Tag Archives: Focus Article

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Angus That’s Bogus

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Angus, food fraud
Records involving fraud can be found in the Food Fraud Database. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

Good news: Crime does not pay off. In addition to several hundred thousand dollars in fines, a British butcher was jailed for mislabeling imported meat as high-end local British beef, such as Aberdeen Angus. He also falsely claimed local origin for imported pork and chicken, plus some of the meat was expired and re-labeled as fresh. This was done over a sustained period of time, even selling the wrongly labeled meats in his own butcher shop that brought in significant revenue.

Resource

Cardwell, M. and Beard, P. (April 26, 2019). “Crooked butcher made a fortune flogging cheap foreign meat as Aberdeen Angus”. Daily Record. Retrieved from https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/crooked-butcher-made-fortune-flogging-14687970

Question mark

FSMA Supply Chain IQ Test (Part II)

By Food Safety Tech Staff
1 Comment
Question mark

Food Safety Tech’s FSMA Supply Chain IQ test series continues with Part II. The test was put together by the subject matter experts at Kestrel Management, LLC. Before taking Part II, let’s review the results from Part I below. (If you have not taken Part I, take the test now!)

  1.  FSMA requires all records for the reevaluation of cGMPs every three years.
    • FALSE. Only 28% knew this.
  2. Implementation records are required for every FSMA requirement.
    • TRUE. 74% got this right.
  3. Under some circumstances, FSMA requires that conformance of a customer’s control of a hazard is required.
    • TRUE. 90% answered correctly.
  4. Under FSMA cGMPs, you must be able to identify at least 95% all possible contaminated product.
    • FALSE. Respondents were almost evenly split. 51% answered correctly.
  5. Monitoring of frequency of preventive controls must be conducted by the operation as part of the food safety plan.
    • TRUE. 92% answered on target.
  6. Written supply chain plans are not included in FSMA food safety plans.
    • FALSE. 81% answered correctly.
  7. Mandatory recalls are provided under FSMA as a new requirement.
    • TRUE. 63% answered correctly.
  8. Verification effectiveness of the implementation of preventive controls needs to be evident but not documented under FSMA.
    • FALSE. 74% got this right.
  9. cGMPs under FSMA require that outer garments be suitable to protect against allergen contamination.
    • TRUE. 77% answered correctly.
  10. You do not need to document records of all product testing under FSMA.
    • FALSE. 82% answered correctly.
  11. FSMA preventive controls does not require hazards be addressed under the HACCP plan.
    • FALSE. 69% got this right.
  12. The food safety plan does not require hazards that are unintentionally introduced within an operation’s processes.
    • FALSE. 82% answered correctly.

Surprised by the results? Provide feedback in the comments section.

We invite you to take Part II below and then learn more about important supply chain issues at our Food Safety Supply Chain Conference, May 29–30. You can attend in person or virtually.

Create your own user feedback survey

Tyson ready-to-eat chicken strips, May 2019 recall

Tyson Recall of RTE Chicken Strips Hits 11.8 Million Pounds

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Tyson ready-to-eat chicken strips, May 2019 recall
Tyson ready-to-eat chicken strips, May 2019 recall
One of the Tyson products involved in the recall. FSIS has provided a list of all the labels on its website.

Over the weekend Tyson Foods, Inc. announced an expanded voluntary recall of its frozen, ready-to-eat chicken strips due to more issues involving contamination with metal fragments. The initial recall occurred on March 21 and involved 69,093 pounds of product. All RTE chicken strips under the Class I recall have the establishment number “P-7221” on the product package and were produced between October 1, 2018 and March 2019, with “Use By Dates” of October 1, 2019 through March 7, 2020. The products were shipped nationwide to retail and Department of Defense locations, as well as to the U.S. Virgin Islands.

“Our company is taking corrective action at the location that makes these products. We have discontinued use of the specific equipment believed to be associated with the metal fragments, and we will be installing metal-detecting X-ray machinery to replace the plant’s existing metal-detection system. We will also be using a third-party video auditing system for metal-detection verification,” said Barbara Masters, DVM, vice president of regulatory food policy, food and agriculture for Tyson Foods in a company news release.

Thus far there have been six consumer complaints involving metals pieces, with three people claiming oral injury.

FSIS has provided images of the product labels involved in the recall.

Ned Sharpless, Frank Yiannas, FDA

FDA’s ‘New Era of Smarter Food Safety’ to Focus on Traceability, Digital Technology and E-Commerce

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Ned Sharpless, Frank Yiannas, FDA

“It’s time to look to the future of food safety once again,” declared Acting FDA Commissioner Ned Sharpless, M.D. and Deputy Commissioner for Food Policy and Response Frank Yiannas in a press statement released yesterday. Although progress has been made in implementing FSMA and with the development of the GenomeTrakr Network, the agency wants to move forward in taking advantage of the innovative technologies that will help make the food supply more digital, traceable and safer. With that effort comes the creation of a “Blueprint for a New Era of Smarter Food Safety”, which will speak to “traceability, digital technologies and evolving food business models”. Sharpless and Yiannas outlined the significant role that these components will play.

Digital technology in food traceability. Digital technologies could play a crucial part in rapidly identifying and tracing contaminated food back to its origin—changing the timespan from days or weeks to minutes or seconds. FDA intends to look at new ways that it can evaluate new technologies and improve its ability to quickly track and trace food throughout the supply chain. “Access to information during an outbreak about the origin of contaminated food will help us conduct more timely root cause analysis and apply these learnings to prevent future incidents from happening in the first place,” stated Sharpless and Yiannas. This means a shift away from paper-based systems.

Ned Sharpless, Frank Yiannas, FDA
(left to right) Ned Sharpless, M.D., FDA acting commissioner and Frank Yiannas, deputy commissioner of food policy and response. Image courtesy of FDA

Emerging technologies. Artificial intelligence (AI), distributed ledgers (no, they didn’t directly say “blockchain”), the Internet of Things, sensors and other emerging technologies could enable more transparency within the supply chain as well as consumer side of things. The FDA leaders announced a pilot program that will use AI and machine learning to assess food imports at the U.S. point of entry.

E-Commerce. “Evolving food business models”, also known as e-commerce, is growing fast and changing how consumers get their food. With food delivery introduces food safety issues such as those related to packaging and temperature control. FDA is exploring how it can collaborate with federal, state and local stakeholders to figure out ways to address these potential problems.

Sharpless and Yiannas emphasized the end-goal in keeping the food of American consumers safe. “So, welcome to the new era of smarter food safety that is people-led, FSMA-based and technology-enabled!”

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

A Frank Discussion About Wurst

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud, Decernis
Records involving fraud can be found in the Food Fraud Database.

A scientific study of 100 “single species” sausage, such as beef, pork, chicken, turkey and others, was conducted in Canada. It found that 14% of sausages were mislabeled as single species but contained additional undeclared species. There is some encouraging news, however: While this is still an issue that requires monitoring, 14% mislabeling is a lower rate than detected in a previous study conducted a year ago. The samples were tested at the molecular level with DNA Barcoding and ddPCR (Droplet Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction) to detect the species via their DNA.

Resource

Shehata, H.R., et al. (Jan 15, 2019). “Re-visiting the occurrence of undeclared species in sausage products sold in Canada”. Science Direct. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996919300304

Chelle Hartzer, Orkin
Bug Bytes

Product Contaminators: Filthy Flies and Creeping Cockroaches

By Chelle Hartzer
No Comments
Chelle Hartzer, Orkin

Remember the childhood game “Red Rover?” The one where a line of kids lock arms to form an unbreakable connection, then other kids try to run through the arm barrier to break through? With enough time, these runners always eventually break through the tough barrier, and the first to do so is a winner!

Turns out, this childhood game is similar to a much less enjoyable occurrence: Pests invading your facility. You’ve taken the time to implement an integrated pest management (IPM) program to form a robust barrier around the outside of your facility. And yet, pests will inevitably find a way in if they’re allowed the same circumstances over time.

That’s because pests are clever, resilient and persistent. It isn’t a matter of “if” pests will try to find a way into your facility, it’s a matter of “when” they’ll find a way in. When they do find a way inside, these pests need to be removed quickly or they can create significant contamination problems for your product.

All pests carry some risk if they get into your facility. Some may simply pose contamination issues while others are able to spread disease-causing pathogens.

In fact, some of these disease-spreading pests can be quite small, making them more likely to find a way through your facility’s external barriers and contaminate product.

That’s bad news for your business’s bottom line. Imagine the cost of losing an entire shipment to contamination. Or even worse, imagine the impact on your business if a supply chain partner farther down the line received this contaminated product and didn’t notice, allowing it to make it all the way to the consumer! The resulting public outcry could devastate a brand.

So, you must be proactive in your efforts to prevent these contaminators. Two of the most common across the United States—flies and cockroaches—love to live and feed on waste and decaying organic matter, which is rife with disease-inducing pathogens. After flies and cockroaches touch or land on these substances, they pick up microscopic pathogens and then move on in search of other things they need to survive. Those three needs: Food, water and shelter.

Unfortunately, your facility has all three of these needs, meaning any food processing facility is a top target for inquisitive pests. Knowing these pests can cause diseases like typhoid fever, dysentery and cholera makes it even more important to proactively prevent them from coming into contact with your product.

Luckily (or unluckily!), there is a lot of overlap in the types of food sources attractive to both flies and cockroaches. To understand how to prevent these pests from thriving inside your facility, it helps to know what makes them tick.

Why do flies and cockroaches like food processing facilities?

To answer this question, it’s important to look at the biology of these pests. While there are some differences between fly and cockroach species, they’re all attracted to the same general food source: Organic matter.

Fruits, vegetables, meats, grains—you name it, these pests would love to eat it. The presence of these organic foods alone will be enough to draw in flies and cockroaches. But these pests, especially cockroaches, prefer to stay hidden in cracks and crevices when not searching for food.

Cockroaches and flies aren’t picky eaters, so nearly any food is a food source for them. That’s why they can both be found around waste areas, whether that’s the lingering garbage left in the break room trash can or the overflowing dumpster in the back. These locations offer organic materials aplenty, and both flies and cockroaches are going to feel quite comfortable calling these areas home. Some flies are even notoriously able to thrive off the organic material built up in drains!

Once they have found a home in or around the facility, flies and cockroaches alike are going to start reproducing. Both have incredibly high reproduction rates, so a few of these pests can turn into an infestation in no time.

Cockroaches (depending on the species, of course) lay dozens of oothecae over the course of their lifetime, and each of these oothecae—or egg cases—can produce a dozen or more immature cockroaches that can emerge in less than a month. They take a few months to develop but they are feeding that whole time! Flies, on the other hand, have even more daunting reproduction rates. One female housefly is capable of laying up to 150 eggs in a batch, and she’ll produce five or six of these batches over the course of a few days! Within a day after the eggs are laid, maggots will hatch and slowly begin to mature. Within one to two weeks after hatching, these maggots will turn into pupae and then mature into adult houseflies.

It becomes easy to see why flies and cockroaches would love a food processing facility. Simply put, there are plenty of food sources and hiding spots for reproduction to occur. Therefore, careful monitoring procedures and preventive strategies need to be in place and be robust enough.

How can facilities protect themselves from filthy pest pressure?

Roaches and flies are constant scavengers, so any open doors or windows are an invitation for pests to come in. Roaches are also known to squeeze their way through tiny gaps in the exterior of a facility. Loading docks and break rooms are high-risk areas, too, as they’re prime harborage areas with plenty of hiding places and potential food sources. Even clutter like cardboard boxes collecting in a corner can be a perfect home and food source for cockroaches!

When reviewing the food safety plan for potential improvements, look at the proactive sanitation and exclusion tactics and ask yourself if these are effectively preventing pest issues before they become a problem.

Here are a few examples of sanitation and exclusion tactics every facility should be doing to prevent filthy pests like flies and cockroaches:

  • Make sanitation a priority with your staff. Make a sanitation schedule with daily, weekly, and monthly tasks. Assign cleaning roles to your employees based on where they work around the facility, and make sure they know what to do if they spot a pest somewhere. A pest sighting log in a centralized location helps. Don’t forget to clean up break rooms and offices.
  • Use automatic doors and check door seals. End the “open-door policy” for pests. Any entry point is a risk, so reduce the amount of time and number of access points for pests however you can. Air curtains can also help push pests away from frequently used doors, as they push air out of the facility when doors are opened. As a result, any nearby flying pests are blown away from the facility.
  • Seal cracks and crevices. Walk around and inspect the outside (and inside!) of the facility at least quarterly. Using a waterproof caulk or other sealant, cover any gaps or openings you can find. Remember: Some pests only need a few centimeters to squeeze into a building.
  • Inspect incoming and outgoing shipments. Vehicles transporting goods can become infested with pests, too. Inspecting shipments not only reduces the chances of pests being brought in by staff unintentionally, but in partnership with supply chain partners it can help you detect the source of an infestation more effectively to get your operations back up and running quicker.
  • Store food securely. Make sure products are stored off of the floor and are sealed when possible. In kitchens and other areas where employees store food, use airtight containers and empty trash bins at least daily to avoid food waste becoming a target.
  • Don’t forget to look up. Many issues could start on the roof and roof vents, and air-handling units can serve as access points for many pests.

Pest prevention doesn’t have to be hard, but you do have to be organized and, most importantly, proactive. If you take the time to create a strong food safety plan focused on the proactive prevention of pests, you’re going to better protect your business’s bottom line and brand reputation. And, perhaps even better, having a strong plan in place will give you some peace of mind knowing your products are protected from invasive, filthy pest contaminators.

AFSAP, audits

AFSAP Second Annual Stakeholders Meeting to Be Held During Food Safety Supply Chain Conference

By Trish Wester
No Comments
AFSAP, audits

2018 Recap: As VQIP implementation began, confusion among the accreditation bodies (ABs) and certification bodies (CBs) was clearly evident, and options for explanations from FDA were limited. To facilitate information sharing, AFSAP hosted an open gathering of all interested parties to hear from FDA. The inaugural AFSAP Auditing Stakeholders meeting provided a unique opportunity for the auditing community at large to interact with FDA and expand their knowledge on the regulatory use of audits in FSMA. CB attendees gained valuable insight into their hybrid role as part Scheme Owner under the Third-Party Certification Program (TPP) and its operational challenges in the global community. After vigorous discussion, the development of a consensus program for FDA’s TPP audits emerged, although the definitive mechanism to achieve this objective was still to be determined. AFSAP established a membership category for CB’s, and has continued to pursue solutions to these and other audit related issues, but information sharing has been limited to members.

2019: Although progress has been made, there is still a need for information sharing among all interested parties. Once again, the 2nd Auditing Stakeholders Meeting will be co-located with the Food Safety Supply Chain Conference in Rockville, MD, May 29–30, 2019.

AFSAP extends a gracious thank you to them for supporting AFSAP’s mission and goals.

The 2019 Auditing Stakeholder meeting will build on the TPP knowledge base, incorporating other areas that overlap with auditing and auditor development in general. FDA has a new TPP management team participating this year, along with some familiar faces from 2018. Join AFSAP in welcoming them to our event!

We have an exciting agenda planned for this year that includes a members-only session, an at-large session, and updates from FDA’s new TPP team. Association announcements will be provided after the Association’s members meeting has concluded.

AFSAP Membership Meeting

  • Association updates; Accomplishments, Partnerships & Alliances, Plans and Activities
  • Committee Updates
    • The Auditor Development Committee/Chair introductions
  • AFSAP’s Voluntary Consensus Standard (VCS) for FDA’s 3rd Party Audit
  • VCS Board: Introductions and Nominations
    • The review and publication process for a VCS

Auditing Community Meeting Highlights

  • SGS’ Hank Karayan
    • The Accreditation Experience – Lessons Learned
  • Just the FAQ’s – Common questions and misconceptions
  • New! TPP Audit Templates and Auditor Trainings

Contact AFSAP for registration information: info@afsap.org

About AFSAP

The Association for Food Safety Auditing Professionals is a member driven association created to advance and support the professional development of food safety auditors globally. As a 501(c)(3) Trade Association, AFSAP provides a universal platform for individual auditors and the auditing community at large to harness their combined experience and knowledge into a powerful tool equal to the significant challenges that lie ahead. Working together, AFSAP members will have an unprecedented opportunity to engage regulatory agencies and external stakeholders with a unified voice, and collaborate on the development of creative solutions to the issues facing the food safety auditing industry.

About the Food Safety Supply Chain Conference

A food company’s supply chain can be the weakest link in their food safety program. Food ingredient adulteration, fraud, and counterfeiting negatively impacts everyone in the food supply chain. FDA has recognized the risk in the food supply chain. Sanitary transportation and the Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP) are major components of FSMA. The Food Safety Supply Chain Conference addresses best practices, and new tools and technologies that can help food companies, including manufacturers, retailers and food service companies protect their brands and customers from food safety threats in their supply chain while being compliant with regulators.

Question mark

FSMA Supply Chain IQ Test (Part I)

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Food Safety Tech’s FSMA IQ test series continues with a two-part series that addresses supply chain considerations under FSMA. Once again, the test was put together by the subject matter experts at Kestrel Management, LLC. We invite you to take the 12-question test and then learn more about important supply chain issues at our Food Safety Supply Chain Conference, May 29–30. You can attend in person or virtually.

Results of Part I will be posted next week, at which point Part II will be available.

Create your own user feedback survey

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Sour Cream Leaves a Sour Taste

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Cow, palm tree, food fraud
Records involving fraud can be found in the Food Fraud Database.

Customers who purchase sour cream expect it to be a pure dairy product without additional non-dairy fats and oils. In Armenia’s capital city of Yerevan, Armenia’s State Food Safety Service discovered that five of 16 sour cream samples were altered with vegetable oil, which led to a thorough inspection of the five companies. Armenia’s “Law of Food Safety” clearly states that sour cream is counterfeit if it contains vegetable oil without proper labeling.

Resource

Arka News Agency (April 8, 2019). “Examination reveals vegetable oil in five brands of sour cream” Retrieved from
http://arka.am/en/news/business/examination_reveals_vegetable_oil_in_five_brands_of_sour_cream_/#.XKx2StqsyQs.twitter

Adam Serfas, R.S. Quality
Food Safety Culture Club

Step Back and Assess Your Food Safety Culture

By Adam Serfas
No Comments
Adam Serfas, R.S. Quality

Fostering a strong food safety culture is one of the most important things those in leadership in the food manufacturing and processing industries can do. Whereas laws dictate the food safety regulations to which food manufacturers and processors should adhere, facility food safety and color-coding plans dictate how those regulations should be followed, and it is the inherent culture of the facility that ensures these guidelines and procedures will be followed. A facility’s culture is made up of the shared values of the company, the unwritten norms—good and bad—that ultimately influence the behavior of those in the company. It most often stems from those at the leadership level as they set the tone and expectations for the organization.

Most importantly, however, is the understanding that culture is fluid. Be-cause it is not defined but rather just is, a culture can morph over time in a ripple effect manner. If those in leadership begin to place a higher emphasis on food safety, middle level managers will take note and those sentiments—consciously or unconsciously—will be echoed to those lower in the company’s organizational hierarchy.

At the same time, the reverse is equally and, perhaps, even more likely, true. It’s often harder to do the right thing when it comes to food safety; there are extra steps involved to ensure the environment and tools used are clean, to check and double check the quality of the product and to communicate any concerns that may be encountered along the way. It’s easy to look at someone who takes shortcuts—particularly someone at a higher level than you—and decide that’s an accepted behavior. This can lead to devastating results quickly in a food processing or manufacturing facility where everything from the profit margins to the ability to employ workers to the legal standing of the company hinges on quality assurance.

That said, it’s important that those at the leadership level prioritize foster-ing a positive food safety culture by leading by example. Additionally, it’s vital to regularly glean a quick read of the room to stay on top of culture shifts. The following are some questions you can use to guide that check-in and identify potential red flags long before those worst-case scenarios have a chance to play out.

Would you describe the company’s food safety expectations to be one-size-fits-all notions or, rather, clearly defined rules tailored to different teams and job roles?

If you would put your company in the first category, it’s important you take some time to consider the procedures and guidelines put in place in your facility. Whereas you want company-wide buy-in for overarching food safety priorities, the job role will look very different for, say, someone on the packaging line versus the janitorial team. Within those teams, there should be a shared vernacular and routine specifically related to the job role they need to carry out. It’s unfair and perhaps a bit risky to assume that employees will know how to best carry out their job if “best” is never properly defined for them in training procedures.

Is there clear and consistent messaging that stems from leadership about a commitment to food safety?

The actions and words of those at the highest level of an organizational hierarchy set expectations for the entire company. It’s not only important that they communicate the importance of food safety to the company, but that they return to that conversation often. It’s a good idea to reiterate the significance of food safety considerations in vision and mission statement documents but to also bring it up during staff meetings, company-wide emails and annual reports. Food safety trainings should be held regularly as the more of-ten you highlight these expectations, the more they are thought about across the company. That consideration is what ultimately leads to action.

Do members of leadership take on an active role during food safety training sessions?

Again, we cannot stress enough the importance of those at the top setting the tone for a positive food safety culture by not only talking the talk but also walking the walk. Employees will take note if those higher up in the company who take time out of their day to partake in food safety training. It sends the message that this is indeed important to the company and therefore should be important to the employees.

Are food safety expectations communicated to employees via multiple communication outlets?

Just as a teacher in grade school aims to consider the unique learning styles of students, you should be mindful of the ways in which you are communicating with your team. Some people retain information best through auditory exposure, some are more visual learners and, for some, recall is best after hands-on activities. Consider the ways in which your currently communicate food safety expectations to employees and take note of any additional approaches you might need to take to best reach all employees.

Along those same lines, you should be mindful of additional considerations that might be necessary depending on the makeup of your staff. We recommend working closely with human resources to identify whether or not you should incorporate multi-lingual training procedures and how to best accommodate any employees with disabilities.

Does your company have an obvious method in place for raising concerns about food safety?

The mistake a lot of facilities make is focusing too much on what it looks like for things to go as planned and to overlook procedures for when things don’t go according to plan. If you asked any member of your team, they should be able to tell you the preferred method for reporting any concerns related to food safety. We recommend polling a few employees across different job roles to see if that is the case. If not, it’s vital you establish a protocol and clearly communicate that protocol to all employees. The easier the protocol, the more likely employees are to remember it and to follow through when necessary.