergenic ingredients, such as milk or dairy, are treated as foreign invaders and can result in severe adverse reactions, such as anaphylactic shock, when ingested.

From 2012 to 2017, U.S. sales of plant-based milk steadily rose by 61%. With this increasing demand and the need to provide alternatives for those with allergies, it has never been a more important time to get plant-based milk processing right the first time. Although the quantification of fat, protein and sugar content is still important in these products, they pose different challenges to processors.

In order to mimic traditional dairy products, plant-based milk is often formulated with additional ingredients or as a blend of two plant milks. Sunflower or safflower oil can be added to increase viscosity and cane syrup or salt may be added to enhance flavor. All of these can affect the stability of the milk, so stabilizers or acidity regulators may also be present. Additionally, no plant milk is the same. Coconut milk is very high in fat content but very low in protein and sugar; on the other hand, oat milk is naturally very high in carbohydrates. This not only makes them suitable for different uses, but also means they require different analytical procedures to quantify their components.

Although many FTIR and NIR instruments can be applied to plant-based milk in the same way as dairy milk, the constantly evolving formulation differences pose issues to processors. For example, the way that protein is determined in dairy milk will vary from the way protein is determined in almond milk. Both will follow a method of quantifying the nitrogen content but must be multiplied by a different factor. To help overcome these challenges, many companies have started to develop plant-based milk calibrations that can be used in conjunction with existing infrared instruments. Currently, universal calibrations exist to determine the protein, fat, solids, and sugar content of novel products. With more research and data, it’s likely in the future these will be expanded to generate calibrations that are specific to soy, almond and oat milk.

Even with exciting advancements in analytical testing for plant-based milk, the downtime for analysis is still a lot higher than traditional dairy. This is due to the increased solid content of plant-based milk. Many are often a suspension of solid particles in an aqueous solution, as opposed to dairy milk, which is a suspension of fat globules in aqueous solution. This means processors need to factor in additional centrifuge and cleaning steps to ensure results are as accurate and repeatable as possible.

In addition to the FTIR and NIR instruments used for traditional dairy testing, plant-based milk can also benefit from the implementation of diode array (DA) NIR instruments into existing workflows. With the ability to be placed at- and on-line, DA instruments can provide continual reporting for the constituent elements of plant-based milk as they move through the processing facility. These instruments can also produce results in about six seconds, compared to the 30 seconds of regular IR instruments, so are of great importance for rapid reporting of multiple tests across a day.

Keeping It Simple

Although the consumption of dairy-free products is on the rise, lots of plant-based milk are also made from other allergenic foods, such as soy, almonds and peanuts. Therefore, having low-lactose alternatives on the market is still valuable to provide consumers with a range of suitable options.

To do this, dairy processors and new plant-based milk processors need access to instruments that rapidly and efficiently produce accurate compositional analysis. For dairy processors who have recently started creating low-lactose or dairy-free milk alternatives, it is important that their instrumentation is flexible and used for the analysis of all their product outputs.

Looking towards the future, it’s likely both dairy products and their plant-based counterparts will have a place in consumers’ diets. Although there is some divide on which of these products is better—both for the environment and in terms of health—one thing that will become increasingly more important is the attitude towards the labeling of these products. Clean labels and transparency on where products are coming from, and the relative fat, protein and sugar content of foods, are important to many consumers. Yet another reason why effective testing and analytical solutions need to be available to food processors.

Allergens

Key Trends Reinforce Food Allergen Testing Market Across North America

By Saloni Walimbe
No Comments
Allergens

The food allergen testing industry has garnered considerable traction across North America, especially due to the high volume of processed food and beverages consumed daily. Allergens are becoming a significant cause for concern in the present food processing industry worldwide. Food allergies, which refer to abnormal reactions or hypersensitivity produced by the body’s immune system, are considered a major food safety challenge in recent years and are placing an immense burden on both personal and public health.

In 2019, the most common reason behind recalls issued by the USDA FSIS and the FDA was undeclared allergens. In light of this growing pressure, food producers are taking various steps to ensure complete transparency regarding the presence of allergenic ingredients, as well as to mitigate risk from, or possibly even prevent contact with, unintended allergens. One of these steps is food allergen testing.

Allergen detection tests are a key aspect of allergen management systems in food processing plants and are executed at nearly every step of the process. These tests can be carried out on work surfaces, as well as the products, to detect any cross contamination or allergen presence, and to test the effectiveness of a food processing unit’s cleaning measures.
There has been a surge in awareness among consumers about food allergies and tackling the risk of illnesses that may arise from consuming any ingredient. One of the key reasons for a higher awareness is efforts to educate the public. In Canada, for example, May has been designated “Food Allergy Awareness Month”. It is estimated that more than 3 million people in Canada are affected by food allergies.

The size of the global food allergen testing market is anticipated to gain significant momentum over the coming years, with consistent expansion of the dairy, processed food and confectionary segments.

Understanding the Prevailing Trends in Food Allergen Testing Industry

Food allergies risen nearly 50% in the last 10 years, with a staggering 700% increase observed in hospitalizations due to anaphylaxis. Studies also suggest that food allergies are a growing health concern, with more than 250 million people worldwide estimated to be affected.

Although more than 170 foods have been identified as causing food allergies in sensitive consumers, the USDA and the FDA have identified eight major allergenic foods, based on the 2004 FALCPA (the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act). These include eggs, milk, shellfish, fish, peanuts, tree nuts, soybean, and wheat, which are responsible for 90% of allergic reactions caused due to food consumption. In April 2021, the FASTER (Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education, and Research) Act was signed into law, which categorized sesame as the ninth major food allergen.

This ever-increasing prevalence of allergy-inducing foods has presented lucrative opportunities for the food allergen testing industry in recent years since food processing business operators are placing a strong emphasis on ensuring transparency in their products’ ingredient lists. By testing for allergens in food products, organizations can accurately mention each ingredient, and thereby allow people with specific food allergies to avoid consuming them.

Several allergen detection methods are used in the food processing industry, including mass spectrometry, DNA-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as well as ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), to name a few. The FDA, for instance, created a food allergen detection assay, called xMAP, designed to simultaneously identify 16 allergens, including sesame, within a single analysis, along with the ability to expand for the targeting of additional food allergens. Such industry advancements are improving the monitoring process for undeclared allergen presence in the food supply chain and enabling timely intervention upon detection.

Furthermore, initiatives, such as the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL), created and managed by the Allergen Bureau, are also shedding light on the importance of allergen testing in food production. The VITAL program is designed to support allergen management with the help of a scientific process for risk assessment, in order to comply with food safety systems like the HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point), with allergen analysis playing a key role in its application.

ELISA Gains Prominence as Ideal Tool for Food Allergen Testing

In life sciences, the detection and quantification of various antibodies or antigens in a cost-effective and timely manner is of utmost importance. Detection of select protein expression on a cell surface, identification of immune responses in individuals, or execution of quality control testing—all these assessments require a dedicated tool.

ELISA is one such tool proving to be instrumental for both diagnostics as well as research). Described as an immunological assay, ELISA is used commonly for the measurement of antibodies or antigens in biological samples, including glycoproteins or proteins.

While its utility continues to grow, ELISA-based testing has historically demonstrated excellent sensitivity in food allergen testing applications, in some cases down to ppm (parts per million). It has a distinct advantage over other allergen detection methods like PCR, owing to the ability to adapt to certain foods like milk and oils, where its counterparts tend to struggle. The FDA is one of the major promoters of ELISA for allergen testing in food production, involving the testing of food samples using two different ELISA kits, prior to confirming results.

Many major entities are also taking heed of the growing interest in the use of ELISA for food allergen diagnostics. A notable example of this is laboratory analyses test kits and systems supplier, Eurofins, which introduced its SENSISpec Soy Total protein ELISA kit in September 2020. The enzyme immunoassay, designed for quantitative identification of soy protein in swab and food samples, has been developed by Eurofins Immunolab to measure residues of processed protein in various food products, including instant meals, chocolate, baby food, ice cream, cereals, sausage, and cookies, among others.

In essence, food allergens continue to prevail as high-risk factors for the food production industry. Unlike other pathogens like bacteria, allergenic proteins are heat resistant and stable, and cannot easily be removed once present in the food supply chain. In this situation, diagnostic allergen testing, complete segregation of allergenic substances, and accurate food allergen labeling are emerging as the ideal courses of action for allergen management in the modern food production ecosystem, with advanced technologies like molecular-based food allergy diagnostics expected to take up a prominent role over the years ahead.